SrPx

Amazitstanding.

Anyway, about the current situation, the XP-PEN Deco 03 is a good one right now (83$, I believe). Although I'd might better recommend to get a Deco Pro Medium (130$) (the Small in any brand, only if u solely work on photo retouch or pixel art) or a Wacom Intuos (non pro) Medium (180$) instead. The Wacom Intuos PRO versions at this size are way too expensive. The Wacom Intuos Medium (or any Wacom for that matter, versus other brands) if you are a light sketcher and prefer to get the best in pressure sensitivity and less lag. For some it compensates the Wacom's durability and reliability, for others, the Wacom Medium non pro lacking the express keys and a disk, plus the price difference is not worth it. IMO a Wacom Intuos Pro Large (L) keeps being the best choice in quality if disregarding price, in non-display tablets. Lately I recommend Wacom in these price ranges, specially for digital painters, while in display-pens, being the 22 inches model (non pro) 1k $ in Wacom, and yet 1080p, non laminated, sRGB (~96%) only, etc , the XP-Pen or Huion's offering at 24" (or 22" at quite a reduced price tag) and quite finer resolution their display tablets below 1k $ , there I see a more complex decision. IMO for comic pencilers and inkers Huion and XP-Pen make more sense price wise (but line tapering issues, wobble and other inconsistencies in the line art are more frequent in the alternative brands), while for digital painters (except those more heavy handed) and light sketchers that like to get registered even the softest touch, or that make pointillism and want the least lag possible, for those, Wacom is a better choice. Because yep, as many users report with repeatable issues, Wacom keeps being technically better. But in the display tablets, only the non pro Wacom, as the prices in the pro versions are 2x or 3x more expensive! 2.5 k or 3k $ (often having to get a 300 -500 $ stand apart to work with some functionality... or an ergotrom arm for much cheaper) for a drawing device is only for a small portion of artists worldwide, imo. All this said, with the mentioned XP-PEN Deco 03 most artists are good to go. Or an equivalent (crucially, please only get the battery-free pen models ! line wobble will happen a lot more with battery based ones) in Huion, like the Inspiroy models, unless the equivalent to those now are launched with a new name, haven't checked. Both quite cheap. I quite not recommend any 12 -13 inches pen-displays with whatever the brand, including Wacom. 16" inches screen tablets could be fine, specially for students and non full time pros, although the ideal is 22" and up, IMO. BTW, the software included, today means nothing. Is not really a reason for purchase. What you get are often time limited versions, and, except Clip Paint Studio Pro (which is really good, but is a time limited license when you get it with a tablet (I have permanent licenses purchased apart, quite cheap, directly from their site, and they have bargain offers twice a year)) is mostly lite versions or what I call "toy-apps" (again, except Clip Studio). Today that gift is a weak point, as Krita is quite amazing for painting and it's free. Sketchbook is free, too, although requires a free account (NONE of these are having solid image editing features. For that your very best option on an affordable way is Affinity Photo. And Affinity Designer for vectors, graphic design) and there are many desktop apps for painting that are amazing and below 50$.

And way more than 20 years ago.

