Jump to content

Affinity for Linux


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, wonderings said:

I mentioned that in my post. It basically comes down to cost. Cost is more than just the development time to make a port for Linux. It is support and handling a 4th OS. Affinity is not an billion dollar company and I think they have wisely put their efforts into the 3 largest user bases for what their software is used for.

If Serif did as you said and ported for Linux and only release one fix a year the user base would be furious at the lack of attention and not sure why anyone would want to settle for that.

I think I am being a realist when it comes to Affinity and Linux at the moment. I am not against a Linux version and think it would be great for all you Linux users, I just think it is not all a bed of roses as people make it out to be here. All the talk of "I would by 10 copies today!" or "I would gladly pay more..." and things of that nature are not realistic or believable and certainly not something that should be used when making a decision to support a new OS. If Linux grows then companies will begin to take notice, capitalism will find a way to make money selling you the software you want on Linux, it just may not be at the speed you want it to happen.

Smaller companies than Serif manage to support Windows, Mac and Linux without much trouble.  I'm not saying that it can done without adding additional workload on support staff, I'm just saying that nowadays, it's not as big a deal as you're making it out to be.  You don't need to be a billion dollar company to support one more commonly-used operating system.  Linux has a reputation for being difficult.  It isn't.  That way of thinking is very outdated.  Nowadays a modern Linux distro can easily pass the grandma test.

..and I wouldn't by 10 more copies of Affinity Photo on Linux today.  I'd buy 50, and yes.. I would pay more for it.  It would still save my company a lot of money over Photoshop and eliminate the need to manage Adobe subscriptions, not to mention VMware.  There's plenty of opportunity for profit in the Linux market.  Much more than typical market research would have you believe.  If professionals aren't using Linux, it's because for many of them, they simply don't have a choice.  It's irritating to constantly hear that they won't make a Linux version because there aren't enough Linux users, when the very need for the software they produce is what dictates what OS people are required to use.  I'd bet some Affinity users on WIndows or Mac would switch to Linux if that were an option for running the software.

Also, as I mentioned before, if there were to be any plan at all to expand Affinity software into cloud services, then Linux support is a must.  Mac in the cloud is currently not an option and Windows VMs in the cloud are much more expensive than Linux VMs while offering no significant advantage and in fact do not perform as well.  With remote work becoming the norm, I need to be able to scale desktops into cloud virtual machines and for us, that means LINUX.

You're right about the capitalism thing.  Either Affinity captures the creative pro Linux market, or somebody else will.  It's inevitable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, justajeffy said:

Smaller companies than Serif manage to support Windows, Mac and Linux without much trouble.  I'm not saying that it can done without adding additional workload on support staff, I'm just saying that nowadays, it's not as big a deal as you're making it out to be.  You don't need to be a billion dollar company to support one more commonly-used operating system.  Linux has a reputation for being difficult.  It isn't.  That way of thinking is very outdated.  Nowadays a modern Linux distro can easily pass the grandma test.

..and I wouldn't by 10 more copies of Affinity Photo on Linux today.  I'd buy 50, and yes.. I would pay more for it.  It would still save my company a lot of money over Photoshop and eliminate the need to manage Adobe subscriptions, not to mention VMware.  There's plenty of opportunity for profit in the Linux market.  Much more than typical market research would have you believe.  If professionals aren't using Linux, it's because for many of them, they simply don't have a choice.  It's irritating to constantly hear that they won't make a Linux version because there aren't enough Linux users, when the very need for the software they produce is what dictates what OS people are required to use.  I'd bet some Affinity users on WIndows or Mac would switch to Linux if that were an option for running the software.

Also, as I mentioned before, if there were to be any plan at all to expand Affinity software into cloud services, then Linux support is a must.  Mac in the cloud is currently not an option and Windows VMs in the cloud are much more expensive than Linux VMs while offering no significant advantage and in fact do not perform as well.  With remote work becoming the norm, I need to be able to scale desktops into cloud virtual machines and for us, that means LINUX.

