taizo

Affinity Publisher Release Date Change!

67 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, KipV said:

Adobe's merges are one of the main reason they are in the position they are in.

Adobe's mergers are like the 'mergers' between a predator & its prey.

SrPx likes this

Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patrick, You are entering the layout field far too late. Practically everything I can think of wanting in a layout program is more a matter of tweaking the current features rather the rebuilding the whole program from the ground up. Very few people are going to wait 10 years for Serif to build an app that is on par with the current pro layout apps. It would make much more sense to do a Lightroom competitor that is still a pretty new type of software and actually has room for innovation. Adobe just came out with a new less feature rich Lightroom so trying to compete with that would be a lot more manageable. It would also make a Affinity Photo a more serious contender. A lot of what I want to see from Serif layout wise is to make Designer and Photo better at doing simple layouts like I was talking about in that post from about a year ago. Those programs still don't do some of the most basic layout functions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, R C-R said:

Adobe's mergers are like the 'mergers' between a predator & its prey.

Adobe's merges do several things; they kill off would be competitors, that is true, but doing this also makes their programs work better together. Many of Adobe's competitors seem to think that they can compete with Adobe with just one or two apps which is absurd. They don't need to be the size of Adobe but they certainly need more then two apps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KipV said:

Adobe's merges do several things; they kill off would be competitors, that is true, but doing this also makes their programs work better together.

Adobe can't even achieve 100% compatibility among its own apps.

Jens Krebs likes this

Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, R C-R said:

Adobe can't even achieve 100% compatibility among its own apps.

I not sure what compatibility you are referring to but I know that the compatibility between Adobe and Macromedia apps got way better during the CS3 and CS4 updates. This happened nearly a decade ago just to show how far the competition has to play catch up with making their programs work better together. There are certainly merges that can go out of control but no one here can honestly say that the Adobe-Aldus merge was a bad decision. Adobe needed a layout solution right away and merging made their product line up better in both the short term and the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further more Serif only has compatibility with two apps and I know that the compatibility on the Adobe side is certainly way more then two. Adobe had an in road when they first competed with Quark in that apparently Quark had some problems at that point, but today Serif is going up against at least two good layout applications. That is going to be very hard to compete against. I just don't know how you are going to do that, I don't know how they are going to take on two Goliaths at the same time. Adobe has been getting around to fixing the long standing complaints with their InDesign. Serif need to use their time wisely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The compatibility between Adobe applications and the Serif applications use two differing definitions of the word compatibility.

 

With Serif applications is is complete file compatibility in all that means. Serif applications can open for editing each others files. That will extend to APub.

 

Adobe applications, and to limit the scope to the pertinent application, InDesign, is limited to placing files of mainly two of Adobe's other applications, PSD and AI files. But it isn't truly compatibility the way it is defined for Serif applications. It is the mere placing of those file types. That placement of those two file types is also not directly comparable between them. PSD support in ID is pretty good as regards turning certain layers off/on, but that is it. With AI, the only portion of the AI file that can even be imported is the PDF portion and one cannot do anything in ID with it, really.

 

Mike

SrPx, Patrick Connor, R C-R and 3 others like this

My computer is a nothing-special Toshiba laptop with unremarkable specs running Windows 10 64-bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the capability would be at a higher level with Affinity especially with the awesome idea of a single file format being used across several apps. I just think that even if you didn't have capability right away but had partially compatibility that will still be a massive step forward from where they are now. I would be more patient with Serif if it weren't for the fact that they are entering an area that is pretty mature. I would rather they spend the bulk of their time on emerging tech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is the file format per se that is holding up APub. I think it is programming hours. 

 

Serif has long been looking for good programmers who both can do the work and would be a good fit.

SrPx likes this

My computer is a nothing-special Toshiba laptop with unremarkable specs running Windows 10 64-bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KipV said:

I would rather they spend the bulk of their time on emerging tech.

That is exactly what they are doing by starting with a "clean slate" design approach for the Affinity apps. The Affinity range began life as a research project at Serif to study the feasibility of creating high performance graphics apps that could run when very limited RAM was available to the app. (They used old generation iPads for that reason.) The single file format is a part of that, but not the only part.

 

So there would be no point in merging with another company unless whatever tech that company owned was compatible with the file format & everything else that resulted from the "clean slate" design approach. Since none of us know if any other company's tech is compatible, there is little point in speculating about the potential benefits of mergers with them.


Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2017 at 4:35 AM, KipV said:

I think Adobe's recent releases have been dragging for a while. If competition plays their cards right they can leap in head of them I believe. Doing some merges would put them in a better position.

 

Well, PS latest is a nice release, from what I have seen. Finally smoothing for the brush lines (hehe, maybe spying on Affinity  ?) and they finally improved their "vector" node tool. Previous ones did look really uninteresting for my work, though.... So, not as to see a "trend" in it, tho...

Merges... ouch... I'm here running from monopolies like Autodesk (they acquired Maya and XSI, sinking for ever the latter (as was the plan), that sweet wonder...Which made me go Blender all the way. Maybe I should even thank them, lol) or...well, Adobe (forced subscription, and too many apps acquired (think of the entire Macromedia ! It was not a good thing to see happening)). Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather prefer a collection of alternatives, totally independent and competing with each other...We as users win so...IMO.


Freelance Illustrator, comic artist, graphic designer, 3D modeler, animator (2D/3D), texturer, graphics UI specialist, web designer (+ html/css), oil painter, pixel artist.

Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz stock, 3.46GHz turbo (4C, 8T), 8 GB RAM, GTX 275 1GB, HD Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm, 32MB, 3GB/s, Intuos Pro 4 XL, NEC SpectraView 231 23", i1 Display Pro.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bits. Affinity Designer license.

Official important stuff for Windows install and Aero. |  My Aero tips. |  Old inking trick/tutorial, ported from its usage in older applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, KipV said:

but no one here can honestly say that the Adobe-Aldus merge was a bad decision. Adobe needed a layout solution right away and merging made their product line up better in both the short term and the long term.

 

Euh...they finally killed Freehand in favor of Illustrator... sth which I know pissed off a large number of designers (me, for example).

The possibilities are high when a merge happens that is with the intention of a) diminish the app, in favor of own's competing one b) simply sink it, eliminate it from the market. It is expensive, but is specially done when it is a very hard enemy to beat due to the app's quality. If is the case as happened to XSI sunk by Autodesk, when the company was certainly struggling, and had not the overwhelming mass of people behind like Maya had (acquired, but survived!) , then is an easier prey. Freehand was really great. Flash... I'm certainly not happy to how things have gone for that one since Macromedia got acquired. Neither Dreamweaver (and I used that a lot in my first decade as a designer). Ehm...Fireworks ? That had a strong user base, not been treated right, definitely (IMO). And so on, list is huge... A merge of a physics library inside a 3D package, yeah, maybe that's nice, specially for the author selling it, but also to have all integrated for users... but entire apps, acquired... (or "merged", heh) IMO, not a good thing.

 

4 hours ago, toltec said:

 

Must love cats

cat.png.bbe00cafc889d7cd1fc26ade78d14909.png

 

 

I believe dogs count, too (somehow)... :D 

 

 


Freelance Illustrator, comic artist, graphic designer, 3D modeler, animator (2D/3D), texturer, graphics UI specialist, web designer (+ html/css), oil painter, pixel artist.

Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz stock, 3.46GHz turbo (4C, 8T), 8 GB RAM, GTX 275 1GB, HD Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm, 32MB, 3GB/s, Intuos Pro 4 XL, NEC SpectraView 231 23", i1 Display Pro.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bits. Affinity Designer license.

Official important stuff for Windows install and Aero. |  My Aero tips. |  Old inking trick/tutorial, ported from its usage in older applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, SrPx said:

Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather prefer a collection of alternatives, totally independent and competing with each other...

It isn't just you.

Jens Krebs likes this

Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, for whoever have been using graphic software, specially a wide range of it, like 2D and 3D, and a wild variety of uses and profiles, it is pretty clear that what benefits us is several approaches, independent, and so, not leaving you, the user, under the rain when a single, dominant, with all the freakin' cake for its own, decides to set hyper high prices, and/or forced subscription models.  You have almost everything merged under same umbrella, and if this umbrella decides to milk money from you and diminish the freedom of usage and purchase options, you're left there with no other option...Congrats... Also, a bit of a myth.. When one gets enough expertise in software, one can build super complex workflows in most tools that really care for the professional. Affinity does. Corel, too at least in some of the apps. 

