Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tadhg

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't know a great deal about the finer details and standards associated with PDFs but I do use the PDF format to submit my final drafts of my novels for print-on-demand. Companies like IngramSpark are strict about conforming precisely to the PDF/X-1a:2001 or PDF/X-3:2002. If there is any possibility that there may be problems with Apub, as suggested by Lagarto, then I am simply not going to spend the considerable time it takes to format a novel using it. Hence my alarm. I would always expect that whatever vintage a software is, it, at the very least, does not produces an output that could cause problems or a reduction in quality as Largarto suggests. The doubt is in my mind at present so I won't be using APub.
  2. It is a bit alarming to hear an advanced member saying Affinity is not in the same league as older software programs.
  3. Tadhg

    Too many bugs?

    I have the same misgivings as Kobold. It really is worrying when bugs keep appearing long after the final version is published. I hope Serif recognises that this is a problem.
  4. Good tutorial. Nice pace and accent perfectly ok.
  5. Get a grip haakoo. I don't make recordings of my conversations with product reps. fde101, you are more measured in your responses and you have been critical of some aspects of the products. I accept that. I really don't intend to say any more in this thread because it has degenerated into a verbal duel rather than a genuine discussion about the product/s. So, I'll wait and see how the products develop over the next few months. In the meantime I'll combine the strengths of the old and the new software; the new on mac and the old on pc. Regards to all at Serif and Serif users like myself.
  6. Just for the record, Serif did suggest to me, a long time user of all their software, that I should switch to the Affinity Range because they were ending support for their older software. In no way were they suggesting that the Affinity Software was completely different: they offered it as a replacement and upgrade for the older software. Fact. It seems to me that critical feedback, no matter how well intentioned, is not acceptable. It's a shoot the messenger response in general that I am getting. There is no need to be defensive. I have repeatedly said how appreciative I am of all the Serif products over the years. You say that it is a different team developing the Affinity software. That's probably necessary because of different OS environment etc but maybe they have dropped a few features and lost some of the elegance and intuitiveness designed into the older software. Maybe?
  7. I don't agree that it is unrealistic to expect that a new software package should match the older system in terms of features which were there for a very good reason. It may be true that designing software that is platform agnostic is more difficult. But this is the challenge for the company. As far as the user is concerned, technical difficulties are not their concern.
  8. Since Serif have ceased further development and support for their older software it is only prudent to look at the new replacement. One would expect, however, that even the Beta Version of the new replacement would have the feature set of the old version at the very least.
  9. I would accept , fde101, your framing of the issue and the distinction between Alpha and Beta versions of software. I also agree with you about Dave Harris's contention that a design feature is ok because Adobe does it that way and is, as you politely put it, a shame especially, I would add, when Serif had the good sense to to do the obviously right thing with their older software. If Adobe becomes your yardstick then why bother competing with them. Despite what some may think, I am attempting to be constructively critical, and I hope Serif will sustain its reputation for excellence at a reasonable price.
  10. I am perfectly aware that Publisher it is a Beta Version. I am making the point that a Beta Version should be as close to the finished product as possible and my contention is that there are too many fundamental issues (not even bugs) that should have been ironed out earlier. In other words even as a Beta package it was released too early in the design cycle. Unfortunately the costs involved in fixing and adding things late in the development of a software package can be quite costly and also have unforeseen consequences on other parts of the software. An example of this was adding arrow heads to terminate straight lines (easy in most packages). When they were subsequently added to Designer I discovered that if you did not reselect 'no ends' when finished with the straight lines and arrowheads that arrow heads were added to any shape: square, triangle, circle etc. Now it's easy to go back and deselect arrowheads but you should not have to do this . If you select a triangle shape it should be obvious that the arrowhead feature is not required. Small thing, but so irritating in a brand new design package. With regards to the comment that familiarity with Publisher is the issue, I understand that this always is a factor. I am very familiar with many software applications in relation to Design etc. As Head of Broadcast Engineering in the National TV Station I made it my business to examine new equipment and software in a professional and non-biased way as possible. The ultimate Design package in the early years was Quantel Paintbox and I taught all the Design staff the intricacies of that system. I did likewise for our production designers and editors with many different systems. So I am very used to testing new software and weighting it so that old habits do not impinge on opening one's mind to new and better software. I built computer hardware and software dating back to the first MicroComputers in RTE's Design Lab. so I am very familiar with the design cycle of software systems. I hope I have clarified things a little more. I have no hesitation in saying that I have always had the utmost regard and admiration for Serif Products. As you say fde101 the Affinity products are completely new programs with a different design and working philosophy. I am all too conscious of that, but I am, sadly, not as impressed with these more recent products even though they are very reasonably priced for what they deliver. Regards
  11. I have the family of Affinity Software : Designer, Photo and Beta Publisher. I purchased these when I moved from PC to iMac. Prior to that I had the complete up-to-date range of Serif Software for PC : DrawPlus, PhotoPlus, WebPlus and Page Plus. Already I have reverted back to using DrawPlus for rapid Block Diagrams, Presentation stuff etc because it is quicker and and more intuitive than Designer and has some really nice features that are not in Designer. A current project involves the importation of Word Documents and Photographs into a publishing package to create a Local History Book from old documents. I very quickly found that Affinity Publisher is totally inadequate to the task and I reverted back to my old PC and PagePlus. It is a breeze on PagePlus. I have always found the older Serif software really excellent and intuitive. In relation to Affinity Publisher, even though it is a Beta version, it has been released far too early with far too many bugs. I really can't spend the time testing your software. I am regretting moving to a Mac now and strongly considering reverting to a PC and the original Serf Software, even if it is not supported. I really regret that I have to say this because of the great PC based software from Serif.
  12. Tadhg

    Arrowheads on Lines

    Fair enough. I agree with the deficiencies you point out. I am left wondering, however, if Serif can sort some of these issues satisfactorally. Fixing things in software after it has been developed and launched is expensive and not always successful. This is not like adding new features, it's really trying to change the the basic package features and as I mentioned previously this can have unexpected repercussions on other aspects of the design. As it stands Serif are in beta mode with their publisher and there was some talk about them developing a DAM package. Have they taken on too much, too fast?
  13. Tadhg

    Arrowheads on Lines

    Defaults make sense of course. In DrawPlus if you set up specific line ends then that becomes the default for lines until you change it. And in DrawPlus that default is clearly displayed in the context ribbon. However it really does not make sense to make line endings the default for all shapes. Let's be realistic. When I raise these issues, I am not taking potshots at Affinity but genuinely pointing out areas which slow down the process of drawing and are irritating. I have always had great admiration for Serif software and used their Drawing, Photo, Publishing and WEB software extensively for many years. I am concerned that they have lost something along the way but hopeful that they will find remedies for obvious omissions. The "arrowheads" is not the only issue that bothers me. I do get the sense that you are somewhat defensive about affinity. Perhaps I'm wrong. Regards

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | 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.