Still no answers, even on a fine Saturday, at least here in the TST area.
Has no one else wondered?
Hans included this relevant question:
Why other programs like Photoshop have a lot of updates, but Illustrator does not?
in the original thread here:
1 person found this helpful
Does Adobe cares more about the investors than us paying for its products?
Making a profit is no crime and I don't feel that at Adobe it has gone that far that shareholder value outweighs actual product development. Unfortunately, however, there are too many people who don't give a rat's *** about some things as the recent Customer Support note clearly proves. A big compnay like Adobe should have a handle on this. when it comes to the programs themselves - well, clearly Adobe has made some very poor decisions those last 5 years, but you have to take a very differentiated view on those matters. Some things may look good on paper, but looking back they simply do not work out. On a generic level, Adobe has failed to provide users with stability and reliability. Pretty much every of their programs is prone to crashes and hang-ups, sometimes even with simple things. Specific to AI it is perhaps that in a long time not too many meaningful features and enhancements have been added and, because of its old architecture, now certain features collide with each other. Anyway, whether it is Adobe's worst program, is very much open to debate. As I wrote a while ago in that other thread involving you, how we use a program clearly affects our perception of it. My personal list is diofferent, but then it is clearly colored by my work on Betas and software development in general. Still, in the end it doesn't matter - I may consider Photoshop and Flash the worst programs on the planet because of their outdated concepts and underlying structure, but they will still sell like bread fresh from the oven with every new version, because even if I think a feature is utter crap, there will always be enough users who are happy about exactly that one feature... So in the end, unless either of us were in a position to more directly influence any of those developments, that won't change. PS, FL, AI, AE wil lbe with us forever, but how much they realyl change and get better, is an open question. I very much doubt that this will ever happen and so we will probably just have to live with the fact, that we liek some features and have to ignore the bloat around it (which, again, IMO is much worse in PS,DW or FL than it is in AI).
1 person found this helpful
Is Illustrator the worst of all Adobe products?
I couldn't tell you, because I don't use all of Adobe's products. But I know this:
Illustrator is the weakest link within the so-called Creative Suite bundles.
Its interface is the most cumbersome, cluttered, scattered, confused, inconsistent, and inefficient of all well-known vector drawing programs in its class. (Not that they're necessarily cutting-edge praiseworthy, either.)
Its performance is pathetic.
Too many basic features are missing, and have been for decades.
Too many fundamental features are grossly outdated.
The only features that outperform other apps in its class are newer ones. But when they are introduced, their potential is hamstrung by details left incomplete, they are rarely updated thereafter, they are needlessly tedious to use because of the archaic interface to which they must conform, yet they are poorly integrated with the rest of the program.
The result is the least-elegant graphics program on the planet. A hodge-podge grab-bag of a few good features, many lousy features, (many missing features), slopily duct-taped together in a hideous interface scheme in need of a complete organizational remake, but instead only receives mere window dressing treatments slathered on top of the same old worn out structure.
So do you blame Adobe?
Nope. You blame the marketplace. You blame the addicted-to-mediocrity users.
Habituated users cling defensively to this outdated rust bucket because they have very little, if any, expertise in other programs; they know it took them three forevers to become workably comfortable in this one; and they fear that becomming proficient in another would require "starting all over."
Users with intermediate-and-above proficiency in other programs begrudgingly flock to this one because they fear being left among a dwindling minority, and thereby become a self-fullfilling prophesy. They mistakenly assume "well, there must be something to it; everybody's using it." They are invariably aghast when they find so many features archaic, so many basics missing, and so much of what they already know to be more intuitive turned on its logical head. Yet they persist because they've spent the money and they want so despirately to be counted among the "mainstream."
Newcomers find the program absolutely baffling. Ceaslessly bewildering. Painfully unintuitive. And they assume, therefore, that everyone must be right: it must be because it's so "powerful" and "sophisticated,"--a "professional's" tool.
FreeHand was beginning to fall off-track, too. Nonetheless, Adobe set vector drawing backward 10 years when it discontinued FreeHand.
But Adobe is no doubt concerned about bigger things. What must it do to achieve the kind of "must have it" mindshare of corporate America that Microsoft just can't seem to lose? The only real foot-in-the-door Adobe has is its ultimately late-to-the-game Acrobat. How can Adobe get its piece of the enterprise action where entirely web-based buzzword products from companies with entirely different business models seem to capture corporate mindshare almost overnight (ex: WebEx vs. Adobe Connect). How can Adobe convert its legacy "synonomous with paper publishing" perception into an equally synonomous but much more nebuous "content creation" perception?
These are the dark ages of 2D Bezier drawing, primarily because of the market and mindset predominance of Adobe Illustrator. Don't blame anyone other than those who defend the indefensible and who demand nothing better.
Nonetheless, Adobe set vector drawing backward 10 years when it discontinued FreeHand.
Agreed. While quirky and riddled with severe file format compatibility problems, it had its virtues.