 

I could write a book, despite being most experienced in Photoshop than in anything else, or maybe, thanks to that, of the so many points, here and there, where other apps do BETTER the stuff than PS. Indeed, I have right now about 5 mid/low cost ones  in my mind, that do rather better for any comic author/illustrator/painter. Just how terrible would it be even if there was not a Corel Painter out there, or not even a Clip Paint Studio/Manga Studio. Heck, so much people trapped for ever in whatever despotic decision of a single company. No, thank you very much, but let's have a better idea/solution... Again, is countless the pissed off people with : Freehand elimination, Fireworks, (even Page maker! Not every body loved that), XSI, a very large etc. IE, MS acquired a bunch of excellent apps for vectorial design from a Japanese company (sorry, can't remember now the name, but can dig it easily), (I believe it was lke 3 or 4) by acquiring a company, it went downhill, in reality, stopped development, went way of the Dodo, to finally offer it free, but non updated, and lastly, I believe now is not even offered the download. Even while some were as innocent as to believe it was being a merge that would serve to improve those Japanese jewels (better funding, using also MS technology, blah blah. But I knew the story from other cases :/ ). 

 

Truespace had a ton of bugs, but a large community. Finally it got acquired (owner sold it for good money, like any of us would), and the development stopped, though they were as kind as to offer as free download a last version (7.x , can't remember exact one): of course, that's the end for any app, at least closed source ones.

 

The great high detail modeler , Sculptris, a sweet tool offered by an individual for free, had an extreme speed of develoment till got acquired , and the guy contracted by Pixologic (it was really imo a two fork matter, the guy was REALLY good). These people are certainly user friendly, so they had the great move of keep offering it for free. Still is, and even created a forum section for it. But oh surprise, no further real development on it. It was indeed gonna be serious competition at least in the low range of usage it'd allow. A bunch of customers not having the top market needs (ie, not video games studios in the AAA range) would just grab it instead of purchasing Zbrush or similar.  Us as users got benefit from that ? nope... it'd rarely would have make serious damage to Pixologic, but yep loosing certain number of sales (is a clever move from them, but risky).. We'd have today a much more evolved free or very low cost app for our high detail modelling stage. Even so, this is the most gentle, by very far, action you can find when a large company is trying to eliminate competitors that might become a danger. (or which are, already) And it is because the style of Pixologic has been always very user friendly.

 

Of course, many of those are purchased once they are close to disappear for financial probs...but a ton of them just are offered a good sum to the owner.... Usually , it was his/her baby, and treated with care...once purchased, most times the intention is even badly disguised: Trash the app. No passion for it at all, other than a strong desire to eliminate it as fast as possible. Many times is just after the target of you only haveing ONE option to purchase. They wont fight/invest to eliminate those that are less of a threat, or... that have already too strong numbers of followers.(in case they actually care for that kind of thing)

 

Also, the argument of "hey, you are late", is not considering one (very) important  aspect. I fully respect your opinion, btw, but imo, maybe that statement is perhaps not taking in consideration one of the main factors of the strong following Affinity has: Some ppl are REALLY pissed off with the imposed renting. And other...issues with certain monopolies. Some do need already an app, can't wait. So , or will stay in Adobe's boat, or just will purchase Quark. Or depending or their needs, will stay with the older serif's app,  or just use Scribus. But I firmly believe several of those will jump ship to get into APub once is out. 

O. Chevetaigne and furtonb like this

Freelance Illustrator, comic artist, graphic designer, 3D modeler, animator (2D/3D), texturer, graphics UI specialist, web designer (+ html/css), oil painter, pixel artist.

Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz stock, 3.46GHz turbo (4C, 8T), 8 GB RAM, GTX 275 1GB, HD Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm, 32MB, 3GB/s, Intuos Pro 4 XL, NEC SpectraView 231 23", i1 Display Pro.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bits. Affinity Designer license.

Official important stuff for Windows install and Aero. |  My Aero tips. |  Old inking trick/tutorial, ported from its usage in older applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MikeW said:

...

With Serif applications is is complete file compatibility in all that means. Serif applications can open for editing each others files. That will extend to APub.

...

That's fine and good, at least for interoperability inside the closed Affinity/Serif ecosystem. - But since it's still an unspecified proprietary file format, it's useless outside of this small ecosystem for any further use and/or other exchange.

