GeekOnTheHill

Not necessarily. All of the tools are available in the Photo persona, but you have to keep clicking and switching between them. In the Develop persona you can tweak different values with only one opening click and one saving click. This comes in handy in one of my use cases, which is editing pictures sent by a client's employees for use on the company's Web site. Each employee's phone or camera is "off" in different ways, but the corrections needed tend to be consistent for pictures taken by each individual device. In other words, a given device will always produce pictures that are "X" percent too warm, "Y" percent overexposed, or whatever. In the Develop persona, all the fixes can be applied in one screen and saved with one click. Multiply the click savings by dozens of images, and it adds up to measurable time savings. When the reality of your workday is a seemingly unending procession of clicks, reducing the clicks needed to do a repetitive task makes a huge difference in productivity. When I first switched to Affinity Photo, the reason was because it required the fewest clicks to do what I used to do in Fireworks. I've since come to appreciate it for other reasons, but the initial reason was because it won a number of clicks contest. Richard

Same issue here. I reverted to 2.0.0 and it works. Is there a way to disable update-checking for the time being?

I don't use WP, but it's easy to do in PHP. Unfortunately, I get a 403 when I try to use this site's code box; so I can't post my three lines of code here. I doubt I can post a link either.

I actually hate publishing plugins for commercial software because there's an expectation of support; and if you don't have the source, you don't have any way of knowing how future updates to the base application will do to your plugin. I'd be more likely to write something for a FOSS program.

It is a little baffling. A deficiency in an application (as defined by the user's needs) compels the user to look for alternatives. What if the user decides they like the alternative better? Or less-drastically, what if they decide that they don't love the alternative, but can make it work for them? I came to Affinity Photo from Fireworks, which I never used for its primary purpose, but solely as a Web image editor / optimizer. When it became clear that Adobe was going to let it die a slow death, I looked for alternatives. I tried Affinity Photo a few times and didn't care for it because it added clicks to my workflow. But over the course of a few years, changes were made in AP that were exceedingly minor (for example, moving something to a different submenu) that subtracted a few clicks. It still added clicks compared to Fireworks; but inasmuch as Fireworks was a dead man walking, I decided I could deal and budget for the remaining increase in clicks. Now I need .webp support. I use a variety of applications (mainly GIMP and XnConvert) to get it, based on the specific task at hand. I can do the whole process with GIMP if I wanted to, but it adds clicks. So usually I do most of it in AP and then use XnConvert to batch-export the thumbnails to .webp. I still present both .jpg and .webp based on browser support; so usually I do all the .jpg stuff in AP and then additionally convert the thumbnails to .webp, so both .jpg and .webp are available. But consider this: GIMP is FOSS; so if I wanted to, I could script the process to reduce the clicks, and do it all in GIMP. It's perfectly capable of doing it all. It would be a bother to write the script; but in the end, it would cost me even fewer clicks than Fireworks did, and many fewer clicks than using AP and XnConvert. Or I could change the UI to make it more suitable for my workflow, which I don't think is all that atypical. Moreover, if I were to write such a script or make such UI modifications to GIMP to suit my workflow, I'd be required to share my solution with the world to comply with GPLv3, thus potentially solving the same problem for countless other users. So I really don't get the foot-dragging on Serif's part. It's never good business to give your customers a reason to look elsewhere. They may like what they find. And when what they find happens to be free, they may like it even more. Maybe I should write a .webp plugin for AP and sell it for a dollar or two. It kind of rubs me the wrong way because I think something so basic as an export format should really come from the publisher. But it is an option.

That can easily be coded around. Just query the browser for .webp support and present .jpg's if .webp isn't supported.

This is what it comes down to. I despise Google. They've reduced us all to a brothel of whores competing to give a robot the best blow job. But it is what it is. As much as I despise Google, they're the ones writing the rules nowadays.