@more2021: There are certainly enough Affinity users here waiting for their personally sought-after features. Me too.
But: Good software is not programmed in a short time.
You have to recognize several dependencies, work out concepts for meaningful data and file structures. You can't expand a programming team by doubling it up to do new functions in less time, because new colleagues also have a learning curve and there also block the older team members a bit because they have to show the new colleagues how things work.
Not all things can be solved with money alone.
I have been working with Affinity products since version 1.6. Updates come regularly, but not so often that it's annoying.
In other words, the updates are stable and have been tested, so they don't have to be constantly improved.
I think Affinity is on the right track with their product strategy: A more thorough and reliable development of their software makes customers happier than the provision of faster and dirtier (= faulty) solutions.
It's okay to pay for mayor releases. But to see the user as a cash cow, as Adobe is doing, is the wrong way to go. A subscription model is good if you earn money with the software. But if, like me, you only do something occasionally or work with it on a voluntary basis, then a subscription is simply too expensive. In this respect, Affinity is on the right track here too.
