Please stop overriding file extensions!!!

[lphilpot]

30 minutes ago, thomaso said:

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).

I'm not uninstalling / reinstalling LibreOffice to grab a screenshot, but here's a related setting that illustrates a very simlar point:

This allows fine-grained control of how LO reads, converts and writes MS Office files -- Which is a very closely related concept to the OP's post.

 

[lphilpot]

4 hours ago, emmrecs01 said:

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:\.

I'm using the MSI versions as well. That was a more general point, although I'm curious if the Affinity products could be installed to a network share for multiple users.

[walt.farrell]

29 minutes ago, lphilpot said:

I'm not uninstalling / reinstalling LibreOffice to grab a screenshot,

I did (but I was downlevel, so needed to install a newer version, anyway).

[thomaso]

39 minutes ago, lphilpot said:

This allows fine-grained control of how LO reads, converts and writes MS Office files -- Which is a very closely related concept to the OP's post.

I disagree. If I understand the OP correct, their problem is the general, system wide file type association – not to choose the ability to read & write these file types. Of course, file type converters excluded in an LibreOffice installation can't get associated, too.

Thus the question is rather vice versa: What association gets set for the installed components.: Are '.doc', .pdf', '.ppt' etc. opened with Libre Office or with another app after installation? This doesn't seem to be set in your screenshot dialog. *

*EDIT: Walt just answered this.

[walt.farrell]

4 hours ago, emmrecs01 said:

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:\.

Just curious.... Did you also move the %appdata%\Affinity folder, which by default is on drive C? In my case, that's about 20 GB of data for the MSI versions.

 

[emmrecs01]

26 minutes ago, lphilpot said:

I'm using the MSI versions as well. That was a more general point, although I'm curious if the Affinity products could be installed to a network share for multiple users.

With all due respect to you, that more general point was not what you actually claimed!  All the Affinity apps can be installed wherever the user requires. 

As to network share for multiple users, that is surely a completely different matter?

[emmrecs01]

Just now, walt.farrell said:

Did you also move the %appdata%\Affinity folder, which by default is on drive C?

Hi Walt,

No, all those "support" files are still on C:\.  I decided very early on with my use of Affinity products (version 1) that I didn't feel at all confident about trying to move those files and folders.  But for a number of years now I have always installed the main Program Files for almost every app I have on D:\.  The only ones not installed there are those which do NOT allow the user to choose the install location.  For me, the number of these is very small.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, Alfred said:

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

IrfanView no longers lets you set the file associations during install, for Windows 10/11. Here's a screenshot of that part of the installation dialog:

[walt.farrell]

7 minutes ago, emmrecs01 said:

No, all those "support" files are still on C:\.  I decided very early on with my use of Affinity products (version 1) that I didn't feel at all confident about trying to move those files and folders. 

I have moved them, using the mklink command, and have writtten about that elsewhere here in the Affinity forums.

It is not officially supported, but it works in my experience (though with a bit of a performance impact when the Affinity applications access those files). It did break a new function once, but I reported it during the beta and Serif was able to fix it quickly. On my desktop machine the C drive is small enough that it wouldn't support having V1 and V2 and the V2 beta data installed in %appdata%, or I probably wouldn't have bothered.

[lphilpot]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

IrfanView no longers lets you set the file associations during install, for Windows 10/11.

Yeah, MS broke that functionality partially in 7 and completely in 8 / 10. I'm in no way advocating a return to XP, but the way associations were exposed in userspace back then was hugely better for users than the way it's obfuscated now. Apparently even developers can't (easily?) change it now, although Serif seems to...

[R C-R]

2 hours ago, lphilpot said:

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).

To begin with, I think most users consider at least some of the various features in all the personas of AP very useful & well worth including -- even if they use some other app to develop RAW files, the Develop Persona offers various adjustments that can be applied to any RGB pixel layer. Likewise, the Liquify & Tone Mapping personas offer various ways to extensively modify the appearance of those layers, including Tone Mapping presets like the ones James Ritson created and any that users have created for themselves.

So while you personally may not have any use for any of those features, I think most users would at least prefer to have them available without having to re-run an installer (which they may have to download again to use!). And of course, if you personally never use any of them other than the Photo persona you can always customize the toolbar to remove the Personas item.

