Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Suggestions after 3 years of professional use of the Affinity Suite


Recommended Posts

Hi, I am an advertising graphic designer with 25 years of experience. I have been using the Affinity Suite for 3 years (starting with Photo and Designer and then adding Publisher as soon as it was in beta). In Italy, I have created a course dedicated to Affinity Publisher and numerous Live sessions to help other users understand the differences between Adobe and Affinity workflows. I have helped some graphic studios to make the transition. Unfortunately, I have repeatedly highlighted the significant technical limitations present in both the V1 and V2 Suites, which, from my point of view as a Senior professional, are extremely frustrating and cause significant workflow time losses for graphic agencies. This text will be a bit longer, unfortunately, but I hope effective and understandable.
These are essentially the points you will find below, primarily related to Affinity Publisher:

    •    PDF export is not currently reliable. Depending on the values entered, there is a risk of obtaining terrible unintended effects without realizing it. This includes text rasterizations (which automatically transform a Black K-100 into a Rich Black in part of a text), knockout black instead of overprints, and unwanted effects when certain types of FX are applied at the layer. Not to mention what happens if I work with a text with an FX shadow on a Pantone color (the Pantone becomes a CMYK where the shadow is present, instead of remaining a Pantone and accepting the shadow in overprint).

    •    Color management is terrible. If I assign Fogra39 to a file and then I have to print it at a printing company that uses a different color profile when I load the new color profile, all the colors in the file will have to be reassigned because they will completely lose their real composition (the K100 black will become a rich black again and so on, as if the entire color flow passes through RGB and then returns to CMYK).    

    •    There is no internal control system in the Suite that allows the user to understand in advance when these problems occur. Nor is there a tool to understand it after creating the PDF. An Export Persona is necessary for Affinity Publisher that gives the possibility to see exactly what happens in Color Separation when a certain combination of values is chosen from the PDF export menu.

    •    Swatches management is too slow. On the palette, I have to build my Global Colors, otherwise, I won't be able to modify them intelligently later on. But what happens when I copy an object from one document and bring it to another document? Its color palette is not added to the existing palette (each color has to be manually added one by one), and this creates a considerable loss of time.

    •    Why is there no way to transform a Global Color to which I have given the Spot value into a normal four-color process? It doesn't make sense. Often, in the workflow, the same color is changed several times, from Spot to Non-Spot, and only in the end is it decided what to do based on the printing. Here you cannot. The color must be remade and reassigned to each object.

    •    Why is there no way to replace one color with another? A "replace color" function would be excellent. As well as a function that asks me if I want to replace it with another color when I delete a Global Color from the palette

These are the most important and limiting things for me. Although one could list a whole series of minor bugs that have existed for years and have not been resolved.

After accepting that none of this was done in V2, my idea is that I am not part of Affinity's true target audience. I am a professional with extensive experience. I worked with Quark before, and then with Adobe for decades. Why should someone like me switch to an "economic" system like the Affinity Suite? My answer is that I appreciated the great effort made by Affinity to invent a new workflow that is non-destructive by default, more modern, and suitable for the hardware available today. I was bored of using Adobe.
However, after this first step, made years ago, it seems to me that there has been a change of direction. Not surprisingly, most of the Affinity users I talk to are students, enthusiasts, or even mid-level freelancers, but not high-level professionals. This makes sense. It would be a bit absurd to go to war against one of the largest software houses on the planet, we would come out of it with broken bones. Yet I still hope. I hope I am wrong and believe that Affinity can make it.
I have 3 copies purchased of V2 in the drawer. I don't use them because I don't need them, and my workflow now works well on V1, while on V2 I immediately ran into bugs that weren't present in V1. It also happened in Adobe, I'm not scandalized.

But the question to Affinity is: do you plan to address the points mentioned above? Are you aware of them? Do you have any ideas on how to remedy them? Or is it not in your plans?

The answer to these questions would certainly help thousands of professionals like me understand how to orient themselves.
Thank you and sorry for the length.
Sincerely, Beniamino (PS: translated from Italian with ChatGPT)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I see it ... i've got almost the same problem. I'd like to have a flexible color system: for high-end users the export has to be consistent ... spot colors do have to be exported as spot colors. Otherwise/now I've got to return to Adobe to fix that problem. I'm not amused. 

When I open the attached PDF in Designer again there is a confusing new CMYK layer. After deleting it the blue is a spot color again. But am I able to export it?

