Jump to content

Affinity Publisher


Recommended Posts

Well, not having Publisher ready is keeping me from purchasing Photo or Designer. I would want to work with the suite of products.

Why give many unrivalled beautiful features of AD and APh a miss? You can import your charts, polish them and import the results in other layout programs until APu is launched next year/in 2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would want to work with the suite of products. 

I guess I will see if there are other alternatives. 

 

I can not agree with this way of thinking. For me, it is a great time figuring out all the functions of APh and AD, while waiting on APu. So I will have an smooth transitional period from my Adobe products to Affinity.

I have no problem waiting for APu ’til next spring or so (but not longer : )

iMac (27", Late 2013) – 3,2 GHz Intel Core i5 – MacOS 10.14
Adobe user since 1994, but now Affinity enthusiast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can not agree with this way of thinking. For me, it is a great time figuring out all the functions of APh and AD, while waiting on APu. So I will have an smooth transitional period from my Adobe products to Affinity.

I have no problem waiting for APu ’til next spring or so (but not longer : )

 

I'm with you on this, chekka. I'm currently using AD on Windows beta, and I wouldn't like to try to figure out APh at the same time, but when APh beta comes along there will be many things that are already familiar, leaving me free to concentrate on the new things. The same will happen again when APub becomes available next year.

Alfred spacer.png
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher for Windows 1.10 • Windows 10 Home/Pro
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.10 • Designer for iPad 1.10 • iPadOS 15.6.1 (iPad Air 2)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it seems like the ideal time to release the software is once it can do several things that ID and Quark can not do. InDesign generally works ok so just rushing out a competitor doesn't make sense to me. I think what will entice most people to get the software is when it is able to do many of the features that ID users have been asking for over the years that Adobe hasn't delivered. The fact that some people don't want to pay a subscription for ID probably isn't enough reason to rush out the software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guess it would be helpful to know the current state of development 

like done vs to do

 

most things I´ve heard so far were about features that will not be available so it´s like you´re working on nothing specific and don't have a report although it has been delayed again now ..ough

 

if you´d offer such a snapshot (by which I don´t mean a snapshot release) of your development it would be much clearer to see what you´ve achieved VS what is still to be done

 

This proposition intrigues me and I must say I agree with it almost fully. Serif devs would do well by at least giving us a roadmap with the features that are already available on InDesign and Quark visible, and the rest redacted, as they are better kept as secret features until beta testers can get at them and their release schedule can beat Adobe at it's copying game (we saw them doing it with smart corners in Illustrator already, so we all know they can't be trusted and are probably running all the Public Betas at San Jose, California).

 

Think of us, AD and APh owners (and AD+APh+APub+…A[DAM?] potential owners) and users as sort of Kickstarter backers, waiting for a still-pending (and extremely vital) part of the initial deal; that would at least keep the backers informed, happy and confident, even if we don't get to test, buy and professionally use the software in the schedule we were promised.

 

I am well aware that a DTP app that wishes to rivalize with InDesign as well as AD and APh rivalize with their Adobe counterparts is a tall order; InDesign is, in fact, probably the tightest of them all, seing it's the most recent app of the bunch and nearly killed the incumbent Quark, and not just because the latter was developed and sold by bumbling idiots who price-gouged their user-base and consistently let them down during Apple's OS and CPU transitions, InDesign is really that good and the only part of CS/CC I'd kind of miss if I was forced to switch to, say, Quark, PagePlus running on a VM or *gasp* Scribus.

 

But, IMHO, these odd, sparse forum posts with announcements of further delays are a bit out of character, especially when compared with the extremely fast development rate of the other components of the suite, including a Windows port that seems to be on a good track (I haven't tested it lately, but last time I checked, it was surprisingly stable even on a VM, even if a bit rough around the edges UI-wise). A good, consistent developer blog would keep people on their toes, assail their fears that Affinity Publisher might one day become the Duke Nukem 3D of DTP packages (look, I still trust you, because I know software is hard to get right and really want you to succeed, but other people may not be as forgiving or patient), and maybe even make them take the plunge and buy the other apps (you've seen a few examples here already of people who are holding off until Publisher is a tangible or at least believable product).