I also am not sure what you mean about wasting the resources to maintain the other personas. Users do not have to maintain them but Serif certainly does need to do that whether or not you use them because some if not most users do use them. Besides, if Serif did add the ability not to install them, they would have to add additional code & resources to the installers which would increase the amount of maintenance they would need to perform as new features were added, bugs fixed, etc. The same applies to the minimal security aspect because they would need to add more code to the installer to support those options.

I also disagree with your comment that the apps are targeted specifically at experts, & beyond that, that even most experts (however you want to define them) would know enough to decide at install time which features they would want to use as they become more familiar with what the apps (& their updates!) are capable of doing.

For that matter, the installer itself would have to include built-in pre-install help of some kind to guide new users through what could be dozens & dozens of install options, or at least a bunch of built-in links to online resources that explain what they are & any interdependencies they may have with other features, resources, etc.

On top of all that, it make it a nightmare for both Serif & other users to offer or get support for the apps because nobody could be certain what anybody else had or had not installed or if that had any relevance to whatever issue they were asking about unless/until that was made clear to all involved.

If nothing else, it would make it very tedious & time consuming to install & use the apps to their fullest & most useful capabilities, something I think most users & potential users would find of very little benefit & not worth the hassle.

[lphilpot]

1 minute ago, R C-R said:

I think most users consider at least some of the various features in all the personas of AP very useful & well worth including

Hence my statement that if you want it, install it. All features could be checked by default, that's fine. Just allow some customization. That way you don't penalize some for the benefit of others. It's a win-win.

2 minutes ago, R C-R said:

So while you personally may not have any use for any of those features, I think most users would at least prefer to have them available without having to re-run an installer

Again, if they were enabled by default, Bob's yer uncle. No need to re-run anything. Just accept the default and hit "Install".

3 minutes ago, R C-R said:

I also am not sure what you mean about wasting the resources to maintain the other personas.

What I mean is, code that's not installed doesn't have to be upgraded, nor updated, nor virus-scanned, etc. It has no security risk. It takes no space on disk and uses no memory nor CPU. Installing unused code is like filling the trunk of your sports car with cement, just because you can.

5 minutes ago, R C-R said:

Besides, if Serif did add the ability not to install them, they would have to add additional code & resources to the installers which would increase the amount of maintenance they would need to perform as new features were added, bugs fixed, etc.

That capability already exists in many (most?) installers (InstallShield, Wise, NSIS, etc., IIRC). All they have to do is use one that's up to the task.

7 minutes ago, R C-R said:

For that matter, the installer itself would have to include built-in pre-install help of some kind to guide new users through what could be dozens & dozens of install options, or at least a bunch of built-in links to online resources that explain what they are & any interdependencies they may have with other features, resources, etc.

That's called documentation, which is also lacking. Serif should produce complete, comprehensive docs on every thing every app does. Users (current or prospective) should read and understand it first. It's worked that way for decades. And any good installer can handle (inter)dependencies, even in fairly complex scenarios. Ever installed Oracle on *nix? (and that's not even a super-good installer)

8 minutes ago, R C-R said:

On top of all that, it make it a nightmare for both Serif & other users to offer or get support for the apps because nobody could be certain what anybody else had had or had not installed or if that had any relevance to whatever issue they were asking about unless/until that was made clear to all involved.

They're developers. It's trivial to record and report on what's installed, both by machine- and human-readable methods (i.e., Help | About). From a Windows perspective you can even just look in the registry at the Uninstall key for that matter (but there are better, more portable strategies). I've used more than a few packages where the very first step in any support scenario is to run a command / utility / script that queries the system and reports everything needed to the vendor. Many of these tools will automatically email the results to the support team. Standard practice.

13 minutes ago, R C-R said:

If nothing else, it would make it very tedious & time consuming to install & use the apps to their fullest & most useful capabilities, something I think most users & potential users would find of very little benefit & not worth the hassle.

I dunno... I mean, if a user isn't interested enough to even research and learn (about) a product, how serious can they be about using it? I promise you, developers read their documentation.

Anyway, I think we need to agree to disagree and move on.  🙂

 

[R C-R]

2 minutes ago, lphilpot said:

I dunno... I mean, if a user isn't interested enough to even research and learn (about) a product, how serious can they be about using it?

I think a great many users resort to looking for documentation only for things they can't figure out far more quickly by doing a little experimentation once the app is installed. Besides, as you said, the documentation for the Affinity apps is far from complete or comprehensive. IOW, "learn by doing" is far more common than starting off via "RTFM" & typically even more effective for most things.