Idea: let's define colors as CMYK/RGB/Spot color in 1 palette ... during export you decide what you need the product for.  

Beniamino: thank you for your post.

Test_Briefschaft_01-03-23.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2023 at 2:02 PM, Beniamino said:

But the question to Affinity is: do you plan to address the points mentioned above? Are you aware of them? Do you have any ideas on how to remedy them? Or is it not in your plans?

Unfortunately, Serif rarely comments on their plans. As to whether or not they are aware of them, or plan to remedy them, who knows?

Personally, after 8+ years (yes I started with Designer v1 when it launched), I've stopped waiting for Affinity to fix the long-standing issues, and 'professional' feature requests, as going by their actions (the underwhelming, overhyped v2 release, along with the upcoming anaemic v2.1 release) I think Serif are quite content simply remaining in the hobbyist, casual user market. As much as I like the Affinity suite, I'm very reluctant to commit to working with it due to all of the bugs, workflow issues, missing tools/features, and uncertainty that my work will remain accessible into the future (with their proprietary, 'non-standard' file formats). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the only area of Affinity that gives me real anxiety. Most of my work is done for websites/screens but what I tend to get printed rarely involves spots, though I'm familiar with working with them in AI. If I ever move heavily towards printed work, I'd feel I have to go back to Adobe. I don't have the knowledge some here possess to deal with the complexities in a timely manner. Not to mention, it would frustrate a printer to no end to give them "non-workable" files over and over learning that this and that doesn't output as expected, which is unprofessional. So the issues some have cited with output on the regular are concerning. I've had bugs with just printing things at home straight from Affinity that have wasted ink. So I know outside of a quick check, to never use in-app print, which is concerning.

I know some have recipes to make it all work, but like others it gives me serious concern this has not been addressed. I'm fine that they have a screen focus, but I would like to know if they are moving ahead with serious plans this direction or not. If @Ash would enlighten us, that would be fantastic. If not possible atm, it is what it is. I'm not going to beat a dead horse and just appreciate the apps for what they're currently able to do, which is sufficient for what I'm doing. Of which I am grateful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Knorzel52

Thank you for your message and for sharing your case. I'm not entirely certain about the issue you are facing. However, I may have been able to resolve it with the attached PDF. Unfortunately, there is a significant problem with the Affinity Suite, as it is incapable of previewing overprints on the screen. Consequently, this PDF appears fine when viewed with software like Acrobat, but it is not okay when opened in Affinity.

Nonetheless, I assigned overprint to the Blue Spot Color instead of using its level in multiply and then exported the PDF in X3 standard (it may also work in X4, but I haven't tried). This is because if you use multiply with a spot color, it generates a fake CMYK+Spot color ink value on the four separation colors.
Please, check the attached file.

I apologize for my poor English, and I hope I have managed to address your issue.

Test_Briefschaft_01-03-233.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Stanley 

Quote

Yes, me too. Though I would call myself an enthusiast. I think Affinity has switched making apps that look good in advertising videos. Only.

Hi, I wouldn't describe the Affinity Suite in such negative terms. In some ways, it's fantastic. Maybe I was a bit harsh in what I wrote in my post. For me, the problem is that after making giant strides initially to create an innovative Suite, they seem to have stopped just 100 meters before the finish line, when there was only the final effort left to create a top-level product. I know that the issues I listed are at the core of the Suite, so they are not easy things to address. However, I would love to be reassured in some way that the Suite will evolve in the direction of solving these problems. The arrival of V2 was disappointing in this regard because what it brought had nothing to do with the problems that, from my humble point of view, needed to be solved to give professional dignity to the entire Suite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2023 at 1:57 PM, BryanR said:

Personally, after 8+ years (yes I started with Designer v1 when it launched), I've stopped waiting for Affinity to fix the long-standing issues, and 'professional' feature requests, as going by their actions (the underwhelming, overhyped v2 release, along with the upcoming anaemic v2.1 release) I think Serif are quite content simply remaining in the hobbyist, casual user market. As much as I like the Affinity suite, I'm very reluctant to commit to working with it due to all of the bugs, workflow issues, missing tools/features, and uncertainty that my work will remain accessible into the future (with their proprietary, 'non-standard' file formats). 

Yes, I agree. Unfortunately, today, after the enthusiasm of a few years ago, I feel discouraged. Like you, I have no idea if they are aware of the current technical limitations of the suite. In fact, if they target an audience other than professionals, then they do not risk stepping on Adobe's toes, which could prove fatal.

