Jump to content
Our response time is longer than usual currently. We're working to answer users as quickly as possible and thank you for your continued patience.

Affinity für Linux?


Recommended Posts

On 6/26/2021 at 9:33 PM, MrQ said:

Serif ignores the massive desire of users for Linux versions of their programmes.

There may be "massive desire" (that is proven by the endless postings on the subject), but the problem is that there are actually very few people who use Linux at all and of those only a limited number who would purchase the Affinity apps. Just because a few people make a lot of noise that does not prove that they are right.

Acer XC-895 : Core i5-10400 Hexa-core 2.90 GHz :  32GB RAM : Intel UHD Graphics 630 : Windows 10 Home
Affinity Publisher : Affinity Photo : Affinity Designer (latest release versions) | Affinity Photo for iPad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, PaulEC said:

There may be "massive desire" (that is proven by the endless postings on the subject), but the problem is that there are actually very few people who use Linux at all and of those only a limited number who would purchase the Affinity apps. Just because a few people make a lot of noise that does not prove that they are right.

Enabling users to actually use professional and well working Software on any Plattform is not about majority or beeing right.

It's a chicken or Egg diskussion who are first the users or the software/ apps/ games/ ... as long as both are not coming to the Linux Party its stagnating.

Serif cannot fix this but if they follow the lead of Valve and others who are growing their support for Linux things might change with time. I know Valve are in a vastly different position but still.

OS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit ( 21H2, OS-Build: 19044.2006) | Affinity Suite: 1.10.5

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1600X | GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (Radeon Adrenalin 22.6.1)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The core idea of Linux and the open source community is to use free, open, freely customizable and controllable systems and software. Using Linux to then use on it software made by a company, that is possibly going to be a big company, seems nonsense to me.

The best idea would be to get the code of Scribus, and start making one own's publishing software from there. It would be available, controllable, and most important of all, FREE!

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, PaoloT said:

The core idea of Linux and the open source community is to use free, open, freely customizable and controllable systems and software. Using Linux to then use on it software made by a company, that is possibly going to be a big company, seems nonsense to me.

The best idea would be to get the code of Scribus, and start making one own's publishing software from there. It would be available, controllable, and most important of all, FREE!

Paolo

 

why would any business want to go to Linux then if the ore idea of Linux is to be free? Affinity is not making free software and are certainly not even making open source software, their format is proprietary and does not work in pretty much anything but Affinity apps. 

Affinity is not free

Affinity is not open source

Affinity is not freely customizable beyond basic GUI adjustments you can make in the app itself

 

Sounds like it really is the best idea for you to make your own app and see how that goes. Not sure why there is this expectation that apps need to be free, people work hard developing their software. You are not owed free software and it is certainly not a requirement that apps should be free and open source for everyone to do as they please. Pretty self entitled attitude towards software. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, PaoloT said:

The core idea of Linux and the open source community is to use free, open, freely customizable and controllable systems and software. Using Linux to then use on it software made by a company, that is possibly going to be a big company, seems nonsense to me.

The best idea would be to get the code of Scribus, and start making one own's publishing software from there. It would be available, controllable, and most important of all, FREE!

Paolo

 

Even though you are right Linux Core idea is open source. Open Source is not necessarily for free. For Example: SUSE Linux Enterprise, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Ubuntu support and managed by Canonical. And closed Source / Open Source Software you can pay for: https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/7-paid-alternatives-free-linux-apps/ is also available and a huge benefit for creators.

OS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit ( 21H2, OS-Build: 19044.2006) | Affinity Suite: 1.10.5

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1600X | GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (Radeon Adrenalin 22.6.1)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wonderings said:

why would any business want to go to Linux then if the ore idea of Linux is to be free? Affinity is not making free software and are certainly not even making open source software, their format is proprietary and does not work in pretty much anything but Affinity apps. 

Affinity is not free

Affinity is not open source

Affinity is not freely customizable beyond basic GUI adjustments you can make in the app itself

 

Sounds like it really is the best idea for you to make your own app and see how that goes. Not sure why there is this expectation that apps need to be free, people work hard developing their software. You are not owed free software and it is certainly not a requirement that apps should be free and open source for everyone to do as they please. Pretty self entitled attitude towards software. 

