nwhit

Like the old ones MUCH better!

As a follow-up (slightly delayed), we recently upgraded to High Sierra plus the newest 157 build. Thus decided to see if the spelling language had been resolved. In High Sierra, we were able to follow your guide for finding the improved Language settings where we could finally turn off the multiple never-used languages. We also had to turn back on British English despite having had it as one of the two "preferred" languages in Sierra. Once that was done and we restarted APub, we are now getting the correct choices of US and UK English. Finally!!! I think the main issue was Sierra versus High Sierra and how Languages are set/available. 
Anyway, RESOLVED!

Thanks for the info!! I was finishing up a business card (2-sided) in ID, but based on your post, copied and pasted to APub. Seems to have copied without any issues! Not sure if I dare send this output to the printer, however! Might be some other little surprises we all might find since this is a beta!

+1 on hyperlinks. Need them almost every week for documents distributed as pdf's.

That's been a standard with ID for years and it is how you move or send a working/unfinished copy of an ID file to someone. But it is still based on linked files. It simply collects and puts all the linked items, including fonts if desired, into a companion folder for delivery. 
If someone doesn't fully understand or appreciate why linked files are the "normal" method for placing graphics in DTP, it goes back to what I used to try to get across to my students at university. Without broad-based experience, you might simply not know what you don't know! Based on a very broad spectrum of media producers in both print and video (in the beginning, in the middle and even today), linked was and still is the "norm" and embedding is the option when needed for a special reason.
But you are right that it should simply be a main pref that can be set and sustain for all new docs in order to fit a person's pref.

+1

+1 on hyperlinks. Need them almost every week for documents distributed as pdf's.

I agree with Robinp. In the many years of using ID almost daily, never had the desire or need to open that pane any larger much less full-screen. And the APub Resource pane doesn't really have that many columns of useful info requiring much enlargement -- other than to occasionally detach it for longer scrolling needs. It just needs to be handy for routine use.
It will also help once they set the default to "linked" images/assets as opposed to the current embedded default. But it still is a routine workflow to be modifying and updating linked items.
It also would be important -- as in ID -- that this pane have an indicator warning symbol that the linked item has been modified as a reminder to decide whether the document's item(s) needs updating. 

I agree with Robinp. In the many years of using ID almost daily, never had the desire or need to open that pane any larger much less full-screen. And the APub Resource pane doesn't really have that many columns of useful info requiring much enlargement -- other than to occasionally detach it for longer scrolling needs. It just needs to be handy for routine use.
It will also help once they set the default to "linked" images/assets as opposed to the current embedded default. But it still is a routine workflow to be modifying and updating linked items.
It also would be important -- as in ID -- that this pane have an indicator warning symbol that the linked item has been modified as a reminder to decide whether the document's item(s) needs updating. 

If I select an image within a document, then go to the Resource Manager, that item is not pre-selected within Resource Manager. Thus I have to search through dozens of items in a normal document to try to locate the one I need to work with.
Very used to ID, etc. where when you select an item, the "link" is highlighted in the panel/list, thus allowing you to relink, update, etc.
As part of this, would think it would be much handier to have this Resource Manager as a panel that can be added to the sidebars since it gets used a lot in building, modifying and working with media-rich documents. We routinely modify linked items and need to update them within a document. Never done as a mass process, but done as items are moved, placed, changed, etc., so would be much preferred to have it in a readily available pane within Studio just like Paragraph, Character, etc.. 
Thanks.

Aha! I see that the Crop tool does, indeed allow the image frame to be "cropped" in APub. Odd way to do it, but it appears to work. Select image, select crop tool, crop the frame. then using the select tool, double-click to move/slide the image to reframe. 

There are numerous reasons to not disclose EXIF to either clients or end viewers. If you're not aware of the issues involved, you may not need it. But for many professional uses, it is required.

Suffice it to say that InDesign is and has been the predominant software for the creation of professionally printed documents and their associated PDF derivatives for various uses. Ever since PageMaker and then InDesign, this is the most-used "creation" software by professional shops. While there are many others (and I've used and taught most of the biggies over the years like Quark and FrameMaker), professional media creation shops still mostly use InDesign to create documents for offset printing and pdf versions of that print job; and print shops will most often have it as well if it is desired to have them open and adjust a file.
 
