Bit Dissapointed

Users keep asking about why Publisher doesn't flow text automatically like other apps. This is because the AutoFlow feature isn't discoverable - the Text Flow Out control must be Shift clicked so new users have to read/watch instructions or seek help.
I never use AutoFlow because it breaks my documents but the suggestions below would address all of these issues.
Add setting for automatic AutoFlow: Most apps have an on/off setting for auto flow and when selected will auto flow text without needing to click a control like Publisher. Those apps can also delete blank pages automatically. Publisher doesn't delete unneeded pages so to keep this simple, I suggest adding an "Automatic AutoFlow" checkbox to settings, selected by default, that would prompt the user to automatically auto flow when text is overset. In a perfect world, the alert would include a "Don't show this again" checkbox that would disable the setting without having to visit settings, to avoid annoying experienced users.
Add setting to limit AutoFlow to master page frames: The current feature is manual so pages are never created accidentally, but if the automatic option was enabled, it could get annoying when you temporarily overset a small text frame while editing an image caption. This is why ID limits the feature by default to primary text frames. Publisher doesn't have a primary frame feature but a similar option to limit it to master page frames would be nice. It should limit it to true master page frames, not to text frames pinned inline in master frames.
Add setting to always add pages at end of story: AutoFlow correctly creates pages at the end of a section instead of at the end of a document which is great for those who use sections. For those who don't and who use separate stories for each "chapter", Publisher really needs an End of Story option because otherwise the new frame will be created at the end of the document, potentially hundreds of pages later. ID offers three options: End of Story, End of Section, and End of Document but Publisher does a great job of automatically choosing End of Section versus Document so I think it only needs a checkbox named "Always add pages at end of story".
Add setting to preserve spreads: You might not want a single page to be added because it will mess up your perfect spreads which is why ID offers its "Preserve Facing-Pages Spreads" option. This option adds full spreads and not single pages and would be a good enhancement for Publisher.
Support multiple stories per page use case: When auto flowing a document page frame, if a single text frame exists on an existing page, AutoFlow will skip that page. This makes it impossible to use AutoFlow for both stories in a side-by-side layout (e.g., a Bible translation). AutoFlow could instead check if the new frame would overlap with an existing frame on the page. If it would overlap, create a new page, but if not, then create the frame on the existing page.
Fix issue with non-master frames created on top of master frames: When auto flowing a document page frame, if a single text frame exists on an existing page, AutoFlow will skip that page. But it will create a frame on an existing page with a large master frame full of text - the end result will never be usable. It would be better if autoflow also checked for text names in master page layers.
Thanks

User can't select first the "Align to" option in alignment panel beacuase it is greyed out. The manual says something different.
Here's what you can read in the help files for version v2 ↓

Before you comment:
I know this behavior changed between app versions 1.7-1.8. At the beginning, we had the opportunity to set the alignment parameters first, but this was later changed.Users quickly got used to the previous behavior before the change because it was logical and very intuitive.
There were many complaints and requests to reinstate the previous behavior. Yo can check it using the link bellow ↓
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/search/&tags=aw-3864,afd-3927&search_and_or=and&sortby=relevancy
 
Reasons to treat this as a bug and why i'm making the post in bug forum:
Incosistent behaviour between apps versions Actual steps ar not the same as suggested by manual  
Reasons to rolll back to the previous behavoiur and allow users to set the aligment parameters first:
Not logical/intuitive behaviour (not allowing to set parameters for action before applying that action it's a nonsense) Not a good idea to have objects leaping about the place before we go on to click the right options. It's very, very distracting and wearing, particularly after watching objects go to the wrong place before we set them up how whe want. Not productive and notcomfortable tool behaviour for reasons i mentionet above.  
Sorry, I'm going to get emotional here:
For God's sake why don't you let users use the options the way they want.
Reconsider your bad decision and bring back old behavoiur. Listen and don't be deaf to users arguments. You can only gain.
And a one more question to moderators, devs, anyone behind making this bad decision:
Why did you deliberately change the way the alignment parameters work when nobody asked for this and why did you not restore them to the previous version despite complaints and requests from users supported by rational arguments?

Hi @Sad userand Welcome to the Forums,
We do have a bug logged where the export can get stuck on Generating Export and this normally happens when the PDF file is either too large in dimensions or would be over 2GB in size.  On the Desktop version, you would get a warning on the Export Window about this but sadly, the iPad version doesn't have this warning and just gets stuck on the Generating Export message.
PSD files have a size limit in dimensions of 30000px x 3000px or 2gb file size limit.  So any files that exceed that, will get stuck on Generating Export.  This is true of V1 and also V2.