You're right about the capitalism thing.  Either Affinity captures the creative pro Linux market, or somebody else will.  It's inevitable.

 

No 2 businesses are alike and again they may not see a return on investment in Linux at the moment. Adobe didn't (my assumption at least as to why they stopped looking into Linux versions of their apps) didn't seem to think there was value at the moment in Linux. That may be them not having enough vision or just a honest assessment of the potential in the Linux community. It is a small community that is filled with very passionate users who I think are sometimes blinded to the realities. I know it was that way with Mac users for a long time and still may be in some communities though I don't think it is quite so rabid these days. 

A lot of people in this thread have said they would buy XXX copies, and while it might be true for some it might not be for others. You cannot base your business decisions on that.  How many times I have heard from clients trying to get a better deal by promising they would bring their buddy who owns 16 stores, or some other tale that if you do this for me I will bring you amazing sales. That might be true with some of them, I have taken a gamble on a few, some of have paid off some have not. 

With cloud software, do you need to make something specific for Linux? I assumed if the app was running in the cloud via a browser you could pretty much access it with any browser that it supports and it was not tied down to an OS? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, wonderings said:

With cloud software, do you need to make something specific for Linux? I assumed if the app was running in the cloud via a browser you could pretty much access it with any browser that it supports and it was not tied down to an OS? 

well I think he means in regards to the server's OS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wonderings said:

No 2 businesses are alike and again they may not see a return on investment in Linux at the moment. Adobe didn't (my assumption at least as to why they stopped looking into Linux versions of their apps) didn't seem to think there was value at the moment in Linux. That may be them not having enough vision or just a honest assessment of the potential in the Linux community. It is a small community that is filled with very passionate users who I think are sometimes blinded to the realities. I know it was that way with Mac users for a long time and still may be in some communities though I don't think it is quite so rabid these days. 

Which Adobe apps on Linux are you talking about?  Not Photoshop, for sure.  That was never on Linux.  Some time ago it was available for Irix users on SGI machines, but never Linux.  Did they ever have any paid software on Linux?  I can't remember.  Oh, there is Substance Painter.  They own Substance now, and we use the Linux versions of Substance apps every day.  I bought two more subscriptions to run the Linux version just last month.

I'm not blinded to anything.  I'm well aware of the size of the Linux "community" that is often referred to in a sort of patronizing way. I'm not just some passionate Linux user.  In fact, I'm typing this from my Windows desktop at the moment.  I'm a professional with a strong business need for software like this on Linux.  That need isn't going away.  It's growing.

The reality is, that profit potential within a given market usually begins by evaluating the overall size of that market.  In this case, that's a very flawed analysis, given that the market size is determined by the applications that are available to run on it.  In other words, one of the reasons the Windows user base is so large is that people have a need for certain applications which currently only run on Windows!  They don't have a choice.  Give them a choice to run on a different platform, and many of them will make that switch. 

 

Quote

A lot of people in this thread have said they would buy XXX copies, and while it might be true for some it might not be for others. You cannot base your business decisions on that.  How many times I have heard from clients trying to get a better deal by promising they would bring their buddy who owns 16 stores, or some other tale that if you do this for me I will bring you amazing sales. That might be true with some of them, I have taken a gamble on a few, some of have paid off some have not. 

So let us put our money where our mouth is.  If only they would open up to pre-orders or maybe use something like Kickstarter for launching a Linux version.  They've said that they don't want to use crowdsourcing, but that's just silly to me.  What a better way to get-prefunded for the Linux port than to have the customers pay for it up front.  If the campaign doesn't succeed, the Linux port doesn't happen and all the naysayers can say I told you so.

 

Quote

With cloud software, do you need to make something specific for Linux? I assumed if the app was running in the cloud via a browser you could pretty much access it with any browser that it supports and it was not tied down to an OS? 