Therefore, as per my earlier post, we as a creative and media production shop have thousands of client documents/files already created in InDesign. It would be essential to be able to open and convert them in the new A-Pub. If that cannot be done, about 60-80% of our client work could not be done in the new app since the clients are not going to be willing to have us recreate existing documents (but needing updates, etc.) at their expense. And we sure aren't going to do it at our expense! 
 
As I said in my earlier post, for Affinity it's a matter of a slow rollout versus a faster rollout. If media production shops cannot use it to integrate into their InDesign workflow for clients until much later versions, then it will only be used for a "new" job or messing around. But even then, why create a client's job in a totally new format if that's not supported at other agencies, clients and print shops? In the pro world, you really do need to be able to share editable files and currently InDesign is the one most have/use.
 
I would love to adopt Affinity Pub. It looks good in the preview video and we do like AP and AD. But we need to be able to correctly open InDesign files in order to actually use the new app for more than playing around. That's just business.

Suffice it to say that InDesign is and has been the predominant software for the creation of professionally printed documents and their associated PDF derivatives for various uses. Ever since PageMaker and then InDesign, this is the most-used "creation" software by professional shops. While there are many others (and I've used and taught most of the biggies over the years like Quark and FrameMaker), professional media creation shops still mostly use InDesign to create documents for offset printing and pdf versions of that print job; and print shops will most often have it as well if it is desired to have them open and adjust a file.
 
Therefore, as per my earlier post, we as a creative and media production shop have thousands of client documents/files already created in InDesign. It would be essential to be able to open and convert them in the new A-Pub. If that cannot be done, about 60-80% of our client work could not be done in the new app since the clients are not going to be willing to have us recreate existing documents (but needing updates, etc.) at their expense. And we sure aren't going to do it at our expense! 
 
As I said in my earlier post, for Affinity it's a matter of a slow rollout versus a faster rollout. If media production shops cannot use it to integrate into their InDesign workflow for clients until much later versions, then it will only be used for a "new" job or messing around. But even then, why create a client's job in a totally new format if that's not supported at other agencies, clients and print shops? In the pro world, you really do need to be able to share editable files and currently InDesign is the one most have/use.
 
I would love to adopt Affinity Pub. It looks good in the preview video and we do like AP and AD. But we need to be able to correctly open InDesign files in order to actually use the new app for more than playing around. That's just business.

While noticing today's new upgrades for AP and AD, I stumbled across this news and the video. Sounds great! 
 
While I oftentimes hate to admit it, I started out on PageMaker 1.0 with the then brand new LaserWriter ($6k+) and Mac SE. I not only used virtually all early DTP/graphics software and new iterations for many of my companies (including a media production company), I also taught the software during its several-year rollout. Also evangelized and set-up numerous ad agencies, media producers, newspapers, printers and university "commercial art" departments in the "new" electronic publishing and graphics methods and equipment/software. Over the years, I used and taught most of the popular software packages. Some good, many terrible. I came from the "manual" world, so understood what was really needed for day-to-day production versus flashy features.
 
My 2¢ on the new A-Publisher is that I hope it can correctly open recent InDesign documents (we've stayed pre-cloud). While I saw one poster who wondered why anyone wanted to open an old document, the reality of media production has been and still is the ability to use the thousands of client files we store to either update materials, specifications, pics, etc., or to use an old publication/document as the basis for a totally "new" design -- but a "new" design that uses much of the old design as its basis. Just how it is for commercial design/publication work. And clients most often aren't willing to simply abandon otherwise good publications. Many just don't spend money for total from-scrartch redo's. Thus recycling is critical to a normal workflow.
 
If accurate import of InDesign (notice that I didn't ask for import of PageMaker docs????  ;-D ) is not available or working well, it would terribly slow down the adoption of this new software. Just can't spend client's money rebuilding hundreds and hundreds of previously created work.
 
There are many other "base" features that are important in DTP, but I assume Affinity has studied ID for quite some time. But it doesn't hurt to verify with people who make their living with this software every day for many, many years what are "nice to have" versus "critical". Could mean the difference between rapid adoption versus a multi-year roll-out. 
 
