CarterTG

@Lee_T - what happened after reporting this as a bug? 

I just have given up my hopes of affinity software ever getting any features or fixes the community actually needs. Iam happy about everything these programs are able to do (which is a lot) but I dont wait for anything new. Kind of frustrating tbh.
Maybe it would help to have paid upgrades more regularly to speed up development a bit? I really wouldnt mind paying a bit more for these wonderful tools, especially since iam currently still feeding adobe along as well. I would be happy if that cash could go somewhere *better* ;) 

Yes, I have also just made a comment in the v1 forum, I now understand.
This is truly an unfortunate bug to not resolve for more than three years, Serif. 😞 I have just tried using various Apple Magic Keyboards with my iPads, and it happens on all of them.

I'm there with you.  As a paying customer, it's an inconvenience.  Sometimes a major one.
My first install with that other company where they had Internet activation, the hard drive crashed in the computer as did the second hard drive.  So, two activations used up and, since the hard drives were toast, they could not be deactivated.  So, any time I needed to install on a new computer, I had to call that other company, wait on hold, finally get through, explain the whole thing and then go through whatever they had me do to activate it.
Next computer and next upgrade . . .  the logic board failed.  There's an activation gone that can't be deactivated.  And then that other company finally offered non-activation versions.  Did they tell registered users?  Nope.  So, by the time I found out, poof!, gone.
Did any of that stop pirates?  No.
But, me, a paying user, well, that other company basically treats you like you're nothing.  It's an inconvenience, a pain in the neck and sometimes prevents you from using the software you paid for.
So, no, never again.  If I can't "activate" and use software without an Internet connection, I'll pass.
I pay for the software I use.  Sure, sometimes when it's on sale or at upgrade pricing because, well, I'm not stupid.  If they're going to give me a deal, I'm not going to pass it up.  Regardless, I'm paying, not pirating.
I'm not interested in renting software.  If I buy a license to use it, I want to be able to use it as long as I have something that can run the OS required for the software to run.

Just my two cents.
A forced subscription would just make me stay at 1.x forever, I only use this software as a hobbyist and I don't want to have monthly payment required to use it. I also don't see how any professional would want this, pay forever or you lose access to all your work.
Any form of internet or challenge/response activation would also put me off. This was my main reason together with the beautiful UI for choosing Affinity in the first place. This would make it possible for Serif to pull to plug on any version whenever they'd like, similar to how Adobe no longer allows older CC versions because of licensing issues. And no this has nothing to do with piracy, if I wanted to do that I'd just pirate PS and the problem with older CC versions wouldn't exist either.
I trust Serif isn't going down this road, just detailing my thoughts.

We think that this time you should give Serif the time to work, and the time to deliver a thorough and important update. Probably more thorough than Serif is aware of.
Remember, too, that quality takes time. And it costs. And it's good that it costs.
Our impression of the Affinity trio is that the programs are made by too few, too busy and sometimes not competent enough programmers (vector algorithms come to mind, but also Photo which we can't use at all).
In particular, the number and type of staff may become Serif's biggest problem. And probably already is. For our part, we don't have the time or the business case to wait so many years for bug fixes or features, as has been the case since 2014. But we are only starting to evaluate now, so we hope the future is not like the past is described here in the forum (and in the release notes).
But beyond that, the programs are incredibly unevenly developed, and the order in which functionality is developed doesn't make much sense to us either.
Overall:
- Designer is an exciting program for bitmap artists, while it's an immensely thin cup of tea for vector designers. There is SO much missing that the program cannot replace real vector programs for professional needs. At all. What does Serif really want with this program?
- Photo is the most messy and mediocre program - we took it out of the evaluation after few days. My staff simply could not achieve the desired quality. Besides, the program is a sinful mess. The user interface, menus and panels have to be completely rebuilt from scratch. Tell us, are there no real usability specialists employed in Serif?
- Publisher is clearly the program Serif is most interested in developing, but it also lacks features that need to come soon, and come in good implementations. And there are serious signs that the user interface is not thought through from the start - the program risks drowning in panels and complexity year after year.
We're also speechless at the lack of accessibility features for PDF and ebook support. It's as if Publisher was designed in 1995. And what type of customer is it really designed for and for what needs - exactly?
So all in all, we hope that this time Serif steps back ten steps again, and fixes the mistakes and bad choices made along the way, and safeguards the architecture of the programs for the long term. And in the process employ expertise where they are on thin ice. This can be done on a project basis.
There is plenty for Serif to do - it will take time, and it must take time. Please don't push them into delivering more hacks. You're all going to pay for that.
/Eddie and co.

This request is getting years-long in the tooth. Designer on Mac has had accurate numeric measurement for years. Why can’t it’s IOS version have the same!?  Every project I start on a Mac can’t be touched on my iPad without losing control of its accuracy! 1.0625 on a Mac should be the same - editable and reflect-able as such - on IPadOS. 
 
please explain why this cannot be addressed. 

