Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Affinity Publisher Release Date Change!


Recommended Posts

SrPx, I think we are talking past each other. I am not saying Adobe and Serif should merge I am saying that it would be beneficial to work along side other one product companies so that Serif can at least be a medium sized fish to against Adobe the big fish. The problem in my eyes is that no one is a real competitor to Adobe just lots of small fish trying to take on the big fish but that doesn't work. I don't think Serif needs to be a massive 20 product company but if they were a 5 or 6 product company that would be at least enough to take them seriously (I am not including Serif's pre-Affinity line into that number as they said that line would be discontinued to replace it with Affinity.)

The important part about third party plug-in support is that what one person considers essential to their workflow another considers bloat. A layout company has to decide on what the basics are for most people and then provide access to third parties to provide custom solutions.

R C-R, I have no problem with my hardware at all, I have none of the issues you brought up anymore. It just whizzes along without any slow down or noise at all. Apple is just about ready to put out an iMac Pro that is significantly faster then my iMac and I already have no problem with performance of that machine at all.

Adobe didn't kill the competing products they killed some of them, most notably the bulk of Macromedia, but there is a long list of competing products out there it's just that they don't want to work together to become a serious response to Adobe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KipV said:

 

 

Quote

SrPx, I think we are talking past each other.

Believe me, not only I am trying to reply accurately, I am even trying to agree in some points... We then agree that associating with the major monopoly (top dog) would be a total stall operation, good, that's an advance,  :) . So, is mostly a proposal for the company to adhere to some other medium sized company. The issue here, or one of them.. I have been in several software developer studios. They, at least at this size, smaller or bigger, are wanting to create their own product in also their own way. Also building an IP, brand, key product. I am guessing producing something of the highest value possible before any merge would occur would be the clever thing here, and surely the only aim. So that they can sell big later, or, simply become a major competitor (as in the long run can be in this case much more benefitial , profitable than a static one pay (IMO, opposite case of a plugin, extra library/addon for an existing package)) . That, besides usually when one builds a company, one wants to make things in own way, otherwise would choose the **much** easier life (also easier than freelancing) of just getting a high salary and just obey orders, without any further responsibilities. The other way is getting the bad stuff of both worlds, imo...

Also, it is your view -please, excuse me for expressing it so, is how I perceive it-  that they need a merge or join forces with other mid/small company. Just because they have to consolidate first the two apps that have been launched, among other things, to keep the brand strong (other way would be a total sink) , that is, Affinity. or if not, they're finished, kaput, it does not mean that it is a bad road nor pace, at all....And once done that, focus on APub. Also, for you is super important to have APub now ready. but probably they have set a plan of years, like most companies do,they are just WAY more open and flexible towards their users than a lot of other companies (specially the case of Adobe) and so Photo and Designer can provide for now sells, experience for their team, user base expansion of the brand/line, platform consolidation and file format stability, etc, etc.

The same way, I believe is also very arguable that this, or any company, does really need "5 or 6 products" for anyone " to take them seriously". Sorry, I could say I agree with this, but then I'd be lying blatantly . By no means this is that way with serious, professional applications . Is nice to have it so, but not an absolute requirement. Implying that to be considered professional, their product, they have to come in form of "suites", is absolutely a very subjective and arguable statement. There are tons of amazing products and companies not doing so. Pixologic for getting the outstanding success it has (the absolute standard for all high detail modeling in triple A games in the entire world. Even while Zbrush TOTALLY has to insert in very complex game dev team workflows using very different applications and even entirely different disciplines) large sums of money in there, I can tell you, a software training or self taught skills required for absolutely every job offer out there (in game art))   . It only produced Zbrush. Now it is also producing a reduced "lite" version from the actual ZB, surely just a trimmed ZB version, often given away with low end Wacoms, to grab the low cost market, but definitely not really a full blown second, "different" application. And ZB has been there reigning for many years, and more to come. Alias was extremely respected for many years, and it was mainly producing Maya, at least for what did hit the big market. That market has a habit of doing merges, and trying to produce large suites of software is not a sign of quality (of the kind that deserve an special respect, definitely not). Corel's suite  had a pair of great applications, but for years, the other ones in the pack were not at the same level, in my opinion. Even Xara has kind of this issue.

