Jump to content

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, grapher said:

...On the other hand, look at forum, how many people are needing this feature..... tables are just a part of it.

It has tables. Just not ones that can be part of the text flow at this point.

Even in ID and Q I most often avoid tables as much as possible. For what I make, tables can be replaced by text styles. 


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
31 minutes ago, MikeW said:

Even in ID and Q I most often avoid tables as much as possible

well ID CS6 have great engine for tables and possibilities to theme them...  Dont see why you would like to avoid it?

Share this post


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

well ID CS6 have great engine for tables and possibilities to theme them...  Dont see why you would like to avoid it?

ID's table styles are fragile (QXP's are a bit more robust). I too use them in ID when nothing other than a table will work. But I have also repaired more tables in ID than I can count over the years. Tables are something that Adobe hasn't given love to in quite some time.

However, a lot of what I see tables being used for in Word, Excel, etc., that I am handed, I can do using text styles. And so if possible (most often for what I make) I will use text styles and usually in conjunction with a database import using Em Software's data merge. This applies to if I am using ID or QXP. Or I will use Q's conditional styles, or either one's text styles using Apply Next and/or GREP styles. Here I am talking about 100s of pages. Tables and table styles just won't work well in these cases. At best a document can be painfully slow to navigate. At worst, well, it ain't pretty and my time is worth more than the headache.

Mike


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

inData is interesting piece of software, thank you for that. I havent met the problems you are describing, but its maybe because my work isnt based on data import, or such large data sets :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, grapher said:

i dont need clone. Never said that. I need professional tool :) thats huge difference. 

Why bother if you’re a Pro?

Stick with Indesign or QXP if you just now wants & need pro tools!

Affinity Publisher may be month away from release, but, in first public release it would not near compete with Indesign and QXP...

But for me and hopefully thousands and thousands of other users, it may be enough...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, ErrkaPetti said:

Why bother if you’re a Pro?
Stick with Indesign or QXP if you just now wants & need pro tools!
Affinity Publisher may be month away from release, but, in first public release it would not near compete with Indesign and QXP...

read my posts above and you will find answers..... sigh....

37 minutes ago, ErrkaPetti said:

But for me and hopefully thousands and thousands of other users, it may be enough...

Enjoy it then ! With thousands ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mac_heibu said:

Can‘t stand it any more …

Look for a company, which is able to build a fully featured publishing app within two  years. InDesign needed 20 years. Quark even more.

But: Click!

1. you cannot compare programming 20y back and today
2. read the message on serif's pages: "Professional creative software"
3. do you know PagePlus? - they state on their web, that its successor (or alternative) is affinity publisher and pagePlus is now legacy. (Its first release was... hold on, tiger, 1991 !! If you can count, its 27y of development of DTP app) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PagePlus

So, please. at least first try to get some info, before you start posting links to youtube(tm)

Share this post


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

Its first release was... hold on, tiger, 1991 !!

The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article says 1991, but everywhere else on the page it says 1990. o.O

I wonder how many people here remember Jane Louise Bishop’s iconic tiger drawing! B|


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer 1.6.5.123 • Affinity Photo 1.6.5.123 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.6.12.86 • Affinity Designer for iPad 1.6.4.45 • iOS 12.2 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@grapher if you can, please find the first versions of Quark, InDesign or even PageMaker and see what they offered at that time and how long did it take to introduce all the features Publisher has now. If you have in mind Designer and Photo together with Publisher you can see that Quark does not have such capabilities like Publisher.

For some designers that don't work with books (only magazines, flyers, brending...), Publisher's capabilities are more than enough.


Best regards,

Petar Petrenko
Typesetter, Graphic Designer, Photographer
Skopje, Makedonija

Windows 10 x64 Pro
Dell Inspiron 7559 i7
Intel Core i7-6700HQ (3.50 GHz, 6M )
16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz (8GBx2)
1TB HDD + 128 GB SSD Hard drive
UHD (3840 x 2160) Truelife LED- Backlit Touch Display
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 4GB GDDR5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, αℓƒяє∂ said:

The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article says 1991, but everywhere else on the page it says 1990. o.O

I wonder how many people here remember Jane Louise Bishop’s iconic tiger drawing! B|

yea, noticed that aswell :)

mac_heibu: How many times you think was QXP core rewritten? Do you really think that its running on core from y1987 ? No. Its constant development. And as you code, get feedback, you know what people need. And from time to time you simply rewrite even the basics. :) 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Petar Petrenko said:

@grapher if you can, please find the first versions of Quark, InDesign or even PageMaker and see what they offered at that time and how long did it take to introduce all the features Publisher has now. If you have in mind Designer and Photo together with Publisher you can see that Quark does not have such capabilities like Publisher.

For some designers that don't work with books (only magazines, flyers, brending...), Publisher's capabilities are more than enough.

