XLS for features and ideas - Megathread

[VectorStyler]

@Daniel said in XLS for features and ideas - Mega Thread:

On-screen snapping points for common page and screen sizes along with labels, when resizing canvas.

Something similar exists in VS with Size References. You can mark objects with Object -> Size Reference, and then enable "Snap to Size References". Then when resizing or drawing (objects or artboards), their size will snap to the size reference object sizes.

[Subpath]

@Daniel

Just wanted to thank you for your suggestions and ideas.
I read here every now and then.

Even though I only understand 5%, let's say 10%, of everything,
I've never delved particularly deeply into UI design. Instead,
I mostly solved problems with workarounds using scripts (Autohot Key).

I still find the suggestions and the exchange interesting.
I'm always happy to learn something new.

[Daniel]

@VectorStyler: I figured out after I wrote the comment. Now it's a matter of consolidating it all together into a single place, contextually, clearly. Please let me know if you ever need any help thinking this through. I'm very invested in this. By the way, I had the opportunity to speak to the developers of Graphite.rs, who're working on something very similar. It's in the next alpha release, actually. It's a FOSS project.

[Daniel]

@Subpath: You're welcome, and I'll have to confess that I have my own selfish reasons too.

I work for a large creative agency with a huge design team (300 members + 217 contractors); and me and my mates were really pissed at how shitty Adobe was. As a product, as a program, as a company. We hate it. We coined a phrase to express our disgust, derived from Rome, "Adobe Delenda Est". It's a paraphrase of the phrase used by Cato the Elder when he was campaigning for a war against Carthage, Carthago Delenda Est. Carthage Must Be Destroyed! We went on a wild goose chase, studying the UX of literally every software that we could get our hands on, vector, photo editing, 3D, animation, DTP, et al. We also spoke to dozens of illustrators, photographers, designers, architects, engineers, academics. Ran focus groups to discuss issues.

Here's just a small screen grab of a 400-page long file. We then whittled it down to just 9 terms, and 9 simple, If-Then, statements. It took us 8 months of work. We then created a simple matrix to apply the logic. I prefaced it with a manifesto. Here it is: If you wish to read. It's a draft. It's just 1 page. It tells you exactly why I'm doing this. I effin' refuse to settle for shitty design tools. If a carpenter, a plumber, won't settle for shitty hammer or wrench, why should we? But the options are so few.

Of all the vector software we studied, VS has the greatest potential to live up to our war cry, "Adobe Must Be Destroyed". But it cannot happen unless the UI/UX challenges are addressed. That's why I'm doing this.

We were really, really, really banking on another British software, until they effin' sold out to an Australian company, which shall remain unnamed. They've signalled clearly where their focus is, amateur hobbyists, who don't bill their hours to clients, who have the luxury of workarounds.

0_1742988490004_Tool Simplification Matrix.pdf

[lilith]

@Daniel said in XLS for features and ideas - Mega Thread:

@Subpath: You're welcome, and I'll have to confess that I have my own selfish reasons too.

I work for a large creative agency with a huge design team (300 members + 217 contractors); and me and my mates were really pissed at how shitty Adobe was. As a product, as a program, as a company. We hate it. We coined a phrase to express our disgust, derived from Rome, "Adobe Delenda Est". It's a paraphrase of the phrase used by Cato the Elder when he was campaigning for a war against Carthage, Carthago Delenda Est. Carthage Must Be Destroyed! We went on a wild goose chase, studying the UX of literally every software that we could get our hands on, vector, photo editing, 3D, animation, DTP, et al. We also spoke to dozens of illustrators, photographers, designers, architects, engineers, academics. Ran focus groups to discuss issues.

Here's just a small screen grab of a 400-page long file. We then whittled it down to just 9 terms, and 9 simple, If-Then, statements. It took us 8 months of work. We then created a simple matrix to apply the logic. I prefaced it with a manifesto. Here it is: If you wish to read. It's a draft. It's just 1 page. It tells you exactly why I'm doing this. I effin' refuse to settle for shitty design tools. If a carpenter, a plumber, won't settle for shitty hammer or wrench, why should we? But the options are so few.

