qwz

+1 from me. Variable font support would be great. I see a lot of fonts on Google Fonts are variable.

Are there any plans of adding a two-dimensional alignment option? Akin to the "Tidy Up" option present in Figma.
I understand the objectives of those programs are a bit outside of the central scope of Affinity, but additions like that seem like the next logical step. Thank you!

So happy that my 12" record now has a real spiralling groove rather than a set of concentric circles. 😃

I made a bunch of presets for the Spiral Tool. I encountered one problem where the preview thumbnails are very inconsistent and hard to see:

In my honest opinion, I think that the shape previews should be just shown as thin vector lines rather than fills. All of the shapes I saved look the best when it's only vector lines. The fills just ruin the silhouettes. Doesn't help that the lines are all black and the fills are white.
I suggest just dropping the whole fill aspect and just go with lines. Spirals can be used to build filled shapes, but you seldom make filled shapes with spirals.
Also, after having made so many presets, I think it would be a good idea to make it so that hovering the thumbnail of each preset will actually preview on the canvas, just like how text fonts and layer blend modes behave. It takes a while to scroll through the list and applying multiple different presets, so being able to preview it when having a shape that works with that tool would be appreciated.

Apps: Publisher
Platforms: All
There is now a new option to go to your previously viewed spread in Affinity Publisher. So, for example, if you are on page 30 and then go to page 400 to edit something, clicking on previously viewed spread will jump you back to page 30 (and hitting again will jump back to page 400 – so you can switch between the two pages quickly).
You can find this option in the Document menu (Previously Viewed Page) for which you could optionally set a keyboard shortcut for as well as using the new button with the rest of the page navigation options in the bottom left of the UI as highlighted with arrow below:

 
On the iPad version you can find this option at the bottom of the view menu:

 

Hello,  I love Affinity tools... otherwise I would not spend the time making these suggestions.

Adobe defined most of the graphic program UI/UX paradigms in the 90's.  Adobe is outdated.
- Below we have two examples and I could provide 100 examples (almost all point back to Adobe Paradigms).

I would like to beg on my knees that the Affinity team considers changes.
If Affinity is open to the idea, I would make a thread of suggestions like these.. that I can add to as I encounter considerations.

I believe Affinity is close to being able to take certain markets and I believe simple changes like these will help sweep the people over here.
Because in the long run, we want less click-drilling and less visual filtering.
--
EDIT: The images below don't cover reference to PPI/etc. as I tried to keep this simple for now.. however it is nice that the thread mentioned this as it allowed me to keep this post less cluttered.  Thx  @v_kyr
 
EXAMPLE ONE
This becomes tiring in medium to long work sessions. It's outdated Adobe-think.

EXAMPLE TWO (792px x 788px)
(This was rushed.. forgive me for it being imperfect.)
AKA: 4k Res is common in the 27-32"(or ultrawide) screens.. hence the comparison section on right side, top half.
 

 
 
 
 

Thanks for making that clearer.
Yes, you can only distribute multiple layers – it would make no sense to distribute a single layer.
You might also be interested in the Alignment Handles – see attached image.
They can’t be used for distribution but they are useful for aligning layers in a different way.

That's a nice idea
I agree we should handle that better - we'll take a look.

You know Adobe bought Freehand, right? So… Illustrator didn’t innovate as you think. 

That's because what the flood fill tool does here is essentially just converting text to curves on the fly and then boolean dividing it based on the other selected curves. Depending on the fill mode, it places those curves either on top or inside the live text as its children.
In other words, the Vector Flood Fill tool is more or less a kind of macro for workflows that were already available previously if you were performing multiple steps manually (even possible in v1, albeit plagued by boolean operations bugs and limitations). 

Some foundries are now releasing only a variable font.
Which makes a lot of sense.
The current advanced font development process now uses a multiple master approach, so the sources created are inherently variable.
When the masters sources are done, push-a-button to export the variable font.
Producing the static fonts involves additional steps, and compromises.
Depending on the axes, the number of static fonts can quickly get unwieldy.
Most people just think about weight and width.
Using the OpenType "standard" ten weights from 100 to 1000, and the nine widths from ultra-condensed to ultra-expanded, and italics you get - 10 weights x 9 widths x 2 (regular+italic) = 180 fonts.
Then lets add an optical size axis.
What increment do you use for the optical size static fonts?
Merriweather has an optical size axis of 6pt to 144pt.
They only export statics at 6pt, 12pt, 60pt, and 144pt.
Even with their limited weights and widths, that ends up being 120 static fonts.
Playfair Display is being upgraded to include an optical size axis of 5pt to 1200pt.
It also includes a weight axis, a width axis, and italics.
Depending on increments used you could have hundreds of static fonts.
Science Gothic (a Bank Gothic revival) has four axes: weight, width, optical size, and contrast.
They had some discussions about how they could end up with thousands of static fonts (or variable instances) depending on the increments used.
That is with just four axes.
Roboto Flex has 13 axes.
If you used an increment of just 10 for each axis, that would be 10¹³ static fonts.
Additionally…
What is the proper increment for the Mutation (MUTA) axis in static fonts?
Or for the Gravity (GRVT) axis, or the Horizontal Rotation (HROT) axis, etc., etc.?
So far I have documented 59 different variable axes.
And many of those variable axes simply do not fit in a simple incremental pattern.
All of these pre-determined static fonts may not be "just right."
Variable fonts enable the designer to get exactly what they want, or require.
 

Dimension tool is not a priority (but I would be happy to have this tool…).
We really need things impossible to do actually with actual tools.
Can you deform easily an object or text ? Impossible
Can you blend two different shapes in a gradient ? Impossible
Can you create vector patterns ? Impossible
Can you transform a pixel picture in vectors ? Impossible
Can you add dimensions ? Yes. I know that it's a bit painful but you can. And it's more easy now with the End & Start options.