I still believe in it and do not go back on my steps, after two years since I abandoned Adobe. However, even with them, you find yourself in a situation where the files you produce are not under your direct control, the moment you stop paying your monthly fee.

We'll see if in the near future, Affinity will still be able to amaze professionals. I put a lot of hope into it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@debraspicher Thank you for your contribution and for calling out Ash (I didn't know him, and it would be really nice if he could somehow give us more precise information than our assumptions). From my experience, I can guarantee that the printing problems with the Affinity Suite remind me a lot of those encountered with the early versions of Indesign, in the late 90s when the market leader was Quark Xpress and Adobe was trying to take its place with InDesign (successfully). In fact, even today, the Adobe Suite, if you are not technically skilled in printing, can lead to undesired effects and poor results. Unfortunately, Affinity has a few more problems. As I wrote in my post, it doesn't allow for any direct control (or the possibility to verify) of what will happen in print. And this, for applications like Publisher, becomes unacceptable. I have learned to work around all the bugs and problems I have encountered (although sometimes I still come across new problems I've never seen before). But the time lost in constantly searching for the right way to avoid bugs is sometimes really too much, especially for a professional studio, where time is money. With Adobe, this hasn't been a problem for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beniamino said:

In fact, even today, the Adobe Suite, if you are not technically skilled in printing, can lead to undesired effects and poor results.

You seem to contradict yourself:

1 hour ago, Beniamino said:

With Adobe, this hasn't been a problem for a long time.

So I am not sure which is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

You seem to contradict yourself:

So I am not sure which is correct.

I understood what they were saying. Consider the statements after the first quote:

Quote

Unfortunately, Affinity has a few more problems. As I wrote in my post, it doesn't allow for any direct control (or the possibility to verify) of what will happen in print.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LondonSquirrel I think they are both correct but I think that my poor English and the automatic translation have twisted the meaning.

1 hour ago, LondonSquirrel said:
3 hours ago, Beniamino said:

In fact, even today, the Adobe Suite, if you are not technically skilled in printing, can lead to undesired effects and poor results.

You seem to contradict yourself:

There I'm saying that if you are not a graphic designer, you can achieve a bad result in printing using Indesign. And this is because what you see on screen is not what you're going to print. This is not just my opinion, it is a fact that concerns desktop publishing programs and offset printing in general.

1 hour ago, LondonSquirrel said:
3 hours ago, Beniamino said:

With Adobe, this hasn't been a problem for a long time.

So I am not sure which is correct.

Here I was talking about bugs and the big amount of bugs present in the Affinity suite, today, compared to the less bug of the Adobe Suite. I wanted to say that Adobe now as fewer bugs (even if it had important bugs when Indesign was younger).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Beniamino said:

I wouldn't describe the Affinity Suite in such negative terms. In some ways, it's fantastic.

Yes, I came across as a grumpy old man. Affinity apps do have some fantastic features. And, they do all the things I want right now. But the bugs and the experience of using them annoy me every day.

Stan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I 100% agree with the sentiments expressed here. As to whether Affinity are really aiming at the professional market, their marketing suggests as much. I unwittingly triggered an avalanche of resentment from some users for daring to even mention the word 'pr*fessionals', but I stand by it and point people to Affinity's own home page, where the very first word on the page is 'Professional'. They go on to say, 'Since its inception, Affinity has gained the trust of millions of professional users worldwide …'. I think @debraspicher is right though in saying that their focus is on screen media, not print.

@Beniamino, I've been around as long as you have with a matching history by the sounds of it: Quark > InDesign > Affinity. I'd say ours is a pretty common story. I'd still be with Adobe if it wasn't for their greedy subscription-only policy. And Affinity version 2 was a real disappointment for me. Like many others, I was hopeful that V2 would fix the big issues we've been providing feedback on for years. When it didn't, I concluded that there's no point holding our breaths any longer—we just have to lower our expectations if we wan't to enjoy the sans-subscription freedom Affinity gives us.

Incidentally, I've just started a new job where I'm back using Adobe CC. And oh, what a relief it is. I was worried that, after an absence of several years, I might have forgotten how to use it, but those old keyboard shortcuts were still there! Just like riding a bike it seems. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree!

Affinity Suite costs as much as three months Adobe CC. Then you are free of paying more. It is best for Beginners and Mid-Professionals or in-house DTP in a company, where you can solve your problems within your company. 