 

 

To me it seems like the ideal time to release the software is once it can do several things that ID and Quark can not do. InDesign generally works ok so just rushing out a competitor doesn't make sense to me. I think what will entice most people to get the software is when it is able to do many of the features that ID users have been asking for over the years that Adobe hasn't delivered. The fact that some people don't want to pay a subscription for ID probably isn't enough reason to rush out the software.

 

I fully concur. Releasing half-assed products is a surefire way of alienating customers, even if the rest of one company's offerings are pristine. One rotten apple may ruin the whole bunch and break customer confidence, so to speak (just ask Samsung about their exploding Note 7s and machine washers :P ). As for said features, I already addressed that on my answer above; they really should be some kick-ass surprises, dropped on us, the media and Adobe only when the Public Beta hits the forums. As for subscription or no subscription, well… Users can either pay for CC and make a softer transition from Illustrator, Photoshop and Lightroom (yes, Lightroom… You are still working on that DAM, aren't you?) as well, running both those and Affinity apps side by side, maybe converting old stuff into Affinity formats, etc., or they can use an alternative like InDesign CS6, Quark or (in the case of Windows users) PagePlus. I might suggest, too, that you offer some deal like “buy PagePlus now, get a discounted/free license of Affinity Publisher for Windows later” (and I say APub for Windows only because I'm aware that the MAS is not as flexible when it comes to that kind of deal, but since PagePlus is available for Windows only anyway, I wouldn't be too bothered about that as a Mac user myself as it would force me to use a VM and not being able to spread my palletes on my secondary monitor, buy Parallels or VMware and a W10 licence).

 

And, on the flipside, since CC is now a subscription, well… the cost of jumping ship is not as big as leaving a perfectly good CS6/7/8/9 license (the latter three suites do exist, they just aren't called nor licensed that way, alas) gathering dust. Just terminate your payments to Adobe and boom, you're off the subscription train for good and can then feel the utmost Schadenfreude by knowing then and there that Adobe's licensing strategy may, in fact, end up decreasing consumer lock-in and backfiring spectacularly (I hadn't thought of this angle before, but it is now making more sense than ever). ;) As for the transition, namely from InDesign to APub, and the conversion of your archives, well… aren't we lucky that InDesign is probably the only Adobe app that can also use an XML-based format? Just give us a best-in-class IDML importer and we'll be all set. Then, there's feature-parity (or its lack thereof), sure, but for more common stuff and student use APub will be a fine piece of software even if it has some limitations equivalent to those that AD and APh exhibit as of now (I am still waiting for those properly separated spot-colour-to-spot-colour and spot-color-to-0%-opacity gradients when exported to .PDF, but that is an extreme and very specific use case ;) ).

 

 

Most of people in THE WORLD have Windows no Macrappy, ok? So, if they should priorise anything, that should be softwares for WINDOWS

 

Dude, are you high on something? Or, with all due respect to thirteen-year-olds, a thirteen-year-old banging frantically on a keyboard? I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but this isn't YouTube or Facebook either, so here goes nothing: first of all, Windows and macOS marketshare are heavily distorted and skewed towards the latter by dumb clients, POS machines, ATMs, etc. Interestingly, macOS *and iOS* (where Serif will also leave their mark, rest assured) marketshare among creatives is exceptionally high, I would say way above the magic marker of 50% (I studied and worked at a fine arts faculty as the Mac Room monitor – nay, it was the Communication Design laboratory, “Mac Room” was its nickname because we only had Macs there and 70%-80%-ish of my colleagues and users/clients were Mac users anyway – and I can assure you that is, indeed, the case… Also, the last last company where I worked, which only used MS Office and FileMaker Pro on the admin and account management department and could very well standardize on Macs across the board, at least had only Macs in the graphic design department – it was a publishing and events company so graphic design was of the utmost importance there – and they broke less often and less spectacularly than the PCs).

