MikeTO

I am not a fan of Microsoft's automatic language detection, it is abysmally bad.

I actually had the same problem a couple of days ago (1.10 on Big Sur, MBP). I was in a hurry so I just changed the shortcuts to Shift+Cmd+arrow and was back in business. I retested it now since you brought it up and I have time and I can't duplicate the original problem, Cmd+arrow is working for me now. Here's one oddity about the Affinity apps I can't figure out. The other day I had the Insert Index Mark dialog open when I accidentally press the keyboard shortcut for Page Up or Down. Publisher merrily changed the page. If you do this you can't insert an index mark when clicking OK because the insertion point will no longer be where it was when you opened the dialog. Obviously this is not expected behaviour. The reason the keyboard shortcut worked is the full menus were still available. Apps are supposed to disable irrelevant menu commands when a modal dialog is open. Some of Publisher's modal dialogs are truly modal - for example, Document Setup and Spread Setup. If you try pressing Cmd+ P to print while you have these open it will beep at you as expected and you'll find that the Print menu command is disabled. But other modal dialogs are pseudo modal, they dim the document and won't let you click on it but they'll let you choose keyboard shortcuts for things like Print or Page Up. It is really odd to open the modal Print dialog when the modal Add Pages dialog is already open.

Best. Thread. Ever. 🙂

I cannot duplicate this with Avenir Next Ultralight with 1.10 and a similar Intel Mac with Big Sur. Are you sure that the ph is a ligature and not a kerning issue? As far as I'm aware, there is not a ph ligature in Avenir Next.

Unrelated, but you should check the capitalization of "And" - it's inconsistent between the various chapter titles. Chapter 1 is title case, chapter 3 is always capitalized. To solve your problem, you could try changing the capitalization of the chapter numbers (e.g., CHAPTER ONE to Chapter One or Chapter 1) which might provide enough slack to avoid the issue with the first chapter.

Most file formats allow for some variations and it's possible AfPub is struggling with the variation you are using. Or perhaps there is something non-standard with your files that Adobe long ago accommodated that incorrect variation which raises the expectations for other developers to build in accommodation for incorrect variations. This is not uncommon in software development. But without a sample file there's no way to test it. I understand that you can't share those images but perhaps whatever process is used to create them could be used to create an equivalent image of a dog or a chair that causes the same problem.

There's something going on then because 1.9.3 and 1.10 are not that unresponsive for me on a very long-in-the-tooth MBP. My book is hundreds of pages with hundreds of images and Publisher is pretty speedy on my old hardware. FWIW - I have linked all of my images to improve performance and file size. Most of the images are inline. I don't have any embedded PDFs or PSDs. I've broken my book up into chapters, each with its own series of linked text frames - I assume that helps with performance but I haven't tested it both ways, I've just been doing that forever.

Hmm, I couldn't duplicate the issue, I can type "Chaplains'" with the trailing apostrophe without an issue. I don't have the font though. I did have to unlock the group containing the frame before I could edit it - is there a reason why it was locked? (Or did Publisher do that automatically since I didn't have the font?)

Are you embedding the TIFF images or linking them? How large are they? I'd never seen a beachball when importing an image, it's always lightning fast, but my images are all optimized and all are linked. When I placed a large original of 130MB I did see a beachball and it took 4 seconds before the image appeared but that seemed reasonable.

Serif has grouped the attributes in the Context Bar into Paragraph and Character attributes. The Context Bar has the usual assortment of character attributes followed by character style. Then it has paragraph style followed by the usual assortment of paragraph attributes, the opposite order of character. I'm unsure why it's the way it is but there you have it.

That's interesting. Am I correct in assuming placing the same or similar image in 1.9.x was much faster? What is the image file format and could you share a sample here for testing?

If you purchased from the Mac App Store, you won't have a key to use the version from Serif's website.

Tables in professional page layout apps are not intended to serve as spreadsheets but to make tables in documents. Ideally you'd use a billing app that generates invoices but if you don't have that and you just want an invoice template to add up some numbers and apply tax before printing then I recommend using MS Excel or Apple Numbers.

This isn't happening for me. Does it happen with any font? What if the text frame is a tiny bit taller? Could you upload a sample file (before typing the apostrophe of course). What OS and version are you using?

I supported another professional app in the mid-nineties and people asked us for Linux support saying the same thing. It's 25 years later and Linux app sales are negligible.

Could you provide more details about what you were doing that led to the crash and which version of macOS you're using? v1.10 has been rock solid for me on a 2015 MBP with Big Sur. Can you duplicate the crash with a new file using the same features that led to the crash? Can you upload a sample document that crashes? Thanks.

Are you using Microsoft Edge? If so, you may wish to read this. https://www.windowscentral.com/how-download-blocked-files-smartscreen-filter-microsoft-edge

Agreed that it's for those who have the time, but it's not just so that Serif can get free testing, it's because even with enough lots of QA staff it's difficult to test on the variety of hardware, software, language, and document configurations necessary for apps as complex as these. Even with the number of people testing during the beta for 1.10 there were no reports in the final release candidate of the two serious bugs reported in the past few days (crash on opening and the inability to save). If just one of the people who is experiencing those bugs had been in the pool of beta testers those bugs might have been squashed before this release. I find spending an hour with the Publisher release candidate to ensure my own documents open, compose correctly, print, and save correctly is worth my time, but I know we can't all afford to do that. I do it just with Publisher which is the app I'm most dependent on, leaving the testing of Designer and Photo to others.

I think the point is that it is now fixed. The value you entered into minimum character spacing in 1.9 was ignored. The fix was that it's no longer ignored so your layout has indeed changed, but it's now respecting the value you entered just like XPress and InDesign. Just change the minimum character spacing to 0 and it should look like 1.9 again.

I'm using macOS on Intel and I haven't seen any slowdown with 1.10. The things that were advertised to be faster are faster for me, such as generation of thumbnails.

I don't have this problem with Safari on Big Sur. Strange.

I suggest uninstalling and reinstalling 1.10 from scratch.

Agreed. I would replace Insert Filler Text in the context menu with Insert. I use Insert regularly and Insert Filler Text only when setting up a new template. In fact, I think Filler Text should just be a submenu of Insert, it's odd that it's a top-level menu command.

It's a palette of 256 colours from a 24-bit colour space. Dithering is used to simulate more colours than can be stored in single image. Dithering was very popular in the eighties and nineties before 24-bit graphic cards and appropriate monitors became common.

This isn't unexpected for GIF - do you really need to use that format? GIF is limited to 256 colours so gradients often look dithered (what you referred to as splattered). JPEG or PNG (for online) or TIFF (for print) would provide better results.