You say you don't include the previous Serif's line of products (in a quite good number of products, very varied), as it has been discontinued. Well, a pity, as is a good example that proves this concept am trying to explain. I do respect, fully that previous line orientation. Is not worse or better than any other, is IMO just having a different target. previous line was IMO only for the advanced hobyist. But providing very good applications, none the less, and at really good price. yet though, most of us wouldn't make use of those from the older line, as in higher end stuff, you need at least some minimums, even if it wont beat the top dog, we need to "touch" certain standards, we can compensate for the tool not covering certain features ( if not too key)  that do exist,  for example, in PS or Illustrator, in certain aspects: But the tools must be professional. In that regard, I prefer like in a ratio of 100 to 1,in usability, reliability, etc,  all with a pair, just two very professional applications, than 5, 6 or more apps that I cannot use it for a too large number of clients (it targets less professional users). So, IMO, the number of apps is definitely neither a real value, here, but the quality. Even a single app can be absolute gold. I don't mind purchasing one from each company (done so since always), if I am getting more quality in each, more speed, etc.

Quote

Adobe didn't kill the competing products they killed some of them, most notably the bulk of Macromedia,

Trust me on this one : They totally killed a wonder: Aldus (and its later on "Macromedia" renamed one) Freehand. (and yep, I still hear from time to time very angry people from Fireworks, Dreamweaver, and Flash. ) This, in my book, is way, way too many as a precedent...As to take the risk.

And about going for a merge with a smaller competitor, which is probably existing a more fierce competition... wow.. can't see that very possible... Who knows, though. It'd have to be sth reaaally convenient for some magic factor. Sometimes happen, but i wouldn't bet for it. And imo, it'd be the sinking for Affinity's possibilities, (right now very bright, even if some people (not referring to you) can't see it ) really.)

About companies "not wanting" to grow ( as a result of not joining forces? ) and compete... Sorry. Again, I am trying to agree... is just that experience over the years keeps telling me the opposite about some of your statements (some, only). Any company wants to grow. To pay better salaries, to increase their staff, the company value, and mostly to "beat" its competitors ! but joining forces as you mention, sorry, but sounds a bit to well intentioned line of thought, not to the point of over optimistic, but close. Again, this is pure jungle. Or that is what I have known. In every merge, or other tactic approach, there's all sort of counter tactics and cr4p happening, so that I see it as a rare thing to happen. Seems company owners or boards, what they want is to cook their thing on their own (logically!) and almost every time I read about a merge, you research just a little bit, and discover -almost never in the press release, gotta dig a lot more- that one of the companies was really struggling, close to bankruptcy.

Also, you personally need a certain product, which you know it is complex. But a, b, or c company might find a better revenue in producing other product, or that product at their own pace and following a specific internal roadmap. And they have all their right to do it as they wish. I doubt as well they'd have "only " a small success... Quite the opposite. Even with the small resources.

Consider how these companies have not always been the greatest friends among them. happens normally among competitors. You could see even attacks from one company to another (not thinking particularly in Affinity). There are some cases, like probably staff from in Serif, who, coming from Xara, do know people from there, but that's very different from two competing companies be willing to make a merge. Plus, Xara was having its own set of problems, last time I checked. So, any merge operation (or join, etc)of this kind: pretty risky, and doubtfully beneficial (even while in a perfect world, it could be)

 

 

AD, AP and APub. V1.10.6 and V2.3 Windows 10 and Windows 11. 
Ryzen 9 3900X, 32 GB RAM,  RTX 3060 12GB, Wacom Intuos XL, Wacom L. Eizo ColorEdge CS 2420 monitor. Windows 10 Pro.
HP Omen 16-b1010ns 12700H, 32GB DDR5 (corsair), nVidia RTX 3060 6GB + Huion Kamvas 22 pen display, Windows 11 Pro.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SrPx said:

...Trust me on this one : They totally killed a wonder: Aldus (and its later on "Macromedia" renamed one) Freehand. (and yep, I still hear from time to time very angry people from Fireworks, Dreamweaver, and Flash. ) This, in my book, is way, way too many as a precedent...As to take the risk...

