[in reference to several features in Photoshop, including putting the pen as an
option for the Shape tool, and several other complaints, someone said:]

> > In my opinion, Adobe needs to seriously rethink
> > some of their GUI policies simply because they
> > are outdated, inconvenient AND confusing. It's bad
> > for the end users which will ultimately effect
> > the usability of the product. It's pathetic.

I think not. While there are probably legitimate gripes about implementation of
some features, some gripes are born of failing to understand the implementation
(process and reasoning).

Making a program 100% customizable and perfect for everyone's desire is an
unlikely scenario. There will have to be defaults, at the very least, or else
you will be asking quite a lot of the new user as they will have to set up the
program before doing anything with it -- which becomes a catch 22. You can't
just approach GUI design from the standpoint of: What advanced users need, for
example, as then what happens to users that are not already advanced? If you
have ever done programming (and not just looked at different interfaces), it can
sometimes be tricky to accomplish a seamless implementation of tools that end up
LOOKING simple. When the interface appears to read your mind, this should be
considered a benefit, but regretfully those successes will be grandly overlooked
by users. People are only geared to complaining about problems. There will
rarely be praise for something that works like you expect. Expectations as to
how things should work vary from user to user, so almost any implementation can
lead to a complaint.

Sometimes it is best to be glad you can use it at all. Either that or glad you
can learn to use it as is. Generally, I vote for becoming talented with the
tools as they are.

Listing problems is not a solution. Saying: "XYZ tool should do more to read my
mind" doesn't point to the specifics of a problem that you want solved. Making
fun of an implementation does even less, I would suppose. Posing a solution
would probably do more good.

Presets on the options bar are really pretty handy -- if you use them. With a
few clicks I can change back and forth to settings that would have taken many
clicks to make otherwise. the only change I might make is allowing users to
assign default settings, PERHAPS, so they know what to expect and have something
useful when opening the program, instead of just relying on previous settings.
However, those who like previous settings would get jolted with this
change...The solution might be to allow either/or, and the solution swiftly
becomes a more complex one. Suggesting the tools and options will interchange is
silly [user suggested the tools would soon be found on the options bar and
options on the toolbar], of course, but I could see a situation where the tools
might become more like the palettes in the palette well -- hovering over the
left of the options bar could drop the list...and clear some screen space. I'm
sure some would prefer that -- especially those who use the keyboard shortcuts
anyway.

There are probably ways to improve every feature in Photoshop -- and every other
program on the planet. Griping about it isn't going to help; accurate and
helpful criticism might. Adobe will have to choose their battles as there is
only so much time between cycles, and so many hands for programming and testing.
That is a reality. The other possibility would be to hire droves of programmers
to make all the possible changes, and increase the cost of the program,
encourage layoffs, and, frankly, become more business sloppy. I find it costly
enough, thank you, and don't see that a situation which inspires temporary help
as one that will entice the best programmers.

If you really have a solution to a problem with Photoshop, you might try making
suggestions for change through the Feature Requests page at Adobe:

http://www.adobe.com/support/feature.html

These will probably do more to affect change (so long as the requests make
sense) than some random complaints on any forum...

Hope that helps.

Richard Lynch
http://hiddenelements.com




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]