chessboard

I did not.
What, please, does Serif's decision to use MSIX installers lock you in to.
It's true that it means you cannot choose the exact install path, but I don't see why that is a big deal in any practical terms. It's also true that due to poor designs of some 3rd-party apps, or bugs in them, they could not link to the V2 apps. But that is solvable without you being able to choose an install directory.
 

I, for one, don't want to see the "More" button ever again. Good ridance!

But becomes unmanagable if more export formats get added over time (as is actively requested by forum users).
d.

I'm obviously missing something here!
You have one version of a product. – You buy a newer version of the product.
You can keep both versions and use them side by side, or delete the old one, if you no longer want to use it.
If you don't want to keep your old version, but someone else does want to keep their old version as well as the new one, why does that matter to you?
 

Hello?
Allow version 1 users to upgrade to version 2.
The current purchasing method leaves version 1, a program that is available, unused.
If a version 1 user purchases a new version 2, no one uses the existing version 1.
You must upgrade version 1 programs so that they do not remain available.
I think it's the most reasonable way to do that regardless of the upgrade price.
Thank you.

Take a look at Tabletpro, it could be a solution

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

I disagree. I am working with both, Affinity Photo/Designer and Photoshop/Illustrator. I personally can't see an advantage of PS SmartObjects over the various ways that the Affintiy apps offer to deal with placed images, scaling by keeping the original resolution, repeating objects while keeping the ability to change them all at once at any time, distorting objects by keeping them editable etc. which are all aspects that SmartObjects are handling.
You can use many different ways to substitude PS SmartObjects: Starting with linked images, live filters on image layers or groups of images/pixel layers, using chaining objects in AP, using Symbols in AD etc.. Each method has its own advantages or shortcommings.
But the best of all is: you can adjust or edit the contents live and in its context. With SmartObject you are always landing in a new separate window if you are going to edit the content. You have to place the original context (the document that contains the SmartObject) in its window side by side with the window of the edited SmartObject to see, what your changes at the SmartObject mean to the main document. Otherwise editing the SmartObject becomes just guesswork and you have always to switch back and forth between the documents.
In the Affintiy apps you can always stay in context an see the changes live. Ok, not in case of editing linked documents.
The great strength of the Affintiy apps is the possibility to combine the tools and functions of all three apps. For example, the live distortions in AP can't handle vector graphics. But you can create the vector part in a separate AD document that can be linked to an AP document and combined with live distortion. If you need, you can edit the vectors in AD again and the updated file placed in the AP document will still be distorted. And the best: you can than open the AP file in AD and go on with vectors. You can even adjust the live distortion in AD, though this is a AP feature.

Affinity Photo has only fraction of the features of Adobe Photoshop, but in real-world functionality, Photo isn't far behind at all. And if you really learn the software, it's faster. (Try putting a dozen images into an image stack, then switching modes.)
PS's whole Smart Object scheme now seems like a top-heavy, inefficient kludge compared to the Affinity Way😇.
I found the hyped "AI" features in PS ineffectual and unusably slow, and their bugfix for unusable 3D was to put up box telling you 3D is not only unusable now, but will be even more unusable in the future.
I find Affinity's InPainting brush (in V1, I haven't tested V2 extensively) to work as well or better than PS's alternative in typical cases. The border of the repair was often more obvious in PS than Affinity. However, you can't set blend modes in Affinity.
I find Affinity's Refine Selection... Superior and more intuitive all around. I photograph lots and lots of fuzzy little wild animals, and PS's whole refine fur scheme was completely useless. Just running Affinity's matte brush around the perimeter of the little beasty (in Refine... mode) produces a better mask, faster, with less touch-up.
Affinity's Tone Mapping persona is more flexible, faster and has a better UI than PS's clunky alternative.
Photoshop does do video, albeit in the most confounding way possible -- so it's good for animated GIFs, even if the export is deprecated to legacy.
This is not meant to be a slap at Photoshop. It can definitely do useful things Affinity can't (content aware scale, for one), but just comparing alleged features misses the entire point.
This post is based on a trial edition of Adobe CC within the last year or so. I was actually kinda shocked how little, if any, productivity benefit it offered over CS6.
 

You are blindfolded. Introductory price is way less...€120 for 3 apps and universal license is a great deal....That's €40 per app, less then your original price...
 
Prices might drop in time, as they have done in the past and lots of rebates...

They are also longer in development. Compare Adobe v2 to Affinity v2.....

I tend to support the small guys, knowing they don't offer everything the big guns do. But the big ones are the abusive ones, and Serif has thus far pleased me no end - feature- and price-wise. I'm happy to be Adobe-free, and I'm looking forward to more great Affinity features, while respecting the disappointment of those who expected more. For them there's always Adobe. 
In terms of money, my financial support of Serif is a given, for obvious reasons. I'm grateful Affinity exists, and offers what it does. Here's to more!

All editions, all platforms, no subscription. 120 Euro for the coming years. I paid over 200 for InDesign alone - for one year. It's a no-brainer - for me, and thousands of other customers, too.

Developer response here
 

As shown in the comparison images, the old interface looked a bit outdated. The new interface seems to me much more sober and more visible. Of course, it requires a [short] learning curve.

Hello, Did you see you are on a english forum? Please speak in the language of the forum so that we can understand you. It sounds interesting what you are saying.

I like the new look, I liked the old look too. They're both good in my book.
Not really having a problem with the change, although I respect the views of those who are if it's causing them problems.

That extra click is annoying! Mostly I use my own custom presets, so the scrolling doesn't bother me personally.

Thank you for this tip! I had not seen this option. It's even better because you can click anywhere without leaving isolation mode.
 

I find the new command "Hide Others" to be the best method of isolating a selection.
Ctrl + H to hide others.
Shift + Ctrl + Alt + H to show all.
Similar shortcuts on Mac no doubt.