TheOtherRoland

Got it. I'm used to seeing "translate" on Facebook posts, so I thought they might have something on here as well. The good news is that, as of today, I can write in Chinese.

See. There is a God.

Loocor, I'm seeing your posts in Chinese. Not sure what you're saying: is there a link for translating foreign posts here?

This happens to people all of the time and different companies have different grace periods to get a free update. That said, the forum has been a ghost town for months because WE ALL KNEW that another version was coming. It wasn't stated as fact, but when the activity goes from full traffic urban to rural crickets, you can suspect that something is happening behind the scenes. My point in mentioning this is that I would have waited. Sometimes companies have sales just before they put out a new version — a cheap trick, unfortunately. In this case, Serif put out a new version on sale. Life is good. That said, I'm sure that they will do what they can to accommodate those who have purchase only recently.

The company did explain itself and why they "had to do" what they had to do, pricing wise. We are getting 40% off the upgrade price. The fact that we have to share that privilege with "outsiders" should not make us upset, unless we believe that we belong to a special club of insiders. (I write about human psychology and sociology, so these kinds of explanations tend to creep into my posts because I take my work home with me. ). That said, I get discounts on upgrades all the time. And here at Serif, I'm getting them too. I'm happy with that. Why aren't others?

From my experience using Apple computers since 1993, this is how software sales work. You don't get new versions free, unless you've won a contest or work for the company. The people who write code have to pay for their rent and food somehow. Giving everything away free in perpetuity does not allow for that. Q. What do you do for a living, and can I get you to do it for free for the rest of my life as well if I pay you once? (Don't say "psycho killer," cause that would derail my joke).

The fact that you guys addressed this issue speaks volumes about the care that your company (Serif) takes to please its customers. In most instances, and I'm thinking mostly about audio software companies with whom I have long experience, there is a tendency to hide in the shadows and let the controversy just blow over. Cowardice, in other words. So hats off to you guys for airing this in broad daylight before the public eye. That said, you don't owe any of us anything. I have been using Affinity Designer since what? 2016? And from the first day, I was already getting a HUGE discount just by using the software that your company makes. Since that time, I have bought the suite — all three — for both my Mac and PC at what is an incredible bargain basement price when compared to (that other company). And, it all works well. And you actually fix things that are broken. So when you create a version 2 and sell it at the same bargain basement discount, I don't feel any tendency to criticize you for not making me feel special, whether with badges, gold stars, free trips to Italy or an additional 40% discount on top of the 40% discount you're already offering. Let's face it, nature ensures that most animals are selfish out of a need for self-preservation. And sometimes that shows up a little too often in our behavior, especially where money and tribal bonding and affiliation is concerned. So, from the bottom of my heart and wallet, thank you Serif for your Affinity line of products. I use them constantly and commercially and they have not let me down. I have yet to update, but if I miss out on the discount period, it will still be a bargain.

Thank you for confirming. I would have assumed that the alert would have been part of the design — my audio software does that when I try to open an older file version. However, it's good to know that you guys are going to implement it. Users don't always pay attention to such details, especially hobbyists.

This cannot be true — except in a nightmare. Affinity would not sell a new software version that cannot open its own documents or requires an earlier version to open them. I didn't update yet, but whoever has, can you prove this statement wrong?

OT. Just as an aside, I would recommend buying the software directly from Serif vs Apple. It's just easier not having to deal with a 3rd party to install or mediate your software purchases. That has been my experience.

I think we've done pretty good in giving Affinity our creative software business — we certainly have never been "cheated" and v2 continues to be a bargain for pro users and hobbyists alike. Anyone familiar with having had to pay $699 for Adobe Photoshop CS6 in 2012 (or $599 for Adobe Illustrator CS6 or $699 for InDesign CS6) will appreciate that giving Affinity our business has saved us a ton of money — whether in paying for a yearly subscription or an outright purchase, which is thankfully still possible here. Instead of paying $1200 USD or more to buy Adobe products, I paid roughly $180 CDN for their equivalent made by Affinity. And so did the OP. And you complain? Although I wish I was a millionaire, fact is, I'm on a tight budget in having chosen the creative life. That said, I feel that Affinity has done people like myself a great favor in providing this level of software at what is typically a shareware or donationware price. I don't like parting with my money either. But I think that my desire to save money shouldn't leave others poor. Just sayin'...

My experience with recording software tells me that we should also expect Affinity v2 software to open v1 files, but not vice versa. After all, there were new features added that cannot be interpreted by an app that does not have them. The best approach would be for you to use v1 for all shared projects where others have yet to update their Affinity software. Another consideration, in general, is that on Macs, some people would also have to buy a new computer to run v2 — unless they use a Mac OS patch to install Catalina or higher.

My initial thoughts were also to create a choice for this feature: "show preview: yes/no" and that we'd get used to not seeing the color icons in a horizontal sequence. However, it cannot be dismissed that human brains react more efficiently to images rather than text; something to do with evolution and being able to identify a charging wild animal by how it looks rather than how it spells its name. Nonetheless, I'm glad to see that a new plateau has been reached in the Affinity line of products. Kind of like base station 2 on Everest.

That's what I did, too. But just having a simple "copy" indicator would be a big improvement.

