loukash

What? This is not serious maintenance, prioritization, management of the product, nor of the customers' interests and investment. It is not a small problem, a minor flaw, or a trivial impact on the customers.
Alright, I am writing a very critical note in my evaluation form, which I am to submit up the hierarchy, where quality software with assurances of stability both over time and today is being demanded. 24 months and counting since release of 2.0 and no remedy. I see.

"Critical" or not, it's genuinely puzzling that 10 years after its release, Affinity is still lacking a plethora of "classic" vector features which I've been using in Freehand 9 some 25 years ago. 

For those interested in learning more about the new multi-page spread feature, here are a couple of dozen draft pages from the next edition of my manual. This extract likely still has some mistakes and it's possible that the features will change as the beta continues.
Please let me know in this thread of any errors or suggestions. I'll share the final version in my manual thread when 2.6 is released.
Draft for beta.pdf
** Hyperlinks and bookmarks aren't included in this extract so clicking on the blue cross-reference links won't go anywhere.
** I didn't include the Document Setup section in this extract but note that there's also a new Reflow Pages checkbox in Document Setup > Model. This is the same as the Pages panel menu's Page Move Options > Reflow Pages command.

For those who would like instructions for using the multi-page spread feature in 2.6, I've shared draft manual pages in another thread. Please provide feedback there and not here. Cheers.
 

I think it's a bug...

Hi @Clayton King,
To export as separate pages rather than spreads, you'd need to set your document up using Facing Pages...

Trifold.mp4

For quite some time, as far as I can recall.

That explains a lot... You have no idea about what we are discussing. No wonder you keep missing the point.
 

And there you prove my point.   You said a DAM and integrating it in to AP (Photo). You don't understand, and that detail is huge.

The discussion for a DAM is a LOT more than an image catalogue.  I don't often use APhoto, but I live in AP (Publisher) and need to use a lot of digital assets, including images   Likewise ADesign people have different criteria and assets they want to catalogue. 

The database system needs to be a LOT more than just images, I assume it will have IPTC hierarchical keyword system?  Obviously, it needs to understand the current Spectrum cataloguing system.    There is a lot more to it than just extended EXIF especially if the files are not images.
It is easy to come up with a small image catalogue system but a lot more difficult to do a decent DAM. As I said before the devil is in the detail and details take time and expense. I have seen more than one project thrown together in the manner you are suggesting, only to have it scraped and started again from the ground up for V2 because  V1 had so many poor design choices and restrictions after it got  out into the field.
     

My partially color-blind bandmate would have loved it. His favorite joke is that about a year after he bought it, he found out that his beloved and allegedly silvery Gretsch guitar is in fact green…

This would mean that checking (turn on) the checkbox would turn off reflowing for that particular spread. Which, as @matisso rightly pointed out, would be confusing since checkboxes are perceived as switches and commonly use the positive label approach. Essentially "turn on" the checkbox to "turn off"  the reflow doesn't feel much intuitive for me.
As for the label name,`Reflow Through Spread` explains better what action the checkbox controls than `Island spread`.
The `Island spread` metaphor itself may be good, an advanced user "may even know" what it means, but for a regular user it means next to nothing. Even in Adobe they do not use it commonly, they barely mention it when describing a more advanced function, and not always.
Summing it up, as for me, I am happy with what is there now and I find what you are suggesting would be less intuitive.

Good heavens, no. A selected checkbox indicates a confirmation, something that is set to “on”. Bad practice to complicate that. This idea is like placing a sign upside down and telling people ‘just bend over backwards and you’ll read this easily.’ You simply don’t use negative labels like this and confuse users.
Fun related fact: one product in the company I worked for used a similarly worded label and, adding insult to injury (actually, doubling the injury seems more fitting), someone had a “clever” idea to use a toggle without on / off states, only coloured red and green instead. Good luck figuring out whether this was red because the parameter it controlled was effectively disabled, or perhaps actual disabling it (per the label) was …turned off? The product manager said he had a mind***k every time he saw that, lol.

I don't believe this is a bug, it's just not working the way you're expecting. You're trying to add the left page of a facing-page spread before the left page of a facing-page spread that has Reflow Through Spread selected. Just like in 2.5, this will reflow that left page 5 to become a right page 6.
To do what you want (keep page 5 on the left side of the spine along with the newly-inserted page), you must first select the spread with page 5, choose Spread Properties, and deselect Reflow Through Spread. Grey brackets will appear around the spread to indicate that pages will not flow through it.
Publisher 2.6 will have the world's most advanced spread management features but this power comes with some complexity. I know a thing or two about designing multi-page spread features but it took me a while to figure out, too. I've finished writing this section for my manual so perhaps I will give it a quick review and share that section here.

Export to PDF, then print the PDF… 
(I know it's another apparently unnecessary step but in practice, I found that it's the preferable way to print something from Aff Pub.)

@Return Thank you for the suggestion, but I had already discovered that ungrouping or changing blend modes can “fix” the export. However, that doesn’t really solve the underlying issue. In my opinion, this is still a problem with the software, as complex nesting and different blend modes shouldn’t prevent a correct X4 export, especially when X1a works fine. For professional software, handling these types of layered structures should be standard.

