Chills

That is why I moved form Adobe.
However, this does not mean anyone is going to jump OS if there are other tools available on their current OS, which there are.

Your argument starts with personal insults and them waffle. Nothing solid.

That is true for the professionals in the design, advertising and printing business. That said, I for example am not a professional. Far from it. I am just one of those numerous casual users who are happy that there is an affordable alternative to the Adobe subscription nonsense. And at the same time, I am a Linux user, too. So a Linux version of Affinity would be great for me and all the others who want to make the change towards Linux.

I wish you luck, as I agree with your comments regarding Microsoft.
However, as I'm not sure it will happen given the previous responses, wouldn't it be more worthwhile trying to aim for more organisation and focus in the FOSS community and to come up with a plan to fill the holes where creative-focused software is lacking on Linux?  The first step would be to have a clear plan of what's needed on Linux, the next step would be to discuss methods of obtaining grants and other funding to make it happen.
 

I am against Affinity apps on Linux as it is hard to guess what distribution should be supported. They are too many here. If you choose Ubuntu what about Red Hat Linux or other? I will be open thread about simulation using for example Wine and if it easy to implement suggest developers what can they do to open this option. Sometimes adding simple specification or answering internal question can add new experience here.
I don't see point supporting Linux on the first place as the most common platform for graphics developers are Windows and MacOS. I use all Affinity apps on both. I don't see any real advantage of Linux on place MacOS if I want MacOS experience. I'm separating from Open Source matter as it is taste matter. Except ideological reason like paid walls and some advantage for very power users (like customisation of OS) free of charge is not deal breaker when some hardware like Loupdeck is not native supported on Linux and if you have bad luck anyway you can not move full experience from MacOS and Windows. It is reality.
I think the best at the end is platform what is more comfortable for you to use because flexibility. If you choose Linux I respect that. My opinion is simply move to part how run Affinity apps using existing projects like wine and start pointing what is needed to run it better as the best compromise here.

Before I go any further, I am a long term Linux user and I would very much like to see the Affinity product range be ported over to Linux. However, that's not going to happen until the Linux user base grows to match that of macOS. Only then will it become viable to economically port over the Affinity products to Linux.
In the meantime, anyone can use the Affinity products on a Linux computer via the virtual machine technique as set out by Hartmut Doering below (which conveniently does away with the need for a dual boot situation):

While those statistics are interesting, the Linux market share will have to be more like 14.31% before software companies will start to sit up and take notice of potential Linux customers (and I say this as a content long term Linux user).

Is this of any use?
It is "Install Affinity apps (Designer / Photo) on Debian Linux"

It comes down to one thing: Money. Do the sales outweigh the development cost? If not, it's a no go in any business. 
Linux is fine, and I have it on a VM, but we all know that half the people on linux are there because they don't like to pay, which makes it even harder to justify, even if you had enough people who wanted the program. Designers, for the most part, are not building computers and putting Linux on.

As you say: Affinity have no plans to do a Linux version.
I am sorry if reality (both the engineering and the commercial sides) upsets people.
I will leave you to it. 
 

I can't produce sources right now, but this is referring to interviews with Serif staff and leadership that were published before the iPad proof of concept versions were shown. The near infinite zoom and tiled rendering feature from their floating point precision rendering system in Designer seems to have come from this project. As far as I remember, the decision to develop an Adobe competitor on top of that engine was made then, and that was the start of Designer for Mac.
But I'm sure someone from the dev team could give you a much more comprehensive answer.
The Windows versions use mainly .NET for the system specific parts whereas the Plus range used C++. What you describe might just be as simple as some component of .NET Framework relying on a different DirectX version than for example the Affinity renderer. Unlike the Plus range, the Affinity apps use a shared core and everything was developed on top of that, most likely from scratch, judging from all the stack traces I have seen after something crashed. Also keep in mind that modern DirectX, Vulkan, Metal etc. wasn't even around or at least not used when the Plus range was in active development.
Again I cannot provide specific links off the top of my head, and I don't know how up to date that information is, but this has been what Adobe has communicated in the past about their overall user base. It might also vary quite a bit from region to region.
As I mentioned in this thread before, Photoshop product manager John Nack has on his blog also stated that the reason for Adobe not to go to Linux was not a lack of a market or user demand, but that it would only shift part of their existing user base to Linux instead of generating new sales and expanding their market, which seems to have been their strategy for quite some time now ("Photoshop Extended" was probably the first overt attempt at this even before subscriptions). Which makes sense – you just have to keep subscribers happy enough to not cancel, but if you want to grow the profits, you need to instead invest your resources into features that attract new customers or sell additional products (more cloud storage, stock photos, …).