The browser on the client side merely provides a remote view of the software running in the cloud.  The applications run in a virtual machine in the cloud and that virtual machine is running an operating system like Linux.  Almost always Linux, unless you're the kind of person who enjoys paying twice as much for no particularly good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, justajeffy said:

Which Adobe apps on Linux are you talking about?  Not Photoshop, for sure.  That was never on Linux.  Some time ago it was available for Irix users on SGI machines, but never Linux.  Did they ever have any paid software on Linux?  I can't remember.  Oh, there is Substance Painter.  They own Substance now, and we use the Linux versions of Substance apps every day.  I bought two more subscriptions to run the Linux version just last month.

I'm not blinded to anything.  I'm well aware of the size of the Linux "community" that is often referred to in a sort of patronizing way. I'm not just some passionate Linux user.  In fact, I'm typing this from my Windows desktop at the moment.  I'm a professional with a strong business need for software like this on Linux.  That need isn't going away.  It's growing.

The reality is, that profit potential within a given market usually begins by evaluating the overall size of that market.  In this case, that's a very flawed analysis, given that the market size is determined by the applications that are available to run on it.  In other words, one of the reasons the Windows user base is so large is that people have a need for certain applications which currently only run on Windows!  They don't have a choice.  Give them a choice to run on a different platform, and many of them will make that switch. 

 

So let us put our money where our mouth is.  If only they would open up to pre-orders or maybe use something like Kickstarter for launching a Linux version.  They've said that they don't want to use crowdsourcing, but that's just silly to me.  What a better way to get-prefunded for the Linux port than to have the customers pay for it up front.  If the campaign doesn't succeed, the Linux port doesn't happen and all the naysayers can say I told you so.

 

The browser on the client side merely provides a remote view of the software running in the cloud.  The applications run in a virtual machine in the cloud and that virtual machine is running an operating system like Linux.  Almost always Linux, unless you're the kind of person who enjoys paying twice as much for no particularly good reason.

Sorry was unclear on the Adobe and Linux topic. Adobe looked into porting their software for Linux, in the end they opted not too without a reasons. My assumption is they did not see a market there yet to warrant the expense. 

If the need is growing someone will step in and fill that need eventually, just may not be on the timeline people want.

Linux growing with more apps is a chicken and the egg scenario and not a guarantee that if there are more apps on Linux that people will flock to the OS in droves. It is not up to Affinity or Adobe or anyone else to develop and make things grow for Linux, their focus is on profits and recurring revenue. You may be right that there is big potential in Linux, or you could be wrong as well. Serif has made it clear they are not pursuing it at the moment though as they are focused on the current platforms they are on now. Without knowing what life is like behind the scene in that company it really is difficult to try and tell them what they should be doing. Adding another OS to support is not a simple thing, it may not be difficult to get it going but it is a new OS with potentially new problems to work on and update alongside Mac, Windows, iPad OS.

Serif has answered you question about kickstarter in posts back. I don't think any of the "naysayers" are looking to be say "I told you so". I think it would be great to have more options for the software which in turn gives more option and choice for the end user. I question how big the market is on Linux now, it is a small user base and an even smaller user base who would use graphic programs like Photo, Designer and Publisher. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uggh.  Seriously, I'm so sick and tired of hearing the "small user base" argument.  It's so frustrating.  The small VFX company I work for has in the past 4-5 years spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars on Linux software.  Almost entirely pro graphics related.  (eg Autodesk Maya, Foundry Nuke, and more...)

We may be a small user base, but we are BIG SPENDERS.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, justajeffy said:

Uggh.  Seriously, I'm so sick and tired of hearing the "small user base" argument.  It's so frustrating.  The small VFX company I work for has in the past 4-5 years spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars on Linux software.  Almost entirely pro graphics related.  (eg Autodesk Maya, Foundry Nuke, and more...)

We may be a small user base, but we are BIG SPENDERS.

 

exactly, according to the developers of the video editor Lightworks, linux is much more used in hollywood than windows and also black & magic would not do a version of davinci resolves for linux

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2014 at 4:17 PM, Andy Somerfield said:

Hi,

 

Affinity is about, amongst other things, the "experience" of designing things.. 60fps, fluid navigation and editing of documents is at the heart of what we do.