The Affinity Formats could become open source to use and open with other software - that would be amazing, but still just beeing available on the plattform would be great.

OS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit ( 21H2, OS-Build: 19044.2006) | Affinity Suite: 1.10.5

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1600X | GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (Radeon Adrenalin 22.6.1)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PSDfield said:

The Affinity Formats could become open source to use and open with other software - that would be amazing, but still just beeing available on the plattform would be great.

Lots of things could happen, will they? Only the directing team at Serif know and I would not bank of them opening up their format, not sure how that would help them or benefit them. They want people using their software, I am pretty sure they did not get into this to make a new format that could be used across the industry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I would love affinity Designer for Linux, and have paid for a license, and enjoy the hell out of it on windows!!!
I would contribute to a crowdfunding effort, or even buy another license to vote with my dollars.
I would be a free beta tester. I'm a software developer too, so i give good reports.

Affinity is the only reason i am still running windows ( inside of a virtual machine ), and Krita and Inkscape don't cut the mustard compared to Affinity. Also, my pen tablet inside the virtual machine simply does not work well - no problem in Krita/Inkscape.

If there's a way to make it happen, i'm down to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would definitely pay for another license for a Linux version of both Photo and Designer.  Since making the switch back, I've been using Gimp and Inkscape and they are good programs, but nowhere near as good as Affinity.  And I believe there is a market for good apps that are not free on Linux; good example is Davinci Resolve.  They make a Linux version of both their free and paid versions that are the same as the Windows versions....EXCEPT, on Linux, only the paid version has a totally open codec support library (meaning ability to import mp4 files, etc...).  Is this a way to strong-arm the Linux community into paying $400 or whatever it is for a paid license of their software?   Yep, but the point is it's there, as an option for those who want it, and Serif would be wise to follow suit, I think they would be pleasantly surprised the number of people who would be willing to pay for a license.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jmoney, you should check out Krita on Linux if you haven't. It's many times nicer and has more 'feature parity' with Photoshop. It's not 'linux refugee camp struggleware' like GIMP :D

I've thrown some more hours at trying to get Affinity anything to run on Linux..

+ You can forget getting it to work on WINE or crossover.
+ The lack of full graphics acceleration in virtualbox makes Affinity Designer silently crash at startup. Even with the '3d graphics' acceleration turned on.
+ Unsure if vmware player on Linux would run Affinity software properly - it has MUCH better 3d graphics hardware support though, so it COULD work.
+ Unsure if 'looking glass' with a second GPU passed into it would work for Affinity. Given that the 'passthrough' allows you to flawlessly use the original graphics card drivers for your second GPU, and run all manner of 3d games, i imagine that if it works, it works flawlessly.

I'm going to try the vmware player route today and see how it goes.

$400 for davinci resolve is cheap compared to a lifetime of paying for adobe premiere. I personally would pay that money.

Affinity would have a 'best graphics software' monopoly on Linux if they created a Linux port of at least Photo and Designer. It would put them in the position that Adobe currently enjoys  But it would probably be a hell of a lot of developer-hours for a small number of users. I get the feeling it's a hard proposition :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, neptronix said:

I'm going to try the vmware player route today and see how it goes.

If I were to do it, I'd use KVM first and foremost. I don't have much experience with virtual machines in general, having only dabbled here and there, but I hear it's the most performant of the bunch on Linux.

...though getting GPU passthrough to work does require some funky command line goodness.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking glass is an easier way to do what you're describing, and people play the heaviest of 3d windows games on it all the time.

I've done all my work a Windows 7 virtual machine regardless of host OS for 10 years now.. i can tell you that a VM is easy to setup and live with :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Appears to work flawlessly and with very low latency due to the better graphics support in 'vmware player' for linux.
Problem solved, i should have never tried the WINE route. Affinity designer works great.
I can route my wacom tablet into the VM's USB port  and use it with relatively low latency - the extra delay doesn't interfere with drawing.

1937826926_affinityworks.png.b527d5ac94ea20bbb5a6f30cf3401980.png

The windows graphics score is very different in vmware player vs virtualbox. Notice that virtualbox on the right can't even support aero graphics..

vmwareplayer-vs-virtualbox.thumb.png.ca6ad43cf7d60eba666385c3096db95f.png

Installing looking glass may not be worth it. I think this is an OK way to run affinity on linux for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, neptronix said:

I think this is an OK way to run affinity on linux for now.

