bbrother

I'm using this right. Also i tested and used your steps. To clarify couple things: The logic that is used in that panel is that the »Align to:« drop-down cannot be set until you make the alignment. After you make the alignment the drop-down gets unlocked and you can choose the option you like. It's not intuitive but this is how its designed. As it goes to key object as I said before, First Selected must be set to use the key object as reference. There is no bug here and align to key object is working as designed. The only thing that can be criticized is that it was designed in a non-intuitive way. 2025-03-03_06-04-55.mp4

You are right and the process looks something like this: Alpha phase: This is the internal testing phase where developers and testers in the company check the software for basic functionality and fix any obvious bugs. Beta phase: This is the public testing phase where the software is released to a wider group of users. In this phase, users test new features and improvements while also helping to find more subtle bugs that may be difficult to detect in the alpha phase. Finding bugs in the beta phase is a joint effort between Serif and the beta testers but ultimately Serif is responsible for the quality and stability of the software he provides. In practice, if a regression is not detected in the beta phase, it is considered Serif fault and problem. Ultimately we are all here to help and it is only our goodwill that we do so, we are by no means here to do all the work for Serif.

OS: Windows 10 Pro 22H2 Designer 2.6.0 msi I tested it and unfortunately I can't confirm what you're reporting, I don't see any bug when aligning to a key object. The only thing I can think of is that if you're using the drop-down panel on the toolbar, you need to: Make sure that the »Align to:« drop-down is set to »First selected«, otherwise aligning to a key object won't work when using this panel. »First selected« option is mandatory to honour the key object and use its bounding box for alignment. Screenshot (alignment panel)↓

Or a deliberate strategy developed over the years to introduce flashy but flawed features and fooling with promises of improvements and great updates to keep sales going. Just as a reminder↓ Now, after some time, we can say that it was bullshit and an eyewash. A bad update can happen, yes, but when it does, you do what you can to avoid repeating the mistake, prioritizing competence and user experience. In Serif, on the other hand, despite the constant trend of bad updates with lots of bugs, degraded usability, there is no reflection, only disregard for the user. I stand by what @Circulus wrote. Stability, consistency ,transparent communication and taking your customers seriously.

I disagree. Their sole and primary intention is to sell. Deceive with colorfull ads and promises. Quality and user experience are sidelined if at all. Ask your self when where the last time they released a solid update, one that didn't break anything.

Modele używane w Affinity są już wcześniej wytrenowane za pomocą uczenia maszynowego. Po zainstalowaniu na komputerze użytkownika działają lokalnie i nie uczą się więcej ani nie przesyłają żadnych danych. Aby poprawić dokładność modeli, trzeba ponownie użyć uczenia maszynowego do stworzenia lepszych modeli i dodać je do Affinity w formie aktualizacji. Nie wiadomo, kiedy taka aktualizacja i ulepszenie modeli mogą nastąpić, to zależy od Affinity, a moim zdaniem raczej od Canvy, która odpowiada za tę część, ponieważ Serif ma w tej dziedzinie ograniczone kompetencje. Warto również wspomnieć, że Canva przejęła Affinity 26 marca 2024 roku. Stworzenie lepszych modeli będzie wymagało sporych nakładów finansowych, większej bazy danych oraz ulepszenia algorytmu. Oznacza to, że cały proces będzie kosztowny i będzie wymagał wysokich kompetencji specjalistów. W związku z tym nie oczekiwałbym, że ulepszenia nastąpią szybko.

The crop tool and clipping masks didn't require any changes because they worked fine. No one complained about them. Using the "selection box" at the size of the original object when it's cropped is: Impractical and confusing as it disrupts the usability and visual feedback when working with crop tool and clipping masks. Makes it harder to accurately manipulate objects, which affects work quality and efficiency. Fortunately, this issue has been given a bug tag and thanks to that there is a chance that it will be fixed.

Stability and quality should always be the priority, not time. You can't release an update when it's not ready just because some users can't wait for it.

