I'm trying to understand the essence of Affinity.

[Old Bruce]

Affinity had a release date for Publisher that was at least three years earlier than the actual release date. Serif could come out with a road map saying "we are working on RTL text for release next year. Then they miss it. Going to be a hell of a lot of very upset customers.

[Sam Neil]

22 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Here is what I do:

If a feature I need is not in the application I don't buy that application.

A map is not the terrain. In other words if a feature I need is on the roadmap it is not in the application, and may not be placed in the application in my lifetime. But it will be on the roadmap long after I am gone. 

But Bruce a road map has to be maintained and kept up-to-date. If one feature cannot be implemented then you remove it. Simple as that. 

[MikeW]

6 minutes ago, Sam Neil said:

But Bruce a road map has to be maintained and kept up-to-date. If one feature cannot be implemented then you remove it. Simple as that. 

I don't think removal is a good idea. Pushing it back with a brief statement why is sufficient. 

In the case of OB's rtl text, stating the feature is more difficult to implement in Serif's text engine than originally thought and a change to indefinite but working on it would be nice. Then once foundational changes have been implemented to the text engine, the timing could be updated. 

[PaulEC]

13 minutes ago, Sam Neil said:

But Bruce a road map has to be maintained and kept up-to-date. If one feature cannot be implemented then you remove it. Simple as that. 

Then the people who have already bought it, expecting the feature that has now been removed, get upset and start complaining that they bought it for that feature which is now no longer on the roadmap! 

[LondonSquirrel]

5 minutes ago, PaulEC said:

Then the people who have already bought it, expecting the feature that has now been removed, get upset and start complaining that they bought it for that feature which is now no longer on the roadmap! 

Exactly! Once it's on the roadmap there is an expectation. 

[Sam Neil]

8 minutes ago, MikeW said:

I don't think removal is a good idea. Pushing it back with a brief statement why is sufficient. 

In the case of OB's rtl text, stating the feature is more difficult to implement in Serif's text engine than originally thought and a change to indefinite but working on it would be nice. Then once foundational changes have been implemented to the text engine, the timing could be updated. 

Good points. I am one of those desperately wanting and needing RTL support for a major projects and lord knows the amount of "mountains" I have moved to get it to work on Publisher/Designer but I know it will not come until version 2 or 3 or 4 of the software so I have given up and using my un-orthodox methods to get the job done as apart for this, Publisher is amazing!

So I have given up on a road map too...

[Sam Neil]

7 minutes ago, PaulEC said:

Then the people who have already bought it, expecting the feature that has now been removed, get upset and start complaining that they bought it for that feature which is now no longer on the roadmap! 

Fair point. I have given up on the road map.

[jmwellborn]

And then there is this. 

 

[bananayoshimoto]

@jmwellborn

I don’t want to start a never-ending discussion about who is rounder than who, but that “circle” looks far more spherical in Illustrator.

Edit — Poor attempt at a joke based on this topic:

 

[jmwellborn]

7 minutes ago, iuli said:

@jmwellborn

I don’t want to start a never-ending discussion about who is rounder than who, but that “circle” looks far more spherical in Illustrator.

I have no clue who drew that.  Perhaps ancient Egypt used freehand expression?

[wonderings]

5 hours ago, Joschi said:

It seems to me that some people here have the idea, that professional studios or freelancers basically only use programs that have all the features they need.
But that's not how it works in reality.

Fact is: There is no program that can handle all the tasks you need to complete your jobs.

Then you go with the strategy of buying as many programs (or services) that cover the necessary needs that are needed for the job. So several programs, but only as many as you really need (the cost-benefit factors must be taken into account, too).

Now, if you have several options to choose from: Let's assume option A on the one hand, with a program that is available for a one-time purchase and covers 80% of all functions that you need for work. And on the other side, option B, with a program that has to be subscribed monthly for a high price, but covers 90% of all functions.

Now you have to calculate how to compensate for the remaining needs. Let's assume again that for both options there is a provider on the market that offers the remaining functions via a plug-in or standalone software and is compatible with both options.
Which option do you choose? Of course, the option that can offer the best cost-benefit factor in the long run.

If people here now claim: "I only buy a program that covers all my features that I need",
then I wonder if they use any programs at all on a professional basis.

There is no software that can do everything.

But that's what my post was about:
The question of Affinity's long-term planning and direction.

If someone asks: "Why make a fuss about it? If a program has what you need, then buy it, if not don't buy it!", then it shows that this person has never heard of long-term planning and calculation.

This is not how the business world works.
If someone rejects a program because it doesn't have a certain feature, but meets all the other requirements, he is not thinking economically and logically. Because there is no such thing as a program that covers everything. But that is exactly why the question of enterprise customers to software companies regarding long-term planning and development phase is important. Do you seriously believe that companies can change their entire pipeline from one month to the next (just because a cheaper alternative suddenly has a feature that could be useful for work)? There are always long-term contracts and licenses negotiated.

Not everyone uses Affinity as a hobby or for occasional jobs. Others would like to use it as a long-term professional tool in the future. And there's a lot more to it than just asking: Does it have all the features I need, or not?