As for what would need to be a very long list of features set to install by default, I seriously doubt the vast majority of users, pro or not, would want to waste any time scrolling through it looking for items to exclude. And no matter how it was presented, it would mean adding & maintaining more code to make sure all the necessary dependencies were included, not just for the initial install but also for updates that added new features, fixed bugs, & so on. It is in no way a "win-win" situation either for Serif or most users.

Regarding support nightmares, I don't think you understand what I meant. Both Serif & users would need to know what any particular user had omitted from the install & if it had any relevance to whatever issue or question they wanted help with. So among other things, not all Window users know how to or even want to delve into the Registry, download & run some script or whatever to upload what they might consider in part to be personal or private info, or do anything else that would make what could already be complicated issues even more time consuming to resolve.

[lphilpot]

11 minutes ago, R C-R said:

Regarding support nightmares, I don't think you understand what I meant. Both Serif & users would need to know what any particular user had omitted from the install & if it had any relevance to whatever issue or question they wanted help with. So among other things, not all Window users know how to or even want to delve into the Registry, download & run some script or whatever to upload what they might consider in part to be personal or private info, or do anything else that would make what could already be complicated issues even more time consuming to resolve.

Oh believe me -- In more than two decades in IT I had more support nightmares than I've managed to forget. 🙂 

Registry-diving was just a trivial example. It's not cross-platform nor is it advised for those not comfortable with it. I was just illustrating that it's not complex.

However, I've used software that installed an icon / choice on the Start menu (or equivalent on other OSes) labeled something like "Support Information". Just run that, it asks for contact info (only if they didn't opt to supply it during install) and sends correct, detailed and sufficient information about your installation directly to the support team. That's all the user has to do - Run one menu item. A ticket is created automatically at the vendor and the user gets confirmation. The next step is the solution from a support engineer.

I used a very similar process from SUN Microsystems many times. Couldn't be easier.

And about install complexity from a user viewpoint -- For years KDE had a standard practice of "hiding" all optional choices behind an "Advanced" button. There was no requirement to click Advanced, but it was there for those who need / want it. I've not used KDE in a long while, so I'm not sure if they still do it that way but back in the "Mosfet vs. Havoc Pennington" days it was standard.

[R C-R]

1 minute ago, lphilpot said:

However, I've used software that installed an icon / choice on the Start menu (or equivalent on other OSes) labeled something like "Support Information". Just run that, it asks for contact info (only if they didn't opt to supply it during install) and sends correct, detailed and sufficient information about your installation directly to the support team. That's all the user has to do - Run one menu item. A ticket is created automatically at the vendor and the user gets confirmation. The next step is the solution from a support engineer.

But this support forum provides lots of very effective support not just from the staff but also from other users -- in fact, very often the overworked staff doesn't even need to get involved because other users have already done so. So if the info was limited to just the support staff via some (once again new) code addition the effectiveness of this forum would be adversely affected, the staff would be even more overworked, & getting effective support would take much longer.

Besides, some users are quite leery of supplying comprehensive info to Serif or anybody else about what else they may have installed besides one or more Affinity apps that may be relevant to some issue, like third party additions, unless or until they are convinced it might be relevant to whatever issue(s) they are asking about.

As for including  'advanced' options, it still requires more code & more maintenance as the apps are updated, which means the developers would have to devote more time to that & less to fixing the plethora of existing bugs, & adding requested & planned features to the apps, all to benefit what I think must be a tiny fraction of users who want more complete control over what gets installed, at the expense of those who are quite happy with how the installers work now.

[lphilpot]

As I indicated before, we'll have to agree to disagree. My experience informs what I've stated and you don't agree. That's fine -- But there's no point in just tit-for-tat gainsaying each other.

Whatever. I'm done here.

[R C-R]

30 minutes ago, lphilpot said:

As I indicated before, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I think the real issue for you is if you can somehow convince the Affinity developers that the install options you believe should be available actually would be something enough users would want or ever use to justify the work required to include & maintain them.

I think that is a lost cause but I wish you luck if you want to try to do that.

[NotMyFault]

On 3/14/2024 at 11:22 AM, 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):

		<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>

 

Just found a good article explaining this in epic detail, including how to reliably choose the actual app version (e.g. beta or retail, V1 or V2):
 

https://eclecticlight.co/2024/04/10/how-macos-opens-a-file-in-the-correct-app/