MJWHM

I had PagePlus from a very early iteration, and it usually did what I wanted. But there is a significant difference - the facilities that existed in the most recent version of PP had gone through development by Serif and therefore one might reasonably hope that the ideas and methods might make it easier to adopt them in any new software. The actual programming may be different, but the logic for a particular feature must be the same, surely? If we know that the way to do a particular job is t adjust x or y then it should be  transferable skill. I think the problem has been or is that the company may think that the only significant form of publication is either magazine-style or e-publication. I hope I am wrong, but in truth I have lost a lot of my faith in them and I have backed them since before 2008 (as far back as my emails go).
 

Or as we say here, 'all fur coat and no underwear' (we actually name a specific item of underwear, but it is possible that naming it might upset some group or other). Flash video, promising 'something we know you've been waiting for' (only one thing?), which is likely to make every group clamouring for improvements in their particular area hopeit is 'their thing'. I am wondering if the big thing is the total integratio of the products into a single one since the entire ethos of the company currently seems to be focussed on seamless integration. I prefer other programs for some of the things done by Affinity but nothing I have tried yet has come near to matching the quality, effectiveness and ease of PagePlus.

Excellent response. Good to have disagreements without vituperation.

I had PagePlus from a very early iteration, and it usually did what I wanted. But there is a significant difference - the facilities that existed in the most recent version of PP had gone through development by Serif and therefore one might reasonably hope that the ideas and methods might make it easier to adopt them in any new software. The actual programming may be different, but the logic for a particular feature must be the same, surely? If we know that the way to do a particular job is t adjust x or y then it should be  transferable skill. I think the problem has been or is that the company may think that the only significant form of publication is either magazine-style or e-publication. I hope I am wrong, but in truth I have lost a lot of my faith in them and I have backed them since before 2008 (as far back as my emails go).
 

So even this feature is not available? I have used it extensively for my books in PagePlus. 
It surely can't be too much to expect similar functionality with the program that has replaced it?

Woaaa!!
Soon four years and counting!
I remember the early days of UK home computers and PC clones. The UK was leading for a few years, then… suddenly… fell off a cliff due to lack of innovations and customer support. They insisted on being the best; even while the world decided otherwise.
Now, is Affinity aiming at repeating this old sad state of affairs?
Regards
P.S. I have practically stopped using designer (nice app, but integrates rather badly with other software). Photo is relegated to handling old material. I’ve returned to using Lightroom Classic and Photoshop again. And as far as Publisher goes, the still lacking support for docx material import (including styles), lack of foot/endnotes support and especially no real export to ePub usage (especially galling, now that Amazon/Kindle seems to be about to make peace with the format). I’ve even used Word as a Publisher replacement in one recent case, since Publisher seems to have become a dead end, and word at least is supported by most serious environments - still!
It’s not a case of pricing. It’s a simple case of lack of even the most basic features, supported in most serious environments. Nearing four years of non-solution of significant omissions to the product feature list is rather telling in my view.
Your mileage may vary, but all my licenses for iPad, Windows and Mac has fallen out of use the last 12-18 months. Maybe a secondary machine will be relegated to supporting legacy solutions, like Affinity Designer, Photo and especially Publisher.
It all looked so enticing many years ago, and look now on all the good will squandered by inaction or persisting non-solutions to relatively basic needs.
 

I am now getting to grips with Publisher and I appreciate the extra fine adjustment that it provides although the help file still needs a lot of work.
I think that the requests for foot/end notes are well justified, a request still not satisfied  after three years is unlike the tradition the Serif used to uphold, I know, I've been with them from the start of PagePlus. Many of my books need this as a matter off course, I've tried using pinned text boxes but the result is not pretty and of course is not self-adjusting.
Let's have these please , and the sooner the better.

I perfectly understand what is "intuitive" for me could not be so "intuitive" for others. It's a very subjective matter, but I am very comfortable in APub after having used PagePlus, ID and QXP. Anyhow, the desktop publishing software I like the most was my old beloved Ventura Publisher. Obviously, I'm old too.

Exactly the same place as me. Having tried to get to grips with Affinity Publisher, I have returned to and remained with PagePlus for the very reasons you eloquently describe.

I think the worrying thing is that we have been told that the programmers are the same as those who programmed PagePlus. That is almost faultless in the way that is deals with endnotes and footnotes, as well as in other things. That being so, what, I ask myself, is so very different about Publisher that the same concepts cannot be applied? I incline to the belief that the fundamental logic of the Affinity suite is the problem. You don't need notes in Designer or Photo, and the whole ethos of the suite seems to be that something that works in one program will work in the others, regardless of whether it is needed. I have been cheerfully editing my images for publications in other programs and using the publishing program (PagePlus, of course) to create books, booklets, posters and other material. 
As for the issue of 'when', the situation does not seem to progress. Patrick thinks next year (2022, I imagine) but he is not sure, and that is still vague. Surely there is a work-flow diagram which places this feature in a sequence and has a timescale? 
While PagePlus functions, Affinity is an over-complicated and inadequate alternative for me. There is little to encourage me to struggle with its interface which I find is not intuitive. Maybe others are not in the same position, but that is where I am. 
But this is getting to be a little too close to one of those calls we all make, when the automat reply is 'We are experiencing unusually high call numbers. Please stay on the line; your call is important to us.' 
At least with some of those we know which position we are in the queue.