You are calling me a "moron" whilst I have over 30 years of professional SW development and run Linux here (having been a user since before KDE).  What I am saying are the engineering and commercial reasons why your fantasies are unlikely to ever be fulfilled, BTW, a position supported by Linus Torvalds.  Also, Affinity have said there are no plans to have a Linux version.

If you want an adult conversation based on engineering and commercial reality, fine. If you just want to expand on fantasies, go ahead, but you will get called on them. People only call for other people to be banned when they have no coherent or substantive argument against them
 

If the mods see this, they may want to consider banning you from this discussion or at least issuing a warning, since it is unacceptable to call a fellow forum member a ‘moron’. Please read the forum guidelines.

OT: so has the Citron 2CV with restored ones going for over £10,000!!!  Which is nuts.
(I changed on a program about them last night, I assume the Trabi's have a similar following)

The only way I know of to run Affinity Photo well under Linux is using Windows in a virtual machine as per Hartmut Doering's useful advice below.
I can't see Serif Europe or other software providers making their products available for Linux until such time as desktop Linux's market share approaches that of macOS.

As someone who has been in the SW industry for over 30 years, I am giving you a dose of reality.
4% is not better than 0% when it costs you far more to develop and more on an ongoing basis than you can ever recover. 
It is a net cost, there is no gain.

Linux is NOT a "community dedicated to making things work and supporting one another"  as Linus has said many times, it is a very fractured and desperate group which is why there are thousands of different Linux Distributions all changing asynchronously usually with no predictable roadmap.   In fact, there have been steps to throw both Tovolds and Stallman out of FSF because the religious didn't like it when they told some home truths about the state of Linux development. Particularly in the Linux Kernel.
I don't hate Linux, I have two Linux machines running here at the moment (along with Windows PC's and Macs)  but having a degree (BSc) in computer operating systems I understand the internals of OS and RTOS.   None of them are perfect, but I don't have rose-tinted (or religious in the case of Linux) glasses when I look at them,

So like it or not reality is reality and the numbers don't add up for a Linux version of Affinity.
It is that simple no matter how loud you shout.

.

This is 100% wrong. Over the last 30+ years, Linux has oscillated between 001 and 5% of the desktop market.
For 30 years it has been the "next big thing"  Yet 95%+  of the desktop market has ignored it.
Affinity have stated (several times)  there is no Linux Version anywhere on the road map.
There is no commercial justification for a Linux version.

That is categorically 100% NOT true. 
I went from Adobe to Affinity.
There is NO WAY I would use Linux as a desktop system.

That is categorically 100% NOT true. 
I went from Adobe to Affinity.
There is NO WAY I would use Linux as a desktop system.

i just plotted the Linux values from this website from 2010 until now:

@Chills ↓ look at the Last 90 days on there
also yes the userbase has been oscillating but it is still possible to see a fairly big upward trend in the last few years
 
pookiebear i think you meant macOS because if you didn't: can you tell me what's android's kernel?

Creating a version for Linux is akin to creating one for Android. No one is willing to pay the price for anything useful. 10 bucks for an Android app won't pay to keep the electricity on anywhere in the world. Neither will a few Linux users.
There's a thread here somewhere about Linux (still not) running on Bottles (or anything else Linux, for that matter.)

Serif is not in a war with Adobe. They just use another licensing model. There are zero politics in it...

Statistics based on very small groups, represented by developers or VFX artists, are not very relevant, if thinking to the general target of the Affinity Suite. A slightly more significative statistic, that of desktop OSs used to browse the web, say that Linux is a little more than 1% of the total (compared to the 16% of the Mac). A group of users browsing the web is likely more easy to overlap to a group of users making illustration at some degree.
Paolo