User Internface
Whenever I take a look at this software its the user interface which needs lots of work some people dont have 6 months to learn this cryptic interface. These days modern UIs are very intuitive this software needs this to make the software easier to use.
Comments
What would you cite as an example of a modern, intuitive interface? We are always looking at ways to improve the accessibility of CC3.
There are many examples of that:
=> like when working with effects, you need to try and try and try again, while a preview window would have been useful
=> having to click on refresh to see the map being refreshed
=> having access to many different options through different means (keyboard, menu bar, menu...)
Check The Gimp if you want to see a similar tool with a better designed interface
But that's true, that after a while, you more or less get the hand of it
My biggest problem so far is that, even when the mouse cursor is not on the main drawing area, using the scroll wheel zooms the image in and out. For instance, when it is on a symbol catalog, I would like it to scroll the symbol list. On the same subject, if the symbol scroll could be immediate, instead of applying the scroll only when the mouse button is released, it would provide a far better experience.
There are also many places where we have to open a dialog, set a parameter, close the dialog, and repeat the process. Having a non modal dialog (or a dock window) and being able to apply the result (not just a preview, on the real image) without closing it would really speed up the trial and error process. The effects is maybe the most striking of those examples (and having a sub dialog box is just painful, there is amply enough space on a modern screen to display the effect parameters all the time, not in a sub dialog box). The properties adjustment too.
Finally, the philosophy of starting the command, then selecting to what object it applies, while common once upon a time, looks really unnatural nowadays. I don't claim is does not have some advantages, but it has some impact on the learning curve, as well as on the usability. I guess changing it would be quite too much work though.
My goal with this post it not to bash the product or its developers. After all, I bought it: it means I still find CC3 has quite some value. I hope I'm being constructive and helpful with this post, and maybe one day, we will see a more modern and efficient to use version.
~Dogtag
I'll readily admit, I found CC2 quite tricky to learn (Although CC3 today is a lot easier than CC2 was back then), but now, after having learned how to use it, I vastly prefer this interface over most of the interfaces found in so called "modern and intuitive interfaces". Yea, it takes a bit more time to learn initially, but once past that, it is far easier to do most things in CC3 than in most other software I use. And since you are going to spend most of your time as an experienced user, and not as a beginner, I think end result is well worth the steeper initial learning curve.
Also, just try to compare it against Adobe's products. They are horrible in comparison. I absolutely hate their interfaces, especially Photoshop. There is nothing intuitive about their interfaces. The interface of CC3 is a holiday in paradise compared to that horror.
All that said, I do agree that there are parts of the CC3 interface that does indeed need improvement. One of my own main problems is the non-existing handling of multiple monitors.
Anything that can lessen the learning curve for new users is also always good, as long as it doesn't change the basics of the program.
As for intuitive. I've read a few things about such things, and the first time a person finds a computer program interface you like, your brain sees it as intuitive. While someone else tries that same program, and fnds its niterface klunky.
As an IT professional I've worked with around 15 operating systems since 1983. Software even for the same system used different options for the same thing. Ctr-p might be print on one, on another it brought up the save dialog. Programs for MS Windows were standardized in the 1990s to get rid of that.
But generally you can say that I'm quite satisfied with the UI, event though it took me some time to get there.
I've used CC since version 5, but since I had used AutoCAD long before buying CC, it only took me a few minutes to adjust to the slightly different command sequence. It took me several years of playing with Photshop and Paint Shop Pro to figure out how to make them work, and it still takes me forever to do a simple drawing. In fact, I often draw parts in CC3 first and export them to use in PS because it's quicker and more accurate (I can set exact coordinates and dimensions).
Being able to dock the Sheets box would be cool, as would having a preview for the effects. But not having them isn't a deal breaker.
There is only one thing that I find under-the-skin irritating. The Inner Glow effect. In every other dialog that uses color, I can choose via the Select Color dialog. With Inner Glow I have to know the actual RGB equivalent. I almost never use this effect because of the hassle of having to look up the numbers first. Fix this and I would consider this the most perfect bit of software ever made.
Use the Glow effect - that as an switch make it Inside or Outside. Using "Inside" basically makes it an Inner Glow.
EDIT: Unwhispering this...