If you earn some money with this DTP/Designer-business, if you have some different customers, if your products are expensive, you are better with Adobe CC. The uncertainty will not follow you all the time. As told by some contributors in the blog.

And Xpress? Forget it. It is much pricier than Adobe. For example, I cannot convert Xpress 2022 Files down to 2019! So, you are always forced to by a new Xpress every two or three years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2023 at 12:11 PM, Kal said:

I 100% agree with the sentiments expressed here. As to whether Affinity are really aiming at the professional market, their marketing suggests as much. I unwittingly triggered an avalanche of resentment from some users for daring to even mention the word 'pr*fessionals', but I stand by it and point people to Affinity's own home page, where the very first word on the page is 'Professional'. They go on to say, 'Since its inception, Affinity has gained the trust of millions of professional users worldwide …'. I think @debraspicher is right though in saying that their focus is on screen media, not print.

@Beniamino, I've been around as long as you have with a matching history by the sounds of it: Quark > InDesign > Affinity. I'd say ours is a pretty common story. I'd still be with Adobe if it wasn't for their greedy subscription-only policy. And Affinity version 2 was a real disappointment for me. Like many others, I was hopeful that V2 would fix the big issues we've been providing feedback on for years. When it didn't, I concluded that there's no point holding our breaths any longer—we just have to lower our expectations if we wan't to enjoy the sans-subscription freedom Affinity gives us.

Incidentally, I've just started a new job where I'm back using Adobe CC. And oh, what a relief it is. I was worried that, after an absence of several years, I might have forgotten how to use it, but those old keyboard shortcuts were still there! Just like riding a bike it seems. 🙂

@KalThank you for your input. I also went to read the post you mentioned... it's a shame when people misunderstand the meaning of words. Often they don't read carefully and run the risk of not understanding. The concepts you expressed are very clear and absolutely agreeable. And it's also interesting how Affinity uses the term "professional"... I hadn't checked their homepage before writing. You're absolutely right, they are the ones creating the misunderstanding in the first place.

In any case, yes, I have learned to work around all the obstacles I have encountered on my path (I define myself as a "professional" without hesitation), since in my studio, we work for companies of a certain importance and produce all kinds of graphic creations. It's frustrating to waste time working around bugs and unresolved situations. But, as you also say, the price factor makes the difference. I also don't accept Adobe's policy first. Before being a money problem, it was a concept problem: if I pay for the software every month just to be able to open my files, it will be difficult for the software company to have the drive to continue to innovate and update its product. And in fact, Affinity has made great strides compared to where Adobe. There are features in Affinity that I've been waiting for for 20 years on CC. And now, even Adobe seems to have understood that perhaps it's necessary to start programming new things, not just buying other programs and rebranding them with their own name. See you soon and thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2023 at 5:26 PM, Moon12 said:

I agree!

Affinity Suite costs as much as three months Adobe CC. Then you are free of paying more. It is best for Beginners and Mid-Professionals or in-house DTP in a company, where you can solve your problems within your company. 

If you earn some money with this DTP/Designer-business, if you have some different customers, if your products are expensive, you are better with Adobe CC. The uncertainty will not follow you all the time. As told by some contributors in the blog.

And Xpress? Forget it. It is much pricier than Adobe. For example, I cannot convert Xpress 2022 Files down to 2019! So, you are always forced to by a new Xpress every two or three years.

I don't know. I remember very well the times when InDesign was full of bugs and you had to learn how to work around them one by one. Those were different times, but the problem is more or less what I find myself facing again today with Affinity.

I still have hope that the path will be the same, that is, it will take time to fix such professional software. So Affinity still has my trust (I bought three V2 licenses that I don't use, precisely for this reason, to give trust and subsidize further programming efforts). After struggling a lot to move away from Adobe and move a huge workflow to another suite, it would be a kind of failure for me to have to go back.

And even the issue of money, at least in Italy, has its value, especially today. 25 years ago it made sense for 3 software products for 2D raster and vector drawing to cost 1500/2000 EUR (USD). I don't remember the price, at the time there was no EUR yet, but I think it was more or less that. Today absolutely not: such a figure no longer makes sense. Adobe has therefore moved to another system (which, however, as I said, has the disadvantage of not keeping the company on its toes: if there is no more competition and if you don't even have to create appealing updates to collect payments, because the customer pays only to be able to open his files, it is difficult to have the desire and the need to innovate). But apart from this, going back to the question of price, paying for 4 Adobe subscriptions or buying 4 Affinity licenses, within 10 years, makes a big difference. I am not willing to spend that kind of money on software of that type. I am sure that my company can invest that small capital in a more constructive and profitable way. Today we do 3D and composting in Blender (which we happily support with donations). We do video editing in DaVinci Resolve. We do 2D graphics with the Affinity suite. Let's hope they can evolve in a direction that is also appealing to professionals!