In my entire country (and we're called first world), a lot of people is on 30/30 MB, "fiber", and some even yet DSL (well, lots of rural areas. Some don't even have any form of inet). Some people are just sharing the phone connection, for remote work! Others are in 100/100Mbits (I am...and even remote desktop tools of every brand to help friends and family is a royal pain with the ping). And certain number on 300/300 or so (with the several crisis, people downgrade their contracts, anyway, or just rely on the phone, to save bucks). But IMO is a minority. And yep, it's using phone cable to reach our homes, in most cases I know (EDIT: nope, it's not. Sorry, got confused for a moment). I'm telling you, this in a first world country. I keep being unable to see how (even with great ping...it's still traveling from earth to the satellite and back, let alone whatever other issues escaping your control, etc. It seems technology would make local I/O between CPU and RAM faster than that) the computer BUS, the connections between the CPU and RAM, at the current RAM speed (I'm thinking mostly in constant I/O, not in the case of sending a large file once and be done. IE, not like sending a file to render in video editing, or making a 3D render. But for raw editing very heavy files in tools similar to Photoshop or AP) and its connections with the GPU would be slower. How that wouldn't be much faster than, whichever your ping is, in constant I/O operations (I mean, internally in the 2D application, not solely when you save or render a file) that happen while doing anything 2D or 3D?. This is not like in games when most of the communication is small bytes of position or the like, after all, game content is pre-loaded in certain moments (start of a level, etc), and that stuff passed to a local temp file, even with some cloud based ones. When not just very locally installed, somehow. This internal I/O is quite constant in how graphic production apps work internally, or that I'm told. Like with Linux graphic software, I'd like to see it happen, but I'm an eternal pragmatist. 'Could be' is not "already", and by experience, due to the many factors, things change a lot compared to what one expected... I prefer to think of and rely on what works now... Also... not sure I want that to happen. Besides you do loose a lot of control on how that server machine is configured, versus having your hardware locally, I see that, yes, for cross platform usage it is great, but then if no local option is made ever more (or not pushed as much, which is the same than eliminating it given just a little time), we're completely at the companies (mostly the dominant top dogs) disposal to pay whatever the renting and whichever the price (and accept whatever the conditions) increases over time. I'm telling you, if that arrives, I'm ready to go back to my oils and watercolors. Heck yeah...

I'm quite not sure about that. Games are a very different workflow to, say, editing a 1GB image of many raster layers at high dpi, many effects,etc. Imagine editing a RAW with many live layer effects, already an issue with a native app... This is a similar issue than what we were speaking about some posts above with virtual machines, tho this is even worse. And the renting per se, I'm telling you, there is enough critical mass of people against that (I can imagine that a big percentage of Affinity customers are in this line of thought). Yes, Adobe has been able to get away with a large portion of their users (I'm sure loosing quite a bunch, too), but because they have the market monopoly. In every case when one does not need Adobe (IE, I definitely don't, and I do pretty serious stuff) , absolutely not, there are tons of very good non renting options, there were at least two good suites (besides open source) before Affinity arrived. I'd like to see a future when I can just buy a mouse, keyboard, monitor and a wacom, and connect that to some server, as all the hardware will be in such server, for doing graphics (for other things, yeah, why not). Any instance of that which I have seen or tried has been so, so far of what is needed in real professional activity, that I don't expect that to happen in quite some years.

The last answer I've read did seem to point out that they were not saying "never", but IF it would happen, it would be a 2.x version, not before that (if my understanding of English language did not fail me... again). That recent post is something people seem to not be considering, in latest comments. To be honest, I am not sure about what does that mean in reality (but definitely did not sound as "never"). So, yep, I'd strongly recommend to figure out a workflow with the existing Linux apps. My advice would go further: Maybe keep an eye on Windows apps being ported to Linux, be them Affinity 2.x, or any other. But in the meantime, build a solid workflow with what exists already (is a motto any pro should have, imo...). I was able to work for web and print (covering all the needs of a company) in a quite intense environment for many years, and had to do all sort of tricks, but it is kindda doable (always that your projects don't need certain requirements that not even workarounds would cover). And now the situation is a bazillion times better with all those apps than it was then . For instance, Krita supports CMYK (somehow), and Gimp is going to, soon. The interface is... THE SMALLEST problem. So I deduce a lot of people have not found the real issues with those apps, actually. They just got bounced back by the UI, it's like the 95% of what I use to hear as a complaint. But besides I firmly believe one must not get defeated by an UI, it is that I was in dire need (the company was very Linux focused, did not want to buy Windows software) so, I had to dig. So, one needs to get into the "I have to dig" mindset, with these apps. My effort with Blender has paid way too many times that effort. That's another thing those apps need: people working in the field, getting to use that, and explaining the tricks and workflows, (so to bring more graphic pros to the platform) or explaining how people from Adobe CC can adapt, showing real life projects workflows, not the usual super basic things (this is a huge issue in Linux graphic apps videos, specially in 2D /Design. Not in 3D). Me, am not gonna do that (lack of time and motivation), and also, I'm very comfy with Windows. That said, if Linux had the same software available than Windows, I'd totally move to Linux. But that's not gonna happen any time soon. Indeed, if graphics weren't my main duty, or I'd be working at a company doing something else (or graphics), then I guess I'd have a multi-boot (again), but mainly using Linux. What I mean is that for non-industry-standards projects, or, for light freelancing (better said : side hustle, not main income, does not have to be "light") for which you can pick your projects and discard those for which the linux graphic apps are not enough, you totally don't need Windows apps, for that activity. I perfectly know I wouldn't need them. And the problems are mostly with print workflows, as for web graphics, game art, anything screen based, gimp, krita, blender, inskcape and scribus (I know there are others, but some of the others are little more than toys, sorry...) do pretty much cover all the usual graphic needs (sometimes with tricks).

