M-rivers

I like your positivity on the matter. While I can truly understand your stand on this, and even want to share in that sentiment, unfortunately, I've been around the block too many time to be a believer first, I need to see it before believing. My cynicism didn't come naturally. It was cultivated over many years by companies that under similar circumstances tried to convince outsiders of something that eventually turned out to be untrue. But by then, who cares - Right? I really hope that Ash is right. But I don't buy it. The reality is, once a company is bought, anything the acquired company says doesn't really carry any weight anymore. So unless deals were made prior to signing (which, if made, they always have an termination date) I don't take anything they say at face value. I've spent over 25yrs working for software companies and have been around long enough to experience many acquisitions. Point being... every time there was an acquisition, the product line changed - it either disappears or changed direction to the detriment of it's user base and business unit of the acquired. Meanwhile, all along the department heads spent countless hours, days, and weeks denying rumors of changes to the product line or it's internal structure. So being an optimist and having a positive outlook doesn't cut it for me. I'm a realist. While your thoughts on dual pricing models might seem like a reasonable alternative to users not benefiting from a subscription model, you can't forget that this is a merger primarily of financial interest, not so much what is good for the user base. They might certainly consider different models, possibly even dual pricing models, but ultimately it's what generates the most value (ah-the hell with it, Money - what generates the most money). And if that means foregoing a perpetual pricing model, so be it. How many time must you get punched before you start to realize that it hurts. And when you see the signs that a punch is coming, should you duck or believe it's not really going happen? Like I said, I didn't choose to be a cynic, I was made into one. But... I hope you're right. In echoing Ash's words - "Yes, I do!" Right now Adobe must be laughing their asses off. So much for an alternative.

In other words, we're going to coast until it's time to announce V3 of the suite with the added feature of being a subscription. And... you're going to like it.

Really? We've all heard this sooooo many times from other companies before. Do you really, I mean really, believe this yourself? But I get it, you have to say it.

Well... it was ok while it lasted. Now I know for sure that much of what I hoped would make it into Designer is never going to happen. One thing for sure, its time to look for an alternative to what was an alternative. Whenever an acquisition occurs, the standard BS greasing up language comes out. "I'm excited about this", "I'm excited about that". I would prefer a strait up - "This is what's going down, and be happy I'm even telling you. This product isn't going to be developed as originally intended going forward - oh and by the way... It's going to be subscription based starting with V3! Isn't that just great, I'm so excited for the future and I can't wait to get on this wonderful journey! Oh, and btw... a subscription model is best for our users, because we care. Barf! 🤬 And that's it! end of story. No need to ease the wounds for the sensitive. Right now they say "No subscription for the foreseeable future". But wait and see, it's standard corp. practice to wait at least a year or two. I'm sure in two years the name Affinity will be gone as well as the perpetual license. So why then bother with a fire side Q&A about the acquisition? I don't care about the acquisition, and I know you guys don't care either. It's more a standard practice to keep the user base from fleeing in anger over the annoucement. Let's remember, Canva paid a hefty price and they intend on recoup this investment. And so it's important that we the users play along, because without the users, there is no product. That's what this friendly chat is about. Well... now that I've said my peace. I want to congratulate the heads of these two companies for a spectacular job well done on this deal. I'm sure you all will have a great bonus coming. Hmmm, curious... just one last thing though, after the acquisition, we already know what's going to happen to the apps, but what's going to happen to the little people in the company? You know, what always happens in these cases? Oops sorry, you mean they actually believe that nothing internal will change? Is that what they were told? Sorry didn't mean to let the cat out of the bag.

I think this is a good idea, but not sure locking Right and Bottom margins make sense to me. So I would take it a step further and rearrange some of the fields so that it would be more practical to use locking. Edit: I see now what you mean, I didn't catch when you said aspect ration earlier (which is a good idea). My bad. I was going by the icon near the fields in close proximity and thought you implied Right and Bottom to be locked. Regardless... the attached image shows what you suggested plus the ability to lock rows and/or columns separately as well.

You can get it back here - see attached image.

NP.👍 So your only solution for now is to group items, place the group where you want it, ungroup, then re-group. Moving the group will cause the contour to disappear but as soon as you ungroup it, it'll show again. At that point, re-group it. I've tried it and that seem to work. It's definitely a bug. Hopefully it'll get fixed in the next point release.

I am able to reproduce the same issue. It appears the Contour Tool doesn't behave well in groups when the group is moved from where it was originally created. See sample screen capture.

Is this feature request still on the road map? This thread is almost 3yrs old, and the link isn't available anymore. I've been patiently waiting to hear more about this but haven't heard anything, hope it's still on the roadmap.

Wow, I see this topic has been brought up as far back as 2014. Enough said. Thanks.

Hi All, Not sure if this was brought up before somewhere in this forum (Would be surprised it hadn't), but it would be great if there a way to place objects along a path. Sort of like the text-on-a-path tool, but - of course - other objects. Saw a You Tube video on this, where someone discovered a workaround, that to me appears to be an unintentional feature, but happens to be somewhat usable with limited successes. I've actually used it on several occasions with some success, but on many more it failed. Again, I don't think it was intended to be a feature, more like a happy accident. But would love to see this developed into a purposeful tool, as I imagine it would be welcomed by most designers including myself. (See video below).