V2 Publisher EXPORT to V1 ?? Problem…

[dagen]

Hi…

I‘ve been a long time user of the V1 Apps (on MacOs mostly) and also on iPad Os… and recently upgraded to the V2 apps.

 

the following issue is NOT Exclusive to the iPad - it‘s the same on the Desktop app…

Regarding Publisher v2.

 

yesterday I received a Publisher File (made in V1 by someone else) - and proceeded to make a few changes I wanted, then saved it and sent it back.
Only to hear back from the recipient in a short time, that she couldn‘t open the File anymore …

Apparently the V2 files, same file extension etc… are indeed not backwards compatible at all.
that, whilst annoying, would be „understandable“ with feature advancements etc, often in SW-Dev it‘s difficult to achieve a complete backwards compatibility with newer files.
 

I thought, „no Problem“ I just do an export to something else…

But there is simply NOTHING I could do that would work.
There‘s no option to save the file for an older version (MS Office has been offering that feature for ages)… I‘d be perfectly happy to loose a few features in the file, but give me some option to export it so that someone with an older version (one version) of Publisher can OPEN it …. (especially considering the original file was made with V1)
or offer export / Import in both V2 and V1 with a compatibility format, or IDML or whatever ….

I‘ve tried to „work around“ the issue by exporting as a PDF… and then sending the PDF and open that in V1.
that does sort of work - but you loose pretty much all usable editability (text boxes are one line text-items etc…  which makes collaborating on that document pretty much useless.)
It also means I had to recreate the changes I had made from scratch in V1 (I used the Macbook which had still both versions installed - if I had only had the iPad at hand it wouldn‘t have been possible at all) …  which meant a few hours of work just because version change.

Also when someone shares an AFPUB file with me, I have no practical way of knowing whether it‘s v1 or v2… so when I open it in v2 - no problems… but save and share back for some more collaborative work - and if the sender had made it using with V1 they can‘t keep working on it.

which means I need to keep relying on V1 - keep a double install … and always make sure to ask whether it‘s from v1 or v2.

which also means v2 on the ipad is often out of the question.

 

Sure the „easy way out“ would be to simply „force“ the other parties to buy the V2 apps…  and whilst I personally find pricing to be very reasonable, I don‘t think its the solution I‘m looking for.

[walt.farrell]

It will be basically the same issue as trying to export something for an InDesign user to use. PDF may be your best choice, but as PDF is not really an interchange format they'll have a lot of work to do.

If you're going to be working with V1 users you should keep V1 installed, too, and choose which app to use.

Depending on how long the Publisher document is, you might be able to copy it over to V1 one page at a time, using Copy/Paste. Pick a page, select all layers in the Layers panel, Copy, then create a new page in V1 and Paste. But it probably won't get Text Styles, etc.

[dagen]

Copy & Paste : well this would work - on my own computer …. but it still means keeping V1 in place… which isn’t possible on the iPad Pro (no v1)..

 

I really think that this is a bit of a serious compatibility issue…

I can see why IDML isn’t exactly supported, after all it’s an adobe thing. (not sure how “open” the file format is from a dev point of view). But if it’s anywhere near the same as it used to be with a PSD than it will be a while…

Anyhow, I think (as much as I dislike many of their SW-decisions) Microsoft has done this part pretty much spot on with their office-suite: offer to save in an older format.
This way it’s MY Choice whether I’m ok with loosing some features in a file - but at least I can make sure that a customer or colleague on the other side of the globe with older versions of a software can still open it.

At the very least the software should warn me, that saving the file will prevent older versions from opening it again (afterall, the file I mentioned was created with v1).

I would understand this a lot more, if say the current version would be v7 or v9  and backwards compatibility to say v2 would be lost… but one version jump… seems a bit unnecessary.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, dagen said:

At the very least the software should warn me, that saving the file will prevent older versions from opening it again (afterall, the file I mentioned was created with v1).

In an upcoming update, the V2 software will provide a warning if you Open a file previously saved in V1, and will suggest (and allow) making a copy to work on. This will behave like the V1 beta versions, if you ever used those, when you opened a file saved by a retail version.

[dagen]

I think that’s pretty much the minimum it needs to do…
it would at least have saved me a good bit of work.

However I don’t think it solves the underlying issue.