Petar, pease, be so kind and read my posts. you will find my answer there... i will not explain the whole thing again and again.... 
on the other hand, if you dont mind, i would really like to know which capabilities does not QXP have, because im at the moment in decision state if i will go for QX or wait on ID6 for publisher....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, that you find yourself in a lecturing teacher‘s role: „i will not explain the whole thing again and again....(sic!)“

Ok, sir, we promise to pay more attention next time, when you give us lessons! :)

Share this post


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

...if you dont mind, i would really like to know which capabilities does not QXP...

What one application doesn't have or does have—in the sense of required or needed functionality—pretty much varies from person to person. There are a few/several functionalities found in Ventura Publisher that I would like that no modern layout software has today. And for some of the work I have done/do it really is "required" functionality. Anything else is a work-around.

No one can read your mind as to what you believe is requisite functionality. I believe the general rule applies: Download it for yourself and try to do the things you do in it. Initially, it is a very short demo period. Quark will extend that period upon request. This is the same advice I tell people wanting to switch from X application to Y application. There's no one better to judge than oneself.

If you do download the current trial, consider joining the closed FB QuarkXPress group to get questions answered, etc. If ya don't wanna do that, feel free to PM me about issues/questions.


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
1 hour ago, grapher said:

Petar, pease, be so kind and read my posts. you will find my answer there... i will not explain the whole thing again and again.... 
on the other hand, if you dont mind, i would really like to know which capabilities does not QXP have, because im at the moment in decision state if i will go for QX or wait on ID6 for publisher....

I don't wanna be rude here, but what's the point here to whining about a program (Affinity Publisher) that you think it's not enough to you?

WYSIWYG, do you remember that abbreviation? AP will be more stable, but, in the first public release it's not gonna be any new features then you see in the public beta just now (my thoughts)...

Stick with Indesign, and come back this time next year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mac_heibu - sure, you are welcome :) 

MikeW - thank you for your offer, ill take a look. On the other hand, i had nothing specific in mind, i just did some research few days ago, and did not find anything special that affinity have ontop QX so i was really curious what mac_heibu had in mind. Sadly, that part stayed without any answer.

Errka Petti - im not whining. Im not understanding how anyone with 26 y of praxis doing DTP software can release this software even as beta. thats all. Its just my opinion. And people are starting at me. Fine, i will then explain my statement. But, you can have different point of view. Again, fine, have it.  

To be honest, i dont understand what you ment by WYSIWYG when we talk about software for professional use and not some fan project.

I was looking forward to have whole my creative process in software from one single company. So simply yes, ill have to buy QX or stay with ID few years till AP grows up to meet my needs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, grapher said:

mac_heibu - sure, you are welcome :) 

MikeW - thank you for your offer, ill take a look. On the other hand, i had nothing specific in mind, i just did some research few days ago, and did not find anything special that affinity have ontop QX so i was really curious what mac_heibu had in mind. Sadly, that part stayed without any answer.

Errka Petti - im not whining. Im not understanding how anyone with 26 y of praxis doing DTP software can release this software even as beta. thats all. Its just my opinion. And people are starting at me. Fine, i will then explain my statement. But, you can have different point of view. Again, fine, have it.  

To be honest, i dont understand what you ment by WYSIWYG when we talk about software for professional use and not some fan project.

I was looking forward to have whole my creative process in software from one single company. So simply yes, ill have to buy QX or stay with ID few years till AP grows up to meet my needs.

 

Can’t still understand why you’re here in the first place?

Who pay you for that? Sometimes trolling people show up here to complain about lack of functionality on Affinity apps/programs, often seems to be people at Adobe that haven’t anything better to do then trolling around...

If you don’t like Serifs approach to building Publisher, fine, but please, do you have to make ten replies to show us your agony on Affinity Publisher?

If you don’t like Publisher or other Affinity programs/apps, stay away from this forum and join something else that can reach up to your demands...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ErrkaPetti ohoho... now im payed :) great. Didnt know that... By adobe xD omg. yes. exactly. Cmon. Does that mean that when someone does not have exact same opinion as you, than he is wrong, trolling, payed? Personal attacks are allways welcome, when people have lack of arguments.

To my "agony" posts -  Yes, maybe someone from serif will read this and maybe, they will solve the things i (well MANY people if you read trough the posts dedicated to anchoring) see crucial. I hope for it, very much. So one day ill get rid of adobe. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, grapher said:

ErrkaPetti ohoho... now im payed :) great. Didnt know that... By adobe xD omg. yes. exactly. Cmon. Does that mean that when someone does not have exact same opinion as you, than he is wrong, trolling, payed? Personal attacks are allways welcome, when people have lack of arguments.

To my "agony" posts -  Yes, maybe someone from serif will read this and maybe, they will solve the things i (well MANY people if you read trough the posts dedicated to anchoring) see crucial. I hope for it, very much. So one day ill get rid of adobe. 

 

Sometimes a good rant (my word, not yours) about this feature or that can affect direction of present or future features and/or how they work.