I'll keep my eyes and ears open to see how this all shapes up. Very encouraging. While our staff still occasionally curse and swear at things that can't be done in AP and AD, overall have been very pleased. So that bodes well for Publisher!

Well, here we are at v1.6.6 and into Feb 2018 -- still no sticky prefs/settings. Really a bummer. When we process 500-1,000 pics a day, really causes a lot of extra keystrokes/clicks/time/work. Love AP overall, but this seems like such a minor, minor thing to fix. And I do recall someone from Affinity promising that it was going to be fixed/added in v1.6. 
 
Sadly, our clients end up paying for the extra time/work. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE -- again! Please fix this for all of us who really use your great app! While it might seem like an insignificant thing, it is a HUGE thing when you do a lot of repetitive work in the app.

I agree on this. We were promised sticky settings for a wide variety of things in 1.6, but did not get them. Still cannot have settings for cropping, output presets, tool hardness, color swatches, etc., etc. stay/stick. 
 
EACH of us have prefs for many of these things based on our type of work and work flow, yet we waste time constantly having to reset things all over the place. And just trying to remember some of the settings each time is almost impossible, so we end up with varying settings each time we have to rest what is the "default". 
 
And so many of the defaults simply make no sense. Photo cropping is most often constrained to the original ratio and most want a darkened surround to preview the crop. Yet we cannot set that as a default! And color swatches for many, many people should have a default of colors, not greys. 
 
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE! Let people set their own prefs for these things by making them sticky like in most all other apps. We need to be able to set things for our workflow and be able to quit the app and still keep our most used settings. We were promised this here in this forum by Affinity and I am very disappointed that we did not get it.

I agree on this. We were promised sticky settings for a wide variety of things in 1.6, but did not get them. Still cannot have settings for cropping, output presets, tool hardness, color swatches, etc., etc. stay/stick. 
 
EACH of us have prefs for many of these things based on our type of work and work flow, yet we waste time constantly having to reset things all over the place. And just trying to remember some of the settings each time is almost impossible, so we end up with varying settings each time we have to rest what is the "default". 
 
And so many of the defaults simply make no sense. Photo cropping is most often constrained to the original ratio and most want a darkened surround to preview the crop. Yet we cannot set that as a default! And color swatches for many, many people should have a default of colors, not greys. 
 
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE! Let people set their own prefs for these things by making them sticky like in most all other apps. We need to be able to set things for our workflow and be able to quit the app and still keep our most used settings. We were promised this here in this forum by Affinity and I am very disappointed that we did not get it.

Currently in AP when you try to close a window/file that hasn't been saved, it gives you a pop-up to Save, etc. However, it does not then complete the Close of the window/file. You have to do a new Close command. Normal behavior in all other apps is the do the Save, then complete the close. Really slows down a workflow as is.

Yes, having processed several hundred pics recently, some needing cropping, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE! Seems the default should be constrain to original and darken in the first place! A real pain to have to switch it every time. Just more steps in the workflow.

Noticed that in the Macro Library pane/panel, if I close all the subs, when I restart the app they are all open again. 99% of the macros for styles, enhancements, etc. are seldom used. Really only want my own showing most of the time. The look of this pane/panel should stay sticky to however you last set it. 

Noticed that in the Macro Library pane/panel, if I close all the subs, when I restart the app they are all open again. 99% of the macros for styles, enhancements, etc. are seldom used. Really only want my own showing most of the time. The look of this pane/panel should stay sticky to however you last set it. 

1. A must-have, Save for Web as in PS.
 
2. Would be great to see the file extension when saving/exporting. Helps double check I'm getting what I intended.

Noticed that in the Macro Library pane/panel, if I close all the subs, when I restart the app they are all open again. 99% of the macros for styles, enhancements, etc. are seldom used. Really only want my own showing most of the time. The look of this pane/panel should stay sticky to however you last set it. 

Noticed that in the Macro Library pane/panel, if I close all the subs, when I restart the app they are all open again. 99% of the macros for styles, enhancements, etc. are seldom used. Really only want my own showing most of the time. The look of this pane/panel should stay sticky to however you last set it.