Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is very nice to work with and doesn't gauge you with monthly subscription fees.

For a version 1 it is very stable and has not too many quirks. 

And it's fun to use and create with it. Very intuitive for such a complex software. 

I see Apple Pages listed here.... creating even a simple document in Pages is a task comparable only to capital punishment.

Share this post


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

I see Apple Pages listed here.... creating even a simple document in Pages is a task comparable only to capital punishment.

:4_joy::4_joy::4_joy:

As a longtime Mac user, I’ve been using Pages for a rather long time. For very simple documents such as outlines, triptychs, uncomlicated brochures, I actually like it even though I never really thought of it as a "desktop publishing" platform. I’m surprised they dropped it into this mix for the article.

I own Publisher and really like it, but I haven’t had the chance to stretch my legs with it in the way I’m doing with Photo and Designer. Articles like this give me more confidence to try, though. :)

Share this post


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

Yet another article written by someone who doesn't use the software being written about as a livelihood...or is just ignorant writing comparatively.

Honestly, that wasn’t my impression. He seems very familiar with each of those products on a professional level. But maybe I misread something in his article.

At any rate, I appreciated the way he examined Publisher on its own merits rather than assume the older gorillas in the room would automatically have it beat. As a v1.0 product, Publisher has a ways to go especially for pros. However, the developers have clearly signaled where they’re headed with this entirely useful and usable product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

Honestly, that wasn’t my impression. He seems very familiar with each of those products on a professional level. But maybe I misread something in his article.

At any rate, I appreciated the way he examined Publisher on its own merits rather than assume the older gorillas in the room would automatically have it beat. As a v1.0 product, Publisher has a ways to go especially for pros. However, the developers have clearly signaled where they’re headed with this entirely useful and usable product.

It is a positive review of APub, that's for sure.

Much of everything else (excepting maybe Pages, which I've never used being a MS type of user) has factual errors mixed in with the fluffy bits which really don't say much.

I would have a hard time making a living using APub alone. Even if the work was just setting novels. 

Share this post


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

factual errors mixed in with the fluffy bits which really don't say much.

Can you mention a couple? It would help give context to what you’re describing.

Share this post


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

I would have a hard time making a living using APub alone. Even if the work was just setting novels.

Since you’re not the only one who’s said this, it raises another question: 

I can’t help but wonder if someone who was NOT as ingrained by Adobe products or Quark be OK with building a working business based solely around Publisher and its sibling products? :35_thinking:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

Since you’re not the only one who’s said this, it raises another question: 

I can’t help but wonder if someone who was NOT as ingrained by Adobe products or Quark be OK with building a working business based solely around Publisher and its sibling products? :35_thinking:

I'm (mainly) software agnostic. I do have preferences. I use, depending on the day, up to 4 layout applications. But on an average day, two layout applications are used depending upon client requirements and whether I have a choice.

It isn't about ingrained habits nor choice. It's mostly about work-flow and the speed something can be done. If APub had the same/similar work-flow/speed of working/capabilities, I would use it as a choice.

As far as building "a working business"? Any one is free to choose their tools. If initial cost is a factor and the capabilities of Affinity products meet one's goal, sure they can work for that person. At least if client needs can be met. Which often enough in a professional environment may mean turning over file formats of their choosing.

But their can be a false economy if the main reason is solely initial costs. That is, if work-flow issues hamper one's ability to move product out the door as quickly as more expensive software or stumbling to meet the design requirements due to lack of capabilities, it may not be money well spent.

Share this post


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

It isn't about ingrained habits nor choice. It's mostly about work-flow and the speed something can be done. If APub had the same/similar work-flow/speed of working/capabilities, I would use it as a choice.

You may be in the minority with that balanced view. At least in my industry as a professional photographer, it’s often/usually about what people are accustomed to, and the marketing they’re exposed to that determines their choice of tools — at least until recently Adobe got all the press pieces, all the prime real estate in ad space, and plenty of exposure on trade show floors.

But it feels as if there’s a new momentum under way for Serif and their Affinity products. I hope they’re up to making their tools amazing and not simply almost-as-good as Adobe's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ulysses said:

almost-as-good as Adobe's

It's very subiective opinion. I wholeheartly despise Photoshop and Illustrator. I'm sick every time I must do some work with them.

They are powerful but also one of most unintuitive and illogical pieces of s... oftware, worse being only Gimp ;) Not to mention bloat.

On other hand, Corel up to X6 while lacking in some areas, had quintessential UI and UX.

So for me Affinity is middle ground between those two, better than Adobe, and and comparable with Corel (here better, there worse, but overall - comparable)

9 hours ago, Ulysses said:

I can’t help but wonder if someone who was NOT as ingrained by Adobe products or Quark be OK with building a working business based solely around Publisher and its sibling products? :35_thinking:

You can build working business with Inkscape and Gimp if you really want.

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

×

Important Information

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.