Thank you, Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Ben, it’s not just about the money; the subscription-only model holds the user to ransom. Stop paying, lose access to your own files. There’s no justification for such a model if the company cares for its users—its 100% motivated by company profits, and the only reason they had the gall to do it, is because they had something off a monopoly when it comes to comprehensive design suites.

More ethical software companies, like Panic and many others, offer a hybrid form of licensing these days, where you pay, at any time, for their  software and get 12 months of updates. The big difference is, if you choose not to renew at the end of 12 months, you can still keep using your aging copy of the software and you still have access to your own files. There’s no practical or technical reason Adobe couldn’t do the same thing—just their own greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/27/2023 at 10:25 PM, Kal said:

I agree Ben, it’s not just about the money; the subscription-only model holds the user to ransom. Stop paying, lose access to your own files. There’s no justification for such a model if the company cares for its users—its 100% motivated by company profits, and the only reason they had the gall to do it, is because they had something off a monopoly when it comes to comprehensive design suites.

More ethical software companies, like Panic and many others, offer a hybrid form of licensing these days, where you pay, at any time, for their  software and get 12 months of updates. The big difference is, if you choose not to renew at the end of 12 months, you can still keep using your aging copy of the software and you still have access to your own files. There’s no practical or technical reason Adobe couldn’t do the same thing—just their own greed.

Even read only, like Office 365 does, would be OK. So you could still export and print just can’t edit. But not enough people dropped it (or couldn’t) so why would they change if they can get away with it? I guess if you’re making money using it then it’s not such a big deal being locked in and continually paying for it. There still isn’t anything out there does everything AI or PS can (assuming you need everything), no idea about other apps like dtp. Perhaps in another 10-15 years Affinity might be there or perhaps a newcomer will do it instead, who knows.

 

Marc

ArtByMarc.me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, VectorVonDoom said:

Even read only, like Office 365 does, would be OK.

For a monthly subscription, I suppose this would be okay. But again, the better model (IMHO) is the one where you make an initial payment for the app and then get 12 months of free updates, with an option to renew each year if you want to keep receiving updates. If you don't renew, you still have full access to the version of the software you paid for. This provides a true incentive for the developer to keep improving their product, without holding users to ransom.

1 hour ago, VectorVonDoom said:

But not enough people dropped it (or couldn’t) so why would they change if they can get away with it?

That was exactly my point when I said, 'the only reason they had the gall to do it, is because they had something off a monopoly when it comes to comprehensive design suites'.

1 hour ago, VectorVonDoom said:

I guess if you’re making money using it then it’s not such a big deal being locked in and continually paying for it.

If you're a struggling small business or a one-person show (lots of those out there) it just might be a big deal—maybe not all the time, but if you hit hard times, as many people are now, with rising interest rates and inflation, you can't ever press pause on that subscription, even for a few months, without losing your very livelihood. Adobe may not send thugs around to your house asking for protection money, but they are using their position of power to force users into regular payments with the threat of loss if they don't. Tell me I'm totally sensationalising this now, and that you can't see any similarities. 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Kal said:

For a monthly subscription, I suppose this would be okay. But again, the better model (IMHO) is the one where you make an initial payment for the app and then get 12 months of free updates, with an option to renew each year if you want to keep receiving updates. If you don't renew, you still have full access to the version of the software you paid for. This provides a true incentive for the developer to keep improving their product, without holding users to ransom.

That was exactly my point when I said, 'the only reason they had the gall to do it, is because they had something off a monopoly when it comes to comprehensive design suites'.

If you're a struggling small business or a one-person show (lots of those out there) it just might be a big deal—maybe not all the time, but if you hit hard times, as many people are now, with rising interest rates and inflation, you can't ever press pause on that subscription, even for a few months, without losing your very livelihood. Adobe may not send thugs around to your house asking for protection money, but they are using their position of power to force users into regular payments with the threat of loss if they don't. Tell me I'm totally sensationalising this now, and that you can't see any similarities. 🙂

I know the other subscription options are even better but even read only would be better than what adobe offers. But it’s academic as they’re not going to change. Which is why your best hope is someone makes products that are on parity, or close to, but for a one off cost. Not going to happen any time soon though. Look at AD for example, very slowly getting closer to where AI was. But as AI didn’t stand still you could argue it’s almost as far behind now as it was when it was first released. Which is why my guess is 10-15 years assuming AI runs out of things to add, which isn’t going to happen for a while.