Yeah, master pages without descriptive names are useless to me in setting up full sized books having so many distinct parts. If I was doing a brochure, I could probably get away with two and not get confused. "They" (Big Desktop Publishing) should do something to mark duplicate copies as copies to help those of us working on bigger documents stay organized.

In the layers panel, I'm used to clicking Command J and getting a duplicate layer above the one selected. That is the new one. When I duplicate a Master Page, I cannot tell which is the new one — the one on top or the bottom? It does not say "copy" or "(1)" or anything. So if I start applying things to that page — OR DELETING THEM — it could cause issues in my document using that Master Page if it's not clearly marked as the active / in use master, or the new one. Anyone else knowmsayin?

I found a solution and it's holding. But still, formatting the text in the TOC should be as simple and intuitive as doing it anywhere else. That is the high water mark for the programmers: MAKE TEXT STYLING THE TOC EASY. (Not a game of chance where everything is in flux and therefore unreliable)

The OP asked for someone from the company to comment, but no one has. I can't blame them. I think this text issue is a sticking point with many people who are wondering "How do I export a tab-delineated index page out of APub?" only to realize that it's not possible to do so. In fact, I've read advice from various sources on the internet for procedures that I can't engage because of this one limitation. Not being a coder, I don't know how difficult it is to add this feature to APub. But I think it would make a lot of us happier. However, you can copy and paste directly from APub into rtf format and work with it there. However, there are often "gremlins" from program to program when copy/pasting, so the work is never as clean as it ought to be. My kingdom (if I had one) for proper text export. :)

I've also noticed that my book manuscript crashed at times which related (in my opinion) to my needing to update the index. Or it was index related. I think the markers and the whole system of organizing a document sometimes gets dizzy and just faints. And when it does — I hear a thud on my desktop and a low moan as Apub hits the ground. Once revived, it remembers nothing of the event and we go on as before.

You're very welcome. Glad to help. And...the proof is in the pudding, as they say. I stand behind what I said because it really gave me the kind of precision I needed in creating the kind of book that I did. I have some tables and lists and things that needed to stay in place exactly where I'd left them (top of pages, etc.), so breaking the text flow between chapters was the ideal solution. It may also be the first book in history without hyphens at the end of each line. That novelty alone is worth the price, I would think. In case someone is curious, here's my book entitled: Clearing a Path to Joy (And finding contentment along the way) (I've heard from a reliable source that it's pretty good.) Good luck with your project, btw.

The two issues seem to have been related: when the TOC had all these duplicates, the numbering input system did not work. I guess the question now is "How did all these TOCs get into my document when it only has one TOC?" (being that it's a typical book, and I don't recall doing anything bizarre, like copying and pasting my TOC 13 times).

Has anyone experienced this? I usually use the forward and backward arrows for navigating to a page in my book manuscript but today I entered (or tried to enter) a number and immediately upon typing a single stroke, the program crashed. This happened 3 times in a row. Just restarted my computer, just in case. I'm on an old Mac Pro using Sierra using APub 1.10.1. Works fine otherwise, so it's a mystery to me why this would happen. I did use number inputting at other times (previous versions?) without any crashes. No idea why this would happen now - except that I'm sending my book to the printer today. Could be a "divine intervention" thing; gotta consider all the angles. UPDATE: I was checking the preflight and it was asking me to update the TOC. I checked it and found that there were duplicate entries of the TOC. Well, 14 of them exactly. Okay. Luckily I'm working with a duplicate copy of my master file cause this is getting scary. BUT... I deleted those extra TOCs and I tried entering a page number and now it doesn't crash. Problem solved? Or is my file dangling by a thread from a cliff with the intention to jump? Stay tuned for more after this word from our sponsor. (Feel free to post your own random sh*t in the spirit of this uncertain moment.)

I had the sluggishness issue (I believe) when working on the book cover. I had embedded the graphics. I then linked them instead. That may have helped. I haven't worked on the cover in a couple of days. I'll have to check on it again to see if the sluggishness is still there. I can't do metal on this computer. Too old - the card.

No, please. Don't get up. I've got this. Anyway, I solved the problem and found a possible bug. I had to delete the entire chapter (20) — text and master pages — and then add the chapter one paragraph at a time into new content pages that I added. Why? Good of you to ask. Here's why. I have index markers throughout that chapter and when I added a paragraph that I could see the index markers on, the file would not save after that — in most cases. So it seems that some but not all markers got corrupted. I can't imagine what I'd do if the whole index went kaput like that... Anyway, I solved all of this by pasting that paragraph into another program, which stripped away all that marker-based coding, then I pasted it back into the book file and applied my styles again. Voila. It worked. Then I had to reassign the index markers/flags. It was tedious as f... to do it this way, but at least I found out what was crashing 1.10 for this specific file. On other files 1.10 seemed fine, but somehow the index markers got corrupted or may have been mistakenly detached from their origin (at the end of the book) and this created the error (I assume) about "bad access." Anyway, I got my book file working again. However, 1.10 seems kinda sluggish to me, unlike when I was using 1.92. That's not what the advertising says. I'm getting beachballs here on my Mac Intel. So yeah, I think 1.10 needs some tweaking to get it up to snuff.

Yup. My Mac Intel Affinity experience is not what I'm used to. 1.10 has some molasses built into it. Pls clean the inner workings and apply a good quality grease.