+1
wow, this thread is almost 7 years old

I have just tried to create a sine wave using equations as I have done before. The argument of the sine function now seems to be in radians, where it was degrees before. I presume this is a change in 1.8.
I created a straight line in a blank document 250 px high and 800 wide.

I wished to create a sine wave of three cycles, so the multiplier in the sine function is three times two pi, or 6*pi.
In Filters > Distort > Equations,  I entered
x=x
y+100*sin(6*pi*x/w)

John

So I purchased Affinity Designer for Mac and in all honesty it is amazing application and does 99% of what I need as a graphic designer. 
There is one thing missing! An IMAGE TRACE FUNCTION. This software would kill off Illustrator and would be perfect for any designer. Why haven't you added this feature yet? When will you add it? Will it be added?
A lot of people can't afford Adobe's ridiculous prices and use not exactly legal methods to acquire its software. I love using Affinity Designer but its just LACKING ONE FUNCTION, so PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE add an Image trace function and quickly! 
Many thanks!
Chris. 

I still believe it should be integrated for a better work flow. 
 

Auto trace!
How is this not a thing yet?
how much longer until you can program this function?
One of the glaring weaknesses in the program. That and the inability to inline.
every work around I have to go through reminds me that this almost a great program.
I once owned a truck that couldn't drive in reverse.
Today I will be asking my high school son what his work around for auto trace is.
I know he is using the software for a stencil cutter.
 
 
 

Here are a few things to comment on that I think are being overlooked:

This thread exists within a section of Affinity's forum under "Feature Requests & Suggestions"
- My message is a Feature Request and a suggestion about why it is needed.
None of the feedback / flashback to my comment has provided a justifiable reason to not warrant the addition of the image trace feature.
I have seen the developers mention that an image trace feature is only not currently implemented because they are unhappy with the existing performance of their version of image trace.
In other words, not only is my Feature Request valid, but they agree and have been working on it.

Adding this feature will in no way damage the viability of the program or make it less desirable as @JET_Affinity seems to imply.
It will only make it more desirable because it will service an additional user base. If existing users don't like / want to image trace, then they don't have to.

As for an argument that they should not implement this feature because they charge a comparatively small fee for their software already.
Well I expect that the Affinity team would love it if their software became the premier #1 software used by all designers. They are working to get there from what I can see, by offering what those at the top offer but doing it better. But the Affinity software will never make it to the top if it is missing key components.

We as Users are in an extremely fortunate position with the Affinity team because they are currently working to build their name.
This means we can get their very excellent software for much less than it's actual value.
They are being very smart about their business plan if you ask me.

I keep saying this software looks great, but I think it can still improve, and adding Image Trace is one particular way they can do that.

Yup. And so is the one I already have.
If I'm going to image trace then I'll use a program that can image trace - makes sense.

But what about buying a new program that doesn't image trace when what I want to do is image trace?
See the problem there?
Honestly it's a little confounding to talk about a program that doesn't do something it should, then the defender tries to support it by offering some other program that can do what the first program should already be doing.

I already said this - the Affinity programs look great, but Affinity Designer SHOULD image trace, it's an integral function to many aspects of design.

Launched AfPublisher on the MacBook Pro today. I've not yet upgraded to Mojave. After continuing past OSX warning me I was opening an app downloaded from the web, I was informed of the .133 upgrade. Downloaded and installed it. I continued to tinker on a new Publisher document by pasting some copied text from a webpage, readjusted the text box, re-flowed it into a text box on another page and finally, printed the two pages. When done, I closed this untitled doc without saving it. Switched to Safari browser to do some more surfing. A moment later, Publisher crashed with the attached dump:

 
CrashDump-170133.txt

I'm a long time Photoshop user.  One of the default things I do before posting photos to the web is add a title, description, copyright info, and keywords to my files.  I really, really, really want to be able to do that in Affinity Photo!
 
I've tried using a standalone EXIF editor on my iMac, but only part of the data added is retained when output for the web (after editing in Affinity Photo -- i.e. all keywords/tags are missing).

Just imagine some ideas, it might be part of the export persona; with full editable properties like author, tittle, description, copyright, etc...

I think many of the posts here miss the way live trace is used mostly today - what's needed is a replacement for Illustrator's Live Trace tool. You'd never want to use this for photos as firstly illustrator isn't for this, and secondly if you want that effect you'd be better off using photoshop (posterise tool etc). The Live Trace tool is either likely to be used for tracing previous artwork when neither the vector file nor a lot of time is available. Secondly, and probably the biggest reason why Affinity NEEDS to include this tool, is for illustrators and designers scanning in their artwork. This includes people like my wife who illustrates childrens books, and all the designers out there doing hand drawn lettering, elements etc. We know that is almost everyone at the moment, and I'm really shocked this isn't seen as a bigger need. Until Affinity has a live trace feature I will still need Illustrator and I don't want to be using two programs. I'd rather jump ship when it can be a replacement, and that certainly isn't yet.