Please stop overriding file extensions!!!

[General Disarray]

I love the Affinity Suite. Had it for about two years and recommend it to everyone. Affinity Photo is way better than Photoshop. Designer is way better than Illustrator. And I haven't used InDesign for decades but Publisher, for as little as I have used it, seems great. 

But Serif has this nasty, narcissistic habit that all software makers have: they override the OS's associations with their software. I don't get it. 30 years using computers, both Mac and PC, and still don't get it. Why does every software maker thinks their software is better than everybody else's? And why do they assume that if so far I was opening image files instantly in macOS Preview, now I want to wait several seconds looking at their icon bouncing up and down while their software opens??? Especially, if it's the wrong software for it.

I found an old SD card, put it in my Mac, and it had a file with the RW2 extension. Those are photos from my Lumix G7 camera that I haven't used in ages. So I double click on it and preview doesn't open. Then I see that the icon for Affinity Publisher is bouncing up and down, up and down, up and down and I realize that the installer decided to associate itself with .RW2 files. That's extremely rude. So I force quit Publisher, because even on a Mac Studio Ultra M1 with an internal drive that tops at 7 GBps, the Affinity suite is slow to open, at least after a boot or reboot. Second time it's just a couple of seconds. But I force quit it, opened the file info, and setup RW2 files to associate with Preview as they should. Then if I want to edit that photo, all I have to do is right click and choose Affinity Photo from the menu. Which many times, I do.

So please tell me why you think that I want to wait several seconds to open this photo, not even in the correct program in the suite, because a photo is supposed to open with the... with the... Photo app!!! Correct! Yes, you can open it in Publisher, and Designer too, doesn't mean that it's the right program to do so. Unless you're working on some document in those two apps and you need to import a photo. 

At least you could put a step during installation that asks the user for their choices on associations. Some installers have been doing that for at least 25 years. I remember installing Winamp in the late 90's and having a step that was about setting associations. Then why do you think that your software is the only one in the world and all files should open with it? And why do you not even associate them with the correct program? Even more, you have your own file type. It wouldn't occur to me to associate .afphoto files with Preview or Pixelmator Pro, which probably can't even open them anyway. There's a right program for every file type, and sometimes there are several, but it's up to the user to make that choice, not the software maker, except when it's their own file type, like .afphoto.

Please stop being so narcissistic. Please stop changing file associations. 

Thank you.

[R C-R]

12 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

But Serif has this nasty, narcissistic habit that all software makers have: they override the OS's associations with their software.

AFAIK, it is the OS, not the apps, that sometimes does this, typically when a new app is installed that signals to the OS that it can open open specific file types. IOW, the app does not force the OS to change the default binding of a file type to a particular app; the OS just assumes that because the app is newly installed the user wants that done.

[loukash]

7 hours ago, General Disarray said:

Please stop changing file associations. 

On Mac, Affinity apps simply offer the OS which file types they are capable of opening. The OS then apparently picks the newest version of an app, based on the file type list in /Applications/Affinity Photo 2.app/Contents/Info.plist (for example):

		<dict>
			<key>CFBundleTypeExtensions</key>
			<array>
				<string>afdesign</string>
				<string>afpub</string>
				<string>affinity_photo</string>
				<string>affinity_designer</string>
				<string>persona</string>
				<string>affinity</string>
				<string>psd</string>
				<string>psb</string>
				<string>svg</string>
				<string>jpg</string>
				<string>jpeg</string>
				<string>jpegxr</string>
				<string>jxr</string>
				<string>j2k</string>
				<string>jp2</string>
				<string>jxl</string>
				<string>png</string>
				<string>wdp</string>
				<string>hdp</string>
				<string>tiff</string>
				<string>tif</string>
				<string>gif</string>
				<string>webp</string>
				<string>lfp</string>
				<string>eps</string>
				<string>ps</string>
				<string>pdf</string>
				<string>ai</string>
				<string>fh11</string>
				<string>fh10</string>
				<string>bmp</string>
				<string>exr</string>
				<string>hdr</string>
				<string>crw</string>
				<string>cr2</string>
				<string>cr3</string>
				<string>nef</string>
				<string>pef</string>
				<string>raf</string>
				<string>dng</string>
				<string>mos</string>
				<string>kdc</string>
				<string>dcr</string>
				<string>arw</string>
				<string>nrw</string>
				<string>3fr</string>
				<string>ari</string>
				<string>srf</string>
				<string>sr2</string>
				<string>bay</string>
				<string>cap</string>
				<string>iiq</string>
				<string>dcs</string>
				<string>drf</string>
				<string>k25</string>
				<string>erf</string>
				<string>fff</string>
				<string>mef</string>
				<string>mdc</string>
				<string>mrw</string>
				<string>orf</string>
				<string>ptx</string>
				<string>pxn</string>
				<string>r3d</string>
				<string>raw</string>
				<string>rw2</string>
				<string>rwl</string>
				<string>srw</string>
				<string>x3f</string>
				<string>afmigrate</string>
				<string>afsignal</string>
				<string>abr</string>
				<string>tga</string>
				<string>afextensiondocument</string>
				<string>heic</string>
				<string>gpr</string>
			</array>
			<key>CFBundleTypeIconFile</key>
			<string>PhotoDocIcon</string>
			<key>CFBundleTypeName</key>
			<string>Affinity Openable</string>
			<key>CFBundleTypeRole</key>
			<string>Editor</string>
			<key>LSHandlerRank</key>
			<string>Alternate</string>
		</dict>