From a plain “logic” point of view: 

1. create a file in v1
2. Open it in V2
3. edit just basic things (like re-arranging a few text boxes, replacing a few images, etc…) 
4. Save it (in v2).

there is nothing in that workflow that would mandate a file incompatibility.

So when v2. would indeed offer the option to save in a backwards compatible format - nothing should be amiss in that file.

 

Sure if I play with new features etc… when the file is complex, I expect it to loose things - or fail to work to some extend when saved in a “compatibility” format.
But NOT having the option at all is pretty weird.

again - the software dev side of things, I’m pretty much aware off, having worked a couple of years in software development. I know that sometimes you have to adapt a file format to allow it to handle new things. There’s no way around it. This is something I do fully understand.
But I find it highly shortsighted not to offer some sort of compatibility with the previous version.  After all it’s “just” one version - not five or 10 in between.
Sure at some point, loosing compatibility is “OK” - but not between single version iterations without an option to keep working together with folks who don’t update asap.

And sure affinity’s pricing is far more “forgiving” than adobe’s ….  you could say the 100 quid (intro offer) for the entire v2 suite is really just a lovely deal (it is in my opinion).
But essentially now I’m either being forced to keep working with v1 until the people I collaborate on stuff with upgrade as well… or push the people to upgrade sooner.
neither is appealing in my opinion. 

Sure I think at some points the others will upgrade…

but will this repeat with every iteration we see?

 

So here’s my wish for affinity:

- Offer a compatibility mode… a feature-reduced file-type that allows back and forth data sharing between V1 & v2 users

- or better yet, offer a more open file format for interchanging files… whether this is something like scribus’ XML based files or adobe’s IDML support or whatever…  But something, that may take a few issues with complex layouts, but works well for exchanging data between different creators.

 

the last part is something I see as a merit in moden software development - cross platform compatibility.
Lots of things we can do work now across multiple platforms, for many things it has become pretty irrelevant whether someone uses windows or mac or iPadOs,… 
modern Frameworks allow for simplified cross platform development to an extend (it used to be a LOT more work, it still is enough work, especially doing the porting between  win/macos thing, but comparatively it’s easier than say 10 years ago).

Also with plenty of things available truly platform independent as web-apps  cross-compatibility  becomes a selling point.
often when I look for a software solution to a work-problem I look at offerings based on their cross-platform compatibility, on data export/import etc..
I’ve had a few system changes (win/mac/linux/iOS) and use more than one platform, and not needing to find “new” and individual solutions is really great.,
that is something that opensource software like gimp, scribus, inkscape, libreoffice, etc… just do a LOT better than most of their commercial peers. 
And I think it’s a tad sad, that the main reason for this is often a business decision, where a company thinks its great to lock people into their ecosystem (I’m looking at you, apple and your silly lightning plugs…  really 2022 and iPhone 14 still has a lightning plug… it takes the EU to force you to lay off it…. and go for the open standard that is USB-C).  it often feels the same with proprietary software….

[iuli]

Hi @dagen,

2 hours ago, dagen said:

but it still means keeping V1 in place… which isn’t possible on the iPad Pro (no v1).

If you already have V1 for iPad purchased, you can go to Appstore/Account/Purchased to search and instal Affinity Photo and Designer V1 despite them not being available to buy any longer on the AppStore.

Kind regards!

[dagen]

Just now, iulian said:

Hi @dagen,

If you already have V1 for iPad purchased, you can go to Appstore/Account/Purchased to search and instal Affinity Photo and Designer V1 despite them not being available to buy any longer on the AppStore.

Kind regards!

That would work if there would be publisher v1 for ipad, alas that never existed (v2 is the first release on the ipados platform.

Also this “solution” is so far from any ideal: it means retaining an old version, just to occasionally work on files from older version.
But the most difficult part would again be the simple thing: I make a document in v2 - then need to share it with someone who uses v1.  end of the line. out of options.
Aside from trying to copy/paste the entire document from v2  into  publisher v1…  or do the PDF thing and loose pretty much all realistic editability…

how can this be regarded as a viable “solution” - at best it’s an occasional crude band-aid.

[iuli]

1 hour ago, dagen said:

That would work if there would be publisher v1 for ipad

You are absolutely right, of course, I completely overlooked this simple fact.

Edited December 7, 2022 by iulian

[dagen]

1 hour ago, iulian said:

You are absolutely right, of course, I completely overlooked this simple fact.

No, no need to be sorry this isn’t your doing afterall