It is getting hard to keep track of all the things we have reported but I did report this one in the multiple pages feature thread. I also later reported that you can't change the spine location for a master after creating it. I still don't understand the need for masters to have a spine - I'd rather have spineless (haha) masters and just set the spine for the spreads they're applied to.
 

I see a lot of documents that look something like this

Whilst I would advise to try and avoid adding a single page sometimes you have to and to my mind Anchor Toward Spine has done a much better job of making pages that just need a bit of tweaking.
 

From build 2.6.0.2861 the Colour Panel's colour picker will to exhibit older (exiting 2.5.5 release) behaviour by using Option modifier when you Mouse Up.
This already worked on Windows before this build, but now it also works for Mac and iPad.

Hi
Just a bit of feedback now that I have had chance to play around with the new features....
I really like these new options!😀...So much potential! but I have some Queries! or issues😀 
1. Created a Trifold A4 just to play around with the settings and layout options. (A4 X3 Spread margin +3mm Bleed) [630 x 297mm]
This worked well didn't have any real issues establishing a layout...
2. So tried a bit more complex...Can you use a Trifold Layout (Centre) to build an inner page comic strip with template options?

With the Previous template/s I attempted relied upon facing pages | Margins and Columns to define the position of the panels and tiers In this case although it seemed to be a  simple exercise..Using a spread proved to be a bit more challenging! (More weird Stuff!)

So
Trifold 3 page A4 Spread +Bleed + Margins
a. Wanted to make use of multiple or Hierarchy of Masters to control/introduce layouts | Column | Tiers | Panels [Drag +alt Drag]
b. Add Mask Assets as previous method (needs new much wider layouts)(This will all work just need to get the sizes)
c. Add Block Panels as Assets (needs new layouts)

Notes
a. Columns appear to be be reliant on the page and margin rather than spread. Such that you can adjust the Page Margins independently/page but this affects the column layout so it is difficult without manually adjusting blocking layout | Guides to balance the columns across the pages of a spread. It would be useful for the column | guide options to take into consideration the spread dimensions or have the option of Columns to page | Columns to spreads
b. Alignment of objects seems also to be reliant on a page rather than spread. When you select 'align to centre' : The selected object is centred in relation to the spread rather than page. Could there be an option to align to the selected page in the spread rather than just to the spread.
c. Copy and paste tends to paste back onto the page from which it was copied rather than the page you have selected in the Pages Panel
d. Label. (Edit Spread) I like the idea of Labels being added to the Master Template > Spread Properties. (Reflects in Layers). I sort of though this would be a good feature for pages but not essential. I am not sure whether there is a bug here; but you can actually edit a label field in the Spread Set Up (Masters). When you switch from Spread to Pages. Both the tab and input field appear but input is ignored when you close the panel!....Is this a bug! or work in progress.. ? (Edit:Not occurring in New Beta: [2861])
e. Maybe need to manually add spacers and align guides

Samples as below


  

Coincidentally, I was faced with a similar decision: buy a 14 Inch MacBook Pro M4 or a 15 Inch MacBook Air M3, well knowing that waiting for the Air to get upgraded to the M4 was unfortunately not an option. But even with that being the case, I opted for the Air. After a few weeks with it (24 GB RAM, 1 TB SSD), all I can say is that the machine seems to be pretty bored with what I throw at it, including Affinity Photo files with 100+ layers. That's why I find it a bit surprising that you say you need the 64 Gigs in your Mac Studio, but I might underestimate the resolutions you're dealing with, and it probably depends on layer types and structure as well. Also note that memory management is not the same as it used to be twenty years ago. Modern operating systems try hard not to leave RAM unused, so you can't really tell how much is actually needed just by looking at memory usage. The memory pressure graph in macOS Activity Monitor is a better indicator here, but you may already know this.
To give you a bit of additional background: What I found so irresistable about the MBA is its fanless design. I do a lot of audio stuff, and having not even the slightest risk of ruining my voice recordings with fan noise (because there is no fan) was just too intriguing – even though you read a lot of reviews online telling you that noise is not really an issue with Apple Silicon laptops. Moreover, just like @loukash, I really enjoy the larger screen size compared to the 14 Inch MBP, especially for image editing on the go.
All things considered, I think I've found the perfect computer for my requirements – which, to be honest, have not grown to the same extent as the available computing power in modern Macs. As always, ymmv.

Last year I decided that paying ~30% more for a correspondingly equipped MBP 14" wasn't worth it and bought a 15" MBA M2 instead, with 24GB RAM and 2TB SSD.
Strictly "technically", the only "extra" I had to buy was a USB hub that has a HDMI port because an MBA doesn't have one.
On the other hand, I truly enjoy the "extra inch" display estate.
That said, I don't do heavy image editing in APh.
(But I do a lot of audio editing with iZotope RX Advanced and multitrack mixing with Logic Pro. The MBA does what I need just fine.)

"Critical" or not, it's genuinely puzzling that 10 years after its release, Affinity is still lacking a plethora of "classic" vector features which I've been using in Freehand 9 some 25 years ago. 

"Critical" or not, it's genuinely puzzling that 10 years after its release, Affinity is still lacking a plethora of "classic" vector features which I've been using in Freehand 9 some 25 years ago. 

"Critical" or not, it's genuinely puzzling that 10 years after its release, Affinity is still lacking a plethora of "classic" vector features which I've been using in Freehand 9 some 25 years ago.