Vonsnake

Great news on the MSI installer, huge thanks for listening to the feedback! Will grab v2 again once those are live. Automatic updates for v1 refers to the installer, it updates the previous install entry in Windows to reference the new installer so you don't have to uninstall the previous version first. You still have to download the installer manually to update.

I'm down for smaller delta updates but not when it's automatic, that's a huge no for production software. My understanding of how this works is that you can disable updates but it's a single toggle for all Windows apps, so for users that are already integrated into the MS Store ecosystem this means all or nothing for everything they have installed. As a programmer who's constantly trying to work customer requests into a product I understand the push to get it in and a lot of times there's a long list of prerequisites needed before you can implement something, but falling back on pre-made solutions is not always the best solution. With Serif being a smaller company I can see why setting up your own solution for this would be a challenge, but when the solution is to change the programs OS integration and cause more issues then you're solving then you have to question whether it's actually worth it. I don't mind downloading the installer again for each update, a lot of software still does it this way, and I'm sure the majority of users can understand why delta patching wasn't implemented in v1. Honestly, with how other software in the industry rolls it's not something that I've even thought about as being a requirement.

Absolutely, 100% agreed and their interaction is greatly appreciated. It's also worth noting that they're managing all of this after a major release where they're going to be swamped with queries not related to this topic. However this doesn't mean that information they provide and actions they take can't be scrutinized, and the post has already been criticized with greater detail in this thread by people who share the same sentiment.

To install Affinity v2 I used powershell because for whatever reason, both of my up to date Windows 10 machines did not have the app installer installed and I wasn't going to go install it explicitly for a single companies programs. I've never used an MSIX before, so I googled what they were to find that there's a command to sideload non-MS store apps and then also find out there was an external dependency that was supposed to be installed so I didn't have to use a command line in the first place. I installed v2 on a system I mostly use for testing, it never made it onto my production machine. Software is important but first impressions are even more important, and my first impressions of an MSIX installation is that it's underdeveloped and currently should not be used in a production environment, regardless of how convenient and user friendly Microsoft's documentation pages make it sound. Affinity v2 could be the best program suite in the world, and as I said in the previous post I do like it, but it's a hard sell when I can't integrate the software into my system the way I like and it'll forcefully auto-update whenever I start it and there's a patch available. It's no longer about the software, it's now about the BS surrounding it and how I have to babysit and be weary of it. For some users this is fine, for others not so. As a suite of software being marketed as proffesional I would expect it to treat me as an adult and respect my ability to use a computer. Providing an MSIX as a reccomended install and MSI as an alternative install would have solved all of this because then as a user I get the choice. I understand that this would create more overhead for deployment, but with the responses so far in here it seems like sticking with MSI would have been the easier route for both development and support. The MSIX reasoning thread that keeps getting posted does not provide any valid pro points and comes across as a quick effort to justify the decisions made. Out of all of the software I use, I've not seen another company switching installers because of an issue with support cases related to the installation. To me that says there's an issue with Serif's particular installer, which isn't something I or any of the other people I've managed to convince to buy Serif software have experienced. With a cursory glance at forum search results, v1 install failure doesn't appear to be something that's a known or widespread issue either. How this is being handled frustrates me because Serif's business model and the capabilities of the software vs other alternatives to Adobe is a breath of much needed fresh air and I'm rooting on you guys getting a strong grip on the market. An installer should be something so minor I don't think about it and it certainly shouldn't be the reason to request a refund, but this change forces the software to be integrated into a half baked OS infrastructure that I and evidently other people don't want to be roped into. And this is after the hassle I had to go through to even run the file to begin with.

Agreed with this, as a customer I couldn't care less about what Microsoft wants. It's ridiculous that the method of installation has consequences beyond the install process and a utility (aflauncher) is being worked on to act as a quick and dirty workaround for one of them to address it. It sure seems like the MSIX installer is creating more issues then it's solving and is wasting time that could be spent elsewhere. "MSIX promises a 99.9% success rate. " Operating on a promise and developing with the cutting edge is a dangerous move. I've submitted a refund request, v2 has a few changes and features that I like but I can stick with v1 if this install procedure is going to be way moving forward. In hindsight I should have tried the trial first.

Created an account to comment on this. It's bizzare that only MSIX setups are being provided. I don't like having very limited and rigid control over installation paths and I don't see the benefit, at least not as a standalone user. If I wanted an app style install I'd have purchased it from the Microsoft store. I've been using Affinity programs for years and like what Serif have been doing, but without any further context this just seems like a change for the sake of change and completely unnecessary. I don't see what any reason could be for not providing an exe installer, especially since there's already one that works pefectly fine.