wonderings

are you sure they are saved as PDF's and not Affinity files?

Lots of video editing options out there, would not hold my breath for Serif to jump into a completely new field of video editing while they are still working and developing Publisher, Designer, and Photo.

Word and Publisher are completely different programs. Expecting a page layout program like Publisher to act like Word and vice versa is a bit crazy in my opinion. So many things can go wrong with a file when exporting for Word, you are just asking for headaches.

It could, but that is a business decision on their end. They still have to put time into it and time is money. So if they don't see the return value based on the time/money put into it then they would not pursue it. I still question how large the potential user base is on Linux. They are not a standard in print, never dealt with anyone who uses Linux. Reason I am sure is there is no software, at least not the standard that the majority use. I think them going forward as well to try and make Affinity work in CrossOver/Wine would put them on the hook for support. If it were the other way around and CrossOver/Wine/Others decide to pursue and contacts Serif who then in turns gives them a hand they are not really on the hook to support as they are not pursuing it.

I have never worked this way with fonts and Adobe. I have thousands of fonts that I use and manage with Font Explorer Pro. Is this a feature that is really only useful for those creating fonts? I just don't see or can think of a benefit for work in print and design. I do like how Adobe handles fonts in packaged Indesign files. Indesign sees the font in the folder in the package and can use it without being activated system wide. This is helpful and functional when working with clients native Indesign files and not needing to use my font management software. Would love to have the same thing with Publisher when packaging files.

I really don't know why it is so difficult in Publisher and getting PDF's correctly. I took the test square.ai file that HYR uploaded. I checked first in Illustrator it is made up of 100% K and document colour mode is CMYK, all correct. I drop that .ai file into Publisher and then simply export as a PDF for print and look at the separations which are now a CMYK mixture. Why do I need to be playing around with profiles in order to do something so simple? If the file is 100% K then leave it be unless I choose to change and alter. This is over complex and not something I ever have to deal with in Indesign.

Did you go to this page to get your key for the 90 day trial? https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/90-day-affinity-trial/

have you restarted? Looks like maybe the application crashed or the OS itself crashed. The top bar is missing. I would simple try restarting and see if that fixes it.

Have finally gotten around too checking out the data merge function in Publisher. Using the just the basics it works well. I would like to see some refinement to the UI. I do not like the Data Merge Manager window always hovering, this should be able to be looked to the toolbar on the right. A big feature I think is missing (may be there but I am not sure where) is the ability to export a merge directly to PDF rather than generate a merged document with all the graphical elements and then export again. Should be able to cut out that middle step. I tried a simple merge of around 11,000 records. Speed is good and seems to be about the same as Indesign doing the same thing. Data merge along with PDF passthrough are big steps and massive improvements that make this much more usable in a pro environment. I may try some simple live jobs when I have the time and see how things go and compare.

You should not be expecting a perfection conversion going from Indesign to Publisher, there will be issues, some small, some large, but they will be there and you will need to check and watch for this.

do you mean text inside of a Corel document or importing an entire Corel document in Affinity? If just text I would think you could just select in Corel>copy>Paste in Designer. If you want to open native Corel files in Designer I don't think that is an option and would not hold my breath for that feature.

Again Serif has decided not to, they have heard your arguments and many others in the multiple Linux threads. They disagree with you at the moment. Would be great if that changed in the future, I remember using a Mac and how sparse software was, especially when OS 10.0 was released. In time it got better and better and now there really is nothing I can't do on my Mac. Linux has the same hurdles to over come, I think they are in a more difficult situation with the various distros and fragmentation that brings.

It is not as simple as that. They would now need to support a product running on Wine and need a team to handle that. If they are going to market it as working on Linux they need to support it, again they are not wanting to do that.

Because Affinity working on Wine would not be something Serif is looking to use to sell or market their software, so why invest any time reaching out? If Linux users are passionate and want to get more apps for their OS then they can approach Serif about what is needed to get this going. I would say the same thing to your hypothetical. If they were not looking to support or sell for Mac OS then yes it would be up to Apple or those developing software to make it work on Mac OS to contact Serif about their project. The key point here is Serif is selling to Mac OS, Windows and iPad OS. They sell and support for those platforms and only those platforms. If they were going to support Wine then they might as well just jump in and do a proper Linux release, which they are not wanting to do at the moment.