Of all the vector software we studied, VS has the greatest potential to live up to our war cry, "Adobe Must Be Destroyed". But it cannot happen unless the UI/UX challenges are addressed. That's why I'm doing this.

We were really, really, really banking on another British software, until they effin' sold out to an Australian company, which shall remain unnamed. They've signalled clearly where their focus is, amateur hobbyists, who don't bill their hours to clients, who have the luxury of workarounds.

0_1742988490004_Tool Simplification Matrix.pdf

What's in your picture? It's too blurry to see clearly

[Daniel]

@lilith: Sorry. Forum won't let me attach a larger image. It's screenshots of UI from various tools. Labelled and categorised.

[lilith]

@Daniel said in XLS for features and ideas - Mega Thread:

@lilith: Sorry. Forum won't let me attach a larger image. It's screenshots of UI from various tools. Labelled and categorised.

Perhaps you can put the pictures on a cloud drive and share the link

[Daniel]

@lilith: I'd have to consult with other authors. It's not just my file. So when I get permission, I can give you the whole file. They might not want to share it as it contains a lot of attributed quotes from various people.

[Daniel]

@VectorStyler: But how would I set size references for sizes that don't exist on canvas. For instance, if I wanted to resize a canvas from Android to A4? How would I do this by simply changing the size of the canvas with corner handles?

[Ingolf]

@Daniel

Ohhh, it was just a misunderstood term. Not a feature. UX copywriting – yeah, I definitely know what that is. I work with a handful of UX designers who take our products through a thorough UX design phase before a single end user even gets near them.

I was in my own little world and, unbelievably, thinking about something like a copy-paste-style feature in export persona. I probably just should’ve gone to bed earlier.

But yes, UX and UX design, as you wrote – starting with collected observations and then designing from a holistic perspective across the whole program, not in bits and pieces based on ad-hoc customer feedback.

Affinity is beyond saving – they apparently want to play UX designers themselves, or maybe no UX designers want to work there. Respecting others’ specialties – that’s the first step on the road to being a professional.

[Daniel]

@Ingolf: There are so many inconsistencies in the way the program is designed, it is breathtaking. They've let their commercial agenda ruin their UX. Consider this: You can't add multiple artboards directly in Affinity Photo. You have to switch to Affinity Designer and come back. Mixer brush is unavailable in Pixel Persona within Designer. Live Filters are available through Publisher when you click into Affinity Photo persona (is that what it is called?), but not when you switch to Pixel Persona within Designer. Export Persona is unavailable in Affinity Photo and Publisher. At first, I was really cofused. Then it dawned on me. If you make everything available in the same program, you're screwed commercially. Contrary to what fanboys say, it does not have to be bloated. Xara and PL both belie that argument.

So, they decided to bugger their UX for the sake of making it commercially viable.

By the way, Find and Replace in Publisher is an unwashed, unsalvagable mess.

I discovered this about myself recently: I can't say or think the word persona, without grimacing and violently gritting my teeth. It is such poor copywriting.

Persona: Meaning: "The particular type of character that a person seems to have and that is often different from their real or private character." So, if I got this right, Affinity Designer has a private life that we are not privy to.

[Subpath]

@Daniel said in XLS for features and ideas - Mega Thread:

You're welcome, and I'll have to confess that I have my own selfish reasons too.

No problem with that, who isn't?

Your Research looks very impressive and from the research you've
done, it's easy to understand how much you dislike Adobe.

When I started with vector graphics a while ago, I tried Adobe Illustrator,
but didn't like it the first time. So I opted for Xara and CorelDraw. I've
never looked back.

What I like about VectorStyler is the many ways one can combine
things. That's why I sometimes feel like I'm in a research lab
researching highly advanced alien technology. Because it's often a bit
beyond my comprehension of what the developer has come up with.
But I love it.

