Pšenda

As a V1 user, I didn't have to learn anything at all when switching to V2. That is, apart from completely new functions, which is true for every version (even V1 got new functions, which if I wanted to use, I had to learn them).

Information about the version and type of installation (if there are multiple variants) primarily belongs to the About dialog - that's the purpose, after all. Of course, the application can try to provide more detailed information, but it can often be quite complex and inaccurate - see the effect of application sandboxing and their isolation of the OS from the environment and other applications.

Because "sandboxing".

Too bad this information is not part of About.

I was also very surprised that after the negative experience with the introduction of hw acceleration in MacOS, they left it on by default in the Win version, where problems could naturally be expected due to the countless number of video controllers and drivers. I think they should look at it more from a casual/less knowledgeable user perspective. An experienced user can handle it, and the default setting does not suit him anyway and he has to adjust it.

I can recommend:

Try instal MSI/EXE version.

I think this is a completely standard and unsurprising business practice that you can encounter in everyday life - the discount for one yogurt will be lower (if any) than the discount for the whole package.

Yes, but that's not the OP's case - please read his first post, where it says that the resolution of the image is given and fixed (2993 x 7703 pixels), so there's no point in discussing the obvious fact that if I increase the resolution, I will of course increase the file size.

Please indicate their resolution (ie how many pixels they have), the DPI size is not important. As OP write, the target resolution of his image is 2993 x 7703 pixels, and they will remain whatever the DPI is. For a JPEG file, the DPI value is just an entry in the metadata.

Try export as PDF, and Open (import) in V1.

DPI does not play a role in raster (non-vector) formats, and has no effect on file size - pixels are still just the same pixels.

Serif explicitly announced that V2 would not be backwards compatible with V1 when version 2 was released more than half a year ago. There are many threads here on the topic of backwards incompatibility. https://www.google.com/search?q=backward+compatibility+site:forum.affinity.serif.com

Local disk or external (cloud)?

For example, you typed 88 (press twice key 8 on numeric keyboard) thinking you were entering a numeric value in an edit field. This is the most unfortunate "gadget" that unfortunately cannot be turned off 😞 Or hoover mouse over Opacity field, and scroll the wheel, thinking you're scrolling the canvas/document across the screen - also a very unfortunate solution.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ICO+site:https://forum.affinity.serif.com

Yes, it's not possible. https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/designer/full-feature-list/

... or "quick shadows"

This brings me back to the idea that I presented here years ago - why is such a very specific function that rather confuses the user (mainly by its expression - see dozens, maybe hundreds of posts) enabled by default? If the user is knowledgeable and wants to use this function, he can turn it on without any problems - he knows what it is and therefore knows where to enable it. But it's a big problem for uninformed users - what is it? why is it here? reinstalling didn't help! what should I do with it?

A small tip for using Google search here on the forum, which very often provides relevant results even when a "general" query is entered. https://www.google.com/search?q=magenta+outline+site:https://forum.affinity.serif.com

I have to ask again - and why are you wasting your precious time here? Banging your head against a wall doesn't seem like a rational thing to do.

TAB key?

Topic title? If you had read my post and analyzed it, you would have found out that I am talking about different thickness of segments (as stated in the title of your thread), not automatically generated smooth transitions. So writing in response to my post about transitions is completely unnecessary.

Sorry, but I understood your request "Make it easy to make each line segment has different thickness." completely differently. Different segment thicknesses, not automatic smooth transitions, was what my post was about.