KipV likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI's format is largely unexposed as well. Some applications like CD, and for older AI files, XDP, works fine. But it is still a closed file format and there can/will be some gotchas. As is ID's native file format and if IDML wasn't a viable alternative, no one would be able to transport them to say QXP or Viva Designer. And one needs, in the of QXP, to purchase an Xtension to do so. Viva's IDML import is fairly OK, but that application cannot handle large documents well and is certainly missing things for my work.

 

The same does/will apply to Serif's applications: Export to a format as the final use PDF or another format for use in other applications. What is any different than Adobe?


My computer is a nothing-special Toshiba laptop with unremarkable specs running Windows 10 64-bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI's format is pretty bad and evil and not much portable either here for most third party apps. - Beside of maybe PS/EPS/PDF/SVG and some common bitmap formats there isn't much which offers so far a wider range of interoperability. But why should you take Adobe as a role model here, just cause they do things that way, it doesn't mean you have to do it also or follow in this regard. - For any file format in order to gain attraction here and to get a wider acceptance usage base (especially among it supporting third party apps), it has to be well specified and standardized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was using Adobe as a for instance, not as a role model.

 

I will agree re third-party applications in so far as they help production. APhoto, of course, can use .8bf Photoshop filters, but that is still short of specific plug-ins and other models that PS does support. AD, of course, really should get third-party support plug-in and scripting. Serif will never be able to do everything, which is why third-party developers exist in other eco-systems. This all would apply to APub, too.

 

However, none of that is to say that what is important as regards playing nice with other applications is top-quality export. I can accept that Serif seemingly wants a closed system incapable of third-party support. I don't agree with that sentiment. But it isn't my playground and I don't make the rules. So as long as I can create assets for use in other applications, I can/will use Serif applications' export capabilities. I see that as no different than I currently do.

 

So regardless of Serif's ultimate decision regarding third-party developers, I will use AD when it makes sense to. I'll use another application if AD doesn't make sense. And like I do with XDP, CD,AI, etc., I sometimes take things X far along in the design and port it into something else to finish it off. The same will apply to APub for years to come. I have no idea what capabilities APub will have out of the gate, but I seriously doubt it will be of use to me for all but a small portion of the types of things I do in a layout application.


My computer is a nothing-special Toshiba laptop with unremarkable specs running Windows 10 64-bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, Adobe has never even fully specified all the details of the PSD & PSB file formats. The current version also begins with a disclaimer that it is furnished only for informational use, may contain errors or inaccuracies, could change at any time without notice, & should not be construed as a "commitment" by Adobe (whatever that means). It is also extremely complex, including a lot of obsolete resource IDs & ones present only in later versions, a few differences in files written by Mac or Windows versions, & possibly a few other things that make importing from or exporting to PSD/PSB files with 100% accuracy incredibly difficult. Of course, even that requires that other apps support an identical feature set or at least an equivalent one, which puts a huge burden on any company that wants to try for something more innovative or efficient.

 

As for if Serif should release its own detailed file format specification, consider the following:

1. Of necessity this would have to cover everything pertaining to both of the current apps & the as yet to be released Publisher.

2. The developers & staff have made it clear that the details of the format are not just considered to be proprietary trade secrets but also that they are regarded as among the company's most valuable assets, & what allows Serif to compete effectively with much larger companies like Adobe.

3. Some time back, it was mentioned that they would consider releasing an SDK enabling some amount of third party interoperability if & when that could be done without disclosing any trade secrets, but it would not likely be the equivalent of or include a detailed file format specification.

 

So basically, whatever they might decide to do about this eventually, for several very good reasons it is not likely to happen any time soon.


Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MikeW

Agreed, offering top-quality export for shared file formats which is used by other common applications too is crucial nowadays. Generally the best things a peace of software can do to gain a wider market base and playing a more important role here, is to offer some well defined flexible reusable interfaces, good scripting capabilities and common data exchange formats.

Related to APhoto's .8bf Photoshop support, IMO they haven't really done themself a favor with that one so far. It's mediocre at best and doesn't really support anything in a well behaving manner. In other words it's pretty useless and looks more like a quick thrown add-in for the marketing department than anything else here. Instead they should have better defined and implemented their own custom API, which third parties can then use instead to hook their software into their apps in a well behaving and correct working manner. Offering scripting capabilities is another good and important point here to make their software more powerful and useful. - The same does apply to AD here.