How can Adobe convert its legacy "synonomous with paper publishing" perception into an equally synonomous but much more nebuous "content creation" perception?
Why do you think they gobbled up Macromedia? Lets face it, if they hadn't access to Flash technology, Adobe's revenue would be half as big as it is now. It makes the whole company tick. Without it, Adobe would be "just another software company". Regarding Acrobat, I tend to see things a bit differently. It's not Adobe's foothold into a modern world, it just so happens to have taken a niche, when other competitors couldn't pull their act together. Acrobat itself is just as much a monstrosity, it's only saving grace is the expandability of the PDF language.
I do not think is a crime to make a profit; it actually is the best way to make a company grow. My problem is when the company stops showing care for its consumers paying for its products.
Let’s take the clear sample that you mentioned about Customer Service. Adobe until today has not make any changes that will correct the enormous problem. Adobe says that will make a change to improve its Customer Service, but has not yet. Adobe still has this problem today.
So did Adobe forget about its paying clients? Adobe is communicating very well with its investors, but clearly it wasn’t with us, the consumers.
How many claims or angry letters does it take for Adobe to pay Attention to its consumers?
You mention before that Photoshop have a bigger team than Illustrator, which I can understand why Illustrator team cannot produce updates or eliminates bugs right from the beginning. So that is why I asked this question. Does Adobe is not paying attention to Illustrator?
Do we all need to send the same amount of angry letters that were sent to Customer Service for Adobe to provide the Illustrator team the resources that they need?
I think you and JET have the same point about influencing Adobe is up to us, the consumers. And I agree with JET when he said Adobe is not to blame. This same opinion comes from you when you said we are accepting “outdate concepts” from Photoshop and Flash.
When Illustrator CS3 came with the Icon Bug and asked why, and I got the lame answer that the problem was Mac OS, but I found the same problem with PC users. Then I asked my self: How come Bridge (free bonus program) can create Icon Previews of any Illustrator version (including CS4) but Illustrator cannot?
The bug still with CS4 and Adobe has not fix it. Then again, if we take into account that Illustrator team has limited budget, you have to ask what will take for Adobe to give the Ai team the resources?
So that is the reason of my question: Is Illustrator the worse program of Adobe?
I agree with you, we as a group we are responsible for this Adobe Monster we keep feeding. Ignorance makes you happy, and makes you the perfect consumer.
After the CS3 version without updates, I decided to stop buying Adobe products. I keep coming to these forums because I do not think Adobe is helping the newcomers.
They just got a lousy version without any help. Now the programs does not come with manuals (unless you pay extra), and this website does not provide good answers or are hard to find if you are new to the program.
I also agree with Mylenium and you about Adobe still missing the opportunity to learn from FreeHand to improve Illustrator. But why Adobe keeps ignoring Illustrator?
Maybe the reason is because like you said, we think that “Everybody is using it”, “This is the program that Professional use”, “I must have it – mentality”
If the new users or people wondering about buying Adobe products can read the Feedback Forum (http://forums.adobe.com/community/general/adobedotcom_feedback), can get a very different opinion of Adobe’s products.
And maybe the newcomers will stop feeling that they are doing something wrong and recognized when is a Bug.
A lot of people are buying DreamWeaver, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. It appears that Adobe does not want to invest any more money on Illustrator.
I can't say if it is the worst as I only use two or three others in the Adobe stable. You might be more interested in the views of long time experienced users - as am I. I've only been learning to use it for a few years (!) and only occasionally for professional output, therefore, I haven't encountered that many bugs or suffered the frustration and anger that regular professional users might in their daily workflow. I don't need precision much as I use Illustrator for freehand, "cartoony", figurative work. Still, I think it's a tremendously rewarding program to use despite the labyrinthian interface.
I have a couple of other vector programs that I've dabbled in but I still feel more comfortable in illustrator. I do worry, however, that it is being neglected and can see that there hasn't been much improvement over the time that I've been using it. For this reason, I am grateful for the opinions of the more experienced users here.
So, going back to the question; the worst? maybe I can answer it after all and say, of those that I use, yes, it might be - but even as the worst it is still a great program. Am I an "Habituated user(s) cling(ing) defensively to this outdated rust bucket"?
I haven't been using Illustrator long and I haven't really seen many bugs or glitches aside from the fact that my preferences are constantly corrupted (.. if I leave them unlocked). Using AI's interface for me is so much more natural compared to when I tried to use Inkscape or CorelDraw. There are a lot of ways to do things and that gets annoying, but learning them opens up a lot of possibilities. Some of the solutions I see to achieve something are like "wow, how would someone even come up with that without being Neo?" and I dislike that, but becoming a professional at something will always in the end reveal little quirks to make your life easier.
I would judge the worst of a program by its contribution to society and thinking about that I'd have to choose Flash as the worst. I thought things were bad in the world when there was banner.gif. Now we have popup_inyourface_with_music_movie_and_cant_closeuntil_itsfinished.swf. Granted, Adobe didn't start that, but they sure are not finishing it.