Jump to content

Extremely disappointed that this installs as an "App" and not regular software program


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Xzenor said:

Wait..... So let me get this straight..

You are blaming Serif that other applications don't support the affinity file format?
Just repeat that a few times in your head and maybe you'll start to understand how silly that is..

You do understand that support can be significantly accelerated if the owner of the proprietary format is proactive in helping third parties provide that support?

A recent salutary warning - which seems closely analogous to the situation you're happy to mock - was the shambolic delivery of support by third party converters for the Nikon Z9's "HE" RAW formats: closed proprietary format; and a complete lack of help by its owners to facilitate third party support.

Sound familiar?

Not so silly at all, then...

 

Keith Reeder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without harsh words and blaming - I wish to know WHY. What is the reasoning behind that decision. What are benefits - if not for users but for company, I still would like to know. Because for now it just looks like it creates problem for both users and company with that backlash. And I am not trying to proof any point, I am not saying "this is stupid", "I will not purchase" etc.

I will use Affinity regardless but honestly I am simply curious why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, nezumi said:

Without harsh words and blaming - I wish to know WHY. What is the reasoning behind that decision. What are benefits - if not for users but for company, I still would like to know. Because for now it just looks like it creates problem for both users and company with that backlash. And I am not trying to proof any point, I am not saying "this is stupid", "I will not purchase" etc.

I will use Affinity regardless but honestly I am simply curious why.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

This is a common statistic from Microsoft across all MSI installations. This is just one of many reasons why Microsoft want application developers to migrate to MSIX.

I understand your desire to move to MSIX for the reasons you listed but would you consider a MSI under "advanced downloads" for people who want more control over their installations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Matterdor said:

I understand your desire to move to MSIX for the reasons you listed but would you consider a MSI under "advanced downloads" for people who want more control over their installations.

I would doubt it unless they are 'forced' to do so by way of refunds or an aversion to purchasing by potential buyers. I fully appreciate the need to advertise the product on the MS Store - a wider audience so possibly more uptake - nothing wrong with that line of thought. Adobe, Corel and several others do it. They also though make available through their own websites a traditional install program. So you have the choice. 

It's difficult getting folks to jump ship. I did as I was fed up with increasingly expensive subscription software for very little in return. The 'name of the game is acquiring new customers and keeping your existing ones'. That's how organizations grow. There's no point in having a bucket with holes in it but that's the route Affinity/Serif have taken although I don't feel they believe they will loose existing customers - but they will unless they get to grips with this problem ultra quick - like yesterday. It's difficult enough getting new customers but virtually impossible to get them to return once they've jumped ship.

For now I'll stay with V1 until a better alternative comes along (which it will at some point) or V2 becomes a viable proposition. 

There seems little point in posting further on the subject. All I'm reading, apart from highly dissatisfied users, is half baked excuses, workarounds, blame gaming, etc from Affinity/Serif. I have not read anywhere by Affinity/Serif of the need to to correct the problem that folks are experiencing. Just maybe they can't and they are wedded to the app route - a take it or leave it software model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2022 at 9:20 AM, Mark Ingram said:

We already have app execution aliases installed to:

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityDesigner2.exe

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPhoto2.exe

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPublisher2.exe

Please replace username with your Windows username. Also, those paths are already in your %PATH% variable so you can launch them without even specifying the full path, e.g. AffinityPhoto2.exe.

Mark, I can create a new shortcut on my desktop that will successfully launch Photo 2, simply by supplying the executable name in the link. But, I cannot then use that shortcut from another application (in my case, XnView). It tells me the same thing as if I had tried to execute by directly navigating to the exe.

I'm new to the discussion, so I've probably missed something in your posts.

At any rate, I never uninstalled Photo V1, so I still have functionality. Hoping this gets fixed soon so my workflows can still flow with the shiny new Photo/Publisher/Designer V2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

 

Sorry, as a software professional working in this area, almost none of this is accurate.

You do not need to use MSIX, with its multiple drawbacks, to solve these issues as evidenced by my development team.

It’s especially misleading to state that MSI does not support deltas. I have shown you the MS documentation.

Please at least remove that claim and the one that people will interpret as saying that MSI files cannot be signed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rvst said:

Try the script in the post just above yours. It unsandboxes the app for me and makes it function like a normal Windows app

There are much better options than that. Changing permissions on folder is not a great solution and it could effect upgrades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Matterdor said:

There are much better options than that. Changing permissions on folder is not a great solution and it could effect upgrades.

If there are better options, could you please list them (apart from building a .exe installer instead of an MSIX installer, which us users can't do)?

And no, adding these permissions will not affect upgrades at all.

As soon as the version number changes, the installation will occur in a different folder in "C:\Program Files\WindowsApps", erasing the prior one, since all Windows Apps are installed into a folder with a mangled name containing the version number.

But even if the folder didn't change, the way I added the permissions would not have an effect on upgrades. File ownership remains the same and a broader execute permission that isn't conditional is added on top of the other permissions. All the script does is add more permissive permissions: it doesn't change existing permission entries, it doesn't change file ownership and it doesn't add restrictive permissions, any of which could potentially interfere. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, rvst said:

Try the script in the post just above yours. It unsandboxes the app for me and makes it function like a normal Windows app

Thanks, but I opted for a refund. First, they never added WebP as an option to the version 1 apps and now this? I don't need to pay a company to make my life more complicated than it needs to be. I will stick with the open source programs I currently use, they have more respect for me and offer all the file formats I need. They get the job done.

