m.vlad

If that's the case then we have our answer. They refuse to let us prove it and thus they refuse to even consider it.
If that's how they look at it then it seems they do not care if there is enough people to sustain it or not, they just don't want to do it at all because the only thing they are willing to consider is stuff that will skew it in such a way to justify it to themselves to not do it.
If they genuinely wanted to know then they would allow us the chance to genuinely prove it but instead they want to put on tasks that will take a very long time to build momentum on the hope it will be enough. This is like a older sibling giving a video game controller to their younger sibling that isn't plugged in to trick them into thinking they are doing something while you know it accomplishes nothing.
Quick note to Serif: the argument of "we're better than crowdfunded software" is an excuse and bad one, because a lot of people have used crowdfunding as a way to gather interest and backing to become a massive success. Font Awesome for example did crowdfunding to find out if enough people would back it to justify extra work and when they did it we proved that we wanted them to and thus it was successful and it got even better. (for reference:  Font Awesome on Kickstarter = 35,550 backers. They only asked for a $30,000 goal and the total raised was $1,076,960 . . . for a icon set! They gave us the chance to prove we were willing to pay and we did.

Apparently some of the downvotes were because someone already posted about the thing the same day.
 
These have quite a high number of upvotes and comments, I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase.

Apparently some of the downvotes were because someone already posted about the thing the same day.
 
These have quite a high number of upvotes and comments, I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase.

Apparently some of the downvotes were because someone already posted about the thing the same day.
 
These have quite a high number of upvotes and comments, I hope this proves that the FOSS-focused people do not represent the entirety of the linux userbase.

One last quote: This made me think of that Hiri commercial email client.
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/07/linux-users-are-more-valuable-customers

I disagree, if anything what I got from that comment is that some people want to pay for things, as long as they're FOSS because when the company fails, at least people will be able to learn from the available code of the FOSS app, instead of starting from scratch. That doesn't mean that they represent the entire userbase. I think this is something that should be discussed with someone like Black Magic Design, who offers a paid studio version of DaVinci Resolve, and see what their numbers are in terms of people who pay for the studio version on linux, people who use the free version and how those numbers compare with the Windows numbers. They're probably in the best place in the market to give Serif advice on this, since video editing and graphic design are similar industries with a lot of crossover.
As far as gaming goes, it's an entirely different beast from a design app, there's way less stuff going on behind the scenes and to be fair, most game developers either use an in-house engine, which they spent years developing because it's such a huge beast to manage and they haven't planned for linux ahead of time, or they use one of the existing Unreal Engine & Unity engines and either don't know enough about the linux market or don't have the capacity to export to linux. Or I guess there could also be the case they just don't care about Linux, or are entirely reliant on steam's Proton development which makes most games playable on linux. Sadly, Affinity does not have that benefit, Proton doesn't work on Affinity and even this attempt to get Serif to work with CodeWeaver seems to be a "oh let them contact us first" as if it's CodeWeaver themselves who would benefit from this, not you who'd get access to an entirely new market at the price of... a few hours of e-mailing?
Also, Mark, for the same reasons you mentioned you could say "oh people use free browsers, play free games and use free apps like inkscape, figma, gimp, photoshop online and others on windows, we don't know if we will make any money at all from it." and yet you did. I hope you can see how this sort of statement can appear biased to someone like me when there are a multitude of other better reasons to make the jump.

I think it's just a general sentiment that linux has that FOSS apps help the ecosystem more than proprietary apps, as a user put it in one comment, and I get that, I just think that it's a waste of time to invest so much time and money into a FOSS alternative when even a proprietary app like affinity struggles to take away from Adobe's market.

Oh well, this went as well as I would've expected. 

I was thinking of making a post today on a few subreddits.

I was thinking of making a post today on a few subreddits.

you have a limited amount of votes, instead of spreading them throughout the suite let's keep the votes contained in the same app, the one that Redsandro linked. The issue is most likely the same across the board but it'll take us longer to get there if we spread out the votes

I agree with what a lot of you are saying- Serif (mistakenly) doesn't understand the opportunity here, so I think this is futile. As exemplified by @Mark Ingram recently using the idea that the number of people here talking about a linux version is a metric. That's an absurd lame "metric".  It's a circular argument: 
In essence it goes like this: "Why should we approach the linux community, obviously they don't want it because we haven't heard very  much from them."  That makes no sense; for example I had never even heard of Affinity until like 3 months ago.  ..... because I run linux.  See the circle there? "The reason aliens don't exist in the universe is that I haven't seen one."
"The reason we don't support linux is that there's no demand." 
Should instead be stated:
"The reason there's no demand is that we don't support linux." 
They have this attitude that they're the gold and we're supposed to be bending over backwards to get it. No, they' don't understand, *WE* are where the gold is; a wide-open hungry market.  They should be bending over backwards for us, not the other way around.  We shouldn't need this whole plan of getting votes for wine support, they should have some of their devs in their making it happen, regardless of whatever votes there. 
I say we should just give up. They don't get it.

All the things I mentioned in my previous post. Using this as the method to gauge interest is flawed because it has so many barriers that will filter out people before they can actually say "me too!"

You don't get it, affinity photo already has the bugs attached to it. The Affinity suite has the same core code, and it's that code that's bugging out (working on the artboards, making new documents). I have barely used affinity photo myself and i'm also an affinity designer user mainly but consider this: if hypothetically no one here has an account before now, and they use their vote for this only, we only need 130 more people to vote (AP has 18 votes at the time of this comment). If we split the votes up it's more than double that to get both to 407 and even more if we also have publisher people vote for that app separately.
For this purpose of porting the suite, one app should cover most bases as they share a large chunk of their code. That's why I said earlier to keep the votes contained in one app, not because I'm a Photo user.

same
True, so we all need to vote only for Affinity Photo: https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=39311
Right?

You don't get it, affinity photo already has the bugs attached to it. The Affinity suite has the same core code, and it's that code that's bugging out (working on the artboards, making new documents). I have barely used affinity photo myself and i'm also an affinity designer user mainly but consider this: if hypothetically no one here has an account before now, and they use their vote for this only, we only need 130 more people to vote (AP has 18 votes at the time of this comment). If we split the votes up it's more than double that to get both to 407 and even more if we also have publisher people vote for that app separately.
For this purpose of porting the suite, one app should cover most bases as they share a large chunk of their code. That's why I said earlier to keep the votes contained in one app, not because I'm a Photo user.

you have a limited amount of votes, instead of spreading them throughout the suite let's keep the votes contained in the same app, the one that Redsandro linked. The issue is most likely the same across the board but it'll take us longer to get there if we spread out the votes

Let's give this a try. Cast votes for the latest reported version. We only need 407 votes to be at the top of the list.

Tbh i didn't even see there's a vote thing there, also you need to register there as well, so we're now at 3-5 barriers of entry to gauge interest? We've got people who use the forums, who've seen this thread, and now who've been to the wineHQ page for affinity photo in particular, are registered and voted for the program?

Guys, Affinity would be able to say its the only design app that works on Mars.

Guys, Affinity would be able to say its the only design app that works on Mars.

Uhm, sure, but they need to get this app working with a multitude of apps. Wanting them to make the first contact is a bit presumptuous. They don't get anything from this, since wine is a free project, whereas you have everything to win.
https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=39311&sAllBugs