Photoshop: Some unspecified menu item is broken

  • 6
  • Problem
  • Updated 2 months ago
  • (Edited)
Every launch has key features that are CLEARLY broken... but why? I want to distort an image - but it doesn’t work. It has worked for +20 versions - but not now. Hannah et al recommend... “Please go back to a previous version that is not broken, while we try to work out what to do”.Adobe CC is not a ‘freebie’ productIs it too much to ask that someone from QA tries ALL the menu options BEFORE we get the ‘amazing new release’
Photo of Andrzej Bania

Andrzej Bania

  • 7 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
  • Constantly frustrated

Posted 3 months ago

  • 6
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 836 Posts
  • 205 Reply Likes
Adobe uses ExtendScript for automated testing but I guess these tests can't cover GUI interaction. So test with image distort might pass because it tests pixmap transformation algorithm but not corner point dragging with and without shift key and similar staff.  ExtendScript usually can't use cursor and keyboard emulator. Would be great if GUI interaction could be also script-able by 3rd part developers.
Photo of Jeffrey Tranberry

Jeffrey Tranberry, Sr. Product Manager, Digital Imaging

  • 15208 Posts
  • 2184 Reply Likes
We also use black box testing (manual testing and inspection). We use other unit tests besides, so we're not limited to ExtendScript.
Photo of Andrzej Bania

Andrzej Bania

  • 7 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Automated testing is clever... but with MILLION$ in monthly revenue from us users... it would be nice if some humans spent a day ‘trying the options’ - rather than using us as guinea pigs
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1562 Posts
  • 485 Reply Likes
What exactly are you referring to?  Tell us what OS you're running and what menu command isn't working? I'm quite lost, as "distort" covers a lot of ground in Photoshop. It exists in the Filter menu. It's in the Transform menu. And then there are all the ways you can distort an image by another name.

Or doesn't it matter? You said Hannah et all told you to revert, which a lot of people have chosen to do, so this is only a complaint? You don't want/need any help from any of the gurus on this forum?
Photo of bowek

bowek

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
I totally agree with Andrzej, my Money 
Photo of bowek

bowek

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Sorry, my complete reply didn't get through. 
Here it is: My Euros I pay for the package CC Photography are not broken, has no shortcomings and transfers with same value and on time to Adobe's account, needs no relearning, and I do NOT withdraw it, when I am told to go back to an older version.
I'm losing much of my valuable time, whenever I run into an issue particular the latest update has come with. Who is compensating me?
Automated testing is ok for the first shot, but then humans must take over, key users must test the package before launching it. I would like to see Adobe's committment to do so!
I'm (still) a loyal user of the package and, please; Adobe, keep it this way. 
Photo of Andrzej Bania

Andrzej Bania

  • 7 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Focus: Many people have posted issues relating to Adobe's attempts to implement some alt-tab functionality
Font: Absolutely broken on a recent major release - you could not increase/decrease sizes with keys - instead you had to assigns a value - apply it - and wait to see if it was correct
etc etc etc
Sorry Cristen, I'm sure you are a really helpful person, but my problem is the CHRONIC lack of proper testing before Adobe goes live with a 'Wow! Amazing! Coool new features version' that (a) feels like it adds very little, while (b) destroys some primary functionality of the programme that we use to make a living.
Whoever heads up testing for Adobe should be ashamed of themselves.
Hannah & Co have to fire-fight - and 'Suggest that users roll back a couple of generations' etc.
It's just poor quality control management.
Testing for new features is one thing...   But you need comprehensive regression testing... To make sure that your new fix/feature doesn't break previously working functions.
On a 'free' programme... OK
But when you are raking in MILLIONS per month?...    Adobe QA needs to step up its game.
Photo of Rosa

Rosa

  • 331 Posts
  • 179 Reply Likes
I totally agree with you Andrzej

I do compliment the Official Reps from in the PS family forum as they do try their hardest to help us.

I'm very annoyed that the latest upgrade PS 2019 has been a dismal failure which has caused some of us to lose valuable time and deadlines. 

So, in saying that, I agree with everything you say. It's like putting a car on the market and the car halts to a full stop because the engineers didn't run the full gamut of quality testing under all conditions. 

