Stephen_H

I've just checked... (I think you mean the Move tool?) Yes just like that, but it should be permanently displayed. If I have to select a tool, I might as well use a pull down menu.
Incedently, if you use the space bar to access the move tool, you don't get the move tool's contextual menu. I use the tool all the time, but I never select it which is why I didn't know about it.
Strangely, we don't get the same info when the move tool is selected in Designer. I think this is an oversight that needs fixing.

Well people, I have done it. I've cancelled my Adobe CC subscription. Here's the proof. Anyone else packed it in with them?

(It's a bit off topic, but I can't find a general/misc category for posting my own news.)
 

Well, in Michaels' defense... it's not wonderful.
 
When you hit the TAB key, it's not docking or minimizing the panels, it's hiding absolutely everything. It's not really a work space, but more of a preview mode since you even lose your tools (docked and floating tools). I have to bring back my panels just to change tools or alter a font size. It's too much of a "scorched earth" policy to be part of a workflow.
 
The better option is "Command + Shift + H" as it just hides your studios, and leave your tools and the properties bar visible. (The only short coming of this is that it doesn't just hide your two side studios, but it also hides your floating panels. I think I'm going to request this as a feature. This way you could keep one useful panel (like Layers) open while hiding/revealing all your docked panels)
 
As another work around, you can try working in the old 1990's way of floating your panels (Window/Separated Mode). This way, when you minimize a panel, it does actually take up less space on the screen, not just less space in one of the side studios. It even continues to work in full screen mode which is a nice compromise.

No, it's not a solution. Try this experiment:
1 - In a CMYK document, draw a box in 100% cyan
2 - Duplicate the box and rasterize it
3 - Convert the document to RGB
4 - Convert the document back to CMYK (effectively the same as your exporting a CMYK PDF solution)
5 - Now analyze all the colors in your document. (Selections & color pickers)
You'll see you no longer have 100% as it's color mix. Visually, you probably saw no change, but if it's a corporate color in a logo, you've now got 2 versions of this color. One is right, and the other will lose me a client because I can't keep to their global corporate image.

Well people, I have done it. I've cancelled my Adobe CC subscription. Here's the proof. Anyone else packed it in with them?

(It's a bit off topic, but I can't find a general/misc category for posting my own news.)
 

100% agree. 
I really can't think of any reason to have swatches if they aren't live.

Ah, yes because document layout has color consistency as a core principle. I cut my teeth on newspaper and magazine layout so I naturally believe all swatches should be live/global and essential to professional layout & design (though not important for illustration).

I played with an updated color palette a while back as well. This was my contribution... just combine the wheel, the sliders and the swatches into one palette.

Well people, I have done it. I've cancelled my Adobe CC subscription. Here's the proof. Anyone else packed it in with them?

(It's a bit off topic, but I can't find a general/misc category for posting my own news.)
 

Well people, I have done it. I've cancelled my Adobe CC subscription. Here's the proof. Anyone else packed it in with them?

(It's a bit off topic, but I can't find a general/misc category for posting my own news.)
 

Well people, I have done it. I've cancelled my Adobe CC subscription. Here's the proof. Anyone else packed it in with them?

(It's a bit off topic, but I can't find a general/misc category for posting my own news.)
 

Yup the basics seem to have been covered.
(Text styles, rules, baseline, text wrap, page management, rules, drop caps, text box columns, text box linking, baseline, spell checking, picture frames special characters, master pages – I wish I could see that far set of panels)
 
I find their Pages panel a bit confusing... Spreads are named after the left page. I can see this terminology causing confusion. e.g.:
"Go to page 5 which is on the 3rd spread that's actually called page 4" (see my screenshot)
 

 
Even here, they are working on page 4, but page 3's thumbnail is highlighted with page 2's name is highlighted. Yeeesh... 
 
I hope page and spread shuffling will be easy. They are a bit of a nightmare in InDesign if you want to pagenate (page imposition) a 32 page booklet. It'll be fantastic if that can happen automatically at export.