 

So, while THE WORLD [sic, didn't your mom tell you it's rude to shout on the Internet? She should've, clearly] may “have windows”, creatives do use mostly “Macrappy”, and you are either a student who never used one and/or envies his colleagues, or a little kid with no sense of regard for personal choice nor any knowledge on both OSes' technical merits (yes, I am a staunch Mac user and evangelist, but I started out on the PC side of things and I must concur that Windows has gotten pretty decent as of late… though not enough to woo me back, and if you had at least a smidge of knowledge and respect I would just need to utter “Registry” for you to at least give us and our Macs the benefit of the doubt).

 

Oh, and it's not like Serif isn't offering you already a Public, free, pre-release Beta of Affinity Designer *for Windows*, and you still have the gall of questioning Serif's more-than-reasonable Windows roadmap (in case you didn't know, Affinity started out as Mac-only and though Windows users could be justifiably more pissed than you, especially Plus suite users, none of them behaved as badly and childishly on the forums as you did here on this thread, not that I can recall) just because some user made the recurring and a bit unfair judgment that Windows development greatly delays Mac development… Maybe it does delay it a bit because of added complexity and cross-compatibility checks, but the costs are marginal when compared with Serif having the chance to go head-to-head with Adobe, which is Affinity's whole point. Serif is betting the whole company on it, haven't you noticed? Nope, I am betting you didn't even bother to check their website about it.

 

Finally, I take it from your user name that you are either portuguese or brazillian; I could've written all this in our native, common language, sure, but this is an international forum and that would've been disrespectful (besides, there's already another portuguese user around and a portuguese moderator, MEB, who both write in perfect english as well). If you can't even write english properly and add something useful and constructive to the discussion (and failing to do so is, suffice to say, disrespectful itself, especially the latter), please keep it to yourself, will you? You bring shame to us all protuguese/lusophone people by showing such rude behaviour on an otherwise civilized forum. /rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I confess I only read a part of JGD's post but on the issue of the current state of development of Pub, it isn't as simple as what is done & working & what is left to do. Features do not exist in isolation; they interact & have consequences beyond the obvious, like how getting one thing working might require rethinking how several others that are already "done" would work best with it.

 

So even if they were willing to post periodic "done vs. to do" progress reports, it would not mean much because things "done" might well become "undone" as development progressed.

Affinity Photo 1.10.5, Affinity Designer 1.10.5, Affinity Publisher 1.10.5;  2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.5.280 & Affinity Designer 1.10.5 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.0.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R C-R, I totally understand your point. In that sense, software development is not at all unlike, say, typesetting itself; in a less dramatic sense, little, apparently innocent and unavoidable changes may cascade through a supposedly "finished" or at least stable project, and force one to rethink and redo it entirely and on the fly, multiple times even and to the very last moment before sending it to the printer… We've all been or will be there at some point in our professional lives, am I right? ;)

