deeds

allegedly is the right word. Most of them use a bare minimum of C++ objects, and actually code in C for all the crucial stuff, surfacing an object oriented API for ease of use and bridging/binding to any required/needed scripting languages. The most important part of a game engine is the rendering which is all done in barely more than variations of C - the shading "languages" for GPUs.

At this juncture (point) in time, I think it's time to just accept that it's *pointers all the way down. *Turtles all the way down, too.

And yet, just as always has occurred, they and many other endeavours revert to C whenever each new round of ambitious newness flails and/or fails to realise its claims.

C is much older than the Apple II, and also stands for Chomsky, who is much older!

And a public relations company to do all the announcements that defers to the others for secrecy reasons.

Except games, audio, motion graphics, visual effects, 3D modelling apps and real time renderers, high performance charting, analysis and realtime trading software, embedded systems in just about everything, specialised equipment and just about everything else that cares about stability and cycles.

Speaking of Sweeney, you could put Affinity products on the Epic Game Store, and Steam.

That's Procreate's 3D model painting features. https://procreate.art/ipad/3d Procreate is the single biggest and best reason to own an iPad. After using it for a while you'll find yourself double tapping paper to Undo. It's that engaging.

Their products also require adoption of latest iOS and MacOS versions, and therefore newer hardware. Which Apple loves! And I think this is, sadly, why Affinity does it. To get that love. So they might as well use some of that love to their advantage.

WASM reminds me of Rust hype, which reminds me of HTML hype which reminded me of Ruby hype which reminded me of thin client hype which reminded me of Lawn Mower Man hype for VR etc etc etc. C is here to stay. Forever. And that's Ok. -- Embedding Lua is also light, fast and easy. end this is what the "for" in "make plugins for Affinity products" means. ie API access.

^^^THIS^^^ Reaper, on a Mac, immediately after Rendering (Exporting) an Audio clip/stem, offers up a popup asking if you'd like to go see the file in Finder (Return key is this option), or preview it right here and now, or drop it into the current project, or just continue - which is the default action if you press escape. This wonderful courtesy is reason enough to love working with Reaper. It just feels like they GET the audio workflow. MIDI... not so much, but Audio... yes!

those users are right here, articulating their thoughts and feelings and experiences. Instead of parroting this canard, you can, quite literally, just ask them what they think, feel and have experienced. At the time of his initial commentaries on UWP and the obvious directions of Windows, he did not have a store, nor have one planned. It was, in fact, a response to these issues becoming universal... by the fact that UWP closed the loop... it meant that all OS vendors were now attempting the same thing. When has Microsoft not had good intentions (road paved to hell, etc)? And I'm sure this guy is just "holding it wrong":

The crucial word here is "can", but is not just that, is it? Just as UWP was most definitely not just a new design metaphor and UI framework, as you first claimed. It's also a means of isolating/removing the choice mechanisms that users have come to know and love about their usage of Windows, to begin gathering both types of users (end users and app makers) into a process that's much more akin to the direction of Apple's App Store on iOS. ie even less free than that of the Mac App Store. This is what Tim Sweeney has most clearly identified and explained, as have many others. Note, your company is unable to identify ownership from either of these platforms' stores. Is it really a wise idea to be having anything to do with them if they're not permitting direct, identifiable relationships with your customers?

You really have to get a feel for how Microsoft operations are planned and executed over generations to have any kind of feel for what the OP is on about. That kind of wide context, and insightfulness is difficult. It's not expected of you.

Maya also offers this, and absolutely requires this of the user if they want to get to any degree of speed and fluidity within its byzantine organisation of features and functionality. Having set it up, it's almost tolerable to use it. Maya also has "right click markup menus" which are no longer covered by any kinds of patent protections and can be safely used by any kind of software for any kind of shortcuts. These are amazing, and actually had lots of preexisting art, so the claims over them by Alias etc were always a bit tenuous. These can also be customised within an inch of their lives, and often this is needed if you're doing repetitive works, or wanting to stay sane after coming across for a visit from 3ds Max:

No, UWP is the precursor to the MSIX approach... some just remember it as having bad UI because everything new from Microsoft also has a new and bad UI. https://www.pcgamer.com/tim-sweeney-microsoft-uwp-is-still-woefully-inadequate/

Something like this, or almost exactly like this, would be FINE!

Deserving of its own sloganeering:

It's me that switches OS, not the computers. I use a Mac and a PC, both are very fast. But under load, both will crash, entirely. The Mac less so, perhaps twice a week. But apps on the Mac will freeze, and need to be forced closed, quite a bit more often. Usually when least expected, definitely when least desired. Absolutely! Skin thick as a gum tree and sticky as Vegemite on a warm spring day and a penchant for Fred Dagg. Sorry to hear that, but... Just kidding! Have been down that road with both of them, locked out of Apple's iCloud, still. They won't believe I'm me, despite offering to show them passport etc. But... this behaviour is now endemic. All companies have now isolated themselves from their prole users and customers. It's as though every company is run by sociopaths delighting in making lives as difficult and tortured as possible, with a glee that's public. And then came the pandemic... wherein things went to 11 on all these scales and the massive corporations were handed the customers of every little and medium sized business.