 

[General Disarray]

7 hours ago, loukash said:

On Mac, Affinity apps simply offer the OS which file types they are capable of opening. The OS then apparently picks the newest version of an app, based on the file type list in /Applications/Affinity Photo 2.app/Contents/Info.plist (for example):

Do you know this as an absolute fact? I'm not saying you're wrong, but the internet is full of people guessing things and posting them, that's why I'm asking.

And if this is 100% accurate, then Serif has to change the installers so that in any case, if it tells the system what file types they're able to open, to not include file types that are obviously compressed, uncompressed or raw image formats in the Publisher installer. I'm familiar with a lot of the extensions in that list, but not all of them. But of the ones I'm familiar with, several of them are not for the Serif equivalent of Adobe InDesign. At the most, .ai, which should be associated with Designer unless you also have Illustrator (I don't), but the rest are for Photo. So Serif should take a lot of formats off that list in the Designer and Publisher installers, and maybe include them in the Photo one, but I wouldn't include most formats for even Photo, at least not the ones that open with Preview in a snap. Then if the user still wants to associate them with Photo, it's very easy.

One of the main advantages of macOS as opposed to Windows is the ability to use Finder as a photo browsing app, which is fast even on older Macs and you can press the space bar for a quick preview, then if you want to learn more about the file, like DPI, dimensions, metadata, etc, you can click the Open in Preview button. Or you can just double click and open in Preview. So files that open in Preview should not be associated with any of the Affinity apps unless the user wants to, or like I said, offer a choice, a simple step in the installer listing all the file associations and a checkmark for those you want to associate with the app being installed.

[loukash]

11 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

Do you know this as an absolute fact?

7 hours ago, loukash said:

The OS then apparently picks […]

Do you know the meaning of the word "apparently"?  

[R C-R]

57 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

So files that open in Preview should not be associated with any of the Affinity apps unless the user wants to, or like I said, offer a choice, a simple step in the installer listing all the file associations and a checkmark for those you want to associate with the app being installed.

I for one would absolutely hate having to run through a long list of file types to be included in the Info.plist before I could install any of the Affinity (or any other) app!

[thomaso]

18 hours ago, General Disarray said:

nasty, narcissistic habit that all software makers have: they override the OS's associations with their software. I don't get it. 30 years using computers, both Mac and PC, and still don't get it.

I think in 30 years there have been many situations in which you may have had the experience that it is not the apps that override the macOS settings, but that, conversely, macOS is trying to help with its idea of efficiency and a new one program is assumed to be a preferred one in the future.

What do you see as the real problem? I suspect that after your experience with the RW2 file, you adjusted the file association for this file type in macOS and have not experienced the error since then. For some file formats, I personally find the assignment to be fundamentally cumbersome because I sometimes want to open them with one program and sometimes with another (e.g. PDF or SVG).

3 hours ago, General Disarray said:

Serif has to change the installers so that in any case, if it tells the system what file types they're able to open, to not include file types that are obviously compressed, uncompressed or raw image formats in the Publisher installer.

"has to"? – Do I understand right that you request the Affinity installer to influence/set/change your system preferences in macOS? I'm wondering if Apple's security rules would allow this or, if so, whether you really want to give Affinity the right to change your system settings.