To be fair, *a lot* of APub is already done in the form of an excellent rendering engine already found in AD, but APub will probably be, to put it into very simplistic terms, AD on very strong steroids, with more advanced typesetting tools (not as advanced as Adobe's Multiline Composer, though, the devs said as much before, but I'm hopeful they will make it a top priority after the first release and get it ready for v2) including high-quality and an easily customizable and manageable typographic grid system that may put Adobe's convoluted one to shame and obviate quite a lot of must-have plugins (to their respective devs and to Adobe itself, which enables that situation: I am very sorry for their future loss of business, but that kind of stuff should be built into any self-respecting professional-grade DTP package, not just available as a paid add-on, because it lets lazy and/or less qualified designers get away with equally lazy designs that don't adhere to any semblance of a grid or to good typographic practices, nor do they eschew those visibly and intently like Carson and Brody did – thus residing on that uncanny valley of mediocrity and being worse even than sometimes comparatively illiterate but masterful typographers, taught by their own masters from an early age – and, as such, disregard 500+ years of accumulated typographic history and knowledge – hence my offer, a few years ago, to work for Serif as a typography consultant; I am finishing my final dissertation about, of all themes, Modular Type Design and Typography on, of all degrees, an MFA in Contemporary Typographic and Editorial Practices this school year and intend on looking for work and move to the UK, preferably Scotland, on the next, so my offer still stands and if you ever reach a point in development where you think you may need someone with those qualifications, by all means do send me a message –, which the software itself could help to reinstate in an intuitive fashion – cross alignment of columns with differing leading values by calculating common divisors or multiple-field-grid calculators are two features which come to mind and are incredibly bothersome to replicate manually), an easier to program alternative to GREP Styles (easier as in as easy as AppleScript or Automator, maybe in addition to GREP Styles themselves for those who like that kind of thing), artboard/page management along the lines of a more conventional spread model (though I am very much yearning for Serif to surprise us with different modes – personas? document presets? – that allow us to do folded leaflets more complex than three-page fliers and multi-page accordions, that would be awesome) instead of the free-floating artboard model we have now (though a hybrid model or even a free model like that of FreeHand and, indeed, AD itself may be desirable in some projects), a strong linked document management panel, and above all an excellent master page system (are Symbol and Asset support, along with Constraints and other tools/capabilities, repurposeable for DTP? Maybe…).

 

The common document model will take care of the rest (though I am not so sure how are you supposed to be able to open an arguably more complex APub document in AD or APh without losing some information and what for, honestly… Seamlessly editing – in-line or otherwise – linked documents and assets seems to be more useful, IMHO, since APub will be, for all intents and purposes, the “end” of the print design production line, combining elements created on the rest of the suite) and, of course, APub can have a modicum of live, non-destructive filters and effects that may even allow foregoing the other elements of the suite for lighter stuff and reusing the same assets in different documents, with different filters and effects applied in each, much like you can do in InDesign already.

 

But I digress; even if there are twists and turns in its development, actually getting to see how the process goes (at least for non top-secret features go, because as AD and APub have shown us, some 80% of the features are obvious and very similar to those found in competing offerings) would still be better than being left completely in the dark. Heck, even Apple cuts features and re-adds them later from time to time when performing transitions on release-quality software (iWork and iPhoto/Photos for macOS come to mind, and even OS X in the early years was a prime example of that) and most users end up eating those up, so why would Affinity users be mad if Serif said “sorry, we had to redo features x and y because of conflicts and dependencies”? On final, paid-for creative software we would probably go mad about it on the forums and never buy it again, but these would be Developer Alphas, not even Betas…

 

On that note, it's also interesting that I mentioned iWork and Photos, since it was the effort towards achieving feature-parity with iOS that motivated said feature culling in the first place, and I wonder how Serif will manage feature-parity and feature creep management when their iOS apps hit the App Store.

Anyway, I, for one, wouldn't mind witnessing a convoluted development process, especially if said dev blog came with a big, fat disclaimer expressing that it would be perfectly normal and expectable. And this isn't the Apple Watch or the Apple Car we're talking about, a DTP package is a perfectly obvious, necessary and doable addition to the suite, it's not like Serif doesn't have the chops to do it or will can the project any day (otherwise it would be a company secret or a half-promised-without-a-schedule app like the DAM; they wouldn't have announced with such fanfare it in the first place, nor would they have discontinued PagePlus development altogether like they did). It may come out super late, but come out it will eventually and, if the other components of the suite are any indication, it will be worth the wait.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that some people don't want to pay a subscription for ID probably isn't enough reason to rush out the software.

 

For me it ist. 

I never had thought to leave Adobe if they haven’t changed to a license model that becomes more and more like 1984 (if you know what I mean : ) 

 

I want to own my software, not rent it. I want to sell it, if  I do not need it anymore. 

