Step and Repeat

[wonderings]

15 hours ago, FrustratedandConfused said:

i guess, i appreciate your feedback.  I do however find it very interesting when a question that is framed regarding Adobe is asked - that same attitude and position is not taken. 

What question is asked about Adobe that compares to what you asked? Indesign was not an update from a completely different app, it was from scratch just as Affinity has done with Publisher.  Think I am missing something as I am not sure what you are referring to.

[wonderings]

6 hours ago, Petar Petrenko said:

We may expect Adobe will start again to redo its trio from scratch. i don't think they are very happy what is happening here with Affinity.

I don't think Adobe is worried about Affinity. Now if Adobe's user base was dropping then yes they might look at reasons like Affinity but as far as I can tell their numbers are slowly rising. From 2017 to 2020 they grew their user base 85% for the CC. They have gone from 12 million users in 2017 to 22+ million in 2020. Not everyone is hindered by the subscription fee, it really is not all that bad for pro use. For those not making a living with the apps or just small projects here and there then yes it is cost prohibitive, but this is pro software that is vital for may businesses. 

[MikeTO]

8 hours ago, Petar Petrenko said:

We may expect Adobe will start again to redo its trio from scratch. i don't think they are very happy what is happening here with Affinity.

I doubt Adobe is planning to start over.

The original crop of 1980s page layout apps needed to be scrapped and replaced because they were written in assembler. At some point their code became too complex to maintain and and the developers couldn't wrap their head around the text composition code so with increased RAM it was easier to rewrite them in C.

The next generation of page layout apps were written in C but not in an object-oriented language such as C++/Objective C/Swift. While this code was much easier to maintain than assembler it was still crude by modern standards. For example, when you click on a text frame in an app written in an OO language, the text frame's event handler is triggered automatically, the text frame object "knows" it's been clicked on. If you write your app in just plain old C, your code will be informed only that the user clicked on a specific x/y coordinate and then your code has to figure out which of the many objects on the current page is the top-most object at that particular coordinate and what part of the object was clicked. This is a trivial example but page layout apps are so complex that at some point each company realized that rewriting in an OO language would reduce the amount of time that developers needed to debug their code.

There are few reasons to start over if your app is written in an OO language. One reason to do so would be because you want to go cross platform or add support mobile and your existing code is too platform dependent to easily port. Another reason would be because you realize that your original architecture is constraining your ability to add the features you want so it's better to start with a fresh architecture.

[daveindezmenez]

I think a function like the Step and Repeat that Quark has would not only be useful for Publisher but for Designer and Photo as well.