They chose to develop and market and sell for Mac and OS, they are not choosing to market or develop or sell for Linux or Wine

Is that something you would even want to advertise as a feature with Wine? Seems like a work around but not something you would use for marketing and selling more software.

I would judge them based on their product not what you think is a bad business idea.

Adobe has industry dominance and is the standard but that does not mean they are not looking to make more money, it is what they are in it for after all, just as Serif and any other for profit company. A good company does not just sit back and say "hey we did it, we make a lot of money, lets stop development and let the money keep rolling in forever!". They have shareholders to keep happy and need to find new sources of revenue while increasing their profits from what they have out already. I was not suggesting that Affinity wait for Adobe, I was simply using them as an example. You and others can tell yourselves as much as you want how easy it would be to make all this money when that is just not the case, there is so much more to running a business, especially in the software arena. Linux is a small market as is and would be an even smaller market for those wanting graphic software that Serif offers. I get the catch 22 with Linux but again it is not up to Serif to make that happen by getting in and trying to change things and increase the Linux user base. Linux is great for its functions, but for the masses it is not what people want at the moment. That can definitely change and grow, Apple did it so can Linux, though their model is vastly different as it is open source and you are wrestling with multiple flavours of Linux which I think can confuse people who are not tech savvy.

Seems very emotional as you are upset that they are not doing what you think is right. They have their business plan and direction and doing it. It may one day involve Linux, it may not. You are not owed a Linux version of Affinity and if you are going to dissuade people from using good software for a great price simply because you are not happy with them not developing for Linux I would say that is very childish. If the software is good then recommend it. Obviously you could not recommend it for a Linux user but why you would go ahead and dissuade people from using on Mac and Windows is beyond me.

Or they disagree, I know that is hard to believe. Not sure why you are getting so emotional and telling people to not buy a product because they are not doing what you want them to do. Seems like a childish attitude. Adobe not developing for Linux is probably a good indicator of the need and potential profit in Linux. They have the money and the resources and as they are in it to make money and if they could make money in Linux I am sure they would.

not sure why they would read the thread. They know that people want a Linux version and it is not in their plans to release a Linux version. Even if they were going to release a Linux version don't see any reason why they would need to put time into reading and following any Linux thread.

yes.

What evidence do you have that people are moving away from Adobe because of the subscription cost? Looks to me like Adobe is continuing to grow and its CC subscribers is increasing. I do think the price is high for Adobe CC if you are a casual home user, if you are a business making money from the software you should very easily be able to support the $50 a month.

I was just going to post on this and did a search before hand. I don't know if I am alone on this but I really dislike the way colour swatches are handled. Do we really need to have this long list of different hues for various colours? Please simplify or at least give us the option to reduce all this clutter. Attached is a comparison of Indesign and Publisher. I cannot even fit the entire list of colours in the colour swatch panel in Publisher. It is just unnecessary. Same goes for the Greys, though that is nowhere near as bad as the Colours selection. I don't see the time saving of having all those percentages of K in a separate section. Just go with CMYK, anyone can select black as their colour and adjust the tint as needed. I think in this case the best solution is following Indesigns function here. Simplify the colour swatch to the basics, show automatically any pantones/spot colours that might be in a placed file in this swatch panel automatically so I can use the colour with other elements. .

I would say there is a standard and that is Adobe. For page layout the standard is Indesign, for vector Illustrator and photos Photoshop. The vast majority of creative professionals are using Adobe (at least for print and publishing). I do not think there is any perfect conversion even among Office programs. I know in Microsoft Office word files can open differently for me then someone who sent me the Word file, which is why I always ask for a PDF as I will then get a file that looks how they see it on their end. Sure some are better then others but I think as things get more complex so do the issues with a standard file format that will work with multiple applications from different developers.