 

WINE is a wonderful project, but I don't think it would work for Affinity - performance is close to native, but support for things like our use of OpenGL / input interaction would take some work. It also assumes a Windows build to map onto WINE libs - which we don't have. You have more chance of convincing us to make a native Linux version than a WINE one..

 

I won't rule out making a Linux version of Affinity, but I need someone to show me a combination of distro, desktop topology and deployment (paid) platform where we would recoup our development costs. If someone can show me that, I'll be willing to talk some more about it all..

 

Hope this helps,

 

AndyS

you could ask Editshare developer of Lightworks and Black & Magic that has editing software for linux, I think they would not spend resources for now developing for linux

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2020 at 3:25 PM, justajeffy said:

Smaller companies than Serif manage to support Windows, Mac and Linux without much trouble.  I'm not saying that it can done without adding additional workload on support staff, I'm just saying that nowadays, it's not as big a deal as you're making it out to be.  You don't need to be a billion dollar company to support one more commonly-used operating system.  Linux has a reputation for being difficult.  It isn't.  That way of thinking is very outdated.  Nowadays a modern Linux distro can easily pass the grandma test.

..and I wouldn't by 10 more copies of Affinity Photo on Linux today.  I'd buy 50, and yes.. I would pay more for it.  It would still save my company a lot of money over Photoshop and eliminate the need to manage Adobe subscriptions, not to mention VMware.  There's plenty of opportunity for profit in the Linux market.  Much more than typical market research would have you believe.  If professionals aren't using Linux, it's because for many of them, they simply don't have a choice.  It's irritating to constantly hear that they won't make a Linux version because there aren't enough Linux users, when the very need for the software they produce is what dictates what OS people are required to use.  I'd bet some Affinity users on WIndows or Mac would switch to Linux if that were an option for running the software.

Also, as I mentioned before, if there were to be any plan at all to expand Affinity software into cloud services, then Linux support is a must.  Mac in the cloud is currently not an option and Windows VMs in the cloud are much more expensive than Linux VMs while offering no significant advantage and in fact do not perform as well.  With remote work becoming the norm, I need to be able to scale desktops into cloud virtual machines and for us, that means LINUX.

You're right about the capitalism thing.  Either Affinity captures the creative pro Linux market, or somebody else will.  It's inevitable.

 

The above is nearly word for word what I was going to come here and post.  I'll add: 

Serif,

The majority of people running linux are developer types, and even if they're just exclusively programmers (don't create media of their own), they usually end up having to deal with files handed to them from designers, and sometimes have to massage the media (images, video, and whatever adobe crap) on the fly for some small modification to cram it into the application.  So you could pretty much look at the percentage of linux share in the OS desktop market as a mostly developers; mostly fertile ground. (Hell, given the lack of adobe support, not even just "fertile", but "virgin"!) 

In other words you shouldn't be going by overall OS market share and multiplying by the same fraction to calculate potential customers to each OS. Most typical windows or macos users aren't the type that would buy your products, right, not everyone wants to edit media. You should be going by the percentage of users of each OS that would likely buy, and if you do, the bar charts resolve in a different way. 

So throw in  numbers here, for windows users call it, I don't know (I have no idea) but call it 10% use adobe software.  Macos, Maybe what 20% use adobe software since mac users do visual stuff. (I'm throwing these stupid numbers out as examples, I bet you have legitimate metrics, but let's just use those to contrast each other.)  

Well, what's the percentage of likely linux users (mostly developers) for your product (or adobe products)? I'm gonna say that the number is like 80%.    And then when calculating the potential of the linux market you add a third factor; the fact that adobe products aren't available in linux. (Which isn't there in the MacOS and Windows' calculations.) You get it now?  I'm not saying linux will be a *bigger* market, I'm saying that you're looking at this unilaterally when you should be looking multilaterally. 

Lastly I know you don't like anecdotes but before I finally fully jumped from windows to ubuntu 5 years ago, I made a list of what applications I'd need.  There were only four holdouts that I couldn't get for linux, three of them were adobe products. Photoshop, illustrator, premiere.   If it hadn't been for them I would've switched 10 years ago instead of 5. 

