Why so expensive?

[denironaut]

I just think you need to lighten up man, why so serious?

[deeds]

Because I take design seriously, including the design of design software.

[VectorCat]

For some reason, the old cliché "Rome was not built in a day" comes to mind...

 

As I recall, the entire publishing industry did not jump on Adobe in their 1.0 releases... Obviously it was a different landscape back then and digital had not penetrated into the market, but nevertheless, it takes time to penetrate any market, specially on the first release of any product. Affinity is laying the foundation for a seriously powerful environment, and they're doing a pretty amazing job of it. Is it ready to replace the industry standard on it's first release? Umm, that may be a little unrealistic... it's like criticizing the Wright brothers for not reaching the moon with their first airplane...

 

While I agree with what's said here, I am also concerned about ease-of-use issues concerning selecting objects and layers, and how these things behave relative to conventions which are pushing 30 years old by this time.

 

I agree that AD has some features and methods which ought to make the entire graphics world sit up straight and pay attention, but it's also true that much in life is more meat-and-potatoes, as opposed to exotic and whizzy.

 

IOW: a pencil had better behave like a pencil is expected to: Point at one end, eraser at the other, diameter that feels right in the fingers and lead reasonably resilient to pressure and ability to take a sharp point.

 

If I pick up a pencil and it lacks one or more of these qualities, I chuck it into the wastebasket and search for something that fulfills my needs, even tho that other pencil may have some magic other qualities. If it does a lousy job of being a pencil, I'm done widdit.

 

AD does not do a lousy job at being a vector draw program, but I feel it could do a better job of adhering to certain conventions and expectations rather than trying to re-invent methods.

 

EDIT: and I say this, not to cast nasties on the AD innovations, but because, like it or not, AD is trying to break into a game where Adobe owns the arena. It's simply the way it is; neither right nor wrong.

 

If Affinity had gotten there first, it'd be Adobe playing a game of catch-up, and trying both to adhere to conventions and to differentiate itself from the incumbent.

[Andy Somerfield]

deeds,

 

I find this conversation tiresome, to say the least..

 

Show me *one place* in *any* of our marketing where we say we "replace" Photoshop, or "replace" Illustrator - if there are are any, I will happily have them removed immediately..

 

If you think that you can identify areas in which we are less capable than the products mentioned above, I absolutely guarantee I can identify fifty times more than you - we don't, and have never claimed to replace these products..

 

Our *users*, for their *particular workflow* might claim that we are in that position - but their words are not mine..

 

Affinity is a line of new products, with new ambitions and a new timeline - if you want a $50 Photoshop, or a $50 Illustrator at this point in time, you are in the wrong forum..

 

A

 

[deeds]

deeds,

 

I find this conversation tiresome, to say the least..

 

Show me *one place* in *any* of our marketing where we say we "replace" Photoshop, or "replace" Illustrator - if there are are any, I will happily have them removed immediately..

 

If you think that you can identify areas in which we are less capable than the products mentioned above, I absolutely guarantee I can identify fifty times more than you - we don't, and have never claimed to replace these products..

 

Our *users*, for their *particular workflow* might claim that we are in that position - but their words are not mine..

 

Affinity is a line of new products, with new ambitions and a new timeline - if you want a $50 Photoshop, or a $50 Illustrator at this point in time, you are in the wrong forum..

 

A

 

Way to miss the point(s).

[Andy Somerfield]

No, you have missed the point - the point and sole purpose of this forum..

 

If you have nothing to offer which is properly constructive, I suggest you leave - else I will do it for you..

 

A

[deeds]

Define "properly constructive", please.

[Andy Somerfield]

With pleasure:

 

1.) Comments relating to a specific, demonstrable bug with any software offered by the owners of this forum.

2.) Comments relating to a specific feature request for any software offered by the owners of this forum.

3.) Rational debate regarding the specific sector of the software industry in which the owners of this forum trade.

 

Next question?

 

A

[bpedit]

Not your bombastic diatribe. Properly constructive implies contributing something that can be used to improve. What's constructive about complaining that the product was released before it was ready for "prime time"? Even if we all agreed that's true, what can be done about it? Not constructive. Personally, I think an earlier release allows for greater user input as the product matures. I also like the fact you communicate directly with the developers instead of representatives.

 

How about you figure out what feature you most want and request it kindly in the forum. Constructive.

[deeds]

With pleasure:

 

1.) Comments relating to a specific, demonstrable bug with any software offered by the owners of this forum.

2.) Comments relating to a specific feature request for any software offered by the owners of this forum.

3.) Rational debate regarding the specific sector of the software industry in which the owners of this forum trade.

 

Next question?