You are not running Affinity on Linux. You are running Affinity on a Windows virtual machine on Linux. At which point I have to ask... what's the point? You have gained nothing, and you will undoubtedly lose performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the point? I get to use Affinity without needing a special computer or running windows as my main OS, in exchange for a barely perceptible additional lag.

Show me a better way to do it, and i'm all ears. I just want to run Affinity at the end of the day and get work done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

You are not running Affinity on Linux. You are running Affinity on a Windows virtual machine on Linux. At which point I have to ask... what's the point? You have gained nothing, and you will undoubtedly lose performance.

I can't speak for everyone, but verything I use my computer for generally runs better in Linux. I'm not using it just so I can toot the FOSS horn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, neptronix said:

What's the point? I get to use Affinity without needing a special computer or running windows as my main OS, in exchange for a barely perceptible additional lag.

Show me a better way to do it, and i'm all ears. I just want to run Affinity at the end of the day and get work done.

You can run whatever, I'm not bothered. I still have a UNIX desktop for when I do UNIX things. But in the context of running Affinity apps I am asking what is the real benefit to you? Meanwhile I can see several disadvantages:

  1. You have to pay for a Windows licence (so no saving there), and if you don't already have a licence that is an additional cost.
  2. If you are using VMware Workstation Player to run software commercially, that has a cost (currently $180).
  3. You have the overhead of running a virtual machine, using up RAM, disk space, etc, just to run Windows. It doesn't matter how large your system resources are.
  4. No matter what the VM providers tell you about 'near native speed', and other performance claims, etc, that is just marketing talk. You always lose something.

If you are using Affinity apps a lot you are better off running them on Windows, not on Windows in a VM on Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Renzatic said:

I can't speak for everyone, but verything I use my computer for generally runs better in Linux. I'm not using it just so I can toot the FOSS horn.

I've had (genuine) UNIX desktops for over 20 years at work, and UNIX-like desktops (FreeBSD and Linux) for the same length of time (mostly at home). Comparing operating systems, I would say that genuine UNIX (Solaris in various versions) was the most stable and the best supported (Sun Platinum cover was the best, it was expensive, but they always replaced hardware gone bad without umming and arrring about it) Sun (pre-Oracle days) was also pleasant do deal with.

FreeBSD was very close behind - the only time I experienced a kernel panic on FreeBSD was related to hardware that went bad. They had problems with threads in the 5.x series, and it took a long time to get right but they got it eventually.

Linux, in the old days, I lost way too many files to lost+found due to hosed file systems after crashes. I have mixed feelings about Linux. Sometimes it seems that Linux distributions are in the hands of people who are intelligent but are also trying to be too clever when a simpler solution is all that is needed. Comparing Exim and Sendmail, Exim has a human-readable configuration file. Somebody at Debian decided it would be a good idea to split this one file into 70+ files, necessitating the use of grep to find out which file contains the thing I want to edit. Sure, they had a tool to make it one file again. But why bother? Then there is systemd, the monster octopus (though it has more than eight parts) to seriously ruin anyone's day when there is a problem. systemd is not innovation, it's stupidity.

It is perhaps clear that I have quite a bit of experience with UNIX and Linux. I've built more kernels on UNIX and Linux than I care to remember, though I enjoyed it at the time. 

Linux has its place. It is not great on the desktop, it is merely acceptable within limits. Those limits have barely changed in >20 years. The same arguments being made today in favour of Linux are all but identical to those 20 years ago, with a few name changes. If only so and so company would release drivers for their graphics cards (Nvidia), if only so and so company would make versions of their software available for Linux (in this forum, Affinity). Linux has no great 'gee whiz, I really couldn't do without that' feature. I'm glad that you like it and can work within its limits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, i'll take what i can get. I have a core i7-10700 to soak up the inefficiency and make it almost disappear. I have had to run windows in a VM for a very long time to run certain software. No problem.

I have an old copy of windows 7. You can also use an unregistered copy of windows 10 ( it won't allow you to customize it - not much of a punishment ) for use in the VM. Whether you pay for a vmware player license is up to you.
You could also put in elbow grease and use looking glass and get native-like 3d/2d graphics speed by utilizing a second GPU.