Don't know either what that new APublisher version will then offer, but I can imagine that it might follow feature wise more or less here their former PP Windows version. - Well we will see.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SrPx I never tried to defend every merge that has happened in human history. There was one merge I specifically brought up which was with Aldus. I haven't heard anyone here argue against the fact that whatever you think about Adobe today late 90s Adobe was much better then early 90s Adobe. There is a similarity between early 90s Adobe and where Serif is today, although of course early 90s Adobe wasn't as advanced as 2017 Serif. At the time they had Photoshop, Illustrator, Premier, and After Effects. I don't know if the video programs are of much relevance in this conversation but the fact that they only had a photo editor and drawing program without a layout tool was a big problem in this lineup. Aldus gave them both short term and long term solutions and Serif could be in a similar position by having both solutions as well. 

 

People have been saying they don't know what the initial version of Publisher will be like but I think people do know and they are right to set their exceptions pretty low. I don't have super high hopes for version two or three either. Then there is the question of plug-in support which we have no guarantee that wide spread third party plug-in will even happen. This support is essential to a layout program getting off the ground. Some ID plug-ins haven't even made their way to Quark even though it was an industry standard. You really think there is going to be a big third party push for Publisher? Why?

 

It seems to me that a lot of people here don't get that the reason Adobe is in the position they are currently in is because the "competition" lets that get away with a lot. If the competition was a bit more competitive Adobe wouldn't be in such a dominate position. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, R C-R said:

That is exactly what they are doing by starting with a "clean slate" design approach for the Affinity apps. The Affinity range began life as a research project at Serif to study the feasibility of creating high performance graphics apps that could run when very limited RAM was available to the app. (They used old generation iPads for that reason.) The single file format is a part of that, but not the only part.

I don't care much about saving RAM I have 64gb and haven't filled that up yet (highest use was 50gb so far) and you can buy desktops that have at least twice that much ram. A 64 bit processor allows the RAM limit to be virtually limitless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KipV said:

 

Quote

SrPx I never tried to defend every merge that has happened in human history. There was one merge I specifically brought up which was with Aldus

 

My point in bringing so many cases is to make evident that most cases is a predatory operation (maybe a bit better in some cases, and when can be negotiated equal conditions, when both companies are huge. Not the case here (neither any other company of the field)) where rarely the user gets a real benefit, usually is the opposite. A lot of people got very unhappy with Aldus selling . I remember the times, and the professionals (I was a young newbie, at least in design, when Aldus freehand 1 saw the light) reaction. Not only with Freehand, also with Pagemaker. What should not be left aside is that when a merge is produced by a HUGE monster like Adobe is, and a very little fish like Serif is (no matter that is quite efficient, we're talking here about massive power), what tends to happen is that whatever advantages and personality brought by the little fish will disappear, for ever and for the users. And back to the monopoly disadvantages, again.  On the other side, the existence of Affinity, and I emphasize, its independence and non merging with the giant, is indeed a great thing for Adobe users, too!. Just as AMD Ryzen, the new processors line has pushed intel to wake up from their usual comfortable pace in releases and etc, and so, the users are getting now an intel six core (some of the Coffee lake line) a bit sooner than surely was planned (finally six cores at  mainstream price, while probably Intel would have preferred to milk the thing a bit more with more 4 core models) , and well, care a bit more, fight a bit more for maintaining their users, as in front of them they had -still do- very good machines specially for content creation, even if they are not as good in games. At a very nice price a 8 cores and 16 threads processor (Ryzen 7 1700), while anything even 6 cores was till yesterday really expensive in Intel side. This is important specially for video editing and 3D rendering (I know by experience). And in general, great for heavy multitasking (a case for most professionals, imo).

 

Maybe the main aspect/matter here is that you believe that a merge with Adobe would be all sweet and dandy for Serif. I strongly doubt it, history tells you this. Specially with Adobe's history. You'll only get Adobe back to its calmed state, totally alone in the field, (the other competitors kind of found a certain niche, since a while) without  -almost- any competition, again. Of course, unless this is exactly what is desired. Not my case. I don't want monopolies in graphic creation tools (or at least, have sth even small to make them a lil nervous!), neither in PC machines, and indeed, while I definitely like Windows, I'd rather -said it before- would prefer  if the 3 systems were equally useful in each field. I can tell you we the users always win with that. A merge is the opposite to all of this. Plus, if you are fine in going with a merged Adobe-Serif thing (imo, is the same than saying, "just Adobe", all the way again), why don't go for Adobe CC already and be done with it ? I mean, everyone has to set own's priorities and preferences. I mean, going for Affinity's solution is by nature for wanting to avoid Adobe schemes, business model, style of doing things... 

