Fixx

It would be good to have different kinds of content aware tools in Affinity. I would think they are so mainstream by now that they will come sooner or later.

Pleased to hear that it's much improved in the 2.6 beta for you. 🙂
I've checked and this is currently by design, but feel free to post over on the feedback forums if this is something you'd like to see added.
I've logged the observed DWG import scaling issue with the developers. 

When saving the .tiff form, you can remove one letter f 
Many wide-format printing devices do not support .tiff
I rename each file every time, I remove one letter f
.tif is saved through coral Drow and Photoshop

Yes. There is also Calibre, Kindle Create, and others. They are all useful programs, but they are not as powerful and have some errors that are detrimental when you want to get a quality ebook. You only get what you pay for... which is not much. 😇

What an idea! Instead, use Jutoh (€40 to €80) which is by far the most efficient specialized software.

This isn't actually a bug – it's by design! But it is extremely annoying!
I'm sure I can't be the only one who finds it easier to work with facing pages, but, invariably, wants to export as single pages. I have no idea why it can't be an option or a sticky setting or, at least, included in a preset.

^ There was a time when InDesign didn't have this feature either. It was all done manually. 
Now designers are used to having span columns feature available. If Affinity wishes to compete they should add it. 

It should not be necessary to think about pixel alignment or resolution differences (as long as there is resolution enough).
The document should look the same before and after merging. Layered document creates a merged look on screen on the fly anyway and it should be true. If the look changes upon merging it is up to devs to correct behaviour, it should not be up to user to adjust layers.

Story editor was mandatory when computers were so slow that editing text in layout was not practical. Nowadays editing layout text is no problem.

Sometimes the bleed in imported documents is needed. There should be an option to make it visible. Minimal solution would be to import document as cropped and crop tool would reveal hidden bleed when needed.

I just bought Motion yesterday. Would love to have vector import from AD  :rolleyes:
 
I think it would be nice if Serif would add Motion XML shapes export to AD. Third party solutions or opening AD file format to Apple are not very probable so far.

It is useful if you need to maintain original scale (like in architectural drawings) or stretch it to some common scale. This is more about vector images of course.

or you can place discretionary hyphen in front of the word. That is cmd-shift-hyphen in mac keyboard.
But, it is all manual. Maybe you can find-replace specific words with no-break attribute?

Not available. You can use a clumsy workaround presented here: 
 

Well, CAD apps are great for design but AD is needed for presentation and making press ready documents. Scale function would be nice as it would take away one headache... when I have a rectangle 83 mm wide it would be in 1:50 scale.... ummm what...? It is not difficult but I always have to check I am not doing 1:200 scale instead... and repeat that with every object..

Yes, transform each is a feature I miss from other A-software. Transform each/in place/separately would be very useful. It should regard groups as objects.

Story editor was mandatory when computers were so slow that editing text in layout was not practical. Nowadays editing layout text is no problem.

Ok here it is as request :-)
 
1-bit bitmaps are used as line art (printed cartoons, illustrations), in silk screen printing and copydot printing systems. They also can (should) be used in coloured comics, where colour plates are overprinted with 1-bit black key colour. Possibly there are other technical purposes also (please list them in this thread!) There is not many apps that support 1-bit but for these uses 1-bit is crucial. 1-bit ensures that black image is NOT rasterized, resulting fuzzy outlines.
 
Technically 1-bit colour space should be easy feat. You can convert greyscale image to 2 tones (b & w) by thresholding image where light areas convert to white and darker to black.
 
Threshold should be adjustable so you can select how black or how white image is. (Scanners can scan directly to 1-bit but I think it is much better scan to greyscale and set the threshold manually.)
 
Alternative to thresholding is dithered image – that is, using something like grain mask or stochastic raster or Atkinson dithering to build the greytones. I am not sure that is so much needed as it is just a special effect (imho). Besides, there is excellent HyperDither app available.
 
There are some angles that are worth considering. Colour images are best at about 300 dpi when printed. 1-bit images display jaggies in that low resolution, optimum res is 1200-2400 dpi. Ideally 1-bit pixels would map 1-1 to device pixels but above 1200 dpi that is academic.
 
Details are not needed in that high resolution range, meaning that true 1 pixel resolution is not needed. Resolution is needed for avoiding jaggies, making lines and shapes smooth and clean. That also means that you can upsample image to smooth jaggies out. It is perfectly ok (even when not really hi-fi) to take 300 dpi greyscale image upsample it to 1200 and convert to 1-bit. In photoshop you can upsample in convert dialog (doing 300>1200 AND 8-bit to 1-bit) but I think Photoshop did it wrong and resulted jaggies. I do not know if they have corrected that bug (I use PS CS5). I hope AP would upsample and convert at one go and do it right.
 
There are some massage you can do to makes 1-bit appearance better. You can play with local contrast to make darker parts lighter so there will be more meaningful black and white areas in image. You can do it manually, or you can use filter (I think high-pass filter is used here?) I am hoping Affinity team would find some quick and easy slider here to apply in convert dialog to reveal more detail in final 1-bit image.
 
Tools: there is not much need for any special tools. (Or is there?) You can paint pixels black or white and that is it.
 