Those of us who use Affinity for something serious in a production environment certainly appreciate Serif prioritising a stability improvement first, so that we work in the best possible product until we can install 2.4.x, and no, it won't be 2.4.0 for good reasons. It may end up being a long while, so yes to the thoroughness and patience of adulthood.

This is a request that Shortcuts be made searchable in Preferences.
I had hoped that as part of the "Something Big" launch of APhoto Version 2 we would see a useful Search function in the Preferences dialog box. Especially the Shortcuts should be searchable. It's a feature that has been requested for many years. The inability to search Shortcuts is especially frustrating when trying to create new shortcuts.
The need for this Search was discussed at some length 2-1/2 years ago in the thread athttps://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/110065-publisher-for-windows-18-using-preferencessearch/
and 
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/68413-preferences-window-ui-is-frustratingly-designed/
I reported this lack of searchability as a bug in APhoto Version 2
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/171185-search-box-in-preferences-does-nothing/
I now understand this lack of functionality is not considered a bug because the Search works as designed and coded. That's why I am now making this a feature request.
 
 

That would absolutely get my vote!

When a company like Serif deliberately provides customers with such unconventional (and unpopular) functionality for years, it would only be good practice to offer a traditional one via global preferences or in layer panel preferences. Not per document though.
I would venture to say that I would strongly recommend that the traditional method is the default, and I can't imagine customers rush to switch to the untraditional one. But then Serif's advocates could sit in Nottingham and repeat in whispers "We haven't removed our method. We have not removed our method." in a rocking chair.

It could actually be beneficial if Affinity had an Import ... menu item from which you could import a number of formats such as IFF, and from there it is also more transparent that Affinity cannot necessarily also save in the format. This could be a smart thing to implement if it is also coded appropriately, so that plugins can be created for import.
There will be some fighting over the concepts of place and import content, but nothing a good UXer can't solve. It can be simplified.

It was such a versatile and ubiquitous format in its day and that's why I think it deserves to be readable by the Affinity suite - I don't know how much work it would take since the code to read the files is open source (linked in my OP) but anyway I won't hold my breath.
Anyway my immediate needs are met by GIMP, XnView and ImageMagick (the latter two I only learned of today) so many thanks everyone!
Alex

Those of us who use Affinity for something serious in a production environment certainly appreciate Serif prioritising a stability improvement first, so that we work in the best possible product until we can install 2.4.x, and no, it won't be 2.4.0 for good reasons. It may end up being a long while, so yes to the thoroughness and patience of adulthood.

It's a very versatile storage format that was far, far ahead of its time. The IFF format was innovative because it addressed challenges and needs that would later become central in the multimedia and data storage industry. Its modular and flexible nature made it timeless, and it continues to be of interest to some today.
Today, several commercial and non-commercial image editing programs can open Amiga IFF/ILBM images. Some commercial options include Adobe Photoshop and Corel PaintShop Pro. Additionally, there are free and open-source programs like GIMP that can also handle IFF/ILBM images. XnView, IrfanView, Paint.NET also opens such images.
The format is still being used in some - let's call them retro circles - as the Amiga emulator market is thriving, Amiga enthusiasts are active, and the demoscene is still alive, although the number of users is relatively small, of course.
I haven't heard of it being used in legacy systems for a long time. However, it has not been removed even from Photoshop, but they have also had the code for it for years.

i, for one, don't want AI in Affinity products.
i am moving away from adobe products due to their push to AI, without improving core features & long standing bugs.
AI has been trained on stolen artwork. adobe profits from AI-gen photos that are being used to create misinformation online. adobe does not give artists in their stock art store the ability to opt out of their AI training theft.
despite the ability to opt-out of their firefly software features, i can't continue to financially support anti-artist policies/behavior.
there is nothing intelligent in AI algorithms.
focus on improving core features & make a solid product that will outlast the AI trend.
surpass adobe's stale offerings.

Well, I got a little carried away: nothing has really changed in terms of managing Stage Manager... especially since the Command + M shortcut still doesn't work!...

I am truly looking forward to the time when AI is not just fancy features, but when companies' approach to its application matures, allowing AI to quietly take the burden of routine workflows off my shoulders and those of others. There is so much that can be replaced or supported in Photoshop, and thus in Photo as well, that books could be written about it. The companies that succeed in this will become so unreasonably better that the alternative will seem ridiculous. And at some point, it will not even be premium features. So yes, companies like Serif Software need to be alert now.
And this also applies to Serif's opportunity to use AI in the development of Affinity in terms of new features, optimization, usage and feedback analysis and bug fixing. It's about getting started and utilizing the potential.
Of all the factors I've encountered that limit what I can do, time is the greatest, with no close competitor.
And thus the day ended, phew. Let me see what I can and cannot accomplish tomorrow. Any assistance will be appreciated. Any significant help will be implemented as opportunity arises.

