wonderings

I use Indesign daily, it is my main application for work. I find it strange that if you can figure out Indesign you can't figure out Publisher. Are they different in how they do things? Yes, but the basic ideas are the same and getting around to simply make a book in spreads should not be that complicated for you. Your original post made it sound like you want drag and drop like the websites you use for photo books, this is not what Indesign and Publisher are for, simple book creation. You create everything from scratch having powerful pro tools to do it.

As others have said, those websites are the amateur way of doing things. They give you simple basic tools, drag and drop, dead simple. Publisher is not like that, it is full featured layout software. I work in print for a profession, I would never dream of using any of the sites you listed for the simple fact as they are so limited in what you can do. You find it unintuitive because you are using a full featured application, many of the tools you will not need. Not sure why you bought the software before using the demo first to see if it suits your needs. There are lots of websites for photo book creation, is there a reason you are looking for a stand alone app to set these up? Especially with no experience?

QR Generation integrated in with Publisher would be a nice feature. Yes you can create QR codes elsewhere, but can you create QR codes based on variable data? Not all QR codes are common in their use. I have a few clients who generate QR codes based on data, so each piece addressed to a person will have a different QR code, or for business cards when scanning the QR code it adds their contact info. This can all be done through a data merge and because Indesign has QR creation it can be done directly with the data, no manual creation of the QR code for each name.

It would be the data that would need to be in order to match. If the data did indeed match you could simply just copy and paste the rows you need into the data file you are using for the merge. It is hard to imagine for something like a business card merge that there would be such stringent security, especially as I am assuming you will eventually be printing a business card which by design are meant to be handed out and not treated with the greatest care.

You would first need to know if your mom bought it through the Affinity website or bought it through the Windows App Store. From there can figure out how to install this on your new computer.

You could try changing your PDF export options to X-4 and see if that helps. It might not have anything to do with this, but while you waiting for them to check over your file you might just get lucky. I have had the odd time using X-4 has helped push the PDF through.

How long have you let it sit and process the job? Complex jobs can take a while depending on the makeup of the file. I have a file in Indesign that takes about a literal 10 mins or so to make the PDF on an M1 Max. Lots of feathered vectors and layered over prints. Does not look that complex but the computer certainly thinks so.

If the intended use is for a client or someone else to edit the file I would recommend looking at a PDF editor rather then Word. As others have mentioned there is no direct translation between an Affinity Publisher file and Word. I get clients asking for this all the time and have to tell them it does not work like that. Never had anyone complain yet after explaining that it was setup using professional applications and Word is not a professions page layout/design application.

Never thought about the idea of 2 or more data files to be used at once. Sounds like a scary thing if data does not line up exactly. I have done more than my fair share of mailings with variable data and this idea seems like a disaster waiting to happen. Your data has to be meticulous and perfectly matching the other data records for this to work, and I have yet to see data come into our mailing department that did not need cleansing.

You can load a PDF in Publisher without it being editable, so you don't have to worry about Affinity doing anything wonky with missing fonts, or anything else. You can't have it editable and not editable at the same time, though I think it might be a translation issue.

Not sure where you would even get the idea that they "desperately need the app in th eir portfolio" from. Affinity makes some great software liked by a lot of people. A select few want Lightroom from another company other than Adobe. This is not the direction Serif is going at the moment, so if you need a DAM, then Affinity might not be for you if it is that important. And again, if it is all that important sticking with Adobe is not that big a deal, they make great software and are an industry standard, so no loss there.

The OP question implies Affinity does not listen to their customers. Basically stating that Affinity is ignoring customers simply out of spite because as you say, the work is already done, what could be so difficult in releasing a new application? Other than the dollars, the marketing, branding, support, etc. It comes across as very entitled as do most people in this thread who make it sound like they are owed a DAM application from Affinity. Affinity is going to do what they deem best for their business, if there are other solutions that work then yes that is for you and sadly not for Affinity. They obviously know this and are most likely not all that concerned otherwise they would be creating the very app needed to alleviate the concern.

I can only speak anecdotally. I work in print, wide format and signage. Everyone uses this software. From design houses to the print shops themselves. In the days of old it was always a gamble on what file type you would received and more so if you could even open it for editing or working on it. In a world where people work collaboratively, being on the same software version is huge. Also the use of AI now in Photoshop and Illustrator is HUGE. I use it daily and they are massive time savers. That being said, I have never had issues with PDF files created in Affinity. I can't say the same for Corel, Canva or other graphic apps people use that are more budget friendly. If pro's don't want to pay the money that is their choice, I wonder what their margins are like and if working too cheap... could be what the market can bare in their area. For what we do, and we have multiple users with Adobe CC, the price is covered easily with lots of profit to spare.