I recall from my time at NeXT europe subsidiary that Freehand was initially a rebranded Virtuoso version and the inventor and implementor of that software was Altsys. Then after some time Altsys licensed it to Aldus Corp as Freehand, though the rights of it (the software) still were hold by Altsys not Aldus here. Thus when Adobe aquired Aldus, Freehand (aka Virtuoso) was not part of that deal. - Later Macromedia aquired Altsys and so took their software over. Then in turn one day Adobe aquired Macromedia and so got all that stuff under their control.

BTW Xara some time ago had also been aquired by MAGIX AG, though it looks like they can still also operate under their own brand name here.

☛ Affinity Designer 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Photo 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Publisher 1.10.8 ◆ OSX El Capitan
☛ Affinity V2.3 apps ◆ MacOS Sonoma 14.2 ◆ iPad OS 17.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

 

BTW Xara some time ago had also been aquired by MAGIX AG, though it looks like they can still also operate under their own brand name here.

 

Xara was bought once (or licensed) by Corel and was sold as Corel Xara.

Windows PCs. Photo and Designer, latest non-beta versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's longer time (see here) ago and somehow seemed to have been more a marketing distribution scheme those days. - The version I use nowadays on Win is sold by MAGIX too, which I believe are actually the owners.

☛ Affinity Designer 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Photo 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Publisher 1.10.8 ◆ OSX El Capitan
☛ Affinity V2.3 apps ◆ MacOS Sonoma 14.2 ◆ iPad OS 17.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

That's longer time (see here) ago and somehow seemed to have been more a marketing distribution scheme those days. - The version I use nowadays on Win is sold by MAGIX too, which I believe are actually the owners.

 

Yes, I believe Magix owns Xara and runs it as a subsidiary company. 

 

 

Windows PCs. Photo and Designer, latest non-beta versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up until this month, Xara & Magix both sold the Xara products as well as both handled support. As of this month, Magix is the sole distributor and first-line support for Xara products. And yep, Magix bought Xara in something like 2008/2009 area if I recall.

 

Seems Xara's main focus right now is their online designer. XDP is seeing little love, though there should be an update soon with the Magix branding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not know (actually, I knew in its day, as -vaguely-  have remembered when reading your comment, but totally forgot) the whole story behind Aldus and Altsys. And yep, it was acquired by Macromedia.  I just remember well that when it stopped being called Aldus, I saw changes that I really disliked (in UI and other matters)  . When Macromedia purchased it. But most of all, when Adobe acquired it, was the worst moment. No updates -almost- and was quite..."hidden". As the intention of the whole thing seemed to be to replace it with Illustrator.(which, for design, never liked as much as Freehand). We all knew it was its end.

36 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Seems Xara's main focus right now is their online designer. XDP is seeing little love, though there should be an update soon with the Magix branding.

Indeed, I sensed that thing in their forums, I was on the verge of purchasing it (i wanted to decide for ONE vector package, to focus on it, instead of several, by that time... Today I see no issue in handling several.), but then I did read those bits (their forums were filled with a lot of upset people, at certain moment, saying not very pretty things about the software, maybe was my bad luck), and started seeing stuff about a thing called Affinity (which I knew from the past, somehow (some review or sth)... and as rare as it sounds, in the beginning I did not realize it was actually the old Serif ! (in my country (since very early times, I believe i keep a DrawPlus 4, just for the memories, in its CD envelope), tons of times DrawPlus (and several others) used to come included free with computer magazines, of course, never current versions.)).