Serif has too few programmers for the scope of all they want to accomplish and therefore the timeline to do what they map out. I think they have had job postings for more programmers since the beginning. So while in-line, anchored and/or flowing tables may have to await a timeline wherein they can get to it, they do need to begin somewhere and do what they can to achieve certain goals. The same can be said of data merges (insert wanted/needed/have-to-have features here) someone may think are more important to them than flowing tables.

As regards QXP versus APub for myself...one of the features I "have to have" in a layout application is the tagged text (that I think I've mentioned...) import. It's simply part of my oft-used processes. It doesn't matter if I am sent a Word, RTF or ODT file, it always goes through Word and is exported from Word as a tagged text file either using my own custom set of macros or an add-in. Always. Same goes for the posters I generate for a couple hospitals. Data comes from their data base(s) and I export as tagged text to import into Q. Even if I am sent a plain text file, I use macros & scripts in my text editor to tag the text.

Master pages in Q are like/similar to ID. APub? Not so much and I cannot use APub for certain work without say a primary text frame. This list goes on. And those features are in ID and Q. But as regards purchasing a license of Q? Heck, unless your OS makes ID untenable, I would stick with it. And if that time comes, then worry about a replacement.

Anyway, this all should be fun to discuss and so to the people jumping down grapher's throat? He did start the thread and if you want to react negatively towards the person rather than discuss the issues, maybe stop reading the thread? I think it's safe to say that everyone here wants APub to be the best it can be.

Mike


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
1 minute ago, MikeW said:

Sometimes a good rant (my word, not yours) about this feature or that can affect direction of present or future features and/or how they work.

Serif has too few programmers for the scope of all they want to accomplish and therefore the timeline to do what they map out. I think they have had job postings for more programmers since the beginning. So while in-line, anchored and/or flowing tables may have to await a timeline wherein they can get to it, they do need to begin somewhere and do what they can to achieve certain goals. The same can be said of data merges (insert wanted/needed/have-to-have features here) someone may think are more important to them than flowing tables.

As regards QXP versus APub for myself...one of the features I "have to have" in a layout application is the tagged text (that I think I've mentioned...) import. It's simply part of my oft-used processes. It doesn't matter if I am sent a Word, RTF or ODT file, it always goes through Word and is exported from Word as a tagged text file either using my own custom set of macros or an add-in. Always. Same goes for the posters I generate for a couple hospitals. Data comes from their data base(s) and I export as tagged text to import into Q. Even if I am sent a plain text file, I use macros & scripts in my text editor to tag the text.

Master pages in Q are like/similar to ID. APub? Not so much and I cannot use APub for certain work without say a primary text frame. This list goes on. And those features are in ID and Q. But as regards purchasing a license of Q? Heck, unless your OS makes ID untenable, I would stick with it. And if that time comes, then worry about a replacement.

Anyway, this all should be fun to discuss and so to the people jumping down grapher's throat? He did start the thread and if you want to react negatively towards the person rather than discuss the issues, maybe stop reading the thread? I think it's safe to say that everyone here wants APub to be the best it can be.

Mike

Sadly, lack of programmers is truth. we have aswell problem finding good programmers for our android dev department :( .
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MikeW said:

As regards QXP versus APub for myself...one of the features I "have to have" in a layout application is the tagged text (that I think I've mentioned...) import. It's simply part of my oft-used processes. It doesn't matter if I am sent a Word, RTF or ODT file, it always goes through Word and is exported from Word as a tagged text file either using my own custom set of macros or an add-in. Always. Same goes for the posters I generate for a couple hospitals. Data comes from their data base(s) and I export as tagged text to import into Q. Even if I am sent a plain text file, I use macros & scripts in my text editor to tag the text.

This. Yes! 

Sadly I think we are viewed as dinosaurs.

Have to go, feel a rant bubbling up. [polite-smiley-face emoticon]


MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 10.14.4

Affinity Designer 1.6.1 | Affinity Photo 1.6.7 | Affinity Publisher beta 1.7.0.293 | Affinity Photo beta 1.7.0.120 | Affinity Designer Beta 1.7.0.9

Share this post


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

I think it's safe to say that everyone here wants APub to be the best it can be.

This is clearly visible here and it's great to see. :17_heart_eyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2018 at 1:49 PM, grapher said:

a way to flow the table over multiple pages? like when i add one more row on page one and the last row, that would otherwise be out of the page, flows to page 2 ?

+1 for this feature request. This was the second first feature I was looking for when trying to create my first non-test document with the Affinity Publisher Beta.

It would be great if you could kindly consider adding a solution for multi-page tables in a future Affinity Publisher version. This might be a harsh comment (but is meant as honest feedback in a kind way): I can't build this particular document (which contains a CV / resume like table) with Affinity Publisher without taking care of the text flow in a very manual way. I will probably revert to InDesign or even MS Word (which sucks with the Design part, but allows me to create a universal document template that will do the multi table text flow) to do the job.

Still, thank you very much for working on an affordable yet modern DTP tool that is generally meant to create multi-page documents. This will fill a big gap. I really love the product concept and am looking forward to future versions!

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

×