These issues are far worse when using stacks of effects in Designer. The refresh becomes a slide show taking up to half a minute to redraw even on a modern machine with a strong GPU. No preview zoom level is an accurate representation of the export. And get much further from accuracy the more zoomed out, to the point where it's almost comical how different the real is versus the representation shown. Editing "live" becomes glacial at all somewhat useful zoom levels. Faster if extremely zoomed out, but then it's impossible to ascertain what the settings changes are actually doing to the effects. Exports often fail!

Blame Microsoft for a decision Affinity made about hobbling a key feature of a Mac Suite's interoperability within a busy desktop environment?

What's the definition of "work with" that doesn't include input, work and subsequent output? To my thinking, and probably most others, seeing "work with" implies in, on and out. If you're not able to export/output a format, you're not, to my thinking, working "with" that format, you're working with a converted version of that format that is no longer that format.

Probably older than you. And also have a long built up [Control/Command+S] muscle memory that twitches into action after every operation of significance to digital endeavours. This saves me daily, sometimes hourly, as I switch between operating systems and their various apps for digital creativity. There's still no fabled security, nor stability, when running many creative apps including game engines, whilst they all battle to get at video memory, main memory, GPU and CPU as greedily as possible. It's also fascinating to see which apps have good inbuilt backup systems, as these are often the most stable. I don't think this is a negative coincidence. I think their care for the users is such that they offer auto backup facilities with archiving AND good stability because they care sufficiently to work and think in this manner. The only was a lightly irreverent and facetious attempt at humour by way of referencing how shockingly strongly the "Sorry" stands out (to active, current users) as extremely unusual in this day and age, and harkens back to a time when we felt like there was a real concern for users and user experience, creativity and capability expressed through the manner in which the software attempted to get to somewhere like an empowerment of users.

For those naive about the operations of monopolies, look up Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

Here is a google translation of the above, well worth a read: Thank you Steve for the email that directed me here, and thank you Ash for sharing. I am a long time Affinity user and promoter, I know the Affinity team has done a great job, I wish Affinity well. Because of this, I have some sincere words to say: Premise: Affinity’s success in occupying the market is due to the pricing factor, but don’t play yourself “bad” because of this factor; Premise: The Affinity data format is still far from the "de facto standard", and there are not many and not strong bonds to maintain user loyalty; Question: How does the V2 Universal License verify the legal authorization of users on multiple platforms? This verification method is provided in V1, can't it be upgraded? Experience: Software companies need to continue to invest a lot of costs to maintain normal development. Pricing and charging are the natural and necessary rights of the company. Similarly, users also have the freedom and right to choose or not; Experience: Entering the market can be rough, but maintaining and expanding the market needs to be refined. Questions like "still have the issue of customers who bought the previous version 3 months ago vs. those who have had it 2+ years" cannot be handled roughly; Experience: Often when users discuss prices, they are not simply comparing numbers, but cost-effectiveness, or the "feeling" about the return of money invested, including the difference between this purchase and the last purchase. Therefore, don’t think that users who are “low enough” will pay the price, especially old users—because they have expectations for functions and respect. I hope you enjoy what @monzo @lettersign shared; Experience: The subscription model is not "heinous", and the market has completed the education of users on subscription services. Especially now Affinity's upgrade/price strategy is not much better than the subscription model. Just look at the feedback from the Mac App Store. It's time to think carefully. Refer to JetBrain's perpetual fallback license? Transparency: @ash, you mentioned the description about the V1 upgrade, but there is not a single word in the official website or email, and the QA section of the official website still says "Please bear in mind that V1 will no longer receive any updates.", um. .. any... Is this a hint to upgrade soon, or a warning to upgrade soon? Sorry, I feel all these negative possibilities; Transparency: @ash, there is no description of the cut-off information of "until 14th December" on the official website or in the email. Is it expected that users will be worried about missing the discount and place an order sooner? Unable to understand the reasons for not publishing this information; Laziness: @ash, as a V1 old user, I received the V2 promotion email in time. I think those emails that overwhelmed your mailbox are also V1 old users. Is it really so difficult to validate an App Store—especially with the current situation Compared? Suggestion: @ash, how about getting through the Mac App Store and Affinity account system? Seems like something that can be done with a registration form? @Sam Neil You completely misunderstand what lettersign means, and your expression is too unreasonable for old users. You have to know that Affinity doesn't offer any upgrades or solutions for users who bought the V1 version within two months, not even two days, right? In addition, those who express disappointment and disgust are old users who paid for V1 normally, instead of counting on "Freebie" or "Shareware" as you said;