 

I don't think plugins are totally essential, if the application could provide at some point similar functionality. And in any case, if you have extreme needs with APub or any other package, I don't see the point of wanting a merge of companies. In that case I'd just (being a freelancer I can be flexible with my specs (and gigs!), but maybe some others can't) I'd just stay in Adobe CC for a while, but even in that case, I don't see the point or advantage of desiring a merge. Au contraire, I'd just wait for APub to be ready (while using InDesign, if my needs would really require it), so to jump ship in that moment, if, as you say, only version 3 or 4 does it for you. I am a strong believer that work can be done with not the very latest cutting edge technology, though, if some brain is used in optimizing workflows, and etc (also because in my experience proved to be the case in majority of situations both in 2D and 3D fields ). But that last bit is a very personal opinion.

 

Quote

It seems to me that a lot of people here don't get that the reason Adobe is in the position they are currently in is because the "competition" lets that get away with a lot. If the competition was a bit more competitive Adobe wouldn't be in such a dominate position. 

 

If merges keep happening, there's not gonna be any competition to speak about (been so for a while till recently....) , to begin with.... And then, in matters of pricing, purchase system(er, I mean, only-renting for ever, never-owning a permanent license ever again), even lack of innovation (of which Adobe users have been complaining a lot till recently, as said, last PS version is different... coincidence? I have my theories...), we will be in the whoever the monopoly holder hands  is.... I don't love that picture, we've lived that already. Again, personal opinion.

Competitors can't give a ton of advanced features in little time because they have less resources and man power. It is not possible until companies do grow. But would never grow as an independent thing if they merge or get acquired somehow (in that case, huge one merges with a small one, the small one vanishes). A fair deal in equal conditions, such a merge with the big fish is not possible, I tell you. It has never been. Is the law of the jungle.

 


Freelance Illustrator, comic artist, graphic designer, 3D modeler, animator (2D/3D), texturer, graphics UI specialist, web designer (+ html/css), oil painter, pixel artist.

Intel Core i7 860 2.8GHz stock, 3.46GHz turbo (4C, 8T), 8 GB RAM, GTX 275 1GB, HD Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm, 32MB, 3GB/s, Intuos Pro 4 XL, NEC SpectraView 231 23", i1 Display Pro.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bits. Affinity Designer license.

Official important stuff for Windows install and Aero. |  My Aero tips. |  Old inking trick/tutorial, ported from its usage in older applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KipV said:

I don't care much about saving RAM I have 64gb and haven't filled that up yet (highest use was 50gb so far) and you can buy desktops that have at least twice that much ram. A 64 bit processor allows the RAM limit to be virtually limitless. 

Do you care about performance, about near realtime live previews, about extremely quick saves of edits to previously saved documents, about the ability to open multiple very large document files at the same time without resorting to virtual memory or scratch disks, or about the ability to run several different apps at the same time & switch between them without delays? Even if you do not care about the ability to run the Affinity apps on laptops for an extended period on a single battery charge, or working without your computer's fans ramping up & subjecting you & those around you to the annoying noise that makes, I can assure you that many users do care about one or both of those things.

 

Again, this is not just about the file format. It is also about how to take advantage of everything that format makes possible & everything else a clean slate design approach makes possible.

 

2 hours ago, KipV said:

It seems to me that a lot of people here don't get that the reason Adobe is in the position they are currently in is because the "competition" lets that get away with a lot.

It seems to me that you either do not get or do not care that Adobe's current position is what it is in large part because Adobe simply bought out the competition & killed the competing products.

verysame likes this

Affinity Photo 1.6.6; Affinity Designer 1.6.0; AP for iPad 1.6.2 (but no supported iPad -- yet!)

macOS Sierra 10.12.6; iMac (27-inch, Late 2012); 2.9GHz i5 CPU; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M; 8GB RAM 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now