jrutled3

They don't even need to target specific and multiple distros anymore (which was a daunting impediment to Linux development/porting in the past). All they would need to do is port to and optimize for one and then package and deliver it in any one or more of the distro-agnostic formats---as a Flatpak, AppImage, and/or Snap. Then it would be widely available and functional across the Linux ecosystem.

Well, I for one, am a customer who purchased both Designer and Publisher for Windows, have since purged Windows from both my desktop and laptop in favor of Linux, and still would gladly buy both programs again for Linux... if native Linux ports ever were released. There you have, at the very least, a doubling of profit from a single customer who is now a Linux user who will not be going back to Windows except when I'm forced to for work (which has nothing to do with graphic design or DTP, so no Affinity there). So, take that for what it is.

That's less a bug and more a requested feature. It should be moved to the Discussions and Suggestions for Affinity Publisher Beta on Desktop .

Yes! The culture and environment make or break a team or organization. If it's not healthy, then no methodology will work well. They're tools to better the organization, not cures. I only referenced Scrum because I think it can be a great, effective tool (especially for software development) if implemented well. That's all. Awesome! I've looked at Scrivener before, but never tried it because I'd been burned by so many other programs in the past, promising me the moon but delivering a disjointed turd. But thank you for that insight! I'm gonna have to give it a shot now, for sure!

I suppose then it would be about casting a new vision for the company to strive toward. Maybe turning their company from offering competitive alternatives towards pushing the boundaries of what their software can do, always striving to be better than the status quo. You're no longer concerned with being better than your competition (if you still have any), but with being better than you were before. Such a mindset will, ideally, prevent the company from stagnating and becoming lethargic. Instead, they will seek to innovate and, where necessary, renovate. All these negative comments on Scrum are discouraging. Not because I think it doesn't work, but because the things being described are decidedly not how Scrum is supposed to be at all, and that such disastrous implementations of it are poisoning its reputation. If you have the bosses working against their team(s), then it isn't Scrum. If you have management not putting workers' happiness as one of their highest priorities, then it isn't Scrum. Self-organizing, self-managing teams and a healthy work environment are at the heart of what Scrum is supposed to be. If you have anything else, then it isn't Scrum (or it is but something has broken and needs to be addressed immediately). But yes, back on track, one of my hopes and dreams for Affinity Publisher is that it will have footnote/endnote capabilities, and those will be feature-rich and flexible. The main manual styles I use when setting up academic papers, theses, and whatnot are the Chicago Manual of Style and the SBL Handook of Style. When using footnotes, in the text body the note is superscripted of course, but SBL calls for the note itself to be normal and followed by a period, as is demonstrated in this official supplement to the Handbook. When doing everything in a word processor, it's just frustrating and laborious, and a lot of times you have to do a lot of the nit-picky stuff manually each and every single time. And more to the point, word processors are just not the ideal tools for lengthy and involved academic works. They'll do if they must, but they're just not ideal. Some DTP programs already available offer more footnote/endnote functionality (like Scribus), but that's if they're stable and don't crash, and you're willing to be even more frustrated with that than you are with the word processor just trying to figure it all out (again, like Scribus). PagePlus has footnote capabilities and they're pretty straightforward. However, they're not as flexible and feature-rich as I feel they should be. For example: If the note is superscripted in the text body, then it's superscripted in the footnote as well. No ifs, ands, or buts (at least none that I've found yet). I just want something that is at least slightly more robust than that, but still intuitive and a pleasure to use (or, at the very least, not a pain in the ass).

According to Simon Sinek in Start With Why, this is probably due to the heads of the company losing sight of their why (the company's vision, why it exists—if they ever had one to begin with) and leading their company to a "split." The split is when the why becomes more and more unclear, causing the company to focus more and more on what they do and (to a lesser or greater degree) how they do it. This is a danger for all companies, even those founded by great visionaries. If the reason the company exists is not instilled into the company and passed on to successive generations, it will inevitably derail and devolve into typical corporate practices. This is why many companies with a healthy sense of who they are and why they exist often hire and promote from within. It is my hope that more and more software companies (both big and small) would remember their why and then, ideally, use Scrum as their how.

That sounds like me with practically everything! Lol Especially when I'm doing anything with TeX. When it works, I don't know why or how, but I'll take it! When it doesn't and won't, I can never figure it out.

I second the suggestion of using HarfBuzz as your text-shaping engine. I know you all are probably well beyond that at this point, but I felt it was still worth mentioning in any event. It supports the full range of OpenType features as well as provides native right-to-left language and Oriental ligature support. But as I just said elsewhere. . . Whether or not you use HarfBuzz, PagePlus proved that you guys have typography as a top-priority, and I trust that you will make it even better in your Affinity product range.