And, I do not want to pay 700 Euro a year for software I never user.

iMac (27", Late 2013) – 3,2 GHz Intel Core i5 – MacOS 10.14
Adobe user since 1994, but now Affinity enthusiast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...] Just give us a best-in-class IDML importer and we'll be all set. Then, there's feature-parity (or its lack thereof), sure, but for more common stuff and student use APub will be a fine piece of software even if it has some limitations equivalent to those that AD and APh exhibit as of now (I am still waiting for those properly separated spot-colour-to-spot-colour and spot-color-to-0%-opacity gradients when exported to .PDF, but that is an extreme and very specific use case ;) ).

 

Yes, I totally agree with you. IDML is used to convert all new InDesign file formats to the previous versions. So, if implemented, all InDesign documents would be easilly converted into Publisher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JGD,

 

Again I have to admit that I did not read much of your latest, very long post. However, I think you may have strayed from the reason a 'done vs. to do' progress report was requested. I think the idea was to help those waiting for the release of Affinity Publisher get a better idea of when it will be released, not to get a "behind the scenes" look at how it is being developed.

 

As I explained, I do not think such a progress report would do that.

Affinity Photo 1.10.5, Affinity Designer 1.10.5, Affinity Publisher 1.10.5;  2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.5.280 & Affinity Designer 1.10.5 for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.0.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is very wise to get overly excited about Publisher. It will come when it is ready (enough). At this stage is is not wise make plans of using it in near future. Use other tools if you need them now.

 

About market situation: There is no other serious tools than Indy and QX, at least macside. No, I correct, not even semiserious tools. PAGEMAKER was fine tool at its day and current tools outside Indy&QX don't match it even nearly. If Publisher was even PageMaker level tool it would be useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Newbie 

I hate the subscription plan too which is one of the reasons I stick with CS6. What is more important to me then saving money on subscriptions though is worthwhile updates. If Adobe was able to justify software upgrades that were actually worth $600 a year (plus the cost of upgrading all your extensions) then I would spend $600+ a year. Unfortunately the value of their updates have taken a slide and it is not because of product maturity as some Adobe trolls like to portray it as.

 

@Fixx

I found PageMaker to be a horrible product. Even non layout programs like FreeHand did a better job at layout. There was on rare case where Adobe was justified in killing off a product where they usually made bad judgement in this area (LiveMotion, FreeHand, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found PageMaker to be a horrible product. Even non layout programs like FreeHand did a better job at layout.

 

Yes, PM was terrible. But it started years before FH and Adobe did not really refined it. FH did not have features like pagination, baseline grid, …

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JGD,

 

Again I have to admit that I did not read much of your latest, very long post. However, I think you may have strayed from the reason a 'done vs. to do' progress report was requested. I think the idea was to help those waiting for the release of Affinity Publisher get a better idea of when it will be released, not to get a "behind the scenes" look at how it is being developed.

 

As I explained, I do not think such a progress report would do that.

 

Ah, yes. As I said, I'm fully aware of the limitations such a developer blog would present. But I was speaking purely from a developer-customer relationship standpoint, which already seems to be very peculiar in Serif's case. If you think of it, at least that option would give the eager potential users a sense for the scale of the project, and… dare I say it, of its actual progress, even with the expected setbacks and all.

 

It would be kind of like watching a progress bar in a torrent download, with its variable DL speeds (and the sometimes bizarre ETAs they generate) and the occasional scrapped packet because of data corruption which does, indeed, make it actually go backwards. A moving, unpredictable goal, yes, but a hypnotizing one nonetheless. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never heard of VivaDesigner. Claims it has been 20 years in business.. awfully well kept secret, no reviews. May be good software but PR department.. (what PR department? :o )

 

PM was good for long documents. Nowadays there are of course some practices which were not so important then. Colour management is whole different beast now. Now if you want to name professional but really terrible software that would be Corel Ventura.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the impression that VivaDesigner isn't at all well known outside of Germany. :mellow:

Alfred spacer.png
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher for Windows 1.10 • Windows 10 Home/Pro
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.10 • Designer for iPad 1.10 • iPadOS 15.6.1 (iPad Air 2)

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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.