Indeed, for drawing and painting, Krita is quite a better friend (unless being technical drawing, or heavily vector based). For graphic design, those other two, yep.

What some other person mentioned is that "running" an app is not a problem. I worked years ago at a company where we were all the time using VMs. I got used to install many OSes on VMWARE and VirtualBox. As a graphic artist, the issue was with real projects, so, heavy ones. Meaning, many layers, projects for print in raster. Think of something 20k x 20k pixels (something in that line) with heavy layer effects (and in Affinity, many of those are live, which is extremely convenient, but also taxes your computer a lot). Also, not sure if some GPU based features in graphic apps do work great through a VM, not sure. Using dedicated hardware (ie, a video card for itself alone) and assign truck loads of RAM to it might come a long way, probably. I did not do such, but anyway, seems less efficient than using native apps for an OS, in graphic production, I'm used to know I need every bit of hardware performance, as I will get the thing to its limits pretty often (meaning, I prefer native apps for linux and native apps for windows. For other than graphics works (or very light graphic works)... Yeah, VMs are quite fine, that's my POV, tho).

The jury was obviously lacking that morning coffee.

It is already super cheap for what it offers. The comparison with Adobe makes it really evident. There have been huge discounts from Serif in certain moments, one very recently (50% or so). But IMO it is already a bargain. And yep, you can go the free route as well (Gimp, Inkscape, Scribus, etc). But really (and I know those tools well, too: I think those are fine), if you work doing graphics, surely with a single gig earnings you can afford the 150 bucks that the 3 costs in sum. Renting (can't buy a permanent license, either) 3ds Max for a single month costs 205$, just to have some perspective here. You own nothing after putting that money every month, and you must keep paying every month bill. That's a single app! I'm guessing you have been working with the cloud entirely, as you can only rent one app or the whole thing (and you want a replacement for the 3 fields), so is 60 bucks per month that you were paying... With a bit more than 2 months you get the permanent license of the pack, with Affinity. Or buy first Photo, then Designer, etc, as your pocket would go allowing. If not doing pro work, you can go for the free tools instead (even for hobby I'd recommend Affinity better), as the lacks there wont be too much of a problem if it is a hobby (other than the fact of Affinity's UI being much easier to learn and deal with). Can't extend much (work, lack of time) but to say that those free tools (Gimp, Inkscape, Scribus, Blender, Krita) are really in a sweet moment compared with how they were before. And yet so, even if using them ( I do) , you will want to get the Affinity apps, as IMO, for certain industry standards needs, are more complete and compliant in most of the cases (though is not Affinity's fields, I'd say that Blender and Krita are very much capable for any freelancing: IMO are a step ahead of the other 3 main open source graphic apps). I often combine Inkscape and Designer, as weird as it might sound, in the same project. And there are good reasons for that. But I don't use any commercial 3D app for my most serious 3D work: I just use Blender (3D printing, game artwork, etc). The nice thing is that there are fine zero cost solutions for doing graphics, now. Just you will not be able to reach certain specs of the industry, but that gap is getting reduced. To me, is not worth it the time and lack of some features to go the free route. At the price Affinity apps are. It is quite worth it for me to have them as my main 2D tools. EDIT: To be clear... you can do most of the pro freelancing with the free (open source or not) tools available. It is just that it will be harder (quite harder for some persons, easy for others) , and that (my main issue since 2002 and before) some features are not implemented despite being required by the industry, and this have been so for many years, although it is rapidly changing. You can still do freelancing intensively, just maybe not being able to pick certain projects.