By the way, there are a few forum threads that recommend to add Affinity to the macOS list of apps that may get access your macOS "Photos" folder and library.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/mac-help/mchl244f2895/mac

[R C-R]

3 minutes ago, thomaso said:

3 hours ago, General Disarray said:

Serif has to change the installers so that in any case, if it tells the system what file types they're able to open, to not include file types that are obviously compressed, uncompressed or raw image formats in the Publisher installer.

"has to"? – Do I understand right that you request the Affinity installer to influence/set/change your system preferences in macOS? I'm wondering if Apple's security rules would allow this or, if so, whether you really want to give Affinity the right to change your system settings.

I think what @General Disarray meant is Serif should remove the filetypes from the Affinity Publisher info.plist file that Affinity Publisher cannot open, like certain RAW file formats. As it is, using File > Open in APub V2 will offer to open several file types not supported by APub (they are not greyed out) but if one is selected, the 'filetype not supported' error pops up.

It's kinda weird though: some RAW file formats can be opened directly in APub V2, but they apparently are developed using some default setting so what you get is a pixel layer in the Publisher Persona with no control over the development settings. So for instance I can open *.nef test files I have on my Mac but not *.CR2 ones.

[thomaso]

4 minutes ago, R C-R said:

I think what @General Disarray meant is Serif should remove the filetypes from the Affinity Publisher info.plist file that Affinity Publisher cannot open, like certain RAW file formats.

I m sorry if I misunderstood the OP. It was the "30 years" that made me assume the general file association workflow in macOS, not for the newer RAW file formats.

6 minutes ago, R C-R said:

It's kinda weird though: some RAW file formats can be opened directly in APub V2, but they apparently are developed using some default setting so what you get is a pixel layer in the Publisher Persona with no control over the development settings. So for instance I can open *.nef test files I have on my Mac but not *.CR2 ones.

Do you mean to open via APub's "Open…" command (a new V2 feature for image files) or do you get this result when opening from the macOS Finder via right-click?

I would not open a RAW file with APub if I want to develop it (= access the APhoto's Develop persona). – However, RAW files can be written in a range of various file formats (and even same file types may be written differently, e.g. for newer camera models of one manufacturer), thus it doesn't appear "kinda weird" to me but rather a consequence of missing file type standards … or missing entries + frequent updates in the Affinity app's library.

[loukash]

1 hour ago, R C-R said:

So for instance I can open *.nef test files I have on my Mac but not *.CR2 ones.

Having a Canon EOS650d from my late dad, I can open its *.CR2 just fine.

[R C-R]

53 minutes ago, loukash said:

Having a Canon EOS650d from my late dad, I can open its *.CR2 just fine.

Interesting. All I can tell you is on my Mac running Catalina Affinity Publisher 2 shows an 'unsupported' error for every CR2 file I tried it with. On your Mac, does it open as a developed pixel layer or something else?

1 hour ago, thomaso said:

Do you mean to open via APub's "Open…" command (a new V2 feature for image files) or do you get this result when opening from the macOS Finder via right-click?

Like I said, the *.nef files I tried open via File > Open, but they also open via right-click choices in Finder. The CR2 files I tried will open pre-developed via the right-click but produce an error if I try to open them from the File menu.

I do not have a lot of sample files of either type to test with buy time permitting I will try with some others.

[thomaso]

1 minute ago, R C-R said:

Interesting. All I can tell you is on my Mac running Catalina Affinity Publisher 2 shows an 'unsupported' error for every CR2 file I tried it with. On your Mac, does it open as a developed pixel layer or something else?

Does your Catalina display the image via Quicklook and/or open the file in Preview? To me it works both, and APub V1 opens .CR2 with its "Develop" process bar as "Background (Pixel)" layer.

[R C-R]

2 hours ago, thomaso said:

Does your Catalina display the image via Quicklook and/or open the file in Preview? To me it works both, and APub V1 opens .CR2 with its "Develop" process bar as "Background (Pixel)" layer.

In APub V2 I never get a Develop progress bar for any RAW file.

I have about 25 total *.cr2 files on my Mac. After checking them more carefully I realized most are not actually RAW files -- they are leftover files of a different filetype from DAZ 3D or an old version of Poser that Finders Kind incorrectly identifies as Canon CR2 raw Image files. That explains the unsupported error I was getting.

However, the 3 that really are Canon *.cr2 files all open in Apub, all show an image via Quicklook, & all open in Preview.app. But never is their a progress bar, just a 'loading 1 document' notice in the main toolbar.

[General Disarray]

On 3/14/2024 at 2:00 PM, loukash said:

Do you know the meaning of the word "apparently"?  