[Ingolf]

@Daniel said in XLS for features and ideas - Mega Thread:

@Ingolf: There are so many inconsistencies in the way the program is designed, it is breathtaking. They've let their commercial agenda ruin their UX. Consider this: You can't add multiple artboards directly in Affinity Photo. You have to switch to Affinity Designer and come back. Mixer brush is unavailable in Pixel Persona within Designer. Live Filters are available through Publisher when you click into Affinity Photo persona (is that what it is called?), but not when you switch to Pixel Persona within Designer. Export Persona is unavailable in Affinity Photo and Publisher. At first, I was really cofused. Then it dawned on me. If you make everything available in the same program, you're screwed commercially. Contrary to what fanboys say, it does not have to be bloated. Xara and PL both belie that argument.

So, they decided to bugger their UX for the sake of making it commercially viable.

By the way, Find and Replace in Publisher is an unwashed, unsalvagable mess.

I discovered this about myself recently: I can't say or think the word persona, without grimacing and violently gritting my teeth. It is such poor copywriting.

Persona: Meaning: "The particular type of character that a person seems to have and that is often different from their real or private character." So, if I got this right, Affinity Designer has a private life that we are not privy to.

Affinity reeks of being created by old-school developers and managers who were blinded by their initial success but never took usability or professional expertise seriously. On top of everything you and many others have already described.

I honestly think the company is an insult. Much of their product line consists of licensed or open-source components they've cobbled together without any real understanding of customer workflows — especially those of professional users. They have the weakest vector algorithms on the market. They were even releasing pre-2000-style software in 2014 and beyond, completely missing the trends of the time. And then there are their iPad versions. They clearly have no idea how a proper tablet app should function.

On top of that, they use a hypersensitive, old-fashioned, serialized file format that can’t be reliably saved to external hard drives or cloud-shared folders without the files corrupting or self-destructing.

They’ve obviously hit a sweet spot in terms of price and features, but their stubborn refusal to learn from mistakes or hire the right expertise has effectively ensured they missed their chance to create stable, modern software and truly capitalize on their potential. The company's record-breaking out-of-touch fanboys in their forum and their reluctance to get out and engage with the market haven't helped.

I refuse to believe they have a UX designer — or even someone who's taken a night course in the subject. Much of it feels clunky and unserious, and the company’s forum replies are remarkably off the mark.

I honestly don’t think Canva truly understands what they’ve bought — or maybe they have big plans to tear it all down and rebuild it from scratch.

[Daniel]

@Ingolf: agreed. To every word.

[Daniel]

@Subpath: Thank you. That's not just mine. It's a lot of other people who worked on it. People who are more experienced and talented than me.

Oh trust me when I say this, Corel (now Alludo) are just as evil, evil as they come. They tried to kill Xara in the crib by buying the marketing rights and refusing to promote it. Charles Moir had enough wits about him to keep the source code to himself so he managed to get out of the contract eventually. That's why Xara never took off.
Now, they're doing to Gravit what Adobe did to FreeHand. Slowly degrading it. I assure you it will be gone within this decade. Gravit is a very good online app. German. Straightfoward. No frills. Robust. That's Corel bought it. They sensed a threat.

[Subpath]

@Daniel

I know that Corel owned Xara for a while and integrated its
features into CorelDRAW. I know Corel well enough not to expect
anything good from them.

When I decided to go with CorelDRAW, they offered me a
reasonable package with CorelDRAW, PhotoPaint, and a good
Font Manager.

Thanks to my good knowledge of CorelDRAW and vector
graphics, I got a fairly well-paying job in digital printing. I was in
screen printing before that. So, it paid off, so to speak.

[Daniel]

@Subpath: Corel does shine in priting industry. But they have the ethics of hyenas: Craven, bottom-feeding scavengers who feast on the leftovers of better breeds of software.

[Subpath]

@Daniel

I think that's part of so called predatory capitalism.
As I wrote before, I never really expected much from Corel.
The company that hired me had already decided on CorelDraw
and because of my knowledge of it, I got the job.

(edited: deleted american)

[Daniel]

@Subpath: True, but Corel is Canadian. Your larger point still stands.

[Daniel]

Soft Groups: The ability to group objects without bringing them to the same layer. This is useful because it lets you group multiple different elements such as texts objects, objects with FX, gradients and so on. And yet, retain them each in their own categorical layers.

For instance, I can group a text object with an image, and yet, for the sake of simplicity, I can keep all the images in the image layer. Soft grouping lets me maintain layer order yet have groups outside this order.