There's a huge mass (proportionally, in the reduced numbers that graphic professionals are in the entire population, that is) of creatives of several fields that don't want to/can't use other thing than a mac (while I've seen tons of linux and windows users handling a mac with ease, tho). I've even passed quite well full job interviews (those with many tests and that) to be fully discarded just because my OS of choice, (said to my face, not something I "suspect") that the one I was more used to, was Windows with Linux a close second, not Mac OS (have handled it quite, though). Of course, the deep stupidity of the interviewer there (I remember in one of those cases he was actual designer) is remarkable, but that's how far many go with this. I've yet to find the opposite case, as most of the bosses in interview processes I've been at (assisting or not), that you wouldn't handle Windows wouldn't be the criteria, but if you knew your way with Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects (which run perfect in both platforms), etc, for the field and profile, and what projects and experience you'd have. Add to it how much of an allergic reaction seem many mac users to have with Windows. I doubt the Mac world is going to change badly in numbers, as I suspect if Apple moved to ARM, they surely have some ace up their sleeve: I don't know what's going on with the ARM new CPU designs, for example, maybe nobody but them knows. And I'd like if it'd all were to be reduced to Windows and Linux systems (I like 'em both...and Mac OS, I just don't like Apple's prices and general line of action) but I don't see that coming. Also, Apple was already not super strong in 3D at least in middle end (game production, etc). In high end they'll surely have the stuff planned, besides since always that area being very custom solutions based. With Intel CPUs security issues lately (less bad in AMD's, but I believe ARMs were the only ones free of the issues) and its race with AMD, not too strange that Apple wants to have more control over that critical part of the hardware. AMD would have been a winning bet (and would have allowed them to cut prices, or be able to do so, specially in higher end machines with many cores...imagine Epyc servers in a Mac Pro, or even just threadrippers), but I think there are a few things that Apple thinks wont play well with Apple's requirements (security, etc). Or who knows, maybe AMD denied an offer...