Well, if you start your post with "Apparently, on Mac, Affinity apps simply offer the OS which file types they are capable of opening." that's one thing. But the way you started it, it seemed to me that you knew this to be a fact. But if you don't know this and are just guessing, then what is the point? Because if you're just guessing, it's no different than me saying that the installer associates the file extensions.

21 hours ago, thomaso said:

What do you see as the real problem? I suspect that after your experience with the RW2 file, you adjusted the file association for this file type in macOS and have not experienced the error since then.

The real problem is that software companies keep doing this over and over in both macOS and Windows. So I've had to waste a lot of accumulated time (sure, one time is not a problem, it's the sum of all the times for 30 years that I've had to do the same crap over and over) setting that file extension association to what it was before. And I had no error, perhaps Publisher can open RW2 just fine, I simply force quit it because I wasn't too happy that a raw file was opening with a program that is not even the right one for camera raw files.

 

21 hours ago, thomaso said:

"has to"? – Do I understand right that you request the Affinity installer to influence/set/change your system preferences in macOS? I'm wondering if Apple's security rules would allow this or, if so, whether you really want to give Affinity the right to change your system settings.

No, you got it backwards. Loukash said that it wasn't the installer that forced these associations, but it was macOS that was changing them because the installer was simply letting macOS know what file types it could open. Well, that's an easy fix. Take out of that plist all the extension that are photo related, like what are .jpg, .psd, .tiff etc, etc doing in that list??? Again, if you're working on a magazine for example in Publisher, and you want to bring in images, whether pixel or vector, you import them, use Place, drag and drop, whatever you want. But why is a camera raw format in that list?

And that's all the time I have for this.

[R C-R]

10 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

The real problem is that software companies keep doing this over and over in both macOS and Windows.

No, software developers do not, nor can they, change the default file binding (a.k.a. default app association) or in any way "override" the binding the OS sets for which app the filetype opens by default. That's just the way it is & always has been for ~30 years or so, which is why no app developer can 'fix' this -- it is something they have absolutely no control over if, when, or how the OS does this.

20 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

Well, that's an easy fix. Take out of that plist all the extension that are photo related, like what are .jpg, .psd, .tiff etc, etc doing in that list???

They are on the list because Affinity Publisher V2 can open these filetypes, so removing them from the list would mean users who did not own Affinity Photo could not open them directly from the File > Open menu. This is something users have asked for since the early days of V1 & many are happy that it is now possible without workarounds. It's the same for RAW files -- as has been mentioned, they can be developed in APub; you just don't get the control over how they are developed like you do in AP.

If it really bothers you that much, you could try making a feature request but you would have to do that not just for the Affinities but also for every other app that offers a list of file types it can open to the OS. Good luck with that.

[thomaso]

42 minutes ago, General Disarray said:

But why is a camera raw format in that list?

And that's all the time I have for this.

After 30 years? Consider that RAW is a relatively young file format. There are file types or formats ambiguous like words with different meanings. Decades ago I used an app that could not handle TIFF files if they have been LZW compressed – but the app was 'generally' able to work with TIFF. Accordingly an .AI may contain compatible data or not for certain apps, like .EPS, too. Also the .MOV as a "container format" can be compatible but doesn't have to, depending on the decompressors existing on your system. Similar with PDF, that may generally contain audio or video but not for all PDF viewers or for Affinity – despite Affinity can open PDF with more features than many PDF viewer apps. RAW can be seen as a similar type of "container format" that may exist in various file types and require various conditions to open, although it is "generally" capable of doing so.

I wonder what you expect how it should work? I am glad that RAW files don't exclusively open with the app of their camera manufacturer but let me choose various apps. I often open certain file types via right-click to select a wanted app in a specific situation. Sometimes I just want to view an image file for instance, sometimes I want to read certain metadata only, sometimes I want to edit it with simple tasks or I need to use another app for more detailed or specialised edits. But for those decisions I need to make my choice, macOS wouldn't be able to associate this file in this moment with the wanted app automatically. And this decision and workflow is entirely independent of Affinity – but it is useful that Affinity informs macOS to let its 'possibly compatible' file formats appear in the list for "Open with…" in macOS' Finder.

[lphilpot]

On 3/13/2024 at 9:31 PM, General Disarray said:

At least you could put a step during installation that asks the user for their choices on associations. Some installers have been doing that for at least 25 years. I remember installing Winamp in the late 90's and having a step that was about setting associations.

