KipV
-
Posts
795 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by KipV
-
-
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.)
-
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.
-
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.
-
I am actually not a huge fan of touch screen due to having to constantly clean the finger prints off the monitor. This was one reason I went with the MacBook over an iPad or tablet. Sierra has pretty much all the iPad features at this point so the constant screen cleaning seems unnecessary to the way I work.
-
Yeah, the "tech from yesterday" part didn't make sense to me either. They just dumped all the old ports and replaced it with USB-C, put in 2TB drives and replaced the function keys. If you want to say that some of Apple's desktops are tech from yesterday that would make some sense.
-
You could also just try to use the program over some time so you learn where the functions are -.-
I don't understand what you mean. I have been using Affinity for a year or two so I have a pretty good idea where it's features are.
-
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.
-
Actually, this particular job works better in Illustrator than in InDesign due to Illustrator's "Select > Same" and "Select > Object" functions.
Then bring that feature to the layout program; don't bring all the layout features to a program that is not designed for doing layouts. That should be an obvious solution.
-
It sure exists for me. I have a recurring weekly piece that includes a variable amount of text across three fixed columns. I drop the text in and use paragraph styles to tweak it so the columns come out evenly. Doing that manually is a PITA.
Just do it from within a layout program; no need to use a drawing program for that.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
Dump gets more than 40 %, people are killing people, people are reading BILD, people are using AD for type heavy page projects instead of a layout app and think they get automatically quality …
This entire sentence doesn't make any sense. I don't know what you are trying to say at all.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I just did a type heavy one page project and didn't have any problems at all.
-
I used to love Adobe with upgrades like CS3 and CS4 it's just that they don't put out updates like that anymore. Fortunately I found another company that could do great work.
-
You could have just shortened your reply to that & still made your point! :lol:
It is also the reason that I lot of people are here using talking about and using Affinity; it's because we don't like the Adobe way is doing things and we want another company to make something better. If we were happy with Adobe why would we even be here? We would just keep using the Adobe apps it seems. To listen to some people talk it sounds like they are really happy with the way Adobe works which just begs the question why don't they just use Adobe?
-
I just think people need to try the Publisher workflow before getting too judgmental. Like I said before it's hard to judge software you haven't used yet.
-
I think the problem here is that a lot of people are having trouble understanding how this workflow works since is it forces them to imagine the way software they haven't used works. This one file format solution can really blow Adobe out of the water. I was reading an InDesign book from about seven years ago that was talking about how Adobe was planning on doing something similar but they never accomplished it. Serif's main goal shouldn't be to merely to catch up to Adobe it should be to surpass them (at least in some areas.)
-
I don't think anyone here disagrees. It is simply where the line is.
The line should be drawn at illustration features. The fact that other drawing apps had non-illustration features is not justification for Serif to start loading in every non-illustration feature in the world. Every non-illustration feature slows me down.
"Er, are we talking about why FH did something like Master Pages still? If so, then what and why they added them is just a historical curiosity, but no slippery slope."
We have already watched Adobe fall down this slippery slope. In some way some of the recent apps have become worse because they keep pilling on features that go beyond it's core functionality.
"Correct. But there is every reason to improve on AI and other vector design applications."
In many ways I don't think they are improving.
-
From your example it looks like the first column of text is what is linked? It's a little hard to tell since it is blurred out but it looks like column one contains a topic with a bullet list in the middle of the column and the story is then continued after the list. What I don't see is illustration work which makes me question why a illustration tool would even be need in this instance. As far as scaling goes why not just use character and paragraph styles? The text tools from InDesign are far greater then the tools available in Illustrator or FreeHand. For an example here is a layout I did a few years ago from a book.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/354025220684087385/
InDesign let me do drop caps, choose how many lines or words would apply to the drop cap, let me capitalize the first sentence or capitalize multiple lines, apply automatic page numbers. These are all things that I don't think illustration tools can do with text (at least as far as the last time I tried it.) I used FreeHand for putting a booklet together once (it was about 20 pages or so) and it worked but once I learned InDesign I didn't see a reason to return for this type of work. InDesign has been my sole choice even for one page mailers. I could see using a program like Photo for simple layouts though. It would have been easy to do my one page design in Photo so I could edit the photo and do the layout at the same time. Once Serif lets me edit Artboards like I can do with Designer I may consider doing the whole one page design in Photo. Staying all in the same app was a nice experience for simple layout.
"Edit In…" Option Greyed Out
in Pre-V2 Archive of Desktop Questions (macOS and Windows)
Posted
I was having this problem a lot in previous version betas and with the MAS versions. The current betas work fine for me in El Capitan.