If a regression is detected during beta testing, fixing it before a production release should be a priority and this is the key issue I have with affinity updates. It is worth mentioning here the particularly awful regressions that were allowed in version 2.5 that broke the Contour (AF-3789) and Expand Stroke (AF-3206) tools and that have been waiting to be fixed for 6-8 months or so. The only thing I'm counting on now is that the 2.6.1 update will come out relatively soon (weeks not months), in which they will finally fix the Contour and Expand Stroke tools and things like (APL-1797 / AF-5966) introduced in 2.6.0.

The States panel and the queries that can be set there can help you find locked objects. Create an query and use the [Locked status is] option (1). Choose the scope in Scope drop-down (Document, Spread, Selection) (2). Use the Select icon to select locked objects (3). Screenshot↓ I'm sure you're an advanced enough user to know the difference between a suggestion, a question, and a bug. So you could at least show a little goodwill and create a topic in the most appropriate place, saving the moderators some work.

And I think it's much worse and that it's an intentional, very unthought-out change in the old Serif style. It means nothing more or less that even though in a few days it will be a year since the takeover, nothing has changed for the better. 😥

Create a Text Style for an entry in your numbered list. While creating the Text Style check the [Space between same styles] option and in the input field right next to it set up the desired spacing. It is located under Paragraph → Spacing (see screenshot bellow) in the Text Style Editor alternatively in the Paragraph panel under Spacing. Apply the created style to all entries in your bulleted list. Using the [Space between same styles] option will add the space only between entries in the list as they share the same Text Style. Example file: example.afpub Screenshot↓

@GRAFKOM I agree with you that the reaction to reported bugs is not what it should be. And as for this regression, I do not understand at all why they changed something that worked consistently and logically to something that does not hold together, that requires additional steps and, above all, why, despite the fact that customers have reported the problem, there is no reaction. This should have been reverted to the previous UX a long time ago in some earlier beta iteration because this dumb UX change is simply indefensible.

@jackamus You are right, the guide lines should be an object that can be selected and then nudged using [← ↑↓ →] keys. Using the mouse isn't very good when you need precision and going to the Guides dialog thru Views → Guides... every time you need to change the position precisely isn't very efficient. Yes, that's exactly how it should work. When incrementing using either the mouse scrollwhell or ↑↓ keys and SHIFT key modifier the decimal value after incrementation should be preserved (e.g 10.25mm → 20.25mm). It's also important that decimal places that you can set in Setting → User Interface → Decimal Places for Unit Types should be taken into account. @NathanC I'm using Windows and sadly there's a bug where the increment is like this: 10.25mm → 20mm → 30mm → ...

Description: In the 2.6 beta there is a regression regarding what (default) object selection box is used when an clipping mask is applied to the object. Steps to reproduce: Create an shape e.g circle. Drag the shape's thumbnail and drop over another layers thumbnail e.g image type layer (this could also be another shape). A clipping mask is created, making only the parts of the photo within the circle shape visible. Observe the selection box used for selection. Observed Behavior: After creating a clipping mask, the selection box remains unchanged and corresponds to the original size of the image. Image parts outside the clipping mask are displayed as empty (transparent) spaces. The selection box still indicates the original shape and size of the photo, not the clipping mask. Expected Behavior: The selection box should adapt to the clipping mask's shape, as it does in the retail version (2.5.7). Notes: This regression affects also the Vector Crop tool. Impact: The current (beta) behaviour is is confusing and impractical, as it shows white empty spaces that users intended to discard by creating the clipping mask. This UX significantly disrupts the usability and visual feedback when working with clipping masks. The expectation is that the selection box will match the clipping mask shape. The current behavior makes it harder to accurately manipulate objects, which affects work quality and efficiency. Displaying the original selection box with empty white spaces adds visual clutter and confusion. *This is really a dumb UX change. **The previous behavior provided consistent and reliable logic and should be restored before the 2.6 beta release. Screenshot↓