Please add DWG or DXF import and export. We are doing architectural visualisations and are tying to replace Adobe's Illustrator with Affinity Designer. We need to be able to import PDF's or DWG's and export as DWG or DXF for our modeling app. Unfortunately, these functions are strongly missing.

Hey, good news! So, it is upcoming...

Designer has also, at least, two "extra" tools:
Node Tool - can be achieved by double clicking on a curve; Pen and Pencil Tools - can be combined together to work just like in Freehand.

Again, a topic conjures up fond memories of FreeHand.
FreeHand had just one kind of text object. It could be set to auto-expand horizontally (i.e., becoming functionally equivalent to a so-called "art text" object in other programs) by simply doubleClicking the right middle handle. It could be set to auto-fit its contained text vertically by doubleClicking its bottom middle handle. The text objects could be bound to and released from paths (instead of being treated as a separate "path text" object). They could be threaded, whether bound to a path or not. They could be set to auto-expand when bound to a path, thereby preventing the problem of accidentally truncated text in complex maps, as is so chronically common in maps built in Illustrator.
This is conceptually parallel to the fact that FreeHand also never had any need for two separate selection tools. Its single selection tool enabled you to edit paths at the whole object level and at the node editing level. That elegant interface design made path drawing far less tedious, more fluidly efficient, and more powerful than any drawing program that insists on following Adobe's hideous model of two primary selection tools.
Macromedia finally gave in to ill-advised "demand" from Illustrator users to add a second pointer tool. When added, it provided absolutely no additional functionality. It was literally nothing but an accommodation to Illustrator-habituated users who just refused to learn that it was absolutely unnecessary. FreeHand users simply ignored it. It was not until FreeHand's very last version that its white pointer did anything that the black pointer didn't, and even that was a minor detail that could have been implemented without adding another tool.
Despite Illustrator's two selection tools (three, really, when you include the ill-conceived "Convert AnchorPoint Tool")--actually because of it--Illustrator to this day does not "know the difference" between a path being selected at the object level versus merely having all its AnchorPoints selected. This causes all kinds of silly inconsistencies such as being unable to use the Break Anchor Point command when all of a path's Anchor Points are selected. (You have to unintuitively de-select at least one Anchor Point for it to work.)
Because object selection is so bedrock foundational to an object-based program, its tedious effects "cascade upward" throughout the program's interface. In a nutshell, it's what makes working in Illustrator feel as frustrating to beginners as trying to eat spaghetti with a single chopstick.
It's because Illustrator's white pointer behavior is conceptually "upside down" from intuition. It's the selection tool you have to use to edit a path.  But its first click always selects the most "internal" sub-part element of whatever construct you are trying to manipulate. Rather than intuitively selecting an object of interest and then "digging down" to its subparts with subsequent clicks, Illustrator's scheme first selects some "molecule" of the object of interest and requires use of a modifier key and subsequent clicks to "back out" of it to each next higher level.
It's metaphorically like getting up in the morning and needing a pair of socks. So you intuitively try to open your sock drawer. But your hand passed right through the closed drawer, and the only thing you can grab is a single thread of a single sock. So you have to then use both your hands to select a single sock, and grab again with both hands to grasp the folded up pair. All this "Bizzarro World" behavior instead of simply opening the drawer and grabbing the pair of socks.
The beginning of the end of FreeHand was not the Adobe acquisition. It was when it started to emulate Illustrator's hideous interface.
Unfortunately, because things like selection tools and text objects are foundational to the program built upon them, I'm sure it's too late to back-track the existing conventional-wisdom (i.e. "like Illustrator") in either case. But I say again: If you want to build a better drawing program, Adobe Illustrator is not the program to emulate.
JET

I can confirm that this appear to be an issue between WPF and .NET on your system - can you please confirm what display scaling setting you have set in Windows Display settings?

Could you also please try reducing the width of the Studio within Affinity and then try enabling these once again - does the app still hang for you?

Many thanks for this! It appears as though the app is 'hanging' in PresentationCore, which is part of WPF (which Affinity uses to draw the UI).
I've provided this DMP file to our developers here to help them look to resolve this in a future update - just to confirm a colleague of mine also tested this using the GitHub version of the font on their Windows 10 machine and the app did not freeze for them either, so it certainly appears localised to your machine at this time.
Could you please confirm your system specifications, and the Windows version you have installed currently so I can provide this information also?

Thanks for confirming that for me, unfortunately I'm still unable to replicate this issue here - however using the information you've provided I have reported this to our developers and we hope to have this resolved in a future update
EDIT - If possible, if you can replicate this freezing, please open Task Manager and then right-click on the Affinity app and select Create Dump File. This should generate a full log for our developers to further investigate, and can be uploaded to the below link:
https://www.dropbox.com/request/jg8mQlXivuE999jOumrh
Please let me know when you have uploaded this file!

Could you please be very specific about what does not show or is missing from which fonts.
I have both EB Garamond and AntiQuasi incl. Caps so I can test those.
Do not have Baker Street 221B Mr Holmes - so I cannot test that.
I do not see any ligature, or OpenType feature, etc. missing, but do not know exactly what you are looking at.

Sorry, have checked it on second PC and and it's gone. Some glitch with newly installed fonts, i suppose. If it returns i'll try to record it.

Sounds like a candidate for another Persona, as an add on after the core apps are developed.

This is definitely a must ...... I don't use this function often but when I need it I *really* need it.

Manually installed  recent Intel driver (27.20.100.9466) and it worked finally.

I'm not sure why it's skipping the device ("(Skipping unsupported device)" in the log file). There are several reasons for this. I'm actually improving this as we speak, so keep an eye on beta updates. For ref: The Intel 620 should be supported.