I was willing to continue to support this company but clearly they have other ideas that don't include potential customers like me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Delphi said:

Thanks, but I opted for a refund. First they never added WebP as an option to the version 1 apps and now this? I don't need to pay a company to make my life more complicated than it needs to be. I will stick with the open source programs I currently use, they have more respect for me and offer all the file formats I need. They get the job done.

That's a real pity. Affinity tools are excellent and it's sad to see people claiming a refund just because the packaging is broken. Hopefully the devs will realise that this MSIX packaging causes lots of problems for users and revert to a standard installation model. Hopefully you'll join the ranks of users again once they fix it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rvst said:

Affinity tools are excellent and it's sad to see people claiming a refund just because the packaging is broken.

You say "just because the packaging is broken" like that's no big deal.

I've set a reminder for when my refund window closes. I'll give them until then to fix this mess with a proper installer--but, based on their "why we're using MSIX" post, I'm not holding my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2022 at 11:20 AM, Mark Ingram said:

We already have app execution aliases installed to:

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityDesigner2.exe

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPhoto2.exe

C:\Users\username\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps\AffinityPublisher2.exe

Please replace username with your Windows username. Also, those paths are already in your %PATH% variable so you can launch them without even specifying the full path, e.g. AffinityPhoto2.exe.


I  created a shortcut on my desktop for each of those files and made a new icon to differentiate version 2 from version 1 for each of the new shortcuts. Then I pinned them to the start menu and taskbar and unpinned the massive sized original versions. 

Clicking any of the icons opens that application.  Dropping files onto the shortcuts opens that application with the file open.  Then I added the shortcuts to the SendTo folder and sending files to the applications via the right click context menu works as well.

I don't need the script above to change permissions of files / folders since the icon shortcut and pinning is all I was interested in.  I have NO idea where the actual files are for these applications. From a usability stand point they work and at least now I have shortcuts that work properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

 

But the 100% failure rate integrating into users' existing workflow wasn't considered? Doesn't anyone making strategic decisions actually use the products?

I'm sorry, but all this sounds more like ad hoc marketing rationalizations than technical considerations. Are you actually saying that 15% of the people running Windows can't install MSI/EXE programs? If it's just Affinity MSI/EXE, then it's obviously not a problem with the installation format itself. If that's the people who can't install because they don't have admin permissions, then they shouldn't be able to install it for a reason. It just doesn't pass the giggle test.

You may think you found a golden ticket in a Microsoft candy bar, and although it may look chocolate, you should really consider why no one else in the industry is willing to take a bite.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Frank Mu. said:

other disadvantages: 

direct loading of the images like e.g. 
photo.exe "image1" "image2" "image3" not possible.

 


This works for me from both command prompt and powershell in Windows 10 with and without quotes around the file location.

 

affinityphoto2 "d:\images\happy.jpg" "d:\images\sad.jpg"  "d:\images\dance.jpg"  

 

And
 

affinityphoto2.exe "d:\images\happy.jpg" "d:\images\sad.jpg"  "d:\images\dance.jpg"

affinitydesigner2 "d:\images\happy.jpg" "d:\images\sad.jpg"  "d:\images\dance.jpg"

affinitypdesigner2.exe "d:\images\happy.jpg" "d:\images\sad.jpg"  "d:\images\dance.jpg"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ChopperNova said:

But the 100% failure rate integrating into users' existing workflow wasn't considered? Doesn't anyone making strategic decisions actually use the products?

I'm sorry, but all this sounds more like ad hoc marketing rationalizations than technical considerations. Are you actually saying that 15% of the people running Windows can't install MSI/EXE programs? If it's just Affinity MSI/EXE, then it's obviously not a problem with the installation format itself. If that's the people who can't install because they don't have admin permissions, then they shouldn't be able to install it for a reason. It just doesn't pass the giggle test.

You may think you found a golden ticket in a Microsoft candy bar, and although it may look chocolate, you should really consider why no one else in the industry is willing to take a bite.

 


 I agree. I never had problems installing Affinity programs.  This whole create your own shortcut and also your own icon to go along with it is garbage and unnessary burden.  
They also need to some how differentiate the icons from the different versions, too easy to click on the wrong application.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Terry44 said:

Then I added the shortcuts to the SendTo folder and sending files to the applications via the right click context menu works as well.

This doesn't work properly if the path or filename has a space. Yes PhotoV2 will open, but the file(s) won't.

It needs a proper fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Steel Rat said:

This doesn't work properly if the path or filename has a space. Yes PhotoV2 will open, but the file(s) won't.

It needs a proper fix.

Hmmm...   I just tested this and as long as you wrap the path in the command prompt terminal it works for me.
Right clicking and sending a file with spaces to affinity photo 2 it opened it just fine on my computer.
 

affinityphoto2 "d:\images\test 1 2 3.jpg"


Right clicking and choosing Send to then affinity photo v2 opens this file on my system on current windows 10 version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mark Ingram said:

 

Hello Mark,

I've read the topic. But I still have a "simple" question: why not both?

Is there any chance that the .exe version will be implemented as an option in the near future?

AMD Ryzen 3 3100 / RX 6600 / 16GB DDR4 3200 / Windows 10 Home

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.