There are “lesser” alternatives, which might suit many people’s needs fine, so it’s a bit more than adobe are a monopoly because they’re not really. It’s also that, for better or worse, they are the industry standards. If you want to get in to graphics design or whatever companies expect you to know Adobe products (unless you’re talking about UI/UX). If you send files they expect it in Adobe format. So you could say companies make things worse and in turn make Adobe worse or at least there’s no pressure put on them to change.

I really meant if you’re earning a ok living from whatever you do then it’s not always such a big deal, plus of course it’s a deductible business expense. But I get your point. You could say that for some (many?) even if you could buy outright like the old days it would be a problem especially for one man bands trying to get going. AI/PS wasn’t exactly cheap back then never mind the Master Collection.

 

 

 

Marc

ArtByMarc.me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, VectorVonDoom said:

Which is why your best hope is someone makes products that are on parity, or close to, but for a one off cost. Not going to happen any time soon though. Look at AD for example, very slowly getting closer to where AI was. But as AI didn’t stand still you could argue it’s almost as far behind now as it was when it was first released. Which is why my guess is 10-15 years assuming AI runs out of things to add, which isn’t going to happen for a while.

I don't need competing apps to match Adobe feature-for-feature. CS6 would still get the job done 99% of the time. I just wish Affinity would get the fundamentals right. Version 2 is still missing basic features like support for 1-bit graphics, and aspects of their UI (especially colour swatch management) are terrible.

The problem isn't that Affinity needs 10–15 years to catch up. The problem appears to be that they just don't understand why these things are a problem. If they did, I think we'd have seen them addressed in version 2. So I'm not terribly optimistic that Affinity will ever threaten Adobe's hold over the industry. I hope they prove me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kal said:

I don't need competing apps to match Adobe feature-for-feature. CS6 would still get the job done 99% of the time. I just wish Affinity would get the fundamentals right. Version 2 is still missing basic features like support for 1-bit graphics, and aspects of their UI (especially colour swatch management) are terrible.

The problem isn't that Affinity needs 10–15 years to catch up. The problem appears to be that they just don't understand why these things are a problem. If they did, I think we'd have seen them addressed in version 2. So I'm not terribly optimistic that Affinity will ever threaten Adobe's hold over the industry. I hope they prove me wrong.

And you can still pick up cs6 very cheaply although on the mac side you can’t run it unless you’re on Mojave or earlier.

Well it is a problem if you’re talking about wanting or needing an alternative to Adobe generally, not for specific for use cases.

I’ve no idea, you might be right and it will never get there especially if they decide to release additional products like DAM… and they’re then spread even more thinly. However just as you say cs6 is fine for you the same can be said about Affinity apps. Some will be absolutely fine with what v1 gave them never mind v2. Some certainly couldn’t care less about 1 bit graphics, not everyone use swatches. In the same way, say for you, you decide Affinity isn’t really good enough others will say cs6 isn’t enough for them.

Related I noticed a headline from a few months back saying that paid Adobe CC subscriptions have almost reached 30 million. Think how much that is a month.

 

Marc

ArtByMarc.me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the moment, I see the progresses development is making, but with them also some regresses (see the case of the UI). And a very slow pace. So, I understand that, at least for my use case, there is still some time to wait before Publisher is ready (and I'm in the privileged position of being fine with the rest of the suite).

Up to now, I've preferred to remain on InDesign CS6, without secluding my documents into CC. But since I can not stay with Mojave for still too long, and working in Parallels Desktop is feasible but a bit clunky, I'm here with the page where I can purchase another year of use of InDesign CC.

Yesterday I've checked various things in my Mac, to prepare myself to install CC again, after having earlier removed any trace of it from my system. And while doing it, I discovered two components of the Adobe software, in a reserved area of the main drive, one to which I can only access by entering my admin password, updated just a few days ago. I didn't get any request or notification. I don't have Creative Cloud installed. I've cleaned all its component by hand.

Yet, some sort of Adobe spyware is still installed in my system.

Please, Serif, hurry up! I don't want to self-recluse myself in that orwellian world!

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.