Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.

BofG

Members
  • Posts

    1,384
  • Joined

Posts posted by BofG

  1. 1 hour ago, thomaso said:

    this means that they have some types of clients in common + new clients in this area can or must choose one or another

    Agree completely. Not sure how anyone can look at Serif offering a suite of desktop publishing + photo editing + vector drawing and come to the conclusion that they are no way competing with Adobe which offers desktop publishing + photo editing + vector drawing. Unless it's meant as an insult to what Serif can achieve, like if I was to line up next to Usain Bolt I'd be competing against him, but I wouldn't be competition for him.

  2. 28 minutes ago, R C-R said:

    I wonder how many PS users actually use that feature

    It's probably used a lot less since CC has become more widely adopted. I remember using it quite a lot, different companies and freelancers had various versions available and it made collaborating fairly straightforward.

    People have given good reason for needing it, maybe it is just a small percentage of the user base. I get the business logic of it, they are a small team and lots of other things people want are still not implemented. At the same time, maybe fostering some goodwill wouldn't hurt. In any case, from a technical standpoint it's possible and exists in other software.

  3. 13 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

    Let us say Serif writes a some code to save version 2 files as version 1 openable files. What would happen with Designer's Warp Group, Photo's Linked Raw files and Publisher's Footnotes when we save as a version one compatible file? I feel like I could guarantee that most people would be very unhappy with how they are handled in version one. And keep in mind that those three items are not the only new features in the suite.

    That's a straw man argument. Are you saying that people are very unhappy that Adobe lets them save for older versions?

    It's a business decision. Time versus return. I'd wager there's also an element of "carrot and stick" about it all. The great new features are the carrot, and for those who don't have a need for the new features, well then there's the stick to help them along 😃

  4. 16 hours ago, BIOSMonkey said:

    It's really not reasonable to expect 100% migration compatibility at major version changes.

    I completely disagree, you said it yourself that the Adobe suite allows back saving by dropping incompatible file features (it just drops them back to the next appropriate primitive element).

    This is a completely proprietary file format, known and used only by Serif. They were free to change it as needed, they could have even put some changes into the last V1 update if necessary.

    This was a time/business decision. I don't see why people feel the need to try and make out like it's an impossible task.

  5. 8 hours ago, R C-R said:

    How? There are many features in V2 that V1 does not support, so how would you expect that to work -- just omit anything V1 can't handle or what?

    I'm not sure if this is meant to be subtle comedy? Anyone who's used design apps in the past decade will know that's exactly what gets done.

    It's a shame there's no back-saving, it was already a pain being an Affinity user in an Adobe world, but now we will even have to be incompatible amongst ourselves.

  6. 11 hours ago, golfortennis said:

    Has it been your experience that double sided printing helps mitigate the bounce issue, or it will still be the same?  Or could that make it worse?

    It won't affect it on each side in isolation, but combined the margin of error doubles. E.g. side one shifts 1mm left, then side two also shifts 1mm left. Your offset is now 2mm. Of course it's possible that the second side shifts the opposite direction and so reduces the offset.

  7. 9 hours ago, RobinMcL said:

    The color Format in my document was RGB/16 and I selected Adobe RGB (1998) as the Color Profile and selected Convert. When having the printer do the color management, I had the choice of "Standard" or "Adobe RGB (1998) so I chose the Adobe RGB one.

    I'm not 100% sure what you mean here, was the source document in Adobe RGB (1998) for both prints?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.