 

A

 

Perhaps a recap is in order:

 

Someone expressed concern about the price, that’s the start of the thread. One of the people at Affinity responded with this bullshit response about "fair", to which I responded with this:

 

https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/4596-why-so-expensive/?p=22116

 

That’s a warning, if you need it translated, Andy. Don’t quibble the small shit, and certainly don’t do it in public. Someone questioning $50 for this app is suffering all sorts of entitlement issues. Leave them be.

 

That clearer for you?

 

Worse, Tony comes off as having decided what’s fair based on his collective viewpoint of the people he knows via the forum. That’s bordering on an attempt to steer peer group pressure, and some have taken it that way, and rallied behind him. That just looks bad to everyone wondering about the nature of the community and Affinity, forever more, in this forum.

 

The forum you’re purporting to have some purpose for.

 

If that purpose is to make Affinity look as draconian and aloof as Adobe, well, you’re well on your way. Let the yapping dogs yap their support for the team. You should be able to drive out everyone but the loyalists puppy dogs in a couple more months of this kind of carry on.

 

At that point you can turn Affinity use into the circle jerk you seem to desire. Whoopee.

 

But whilst you’re reaching for that “Lifetime Ban” button, please continue reading. Just in case you’re not a complete muppet.

 

 

My response to the question of the real price (time  to become productive and creative in a new piece of software) being a far greater concern than $50, was this:

 

“As such the ONLY consideration and benchmark is what pro users need to be creative and productive. And pro users don't need a taste of all features, just a subset of those that make their lives faster than working in the competing Adobe product.”

 

And the fastest way to empower users is a good array of sensible and well thought out shortcuts.  Here, again, Affinity seems to have some pretty grave shortcomings.

 

Shortcuts are how you communicate your (Affinity’s) consideration of your customers. 

 

Even more so than the process of activating and using the tools through the GUI, because they give a profound insight into your understanding, or lack their off, of the user processes of doing things with your software.

 

And Shortcuts are often a very personal thing based on work habits, reach, memory, cognitive connections, past experiences, etc etc.

 

And custom shortcuts are how customers shape their experience to the way they’d like it. If they can. 

 

So, before anything else, I’d suggest you add user customisable shortcuts to both AD and AP. Pronto. For the love of all that is fast creativity.

 

And allow them to save their custom shortcut themes to an external location so that they may be shared with others. That way someone can make a “Just like AI” setup, immediately, and you’ll have a lot more happy customers spending a lot more time doing a lot more with a lot less effort, and explaining to others why they should invest their expensive time in learning to use AD.

 

Which then creates more people positively talking about AD, which creates more users, which creates more people talking positively about AD… etc etc.. I think you can see the point. I FUCKING HOPE SO!!!

 

So great shortcuts, lexicon, consideration of user workflows and the ability to add customised shortcuts are… you know… SHORTCUTS!

 

To happy, productive users, and MORE SALES!!!

 

See that?

 

So let’s take a moment to see what can be discerned from the Affinity Team’s consideration of their users via their ‘shortcut’ provisions and selections.

 

Sub-selection components of an object have been named “Nodes”, and their Tool for editing them the “Node” Tool. This is a bit odd as Node is a word more commonly associated with whole things than parts of things. Be that as it may, it looks as though the first iterations of AD used the [N] key to activate the Node Editing Tool.

 

Fortunately someone has seen the light, and changed this to [A] so it’s at least in line with the most commonly known shortcut for sub-selection editing. Adobe, in their infinite wisdom, call this the Direct Selection Tool, so I suppose we should at least be grateful Affinity didn’t call it that.

 

So there’s a clear indication that folks at Affinity do, after some prodding, find the energy to fight their own desires to be different for the sake of being different… or whatever other motivations see them coming up with alternative user paradigms for no apparent reason.

 

However, the Help File Shortcut Appendix still has this Node Editing Tool’s ‘shortcut’ listed as [N] . I’ve only just noticed this, because it never occurred to me to ever try the [N] key. From the first moment I started using AD, the very first thing I did was hit the [V] key to see what that did, then the [A] key, followed by the SpaceBar, then the [esc] key. 

 

I don’t know about you, but every time I try a new drawing alternative I seek this out to see if they’re doing things the “Adobe way”, or one of the other lesser known ways of handling selection, editing and panning. 

 

I’m willing to bet there were a few people grumbling about the [N] key someways back, and someone at Affinity figured they might as well eat a little humble pie and goto the established convention of Illustrator and Photoshop for this. Well done.

 

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. If you’re going to use the established conventions of selection, editing and view control from Adobe’s litany of bullshit (but strongly established) shortcuts, then why not embrace them throughout, wherever and whenever they’re appropriate?

 

For example, colour swapping. You’ve used X to switch between Fill and Outline, and basically copied the entire swatch systems of Adobe Illustrator, so why not the [shift + X] shortcut?