In other words, wag the dog, the linux share of the OS market might be bigger if serif would support linux! Your mind blown. :o 

Oh wait- here's the killer:  When I  installed windows in a Virtualbox (which is a pain and drains resources), am I going to install affinity stuff or pirate adobe?  I'm sorry but obviously I'd pirate adobe.  Whereas, if I could avoid the headache and sloth of virtualbox and just buy your stuff I'd totally do it. 

 

Edited by Bog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/16/2014 at 9:29 PM, TonyB said:

We would only make a Linux version if we were confident we would recoup the $500,000 it would cost us to build it.

I didn't read 32 pages of the discussion so maybe this has been requested before but if you did have the intention to bring this to life, you could just do a fundraising or a pay-before-model of the linux version. I would be happy to pay my licence for the linux version now, even though i would have to wait an entire year to use it. And i'm sure i am not the only one who would pay for being able to switch to linux..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2020 at 4:03 PM, jere00815 said:

I didn't read 32 pages of the discussion so maybe this has been requested before but if you did have the intention to bring this to life, you could just do a fundraising or a pay-before-model of the linux version. I would be happy to pay my licence for the linux version now, even though i would have to wait an entire year to use it. And i'm sure i am not the only one who would pay for being able to switch to linux..

It might've been worth it to RTFT before posting; the idea of doing crowd-funding for a private company is absurd. This isn't like crowdfunding an open source project.  Why the hell would we be paying for a private company (as in not open source) to make a profit from funding their development?  That makes no sense. 

Here: would you do a "pay-before-model fundraising" for a Microsoft product? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Bog said:

It might've been worth it to RTFT before posting; the idea of doing crowd-funding for a private company is absurd. This isn't like crowdfunding an open source project.  Why the hell would we be paying for a private company (as in not open source) to make a profit from funding their development?  That makes no sense. 

Here: would you do a "pay-before-model fundraising" for a Microsoft product? 

I have found this strange as well and there have been many posts with people saying they are willing to pay more for a Linux version. I would be furious if they released an app for Windows and then charged more for the Mac version that is the exact same thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Bog said:

Here: would you do a "pay-before-model fundraising" for a Microsoft product? 

Yes, if that's what it took to get the product I want created and released for me to use.  That's the whole point of sites like Kickstarter.  What you describe is not unprecedented.  Consider that a successful game company like Double Fine famously ran a highly-successful Kickstarter campaign to raise funds for a game that would not have been created otherwise.  Or how very recently, CoolerMaster completed a Kickstart campaign to fund a case for the Raspberry Pi.  Both bigger companies than Affinity, I think.  It allows consumers and businesses to put our money where our mouth is, so to speak.  It lets us vote with our dollars to help companies (or convince them) to create and release the products that we want.  It also allows small companies to venture forth with an idea without assuming great financial risk.  If it turns out that people don't want it, then the crowdsourcing campaign will fail and the company is under no obligation to continue with the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, wonderings said:

I have found this strange as well and there have been many posts with people saying they are willing to pay more for a Linux version. I would be furious if they released an app for Windows and then charged more for the Mac version that is the exact same thing. 

Creative Pro Linux customers have become somewhat accustomed to this practice.  It's less common nowadays, but some companies used to sell more for Linux versions of their software.  I am absolutely willing to pay more for a Linux version of Affinity Photo because I know that even at the increased cost, it'll still save my company money over Photoshop.  For that matter, they could double the cost of the software for ALL platforms and, as upsetting as that would be, most would probably STILL consider it to be a great deal compared to the ongoing cost of Photoshop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, justajeffy said:

Yes, if that's what it took to get the product I want created and released for me to use.  That's the whole point of sites like Kickstarter.  What you describe is not unprecedented.  Consider that a successful game company like Double Fine famously ran a highly-successful Kickstarter campaign to raise funds for a game that would not have been created otherwise.  Or how very recently, CoolerMaster completed a Kickstart campaign to fund a case for the Raspberry Pi.  Both bigger companies than Affinity, I think.  It allows consumers and businesses to put our money where our mouth is, so to speak.  It lets us vote with our dollars to help companies (or convince them) to create and release the products that we want.  It also allows small companies to venture forth with an idea without assuming great financial risk.  If it turns out that people don't want it, then the crowdsourcing campaign will fail and the company is under no obligation to continue with the idea.