@Renzatic- there's an updated tutorial for GPU pass-through with looking glass here, if you haven't seen it:

I love Linux on the Desktop and am a professional Linux server admin for some large systems myself also. Understand the two realms very well.

This isn't perfect, but it works for now. I may chime in later with some experience with looking glass to see if i can achieve near zero latency on the video output. Would be nice to be operating in more like 60fps than 30fps. :)

Running affinity through intel integrated graphics driving three monitors might be part of my 30fps problem, not the virtualization technology itself, BTW! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LondonSquirrel said:

You are not running Affinity on Linux. You are running Affinity on a Windows virtual machine on Linux. At which point I have to ask... what's the point? You have gained nothing, and you will undoubtedly lose performance.

Agreed (though I am not sure about the performance part). One of the main reasons to leave Windows, for any other OS, is its clunky and oppressive human interface. That said, I looked into some of the VM options mentioned in recent posts in this thread. A VM in general is not an option for me, but I found the investigation interesting and educational.

Just a note: VMWare claims not to work with AMD Video Cards and Looking Glass claims to only work with Windows10 (as of this post). This doesn't mean that either or both will not be useful to some; however, they will not be, at least at the present, a solution for everyone who is able to have and wants a VM for Affinity products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, LondonSquirrel said:

Linux has its place. It is not great on the desktop, it is merely acceptable within limits. Those limits have barely changed in >20 years. The same arguments being made today in favour of Linux are all but identical to those 20 years ago, with a few name changes. If only so and so company would release drivers for their graphics cards (Nvidia), if only so and so company would make versions of their software available for Linux (in this forum, Affinity). Linux has no great 'gee whiz, I really couldn't do without that' feature. I'm glad that you like it and can work within its limits.

The thing is, most of your complaints are sourced from things that haven't generally been true for 10 years now. Gnome 4 is pretty well awesome (though admittedly very Mac like), every program I use either has a native rev, or works perfectly in Wine. It never crashes, and requires very little upkeep. Hell, I barely even have to enter into the terminal anymore. The only limitation I have relative to Windows is that I don't have access to Affinity Photo and Designer outside of a VM.

Yeah, you could get into the weeds over things like systemd, but that's really more hardcore dev nerds concerning themselves over what they consider best practice, and doesn't effect end users at all.

Also, I'm using native proprietary Nvidia drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Renzatic said:

Gnome 4 is pretty well awesome

Gnome 4 was released less than a year ago. Gnome 3 was inflicted on its users for about 10 years. Everything I wrote has been true for >20 years with Linux.

10 minutes ago, Renzatic said:

though admittedly very Mac like

Yes, the Linux way: copy what somebody else has done. 

11 minutes ago, Renzatic said:

every program I use either has a native rev, or works perfectly in Wine.

Exactly as I wrote above, the Linux desktop is merely acceptable within limits. If you don't need MS Office and you don't need Adobe and you don't need (any of thousands of apps which only run on Windows or macOS) you can get by with Linux. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, melina said:

Just a note: VMWare claims not to work with AMD Video Cards and Looking Glass claims to only work with Windows10 (as of this post). This doesn't mean that either or both will not be useful to some; however, they will not be, at least at the present, a solution for everyone who is able to have and wants a VM for Affinity products.

Hm.. on what pages does VMware say this?

If you're talking about the various forms of GPU passthrough in other VMware products.. they mention some AMD cards will work.
https://techzone.vmware.com/resource/deploying-hardware-accelerated-graphics-vmware-horizon-7#introduction

For VMware player, there's no talk about discluding AMD graphics cards:
https://docs.vmware.com/en/VMware-Workstation-Player-for-Linux/16.0/com.vmware.player.linux.using.doc/GUID-EA588485-718A-4FD8-81F5-B6E1F04C5788.html

I imagine that vmware player doesn't use an exotic method of GPU access, and should work well as long as your drivers work well.

There are also some GPU passthrough options that are fully independent of the operating system they're running on. They'd require you to devote a spare monitor and GPU to the cause. Quite inconvenient for most, though. You could run Windows 7, but...
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/QEMU/Guest_graphics_acceleration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. 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.