They choose not to. They are in the market they want to be in.

I completely get it, and thought that way myself in the beginning when CC was the only option to continue on with Adobe. The changes I have seen in the design community that I interact with has been a big improvement. No more fragmentation, everyone has the same version, or at least access to the same version. Adobe has obviously not geared their software for the home user crowd. I myself would not pay for Adobe CC if I was not making money from it. The cost of a license is easily covered in a day for the software, so the money made by using it is easily justified. I am not doubting you when you say Lightroom might not work with future releases of Windows, is there some reasoning behind that? We have run 20+ year old software in Windows 11, and in Windows 11 ARM without issue. The one benefit of Windows is not much changes under the hood to stop older software from running.

I have made suggestions for software they develop, I have never requested them to create software for me because I want something cheaper. I am happy with Adobe, I make my living with Adobe software and have no dreams of switching over to Affinity to replace Adobe anytime soon. Affinity has made some really great software for an amazing price, the majority of the pro world is using Adobe and thus they are the standard. There is a lot of power in being the standard, and a lot of benefits to everyone using the same thing.

If Lightroom serves your needs and actually does it all well, I am not sure why people don't just keep using it. It sounds to me like people want it but don't want to pay for it. I wonder if Adobe and others are getting the same requests, please make it cheaper and you will have way more users. Is there more the hobby photographer community wanting pro tools for non pro work?

I would say an OS is used more than just for configuring network interfaces. I agree Applications are the same when written the same, but navigating an OS for files and maintaining some organization should not be undervalued. I hate the way Windows forces you down a single rode to do something you can do in multiple ways on a Mac OS. Then there is the things that make it efficient moving between apps and functions. Gestures, hot corners, track pad and mouse interaction, they all make a huge difference in ones computing experience. Windows has definitely gotten better in this regard, but to me Microsoft is still way behind the fluid movement and interaction with the OS do work in ways that are efficient for the user. This is all subjective of course, I know people who would agree the OS really makes no difference and they are all about the application itself. Thankfully we have options.

Thanks! Missed that.

I am preparing some info for a client as I am recommending the Affinity suite to them as they don't have professional designers and thus do not want to pay the monthly subscription fee for Adobe. Right now all they would need is Photos as they are using Canva *shudder* for their design work. They have recently rebranded and are very particular on their colour for print but keep sending RGB print files which is a problem as it obviously converts different then the CMYK makeup they have chosen with the rebranding. To make a long story short I think part of the problem is the pictures they are using in Canva being RGB and want a simple solution for them to convert to CMYK. In Photoshop this is a simple thing, I open the RGB image in Photoshop and simply go to Image>Mode and select CMYK. Other adjustments can be done after this. What is the equivalent in Affinity Photo? I am hunting around the software (v1) and cannot find this. Can someone point me in the right direction for a simple conversion to CMYK?

I can count the number of times I have used or seen variable fonts used on 1 hand. I work in print and design so get a lot of work from designer houses (not people with photoshop who call themselves designers). I think they are a great idea, but not something that drastically changes how people work in these field. Many fonts already have the gamut from light to ultra which I would think suits the vast majority of the world. Again I think variable fonts are a great idea and nice to always have options, not sure I would make such a big deal about the variable fonts not being in V2 myself.

Looks like it happens as soon as your mouse leaves spread 1 for the second spread so it now thinks you are on spread 2 and with your text box so big it goes blank. Reduce your text box and I bet it does not happen... till your mouse goes over the edge of spread 1.

You sound like a very entitled Linux user. The only possible reason Affinity would not want to develop for Linux and Android is before they can't afford it? I know it is hard to believe but the majority of the world doesn't share your views on how great Linux is as an OS replacement for MacOS and Windows. It could be as simple as they don't see a return on investment for porting to Linux, advertising, support, etc. The market is very small for Linux, the userbase itself is small, and even smaller still for those who would want or need the type of software Affinity is selling. They have plenty of room to grow in the markets they are currently selling, I would hazard a guess that there is more to be earned with Mac and Windows users vs bringing in a completely new market from the Linux community.

Catch up to what?

I think you would need to spend much more time with both to really see the differences and what each is better and worse at. That being said, Adobe has going for it that it is the standard. You have seen this yourself, your client wants .AI files because they are used everywhere and are the standard for vector work. This is not going to change anytime soon and if you are working or collaborating with other people you may find you need an Adobe subscription in order to properly work with them.