For some people it might work, who only act on the principle of only buying something, that can meet all their requirements.
However, there are many others here who think the same way I do, and don't consider that a realistic and healthy attitude. If you invest a lot of time and money in programs and processes, you also want to know whether it is economically worthwhile to rely on them in the long term. And communication is important because it can give customers security when companies communicate their long-term plans to their customers.

It's not about arguing about which features need to be done first or are more important. It's about showing the customers that you have a plan and that the customers can understand those plans and feel like they are being guided through the process.

I have no other software I use professionally for page layout, working with vectors and for photos. I use Indesign, Illustrator and Photoshop. I have all 3 apps from Affinity I purchased out of curiosity for the first app for app competition I have seen for Adobe, the cheap price tag made that possible as well. Indesign does everything Indesign is supposed to do for me. I am a pro user in the fact that I make my living with Adobe CC as well as some other apps, none of which over lap with Indesign, Illustrator or Photoshop. I have other apps for numbering, imposition, PDF conversion, font management, etc. None of these are things that overlap or any of the 3 apps I use daily have claimed to do or even attempt at doing. I have not had a need to go looking for other software to get my work done, curiosity has me looking to see what is out there but that is a very different thing then needing to find an app to do something I cannot. Everyones needs are different though and I can accept that for some they need more, I will bet that it is not as common as you seem to think it is. 

When you say no software can do everything, what does that mean? Progams are made for specific tests and functions, no one app is going to span over into fields it was never intended to be in. I am not going to map out a trip to the west coast in Photoshop. I don't think that is what you mean, I should hope not as that would be a silly thing. 

I do agree on relying on a company for the long term, I would not want to invest my money into a system that would no longer get updates. It would be fine for a while but eventually it would not work in future OS's along with other issues any aging app can have. Serif has been around a while and they seem to be a solid company. Adobe is obviously the same just on a much larger scale. I would say Adobe is to large to fail at this point.

Again I think it is a unique to software self entitled attitude that you would not use anywhere else. Serif has said they have a road map, they are planning for the future. Your problem is you don't know what they are planning, so you either have to like what you see now and trust that they will continue to improve on it or you should be looking somewhere else. No idea why the customer needs to be guided through the process of the companies game plan. Should they be holding our hands, whispering soothing words into our ears that everything is going to be ok with the software we bought? I think what they have done now is a good indication that they are capable at making quality software and I do not believe it was just dumb luck that got them where they are now. They have a track record that is well respected and have chosen to keep their roadmap private at this stage. They have been clear on this and I don't think people crying out for it will change anything, just like those wanting a Linux version. 

[Alfred]

30 minutes ago, jmwellborn said:

And then there is this. 

Did somebody mention large fonts? 

[jmwellborn]

@Alfred  Ver’r’r’r’r’r’y funny!  And without a roadmap too.  

[Snapseed]

14 hours ago, v_kyr said:

Apple's ways are sometimes unfathomable, too. - The former guy behind Apple's Photo Apps group (Nik Bhatt) afterwards founded Gentleman Coders and developed Raw Power as a sort of Aperture replacement.

In this case, the cause is probably fathomable. When the creative genius that was Steve Jobs died, the accountant Tim Cook took over and, like many bean counters, he knew the price of everything and the value of nothing.

He was the one that oversaw the dumbing down of software for the social media generation and the introduction of gimmicks like the touch bar on Macs thereby neglecting professional users of Apple software and hardware. 

[PaoloT]

18 hours ago, wonderings said:

The entitlement comes from the request over and over for transparency in how the company operates. It has answered this question before and constantly people think they should be able to see everything the company is working on.

Indeed, sometimes, it looks like many customers are in reality officials from the Nottingham trade office…

Paolo

 

[Bwood]

I’d like @Joschi to give me three companies that offer a public road map. I’ve used a lot of software and most companies will indicate they are working on this or that, but not a clear public road map. If there is one, I haven’t found it. 
thx

-Bill

[PaoloT]

On 3/20/2022 at 3:34 PM, Murfee said:

No there is no roadmap but there is other evidence on these forums that things are happening. 

I strongly suspect the ones asking louder for a roadmap are also the ones who never visit the Beta section.

Paolo

 

[Pšenda]

21 hours ago, Bwood said:

to give me three companies that offer a public road map.

Just to add - to make it comparable, it should not be companies which rent software through subscriptions. Its essence is that the user pays in advance for updates, so that one would expect to be informed in detail what the money is actually paid for. In contrast, Affinity is a one-time purchase, where all subsequent updates and supplements are a free bonus. And yet it is expected and even required to inform about these bonuses in advance and accurately.

[Frozen Death Knight]

On 3/20/2022 at 2:27 AM, Joschi said:

gimmick tools - such as the Liquify tool

That is most certainly not a gimmick tool. It's one of the big reasons I didn't pick up Krita or Clip Studio Paint back when I was still actively searching for a Photoshop replacement. This comes off as being fairly out of touch in a pretty ironic way considering that liquify is one out of many transformation options for paintings, photos, etc. used for professional work. The non-destructive Liquify Filter was most certainly not a gimmick either, since now you can combine a lot of various transformation Filters without ruining your work underneath. Non-destructive features are professional features.