 

AD, AP and APub. V1.10.6 and V2.3 Windows 10 and Windows 11. 
Ryzen 9 3900X, 32 GB RAM,  RTX 3060 12GB, Wacom Intuos XL, Wacom L. Eizo ColorEdge CS 2420 monitor. Windows 10 Pro.
HP Omen 16-b1010ns 12700H, 32GB DDR5 (corsair), nVidia RTX 3060 6GB + Huion Kamvas 22 pen display, Windows 11 Pro.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Xara are still the programming team behind the products they have traditionally made. So in that sense, there is no change for a decade. But, Xara has always been slow to advance their products. Still, I think XDP is the fastest application I use to get from point a to point b in drawing. But that is a personal observation.

 

But more to the point of this thread, Xara will never have a layout application no matter how long or how hard they may try. Though they conditionally compile--everything that is in XDP is conditionally compiled to create the other applications--the UI and how they are going about adding features will never support a productive workflow even if they more or less achieve things like actual master pages, variables, flesh out text styles, etc., etc. They would need to revamp the UI and I don't think that's in their blood to do.

 

I also fear this in APub as well. The UI has to approach things differently than say AD does. The UI in AD would not be an efficient layout application interface. And no matter of slight tweaking that AD UI would rectify that. So my hope is that Serif has a plan to make the APub UI efficient for layout work and is open to changing things as they come up during the beta period. And personally, I would hope that before it ever gets to beta, Serif would have taken the opportunity to consult outsiders during the initial UI design phase. My hope there is likely to have already been dashed upon the rocks of despair...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MikeW said:

I also fear this in APub as well. The UI has to approach things differently than say AD does. The UI in AD would not be an efficient layout application interface.

I wonder if that will prove to be true or if it will be more that (like some of the AD/AP UI stuff) it will just require getting used to a different way of doing some things.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V23.0 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, toltec said:

 

What is your current (or closest) ideal as a layout program ? 

 

Almost a toss up. The ideal to me would be something akin to a blending of ID & QXP. If I had to pick just one of the current layout applications I use? Likely ID. I have worked in Q since the early 1990s and there one thing I dislike compared to ID and that is how the text styles work versus ID. So much of layout revolves around text styles that I give the nod to ID insofar as how styles are implemented in it. As for the UI aspect, I like Q best. It is quicker for me to accomplish certain tasks due to Q's UI versus ID's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, R C-R said:

I wonder if that will prove to be true or if it will be more that (like some of the AD/AP UI stuff) it will just require getting used to a different way of doing some things.

 

If APub's UI is too akin to AD's it will not just be a matter of getting use to it. AD is absolutely inefficient from a long document layout perspective. That being said, there is so much more a layout application needs to do that how the rest is implemented will go a ways towards smoothing that out.

 

I mentioned text styles in my previous post to toltec. The way text styles are done in AD compared to the other layout applications I use would be most akin to how Viva Designer implements them--which is a wreck.

 

One needs to remember that if these applications are as the sales blather indicates, made for professionals, then APub cannot be successful without being able to handle layout tasks swiftly and, unfortunately, more or less like other mainstream layout applications. In a professional job shop, there is just too much bouncing between various applications. If Serif makes APub too different (i.e., keeps the AD paradigm), then job shops that use a variety of layout software such as myself simply won't use it by choice but limit its usage mostly to if a client requests its use.

 

In the personal market where choice is the user's, it almost doesn't matter what Serif does. Except, of course, from an ease of use perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, KipV said:

R C-R, I have no problem with my hardware at all, I have none of the issues you brought up anymore. It just whizzes along without any slow down or noise at all.

I guess I was not clear about this or I am misunderstanding what you are referring to. My point, such as it was, was that the "clean slate" design approach is what made it possible for the Affinity apps to avoid the various issues I mentioned -- there is no need to support a bunch of legacy stuff that eats up memory & system resources or requires complex (& often less that perfect) file format conversions for one of the apps to work with a file created in another one.