I think I great way to achieve this is if they used HarfBuzz as their text shaping engine. To quote the official website (which I have linked), "HarfBuzz is an OpenType text shaping engine. The current HarfBuzz codebase, formerly known as harfbuzz-ng, is versioned 1.x.x and is stable and under active maintenance. This is what is used in latest versions of Firefox, GNOME, ChromeOS, Chrome, LibreOffice, XeTeX, Android, and KDE, among other places." HarfBuzz allows for the fullness of OpenType features to be implemented, including native right-to-left language support and Oriental ligatures. But regardless of whether or not they use HarfBuzz as their text engine, I trust that Publisher will excel in the typography department. Serif did a great job with this in PagePlus, and so I anticipate that they will make it even better with Affinity Publisher. Could not agree with you more! I think you hit everything spot on with that, my friend.

I absolutely second all these requests for full footnote/endnote capabilities in Affinity Publisher! In academic/scholarly writing and publishing, footnotes/endnotes are essential. Even more, the ability to fully edit the style of the footnotes/endnotes is a must. For example: Whereas in typical word processors the default for the note number in the footnote/endnote section is just the superscripted number that is immediately followed by the note text. . . 1Thermopolis Brownless, The Book with a Title (Town, NY: Publisher, 2016), 16. The SBL Handbook of Style requires the note number to be regular script followed by a period, with an en space between that and the note text. 1. Genevieve Gracely, The Other Book with a Different Title (Town, NY: Publisher, 2017), 17. Even more, in SBL style, there is supposed to be a line space between each footnote entry. 1. Thermopolis Brownless, The Book with a Title (Town, NY: Publisher, 2016), 16. 2. Genevieve Gracely, The Other Book with a Different Title (Town, NY: Publisher, 2017), 17. 3. Brownless, The Book, 18. This is nightmare, regardless of the word processor or DTP program you use. Each word processor has its own quirks and will let you change some things, but never all of them. The only exception to this was Corel WordPerfect, thanks to their "Reveal Code" feature. But since that program does not support Unicode, and I need the ability to use non-Latin languages (i.e., Greek and Hebrew) in my research and writing, I gave up with the free trial version. Thankfully I caught that before purchasing and saved myself all that money. And as far as DTP programs concerned, they either lack a footnote/endnote feature altogether, or it's a royal pain to use them comfortably and well. This could be an area in which Affinity Publisher soared, and could potentially make it the contender for academic/scholarly publishers, as well as academic journals (not every journal is focused on maths, and so they do not all use LaTeX, which is a pain to learn and use effectively anyway).

I'm with MikeW on this. Why aren't you just using a word processor to create your manuscript from the get-go? You're going about this the wrong way. Your publisher is going to do all the typsetting, so there is no reason for you to be doing any. They're not wanting you to send a separate file format for the fun of it, they're asking you to send the correct file format. If you don't already have it, I recommend you download and install LibreOffice, create your manuscripts in that, save it in whatever format is preferred by your publisher, and leave the typesetting to them. You will save yourself a lot of completely unnecessary work and headaches.

Haven't the people at Serif told us many times that each app (as well as each platform version of each app) has its own dedicated team working on it? I believe they have. And since that is the case, people need to stop complaining about how and/or why Designer and Photo have been ported to Windows and now making the move to iOS before Publisher has even been released. None of those things are affecting the work being done on Publisher in any way. Publisher has its own dedicated team that is working on it and it alone. The people porting Designer and Photo to Windows were their own team dedicated to that purpose, and no resources were detracted from Publisher's development to accomplish those tasks. In fact, I believe it has been said a few times already that the reasons Designer and Photo got their 1.5 update is BECAUSE of the work that is being done on Publisher. That is to say, the Publisher team is working tirelessly and making great advances, and the product managers are taking SOME of the MANY features they've already polished and are putting them into the others as they see fit. Please, people, actually take the time to read the comments and responses the Serif team members are gracious enough to provide on these forum. They don't have to tell us anything at all, yet they have answered question after question. So before you get pissy about the progress on a specific app, take a moment to consider that point (and many others) and ask yourself, "Would I be getting from other companies what I'm getting from Serif? Do I really have the right to be a complete ass to these guys who are doing a spectacular job and have been honest, time and time again, about their past mistakes in scheduling?" And for the love of all that is holy, stop assuming the worst about these guys and stop the constant complaining! If Publisher is taking too long for your immediate needs, you have other options. PagePlus X9 is still available and great, you can always fall back on InDesign if you still have a subscription, or you can be a bit adventurous and take Scribus out for a test drive (it's free, so you have nothing to lose). Either way, regardless of what you choose to fill the gap, Publisher won't be done until it's done, so I suggest you all just suck it up and wait until it is! Seriously, reading through some of these threads is like listening to toddlers whining about how their sandwiches were cut the wrong way. It's embarassing, really.