I think it's wrong to look at Affinity as a replacement for PS & CO.
Certainly it's RAW conversion capabilities have some way to go before they can match LR or CO.
Where Affinity is worth considering is as an image editor. It matches PS in most things and has a few good features that PS lacks (more so if you only have any older version of PS).
The key feature for many potential users is the low one off cost with no continuing subscription.
I agree, and wanted to add that it will take a bit of an investment in time to get the most out of Affinity Photo. So the trial period is too short to get all there is to get from the application. While the concepts of layers and such may be familiar to those versed in Photoshop, their use in AP is similar but sometimes also different (IMHO often in a better way).
Also, depending on one's specific requirements, there are lots of somewhat hidden useful features that can make a lot of difference in getting the job done. A simple example is that most (all?) numerical input fields allow the use of equations. So one no longer needs to use a calculator to calculate some math driven input value, e.g. to double the surface area of an image (like going from A4 to A3 paper size), one could type:
*=sqrt(2) in an input field for resizing. Such things can be useful when an image contains both Raster data as well as Vector data which can then be output to raster output modalities with the maximum resolution of the e.g. added text. Of course, much more complicated formulas can be used than in this trivial example.
The best way may be to first view the tutorial videos to get the idea, and only then start actually experimenting. That should give enough time to re-view the videos if you get stuck somehow, and things will start making more sense. Also remember that when things are done differently, it's not just for the sake of being different. The folks at Serif have a rather good idea of where they are going with their applications, and there will be additions. They also have a pretty good grasp of what it means to work in a publishing environment, so the workflow is designed to achieve common tasks efficiently.
Also, the way that they have implemented things like Pano stitching, HDRI creation, Focusstacking, etc, is actually pretty good, when compared to dedicated applications for such specialized tasks which set the bar to be reached. AP comes pretty close for common use. The same can be said for Raw conversion, which has room for improvement but is already quite usable for common tasks.
Cheers,
Bart