One simple effect/usage mentioned also in Affinity forum is that 1-bit image is placed in page layout app and coloured with front and back colour tools.
 
Last, you might want to consider comix artists' work flow. Old school draw black&white, scan b&w original (1200 dpi) and hand a copy to colour artist for colouring. Colouring is done to separate layer (well, sometimes physical "layer" with brush and paint). Coloured version is set in place in page layout and higher res lineart version is set in register with it and overprinted. Should colour image be CMYK? Or would it better be CMY, resulting brighter colours and less ink coverage, considering there is still black key 1200 dpi image being overprinted? How do you do CMY separation? Also, there are artists that draw with colours so that final artwork is coloured physical art board, and the either take the easy way out and do normal 300 dpi art production, OR filter out the 1200 dpi black key from full colour scanned original (not easy process..). Possibly Affinity can troubleshoot this process to simple and easy colour sep system for comix artists.

If you want to do your graphic novel in traditional way, separate 1200 dpi lineart plate and separate colour layers; 
check that Publisher supports placed lineart. Formerly Affinity apps did not support lineart but converted to RGB or rich CMYK. I did a quick test which seemed to indicate placed lineart retain 100K (great!). Printing a piece out would reveal if Publisher would halftone 100K lineart or keep it fully sharp.

Exactly my feelings. I'm backtracking on paying for version 2 at the moment. I'm out there conducting a serious review of the alternatives before I do so, and it shouldn't be like that.
I'd advise this company to develop a robust process for gathering 'professional workflow' knowledge (Forums are not it), and clarify really diligently who their target market is, or it's never going to reach the heights it set out to at the beginning. It's THE critical thing for their future right now (I've 10+ years experience helping big brands grow bigger, btw).
I'd love to know how sales of version 2 are doing, and whether they're on target with expectations. I'll be surprised if they are. They'll be blaming cost-of-living which will be wrong.
Here's how wide they are - I use ProCreate on the iPad for the quick n dirty photo work - cut-outs, basic adjustments, simple montages. Five minutes and I'm done. Affinity Photo comes nowhere near. And let's face it, quick n dirty photo work is the bulk of photo activity for design professionals who buy the full suite.

V2 is just disheartening. It's like coming from the great, original Star Wars Theatrical, being sold tickets to Empire Strikes Back, and forced to watch A New Hope: Special Edition -- the vast bulk of features are a hodge-podge of stuff the maker wanted, neither understanding nor caring what the audience wanted -- while being 99% the original. Serif could also learn from the various Death Stars down through the ages, it doesn't matter how numerous or fancy the features, if it keeps blowing up.
It's not so much that V2 isn't an Adobe killer now, it's that at this rate, it's so amply clear that it will never even be a contender. There's just so much wasted potential and time, so much missed opportunity, I'll likely just go back to an old Photoshop when my V2 trial expires.
And don't get me started on those of us with the MSIX bug being forced to watch Star Wars: Holiday Special, Clockwork Orange style.

While I was nodding along to the UI frustrations, the big thing I see Serif seem incapable of grasping is colour, which manifests most obviously in the management of swatches.
During the apps early development - as soon as they added the utterly useless 'recent' colour feature, I knew they had no clue how important colour is to designers... Scenario that plays out again and again if you attempt to use it is: "ok, which of the last five shades of red sitting in the recent colour thingy is the red I actually used on that object? Errr, last one in the recent series, as in most recent?  Hope it's the most recent recent colour. Uh-ho, no. What now, there's 4 really similar shades of red!!!" Yeah, there's lots of other things to do to overcome it, but that lives in to my point that there is little point to the recent colour thing.
The colour features in the affinity apps always give the impression that, like so many in this world, they see colour as just a pretty, random, inconsequential thing designers and illustrators haphazardly muck about with, and they can't compute anything beyond that. When actually, colour is one of the most disciplined and important areas of designing anything.
It does not surprise me that you report @kal that version 2 appears to demonstrate minimal improvement in their understanding.

Only used Freehand at school, but we were taught to use find & replace. InDesign’s links panel could do something like it but not seamlessly. To be honest, I preferred InDesign over Illustrator for basic vector work.
 
With this 2.0 update of Designer, I feel kind of homeless again, it’s such a letdown that they let all these UI issues slide. Maybe they got hit hard with covid or something, they haven’t said. Maybe this is just the way Serif is going to be. But there is no alternative really. Seems there is no money in going against Adobe, otherwise we would get actual competition. I’m just floored with how disappointing this is. 

My memories of early OS X are actually pretty positive. (There were plenty of issues, but I think they did an amazing job of making it more-or-less Mac-like.) I know we look at OS 9 and earlier with rose-coloured glasses, but let us never forget…

Yeah, but I never bought the Freehand 10 upgrade because it was just that: a port without any significant improvement worth the cash. And at that time I also switched to InDesign 2 (not CS2!) which ran just great on Mac OS 9, so there was no reason to fully migrate to OS X yet. For a few years I had OS X installed – since the public beta – but booted the Mac from OS 9 for any serious work. I didn't fully switch to OS X before Apple finally re-added labels to Finder. Tagging files and folders with labels always was a key part of my workflow, and it still is.