I don't like the logic of Coolermaster for doing that or anyone who supported it (or the concept of it).  I'd pay money to *subtract* from their kickstarter fund as punishment for insulting us.   

Ok, Imagine if Microsoft started a gofundme project.  How completely insane would that be?  You'd pitch in? 

Kickstarter and gofundme are for small endeavors to get off the ground. (And/or individuals with financial problems that are of no fault of the their own.)  

As for "voting with our dollars" haha, no the way we "vote with our dollars" is whether or not we buy a product. Not give free money for a company to make it. 

What you're advocating it letting companies push the burden of risk onto the consumer.  No, that's no how business works. The producer has the burden.  It's called capitalism. "ROI".   

EDIT: I took out the word "silly" apparently that's like "extreme" or something.  

bog  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Chill guys, Serif are not about to start this just because of an argument on the rights or wrongs of other company funding processes, so please cool your collective heels.

Patrick Connor
Serif Europe Ltd

"There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man. True nobility lies in being superior to your previous self."  W. L. Sheldon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bog said:

Such silly logic to support Coolermaster for doing that or anyone who supported it (or the concept of it).  I'd pay money to *subtract* from their kickstarter fund as punishment for insulting us.   Ok, Imagine if Microsoft started a gofundme project.  How completely insane would that be?  You'd pitch in? 
Kickstarter and gofundme are for small endeavors to get off the ground. (And/or individuals with financial problems that are of no fault of the their own.)  

As for "voting with our dollars" haha, no the way we "vote with our dollars" is whether or not we buy a product. Not give free money for a company to make it. 

What you're advocating it lett companies push the burden of risk onto the consumer.  No, that's no how business works. The producer has the burden.  It's called capitalis

 

m.  
 

Do you think maybe you could find a way to argue your points without being such an incredible dick about it?  Maybe add some actual value to the conversation instead of this childish "haha evry1 is wrong.  i'm smrt and yerall teh stoopid" attitude that you're demonstrating here.

... but yeah, thanks for telling me how business works.  I'm learning so much.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, justajeffy said:

Do you think maybe you could find a way to argue your points without being such an incredible dick about it?  Maybe add some actual value to the conversation instead of this childish "haha evry1 is wrong.  i'm smrt and yerall teh stoopid" attitude that you're demonstrating here.

... but yeah, thanks for telling me how business works.  I'm learning so much.

 

I'll appeal to the audience does anyone else see it that way?   Or is he copping out of a losing argument and not addressing my points whatsoever? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

last warning before a 3 day suspension... this is not Twitter. play nice

Patrick Connor
Serif Europe Ltd

"There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man. True nobility lies in being superior to your previous self."  W. L. Sheldon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

It is not only you in this conversation I am referring to any participants, but you are the one calling other peoples ideas stupid and persistently belittling their suggestions, when all they are trying to do is achieve some progress towards a Linux version.

Patrick Connor
Serif Europe Ltd

"There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man. True nobility lies in being superior to your previous self."  W. L. Sheldon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patrick Connor said:

It is not only you in this conversation I am referring to any participants, but you are the one calling other peoples ideas stupid and persistently belittling their suggestions, when all they are trying to do is achieve some progress towards a Linux version.

I didn't call anyone's idea "stupid".  Oh wait- "silly", right?  Ok I'll edit that and take out "silly"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wonderings said:

I would be furious if they released an app for Windows and then charged more for the Mac version that is the exact same thing. 

What if it was the other way around? Would you notice? As @justajeffy said. This is not uncommon.

I vividly remember the video compositor called Shake. For years, Shake was $2999 for Mac OS X and $4999 for Linux. Some time after Apple bought Shake, the price for OS X dropped to $499 while the price for Linux stayed at $4999.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 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.