Bienvenido al foro. Creo que un número elevado. Pero esos trackings suelen hacerlos las empresas internamente, no es frecuente que una empresa publique esas investigaciones... Si les compensaría los gastos de no sólo crear la versión, sino también mantenerla (a lo que quedarían obligados si lo empiezan, por prestigio/imagen de la empresa, compromiso, etc), eso ya no lo sé. De todos modos, lo último que sabemos directamente de ellos es que no hay planes para hacer una versión en Linux para Affinity 1.x, pero NO se cierran a la posibilidad en 2.x, o así lo entendí yo. Esto PARA NADA quiere decir que lo vayan a hacer !. Sólo que no hay un no rotundo en la 2.x, no se sabe, seguramente no lo saben ni ellos (no estoy afirmando nada). (Muy reciente post: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/47502-affinity-products-for-linux/&do=findComment&comment=644621 ) . Mientras que llega ese momento (si es que llega.... ) o no, sería super conveniente que Linux ( "the powers that be", compañías, proyectos voluntarios...) fuera puliendo ciertos detalles que le faltan en cuanto a manipulación del color (no está lo fino que debería), drivers de al menos algunos de los top periféricos profesionales (algunos problemas hay aún...claro q no es culpa de Linux si los vendors no sacan el driver, pero habrá que inventarse algo, digo yo...he visto peña currarse un driver derivando de otro, cosas así), y alguna cosa más, para que si viene una avalancha de diseñadores, no tengan estos (a menudo poco dados a pelearse con el OS, muchos son maqueros! Conozco bien el gremio) que lidiar con ciertas cosas, aunque para un linuxero esos no sean problemas (para mí no lo son, y hace tiempo q desinstalé mis Linux distros). Ahora está todo muy mejorado, pero quedan flecos algo gordos para este tipo de actividad, aún. Estos... NO serían obstáculos para un diseñador DECIDIDO y previamente familiarizado a fondo con Linux, o tan decidido que pueda permitirse perder algunos clientes o tiempo, etc, pq de una manera u otra, se pueden hacer las cosas, aunque le falten unas vueltas a varias cuestiones. Para los que pedís esto y sois apasionados de Linux o para gente (como yo) con experiencia gorda en Linux, no problem. Pero uf, es que me imagino a más de un diseñador y diseñadora de mundo Mac, y algun@ otr@ de Windows... y ...problema, Huston. De todos modos, se solventaría. Si algo tienen los foros (y demás) de la comunidad linuxera es que ayudan a todo, pero habría fricciones para adaptarse, eso fijo. Sobre todo, que cuando estás con tu jefe o un encargo, no puedes esperar a que alguien responda o parcheé algo voluntariamente, especialmente en diseño, se quiere todo para ayer. Por eso, espero que en este tiempo se pulan buena parte de esas cosas; sería super positivo para que si llega una versión de Affinity para Linux, aterrice mejor, en un territorio menos yermo. De paso sería muy bueno para lo que ya existe: Gimp, Inkscape y Krita (principalmente), todos evolucionando más rápido que nunca antes. Gimp mejorando, Krita y Blender (lo saco del tema DTP, pero con Grease Pencil, que ha hecho mejorar muchas cosas 2D, animación 2D, y otras cuestiones, es que abarca tanto campo que hay que mencionarlo: Ya sirve para Motion Graphics y cosas muy a lo After Effects para publi, algo muy pedido para diseñadores 2D) también, se está viendo más dinero en estos proyectos, o me lo parece... intuyo que por fin hay más interés para estos perfiles profesionales en ese OS. Veremos. Yo por ahora tengo sacado el bol de palomitas, a ver como sale la peli (sigo en Windows hasta nueva orden, pero tampoco le hago ascos a instalar Linux si la cosa mejora. No creo que prescinda de Windows en mucho tiempo, por pragmatismo: Los proyectos para trabajo profesional tienen requisitos muy altos y complejos, se necesita el software más top posible).

Yes...If I make a big effort, during 2007 - 11 (I might be wrong) issues were some browsers (probably IE versions?) wouldn't recognize other than ico, while Firefox was one the ones to accept PNGs early on for the favicon. Back then we weren't using frameworks.... Anyway, the browsers issues and incompatibilities were way harder back then, in general (IMO).

Ehm... back in my web dev/design days you could make the favicon be a PNG... has it changed?

A huge portion of the industry does, tho. So much that is an entire environment of tools, workflows, clients and companies deeply tied to these two OSes, the entire problem is not just 2 or 3 lonely apps (there a lot more specialized tools lacking) being ported. Leaving aside that Gates is not directing MS since a while. Since this year, not even in the boards, as he wanted to dedicate more time to his philanthropic activities. Plus, the man ain't no evil. More likely I might end up seeing the problem partially solved from inside (true open source of REAL high quality like Blender and Krita, Gimp now improving faster, etc). The Windows and Mac commercial software devs, at least in what is graphic tools, usually have much lower motivation for that move (and typically they have a lot to cover already).