Different types of publications are for different readers.  I occasionally read hobby magazines (and even some of the articles in them have footnotes!).  I also read - and write - academic books and reference books.  I don't expect everyone to find them interesting, but there is a sector of the public that is interested in the subject areas on which I write.  Affinity Publisher clearly aims to cater for an extremely wide range of publications, from brochures or publicity to reference books, with everything in between.  At the moment it falls down in some of these areas, which is the subject of this thread.  I hope that they will soon be able to rectify those shortcomings.

Affinity Publisher aspires to cover an extremely broad spectrum of publications from the trivial or entertaining to the classics (look at some of their training videos), reference works and academic publications.  Each of these is likely to be of interest to different types of readers and for different purposes.  I occasionally read hobby magazines (and even some of the articles in them have footnotes), but I also read - and write - academic textbooks.  I do not expect everyone to want to read what I write, but there are certain people who do wish to.

I hesitate to say this, lest things go wrong for me, but I have published two large books, filled with images and notes, using PagePlus X9. I used Book Plus, and it seems to work well for me.
But youa re right about importing PDFs, and also the need that has not changed in two years.

Thanks everyone for the kind words. I was reading a book yesterday and had to think of what I was saying about German (and other) publishing practices again. This is what it looked like. This isn't a page spread that was carefully chosen for its egregiousness, they literally all look like that in this c. 800 page book. You will see the spread begins with a footnote flowing over from the last page and it ends with the last footnote flowing into the next page. All in all the book has 2385 footnotes (if I counted correctly, since the numbering restarts with every chapter).
 
This is just to underscore what is the normal situation in many writing cultures around the world, something that those in the English-speaking world might not be as aware of, which might lead them to consider footnotes nonessential.

"IAmMatt" you may be, but I am seriously impressed by this clear and well-expressed posting. Thanks.

I agree entirely with fde.
It really has all been said.
I'm thinking quite seriously of ditching this whole repetitive thread which has definitely become a scratched record. 
I'm sure the Serif team have quite a full programme of work to make 'bump-maps' and 'tables' as accessible and useful in Affinity Publisher as they were in PagePlus. Maybe they will even consider enhancing Publisher to the WordPerfect level by providing both chemical and mathematical symbology so that thesis and paper-writers in many more disciplines can use its already extensive capabilities. And yes, end-notes and foot-notes would be nice. But, as a 'professional' process engineer and sometime programmer myself, I'm not holding my breath for any of these.
Perhaps the poor struggling programmers and code-writers can also get to vet the advertising material put out by Affinity in future: This current trend of using the term 'professional' grade for tooth-brushes, aspirin, paintbrushes and putty is degrading the English language. It is fast becoming a useless epithet. Much of the wasted words of criticism in this thread have arisen from the somewhat over-enthusiastic advertising copy-writers for Affinity Publisher, who might perhaps have been  just a little more circumspect in dispensing their craft.
Incidentally, I currently make extensive use of Publisher, Designer and Photo to produce a monthly printed and online community magazine  --- see <theroundabout.org.nz> ---- but I certainly don't lay claim to it being a 'professional' publication.

Hello to all.
It is not surprising that an ever-increasing number of Serif customers are getting angry. Whatever the reasons, it is clear that Serif is not keeping its promises on important points of the software, the worst being Serif’s opaque and sometimes misleading communication rather than a language of truth that would reassure everyone.
That said, this in no way justifies the aggressiveness, if not more, of some customers because they feel cheated, nor does it justify the outright response of some other customers who behave more like blind fans than anything else. Let’s be constructive and courteous.
Come on! Protect yourself well and have a great day.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.

Above the footnote, of course!

Helmar, as the seeming 'bitch' who started this off again, I was not, as you say 'bitching.' I was looking for help as a new user of AffPub. I am a Serif user going way back, promoted the products enthusiastically, even gave away my old copies to Developing country home schools so they could do quality work on a dime. I also bought into Affinity line 100%, AffPub being the last.
As a marketer though--one who had served as Product Marketing point person for an eight figure portfolio--I can assure you that customer sentiment is pure gold. The company must have the maturity to embrace that feedback. If we cannot raise these issue here, where should we? Maybe I am just seeing another side of Serif/Affinity that I never expected to. Live and learn.

Is it possible that Serif are holding back this feature until v2.0 is ready? If so, then that is extremely pernicious.
Let me reiterate: implementing endnotes is not difficult. It's really just collating all the footnotes into a table, creating a space at the end of the chapter, or book, and plonking the table there. Simples. Footnotes are a little trickier as this requires creating space for each page and juggling the content to accommodate them, but it still is not rocket science.
The fact that the endnotes and/or footnotes do not even feature in a beta-test is dispiriting to say the least. That Serif cannot confirm one way or the other if/when it is appearing, equally so.
Given the amount of comments this feature alone has generated (90% uncomplimentary - being generous here) just shows the disappointment being experienced by users. I agree with previous comments: DTP without end/footnotes is not DTP.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.