Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by KipV

  1. Today I went to Apple Photo to try to edit a photo I had been working on in Affinity but when it opened up all my changes were gone. Then the photo changed to a different photo in Apple Photo. In other words the same photo is showing up Apple Photo twice and one photo disappeared almost entirely. I would go to Time Machine to restore that old version of photo that somehow got messed up. But I don't know how to do that. I can't find that option in Apple Photos. Please help!

  2.  And I think Apple knows this very well but just being disingenuous about the whole issue. Any idea why they came up with the iPad Pro and Pencil? Hmmm ...

    I think they are moving in the direction of a very large iPad screen with pencil but they are just getting there at a slower rate then MS. Like I said previously iPad has a lot of ground to make up just to catch up to today's Mac, or even last decade's Mac (Time Machine, tagging, fast user switching, etc.) I think Apple's focus is on providing software updates for their current hardware before unloading even more iOS hardware that is now made up of multiple iPhones and multiple iPads. I know some with get frustrated at Apple for pushing the release of a desktop iPad off but in the long run it just makes sense to focus on the current product line before expanding to more hardware.

  3. What is interesting about this design is that it is a bit reminisce to the iMac G4. It was an idea that Apple killed off way to soon (only about 2 or 3 years on the market) where the current iMac design has been on the market for about 12 years in varying degrees of thickness. The main difference here being that the iMac could swivel from side to side and the Surface has more up and down movement range. I have thought prior to seeing the Surface that it would be interesting to have an iMac G4 like system that runs iOS instead of MacOS and has drawing abilities (sorry an iOS / MacOS hybrid isn't going to happen.) I guess I would be ok with a system like this as long as I spend most of my time with the pen instead of the my finger. In an interview from yesterday Craig Federighi said that Apple had working prototypes of touchscreen Macs but didn't release it. I think after they kept having to clean the large displays this was one of the problems. Another possible problem was that they didn't have the pencil available at the time (most likely) so they couldn't consider that as a possible solution. And of course they are focused getting iOS caught up to where the Mac is today (and even to where the Mac was a decade ago.)

  4. I have no doubt that a large iOS screen like that will come out at some point but I think Apple is still trying to take advantage of the 13" screen with iOS. The Mac is still so much more feature rich which is why they can justify the use of 27". When iOS has expose and a dock and a notification sidebar like the Mac it starts to get a lot more compelling to increase that screen size.

  5. In the last couple of years Apple has been seriously behind the new technologies and forced some things that make absolutely no sense (laptops with just one single USB-C port

    The single USB port has worked fine for me. Whenever I look around at the coffee shop or library. People hardly ever plug anything into their laptops whenever they are out and about. The hubs they make these days are super small so if I really need those ports I can always slip a small hub into my pack without making any bulk. 


    Like it or not the iPad is Apple's touchscreen computer. It lacks a lot of the Mac's features but at this point I can't see Apple making a touchscreen Mac in a hundred years now. There are advantages to not having a touchscreen. Not having to clean the screen 10 times a day is nice and keeping the touch strip within close proximity the other keys is another.

  6. I don't think wishing for a single function quite qualifies as "bringing all the layout features to a program that is not designed for layouts." Particularly when it's been a basic tool in both FreeHand and Illustrator, neither of which are 'designed for layouts,' and whose users AD is designed to appeal to.

    I don't care if the feature has been in FreeHand or Illustrator. The fact that it is in FreeHand or Illustrator doesn't justify it's existence. Adobe is not this perfect developer that nails every decision that they make. What I meant by adding in all the layout features was adding stuff like master pages, linked text boxes, etc as people are wanting them to do that makes no sense. 

  7. Just because of how things are going with Affinity, I'm already confident that Publisher will be another great application. Aside from motion graphics, I really don't have any reason to touch the main 5 Adobe programs I own any more.

    I still mainly use Adobe for Lightroom. I wonder how much Serif if going to compete with that product? They have a raw editor and are going to come out with an asset manager so I wonder if they are moving in that direction?

  8. If they continue to add Publisher features in Designer and Photo, then Publisher will become obsolete because it will be devided between the other two apps.


    That is exactly what happened with me in the 2000s. FreeHand kept adding enough layout features that I moved off of PageMaker. In that case it worked ok because at the time PageMaker was problematic and InDesign was immature and buggy but there is no need to add complex layout features to Photos and Designer today. The thing about the argument "well they added these features in the past" is that we don't live in the past anymore. We have a different landscape of design software today so we need to take all the modern considerations into account. 

  9. I have to say that making a clone of InDesign is not our goal; we have our own vision. 

    That comment wasn't directed to the staff at Serif (who have proved you are focused on innovating) it was directed at those who are wanting to bring all the Adobe workflows over to Serif. I am very glad the company is coming up with ways to improve the workflows that don't work well as there are plenty of problem spots that need to be fixed.

  10. As for features, I too think that some features should not be cross-app, mostly due to the fact that it would cannibalize into the sales of the other products.

    I agree with everything in your comment except I don't think price should dictate what features make it into an app. That is the problem with Adobe they have to justify the price of their upgrades or subscription service by pilling on more and more features whether or not it makes sense to add particular features or not. There may be a point where it makes sense for Adobe to slow down development of a product and move onto to another since it will have most the features it needs. 

  11. It is not true that Publisher is coming later this year. So the probability rises that AD will have linking of text boxes before APu launch. Other competing design apps use those features.

    No, it is going to have text box linking. The fact that competitors do it doesn't mean anything. The reason people are interested in the development of a new graphic suite is because they are not happy with the way things are with the competition. If they were happy with the competition they wouldn't be here.


    "Perhaps the code for linking of text boxes was already written. So, why not in AD. And why should the same feature be less efficiently? Same code, same amount of clicks etc."

    Because it is a drawing program not layout app. It is not the same amount of clicks since the more features outside of the basic functionality that gets added the deeper the core features get lost in the bloat. What Serif leaves out if as important as what they put in. Putting linking and master pages will become a slippery slope to adding every non-illustration feature in the world.

  12. It seems like people are expecting absolute perfection from version 1.x software which is unreasonable. It should go without saying (but apparently has to be said) when a company throws out their entire graphics suite and starts over from scratch such a project will be a work in progress and miss most of the basic functions. Our focus should be on where the developer is going not where they are currently at. If you need these features today then you should be looking at using software from other companies. I am sure many people here own Serif software and Adobe software for that very reason.

  13. But perhaps some readers. And perhaps you used a layout app. Sorry, but the question is not if the layouter has problems. The question is if you need much more time to get the job done in AD because some features of InDesign are missing.

    I used the Affinity apps instead of a layout app which was ok since it was only one page. Did it take me longer then with Adobe because of the missing features? Probably not, absence of bleeds made it unnecessarily difficult but then having photo editing inside of the same layout file made it easier so it probably came out equal to Adobe as far as ease of use is concerned. If Serif would add all the basic (and only basic) layout tools then I would say that the experience could actually be better then Adobe. This is why I want Serif to focus on adding the basics to Photo and Designer instead of rushing out Publisher since I am in greater need of a basic layout tool that uses a single file format then a complex layout tool. I already have a complex layout tool with InDesign so if that is what I need then I just run InDesign.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.