 

But this also means that if Serif/Affinity merged with some other company, there is no guarantee that any technical innovations one or the other might own could be incorporated into a common code base to improve existing or future apps of the merged company. More likely, the result would be similar to Adobe: a bunch of apps that are not fully compatible with each other.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V23.0 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I believe APub's UI will pretty much resemble that of the former PP and actual AD/AP here, since even the nowadays Affinity products took over and shared a lot UI wise with those previous Serif products here.

5a15cc50d5a86_Screenshot-2017-11-22SerifPagePlusX9review-simplybrilliantDTPsoftware.png.0efe864a97069e300921b07cea024875.png

Further from a developers point of view, I pretty much doubt that they will reinvent the wheel for certain parts here, especially when under time pressure and in order to come closer to some public release day. In other words, usually you try to reuse what you already have and what has proved to work well before in the past. So they will probably share as much as they can and renew just those things which have been conceptional weaker in the past. And since they have to keep compliance with their -among the already available apps- shared file format, they also can't include completely other things which might spoil then the interoperation here.

☛ Affinity Designer 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Photo 1.10.8 ◆ Affinity Publisher 1.10.8 ◆ OSX El Capitan
☛ Affinity V2.3 apps ◆ MacOS Sonoma 14.2 ◆ iPad OS 17.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of points getting brought up here from my last message and I don't think I have time to address them all. But I just wanted to back to the discussion about Adobe buying out the technology that would later become ID. I find it very unlikely that there is still one person on this planet that would call that a bad decision. As the first version of ID was being developed they were able to incorporate technology from Photoshop, Illustrator, etc to make a tool that would eventually overthrow the market leader. This compatibility between the apps was one of several reasons that got them to where they are.

I also I don't buy this idea that ID became the leader mainly because they bundled it in suites, There have been several apps in their suites that are no longer around today. I don't think most people were forced to use ID Adobe just kept making decisions that made sense and the competition made decisions that didn't make sense. I don't think anyone here brought up that argument but I have heard it elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi

 

I am in the process of creating some picture books (picture pages and text pages) in Pageplus x9. On occasion I also create pamphlets, and photo courses. Now reading all this about publisher I am wondering if I just should continue using PPx9 or switch to designer, or wait for publisher. I use windows 10. I am also a little afraid that if I create those things as *.ppp files I cannot convert them to either a designer or publisher file in the future.  I am not an expert. I am a pro photographer who create those things as a side activity.

 

So, I am asking for some expert opinions. Should I switch to designer, wait for publisher for windows (I can wait a few months, but not forever) or should I continue PPx9. The main activity would be picture books for either self publishing or brick and mortar publishers

 

In addition, at some point I also need to replace webplus x8

 

thank you in advance

Rudy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Use PP, try the beta of Affinity Publisher when available and see if it will meet your needs through the beta release cycle. Make a decision as to APub once you are satisfied it meets your needs. That may mean waiting after the initial release until such time as it does what is needed for your particular projects.

 

Use PP during such time as APub is developed. Once APub meets your needs, simply do your new projects in it, and if an existing PP publication needs revision, use it for those revisions or worry about porting it over and updating it in APub when it makes sense. That's what I have been doing with various applications for a long time now.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would continue with PPx9

 

Even when Publisher arrives, it will take a while before it surpasses PPx9 in features so I would suggest you buy it when it is released and gradually migrate your work over, creating new projects on it.

 

It won't really matter if old stuff is on PP as it won't suddenly stop working. I had stuff on Pagemaker years after moving to Quark and InDesign.

Windows PCs. Photo and Designer, latest non-beta versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys one thing I want to know here, will affinity publisher be able to import/open PP9 files/projects? 

If yes, then it's worth to install learn and work with it then progressively migrate to APub as it becomes mature. 

Please Serif make it possible to import/open PP9 projects/files. 

Never be the Same Again !
---
Dell Optiplex 5090 SFF
Intel Core i5-10500T @2.30GHz with 12GiB 2666MHz DDR4
Intel UHD Graphics 630 for 10th Generation
M.2 2280, 512 GB, PCIe NVMe Gen3 x4, Class 40 SSD

Windows 11 Pro x64 22H2 + LibreOffice 7.5.3

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...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.