@MikeTO The numbers of time you had to say this regarding cross-reference features is getting crazy. Windows users are missing out on so many things atm. This is one of those things where I start to wonder if I didn't report it, does anyone even test feature parity across platforms? 😌

No thanks.

When a company like Serif deliberately provides customers with such unconventional (and unpopular) functionality for years, it would only be good practice to offer a traditional one via global preferences or in layer panel preferences. Not per document though.
I would venture to say that I would strongly recommend that the traditional method is the default, and I can't imagine customers rush to switch to the untraditional one. But then Serif's advocates could sit in Nottingham and repeat in whispers "We haven't removed our method. We have not removed our method." in a rocking chair.

It's a sad deficiency in this forum (which probably stems from the forum software) that one cannot ignore an entire thread. That would probably be the most valuable feature the forum could be expanded with.
It's endlessly exhausting when threads are expanded by the notorious giga-mega-posters here, with thousands of posts to their name, but amount to nothing more than bickering or endless assertions without anyone changing their mind or becoming wiser. It just results in a lot of valuable life being wasted. And, of course, when one has no stakes in Linux, those threads are also annoying to see popping up time and again.
I still have yet to see someone here post something as delicious and attractive as click-bait; what I'm after is more relevance and noise-free content.

This could be you - and a few others in this thread with black and white opinions - in a not so distant future:

The compatibility of sidecar files generated by Adobe RAW (typically XMP files) with other raw developer applications varies. Adobe's XMP format is an open standard, which means other software developers can use it to ensure compatibility with Adobe's products. However, the extent to which different applications can read and apply the settings stored in these sidecar files depends on each application's support for the XMP standard and the specific settings stored in the file.
Many non-Adobe applications can read basic metadata from XMP sidecar files, such as exposure settings, keywords, and ratings. However, more complex adjustments like local adjustments, gradients, or proprietary Adobe features may not be fully supported by other applications. This is because each raw processing software often has its own unique way of interpreting and processing raw files, and some settings may not have direct equivalents in other applications.
Some popular raw developer applications known for their compatibility with XMP files include:
Capture One: Known for its high-quality image processing, it offers some level of compatibility with XMP files, primarily for basic metadata. DxO PhotoLab: Offers compatibility with XMP files to a certain extent, especially for basic metadata. ON1 Photo RAW: This application can read XMP files and apply some of the settings, though it may interpret them differently than Adobe software. LightZone: An open-source application that can read basic metadata from XMP files. Darktable: Another open-source program with some level of support for XMP files. It's important to note that while these applications can read XMP sidecar files, the results may not always match what you see in Adobe applications due to differences in processing engines and supported features. For the most seamless transition of settings, staying within the Adobe ecosystem (like moving between Lightroom and Photoshop) is usually the most reliable approach. However, if you're looking to use another application, it's best to experiment with a few to see which one meets your needs and how well it interprets the XMP files generated by Adobe RAW.

Made in Affinity Photo V2 on iPad Pro.
 

When a company like Serif deliberately provides customers with such unconventional (and unpopular) functionality for years, it would only be good practice to offer a traditional one via global preferences or in layer panel preferences. Not per document though.
I would venture to say that I would strongly recommend that the traditional method is the default, and I can't imagine customers rush to switch to the untraditional one. But then Serif's advocates could sit in Nottingham and repeat in whispers "We haven't removed our method. We have not removed our method." in a rocking chair.

This works but the preview doesn't show the page that is exported. I had tried this earlier but didn't bother to export because the page that was previewed not correct! 

The options for this are confusing. You need to choose "All Pages" then type a page number into the box below. Might be more explicit if there was another option on the menu "Selected Pages" or something similar. 

Yes, I completely agree with this. Let’s hope they’ve got these updates on their road map!

The correct way to explain the absence of HSL in Photos RAW developer is that it is not a good RAW developer. It's most likely a mishmash of old algorithms and open source components made without contact with professional photographers. It was the same in Serif's previous image processing program. 
The companies that make good RAW developers also make some of their own advanced algorithms and have clear opinions about their product, not least because they have professional and skilled photographers as their customers. This results in really good products.
HSL modifications are some of the most common changes I make in Adobe Camera RAW and Capture One Professional. They are essential in RAW development either because of the equipment (sensor in particular), light and colour conditions at the time of shooting, small camera misadjustments at the time of shooting or the desired appearance of the output - and especially in connection with batch developments of RAW files.
There is no convinience involved; therefore, options for HSL changes are available in Lightroom, Camera RAW, Capture One Professional, DxO Photolab Professional etc.