Publisher's release date has already been pushed out many times before so expecting early 2018 is a bit optimistic. I personally can't wait. I have my credit card ready and waiting for the release date. Skip the beta testing phase and just release it – bugs and all. Give me a discount as a launch deal and fix everything in the first update... I won't complain, promise.
 
(It must be the implementation of the 'impossible' arrow heads that's holding up its release...  )

There's so much secrecy and uncertainty around Publisher, that perhaps Affinity needs a forum just for rumors?
(Apple has entire websites for them)

Especially if updates to a common feature can happen once.
e.g.: If there's an update to support a new font type. If all three are sharing the same plugin/resource/code/library, then it's just a single update, not 3 separate updates.

I'd like to think they are for a round-trip work flow. Select an image, click the Photo icon and boom, I'm editing the pic in Photo. Save and I'm straight back into Publisher.
Much better than building image editing feature into Publisher.
 
Or maybe... We're going to get "Affinity Studio" where those 3 app icons are actually personas. We never leave the single app, but all tools, panels and menus change to those of the relevant app. It might be a bit RAM heavy, but you're always being presented with the appropriate tools for the task at hand.
 
I hope this gets added to the other apps as well.

It would be great to be able to designate layers as non-printing, as you can in InDesign and some other advanced graphics programs.
 

+1
 
Before doing any layout job, I always create very detailed guides grid that margins and columns just don't allow. A simple example is a DL leaflet. Using strokes, I create:
Fold guides page margins panel margins top of paragraph guides  
I select all and paste them onto a second, third fourth artboards for consistancy
 
I then select them all and convert to guides.
 
I can't leave them as strokes because as guides they are:
Non-printing Easy to hide/reveal with keyboard shortcuts Snappable (Is that a word? I can snap to them)  
 
If I try do this with regular ruler guides, the guides only display on the selected artboard. TIt's a fight to get them nicely positioned since I find when I drag them onto the artboard, they snap to guides on other artboards – even though I can't see them.
 
Attached is a screenshot showing my preferred set up versus what I currently have to do.
 
Even if my workflow is rare, the addition of this feature allows for creating diagonal guides, curved guides, short guides and a general ability to copy-n-paste guides onto other artboards and even other documents. All are super useful.
 
 

I've just made an animated GIF to explain a comment in this forum and I realised how simple it is to do in PhotoShop. Unfortunately... I had to go to PhotoShop to do it.
 
I know animated GIFs probably fall into the animation category, but it would be great to able to export layers as frames in the same way Illustrator does when it exports an animated SVG. No massive feature set, just a few simple settings at export stage.

QuarkXpress + PDFToolBox is pretty much the whole reason/solution I can't/can leave Adobe completely. I haven't found decent [yet affordable] replacements for InDesign & Acrobat (purely for it's preflighting features).
 
I hope the guys here at Affinity are watching this thread and see the lengths we're willing to go to in order to get off Adobe. The longer we wait for Publisher, the more business Quark is going to get from us. I'd even be prepared to put my money where my mouth is and pay as pre-order (I'm willing to fund it as a "Kickstarter program" if they are struggling with allocating staff resources)

?????
 
Huh? Have I missed a post or just not up to speed on the latest cute cat video on YouTube?

?????
 
Huh? Have I missed a post or just not up to speed on the latest cute cat video on YouTube?

If you want to take up the current version offer, I can put you in touch with someone at Quark via email that can keep things straightened out.
 
I would suspect that the copies from the magazine are upgradable but I don't know that for a fact. If anyone goes for the giveaway and desires to upgrade I would check with Quark to make sure the offer is legit and they are not student licenses or promo copies that cannot be upgraded. 

Publisher's release date has already been pushed out many times before so expecting early 2018 is a bit optimistic. I personally can't wait. I have my credit card ready and waiting for the release date. Skip the beta testing phase and just release it – bugs and all. Give me a discount as a launch deal and fix everything in the first update... I won't complain, promise.
 
(It must be the implementation of the 'impossible' arrow heads that's holding up its release...  )