 

And while I’m asking questions about user consideration, what’s up with the Eyedropper needing a double action to activate?

 

All of the above indicates, and prior injections of commentary seem to come from a staff and mindset at Affinity that’s got no affinity with the user experiences of using the app, and even less concern for the obvious transitions and interflow of use between AI and AD.

 

That doesn’t bode well. 

 

So, ban me. You’ll only save me the time I was wasting considering how to make Affinity more affined with the prior experiences dominant in its new users.

 

Good luck.

[deeds]

Not your bombastic diatribe. Properly constructive implies contributing something that can be used to improve. What's constructive about complaining that the product was released before it was ready for "prime time"? Even if we all agreed that's true, what can be done about it? Not constructive. Personally, I think an earlier release allows for greater user input as the product matures. I also like the fact you communicate directly with the developers instead of representatives.

 

How about you figure out what feature you most want and request it kindly in the forum. Constructive.

 

Use the forum thread tools to find other threads I've started and contributed to before you go off halfcocked. 

[Oldhand]

And he's says all this after drinking his third bottle of the night.

[deeds]

Perhaps if that roadmap were polished a little it could be included in the Designer web pages, where it would be more visible than here.

 

+1

[ronnyb]

deeds,

 

Go find a happy place. Stay there for a while. Learn how to program. Learn how to manage a team of developers. Get funding and launch a software company and make it to the #2 spot on the MAS. When you do, your expert opinions will be worth something. Until then, you are simply coming across as an arrogant prick.

 

Your sense of superiority would be nauseating if it weren't so ridiculous and as fake as your concern for anyone's growth as humans... please, get off your pulpit and put your ego back in its place... stop wasting everyone's time here and go do something productive with your life before you die a more miserable human being.

 

<going to take a shower>

 

 

 

@RonnyB and Hokusai and anyone else preaching blind optimism and positive reinforcement as some kind of magic panacea or wonder lotion:

 

I'm a critic... because I care, understand and am sentient.

 

All your points are not worthy of the time it takes to critique them, but I still care about your growth as humans, which most definitely involves coming to deeply understand the importance of criticism and the many roles it plays in life, love and liberty.

 

However, in the meantime, I suggest you spend some time ascertaining the difference between negativity/pessimism and very deliberate and considered criticism.

 

For you both, and anyone else surfing the blight of faux positivity, and because Serif is an English company, I offer this:

 

 

[ronnyb]

I wonder if @deeds works for Adobe... I wouldn't be surprised if he's a paid PR shill trying to sow discord in this vibrant community. I've seen this garbage happen before in other industries... 

[jackamus]

I think the price is a bargain but I hear you about Apples currency conversion. Dont feel too bad though, the Australian $ is worth .98CAD but the AppStore US.99 is $1.29 here. Thats pretty much right now given the current exchange rate but its been that way since we were paying the equilevant of US$1.25. They are quick to raise prices on exchange fluctuation but take their time dropping it.

According to Computer Active magazine , Adobe products is at the top of their list for software NOT to buy!

[deeds]

I wonder if @deeds works for Adobe... I wouldn't be surprised if he's a paid PR shill trying to sow discord in this vibrant community. I've seen this garbage happen before in other industries... 

 

Until this post I wasn't sure about your sense of humour. 

 

I stand corrected. 

 

You're a laugh riot!

[denironaut]

Deeds, you really need to consider how you come across to other people, your virtual social skills are appalling, writing long winded posts is a futile exercise, nobody considers your points to be rational anymore. It seems you're unable to accept the possibility you may be wrong! Perhaps in real life you're an ok kind of guy, perhaps not, but one things for sure, nobody wants to be labelled a troll. Perhaps say your sorry then we can move on.

[deeds]

The cost of AD is not just $50, it’s also the time it takes to learn it, discern its strengths, weaknesses and appropriateness, and then incorporate it into workflows. This secondary cost is (at least) an order of magnitude more than the sticker price. Yet this secondary price CAN be reduced.

 

​Reducing the secondary costs of AD will greatly increase sales.

 

Everything I’ve subsequently suggested aims at either pulling this secondary price down, or making more compelling reasons to pay this secondary price.

 

And… I’ve not yet expressed anything more complex than the most very basic of common sense, nor claimed anything more than common knowledge.

 

If that’s a revelation to you, or in some way needs the support of an exposed pulpit to be preached from so you might consider it, then I can’t help you because you have cognition and discernment issues and problems in need of addressing. 

 

In very rough order of their expression in this thread, those matters of common sense and references to common knowledge were:

 

1. No staff, representatives and certainly not the boss of Affinity should be engaging with anyone questioning a price of $50 for what is a truly staggering piece of software for that price.