I don't know about on a Mac but on Windows you get pretty much zero options for installation and updates. Just a "go" button and that's it - Not even (from what I recall) any progress status. I really like being able to customize installations. IIRC, e.g., LibreOffice lets you pick which (if any) of their apps will be associated with non-LO-native extensions.

Things that should be asked during installation:

• Where to install
• Install for the current user or all users
• Which parts / features to install
• If and which extensions to associate (this should also be changeable in Preferences)
• Whether to create a desktop icon, quick launch icon, etc.
• Whether to restart any critical services rather than forcing a reboot

A response file would be a nice option, too. I realize not all of these apply to Affinity, but most do (maybe all except the services).

[emmrecs01]

8 hours ago, lphilpot said:

Things that should be asked during installation:

• Where to install

 

I assume you're referring to the MSIX version?

I have the MSI versions of all three V2 apps and all are installed exactly where I want them to be, in my case, on D:\.

[R C-R]

10 hours ago, lphilpot said:

Things that should be asked during installation:
<...>

• Which parts / features to install
• If and which extensions to associate (this should also be changeable in Preferences)

For the Affinity apps, what exactly do you think are the parts / features the installer should ask users if they want included in the installation? Consider for example the multiplicity of tools for the Tools panels, all the various Studio panels, all the presets, & so on, plus all the *.dylib/frameworks & resource files that support various functions & features, & the various help files that explain how things work.

I cannot image that very many user would want to have to wade through a huge list of such things, many of which they may not even understand what they are for before using the app, just to install any of the apps.

The same consideration would apply to filetype associations, which users can change now at the per user OS level anyway.

[thomaso]

On 3/14/2024 at 3:31 AM, General Disarray said:

this nasty, narcissistic habit that all software makers have: they override the OS's associations (…)

(…) a step during installation that asks the user for their choices on associations. Some installers have been doing that for at least 25 years.

How was this handled if one wanted to change the association after installation for a certain file type? Did you set it at several spots (i.e. in the current + in the new app?), or via the operating system as nowadays?

Can you name a software that offers(ed) file association options in their installing procedure? I can't remember any. (though I do remember apps that offer file associations for their internal handling for "Open with…" or "Edit in…" as an app preference, e.g. browser apps or email).

[Alfred]

6 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Can you name a software that offers(ed) file association options in their installing procedure?

I’ve certainly seen it in IrfanView (Windows only), but it’s probably offered by other image editors/viewers.

[R C-R]

7 minutes ago, thomaso said:

How was this handled if one wanted to change the association after installation for a certain file type?

The same question applies for "parts / features" that are not initially installed. Would the user have to re-run the installer (after possibly having to download it again) to install any new parts / features they later decided they want or need?

I'm not even sure that Serif could sell the apps in the Mac app store if all the options @lphilpot wants for the installer were available, & possibly the same for the Windows store version.

[Alfred]

4 minutes ago, Alfred said:

I’ve certainly seen it in IrfanView (Windows only), but it’s probably offered by other image editors/viewers.

 

16 minutes ago, thomaso said:

How was this handled if one wanted to change the association after installation for a certain file type?

In IrfanView there’s an option for this on the Properties menu.

[lphilpot]

43 minutes ago, R C-R said:

For the Affinity apps, what exactly do you think are the parts / features the installer should ask users if they want included in the installation?

Well, for example while I feel certain Photo isn't currently architected to support this, given its size it would be really nice to choose which personas to install. I personally use only the Photo. I've looked at the Develop persona but it doesn't provide the features I get from the standalone raw processor(s) I use. Liquify, Export and Tone Mapping do nothing I need. I've opened each once out of curiosity then never again. If others use them, great -- Select them for installation. But if not, why waste the resources to install, keep and maintain them? There's also in this context a minor -- but still non-zero -- security aspect to this, since any code addition statistically adds to the risk / compromise exposure footprint, so if it can be reduced so much the better.

Other options might include which import / export filters to install, whether to install the "help" system / documentation, additional provided (or third-party) color profiles, etc.

Apps like the Affinity suite are inherently targeted at experts* and should provide options accordingly, rather than being like a one-click phone app install. We're not talking about TikTok...

* That is, professionals and / or those who operate in an essentially professional manner (regardless of income or not).

[loukash]

19 hours ago, General Disarray said:

what is the point?

19 hours ago, General Disarray said:

And that's all the time I have for this.

No worries. You are now on my ignore list, thus I will never waste your precious time again. And vice versa. Good luck!