 

2. Nobody from Serif/Affinity should ever be “leading the choir” or in any other way inciting their faithful to tag anyone else in the forum.

 

3. I’ve reminded folks that this is a public facing forum, but that’s not fully registered, so let me try to be more specific: members of the media have access to it.

 

4. Adobe is a monopoly, more so on the Mac than on the PC, despite their software running more slowly on the Mac. MUCH more slowly in some cases.

 

5. Monopolies don’t “play fair”. They can and will do anything within their power to control “THEIR” market, as that’s what they believe it to be.

 

6. Markets for tools of creativity constitute the entire read of opinion from professional users, those in the media, and last (and least) the faithful in forums.

 

7. There is no single compelling reason to incorporate AD into a professional workflow at this moment. // The pen and node editing is closest.

 

8. AD needs to gain a foothold in the market, and climb from there. A foothold is a killer, absolutely compelling, single purpose reason to use AD in a pro workflow.

 

9. Workflow, speed, creative flow and fluidity of operation is the major concern of professionals - deep consideration should be given to these matters.

 

10. The utmost care should be given to making learning, adoption and using AD seamless within the really real world of AI dominance on the Mac.

 

11. Adobe has made AI and their packages incredibly accessible, there is no longer any room to compete on price, it must be on the points above.

 

 

One more time… all of the above are common sense, and common knowledge. It’s a surprise to me when anyone would suggest otherwise, and I tend to attempt to enlighten those ignorant of common sense and in denial of common knowledge.

 

If any of that comes across as arrogance, “an air of superiority”, negativity, pessimism or whatever else you might deem it (whilst finding it objectionable) the problem is not with me, it’s you.

 

Because you’re failing at common sense, and over time that’s gonna cost you exponentially more than your Adobe subscription.

 

Help yourself out. Take a step back and be a little objective about software, tools, creativity, the markets, media, new mediums and their impacts and the very large shadow Adobe casts over all of this.

[denironaut]

Oh my, yawn, this thread needs wrapping up.

[jackamus]

Deeds, you really need to consider how you come across to other people, your virtual social skills are appalling, writing long winded posts is a futile exercise, nobody considers your points to be rational anymore. It seems you're unable to accept the possibility you may be wrong! Perhaps in real life you're an ok kind of guy, perhaps not, but one things for sure, nobody wants to be labelled a troll. Perhaps say your sorry then we can move on.

I agree but would add that as with emails it can be difficult to express feelings when using a minimum of words. It is so easy to get the 'wrong end of the stick'.

[jackamus]

Have you considered that you may be the odd-one out?

[denironaut]

I think this threads run its course, good points jackamus.

[Andy Somerfield]

Ok, this will be my last post on the subject:

 

"1. No staff, representatives and certainly not the boss of Affinity should be engaging with anyone questioning a price of $50 for what is a truly staggering piece of software for that price."

 

Why not? The initial question was with respect to exchange rates imposed by the App Store - something which we often find ourselves explaining. Our staff will happily discuss any topic with any user.

 

"2. Nobody from Serif/Affinity should ever be “leading the choir” or in any other way inciting their faithful to tag anyone else in the forum."

 

They aren't.

 

"3. I’ve reminded folks that this is a public facing forum, but that’s not fully registered, so let me try to be more specific: members of the media have access to it."

 

Yes, and it's something which the media often pick up on - our directness and willingness to engage directly with end users. It's possibly the single strongest USP of the Affinity concept thus far and it will not change.

 

"7. There is no single compelling reason to incorporate AD into a professional workflow at this moment. // The pen and node editing is closest."

 

So all the guys who are using AD daily for real work are doing it why? Remember - some workflows can use a fraction of the capability of even AD - never mind Illustrator. Or do you mean *your* workflow?

 

"9. Workflow, speed, creative flow and fluidity of operation is the major concern of professionals - deep consideration should be given to these matters."

 

If the "speed" and "fluidity" of AD is not sufficient, then every other vector tool out there is effectively not fit for purpose.

 

I've not banned you from this forum, and will not do so. I must ask, however, that you reread some of your replies in this thread - if you find the condescending manor in which you speak to other members acceptable, then I think you should consider whether or not this is somewhere you want to be long-term - because things will not get easier for you and eventually every post you make, including the sensible ones, will incite combative replies from people who are sick of your tone.

 

A

[deeds]

The context is important.

 

The context remains:

 

The cost of AD is not just $50, it’s also the time it takes to learn it, discern its strengths, weaknesses and appropriateness, and then incorporate it into workflows. This secondary cost is (at least) an order of magnitude more than the sticker price. Yet this secondary price CAN be reduced.

 

​Reducing the secondary costs of AD will greatly increase sales.