If those engineers were in my employ and the same issue affected my clients, then their employment would be terminated. I would make sure my clients were compensated for losses incurred.

Adobe needs to apologise at least. They have our email addresses.. it would be the right thing to do, seeing we pay heavily for a monthly subscription. Adobe engineers probably don't even read the comments in forum so they wouldn't have a clue how disruptive PS 2019 has been. 
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 834 Posts
  • 201 Reply Likes
Be sure that some of them are reading this forum but not as many as needed. And I think whole Adobe has x-mas holiday right now so they will read it few days later in January.
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 836 Posts
  • 205 Reply Likes
If you are interested in manual testing you could try to become pre-release member and test Photoshop before it goes public. I am in and I stopped some ugly bugs before they becoming public. But no one can guarantee that your contributions would have a significant impact. It is all up to Adobe decisions. Also it is volunteer work in your free time and since these versions are under NDA and might be buggy then it is not wise use them for regular commercial work which decreases the chance to find new bugs.
Photo of Andrzej Bania

Andrzej Bania

  • 7 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I’m talking about 1x expert at Adobe - going through the product a couple of days before release - checking if everything works. You know. The people whose BIG salaries we’re paying.
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 833 Posts
  • 201 Reply Likes
It wouldn't be enough. E.g. this could be maybe 0.5-2% of (everything) the things which should be tested. And you have to do this for Mac and Windows. https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/default-keyboard-shortcuts.html

And there is several thousands more things we both have no idea about but are really essential for someone else workflow. No one is capable to know them all. You would need an extremely long checklist. And bug also might be result of the very specific combination of layers and there might be millions of combinations of layers layer types blend modes, layer effects, masks etc. Something like burn blend mode on layerset with 16bit per pixel in CMYK and layerset contains smart object with layer effect ect.
Photo of Marsha Levine

Marsha Levine

  • 32 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I think that the most virulent complainers about Adobe have never done any coding and have no idea of what is involved.
Photo of Andrzej Bania

Andrzej Bania

  • 7 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Not sure if you mean me Marsha, but - just in case - allow me to state that I’ve been coding back to the days of pencils and punch cards. You can tell by Hannah&Co’s apologies on here JUST how caught out the support staff are by the issues that seem to plague each release. If the issues only showed up in a really unusual situation - then that is easily forgiven. When core functions ‘drop off the face of the Earth’, then you know there’s an issue. Also, even if Adobe’s mistakes create costly havoc for tens of thousands of users... you’d struggle to find an apology. We are fee-paying customers. Not volunteers.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1537 Posts
  • 471 Reply Likes
> No one is capable to know them all. You would need an extremely long checklist. And bug also might be result of the very specific combination of layers and there might be millions of combinations of layers layer types blend modes, layer effects, masks etc. >

Sadly, that's too often the case. Fix one, break two has always seemed to have been the law of coding. Every once in awhile someone details a bug, I follow their steps to replicate it on my setup, and can say, yup, me too. Enough of us and it gets fixed—eventually.  '-}

A lot of times, though, I replicate it and it doesn't happen on my setup, just as my bugs don't happen to everyone else, so pinning it down can be very elusive. And I'm sure it helps get it fixed if we get enough people here following along, testing it on their computer, so Adobe can start to figure out that the problem happens with this, not that.  We need details from the complaint to add data to the problem, though.

I understand people wanting to vent their frustration. Sometimes that's really all I want to do, too. I'm not sure it's useful to anyone at Adobe.  Without specifics in a thread, if they're supposed to be testing and improving (we hope) functionality, they don't have time for this. The folk at the top, the ones who make the decisions about resources and who seem to be the ones who are the focus of this thread, aren't the Adobe folk who are here. At best from these types of posts, those who are here can only tell higher ups that the natives are restless. Maybe that helps, but with millions of customers and only at best hundreds active here, I wouldn't bet on it.

We all will rant from time to time, regardless of whether it's a useful thing to do or not. I'm just saying, for us to do more than say "Yeah, Adobe, what's wrong with you?" we need to know what everyone is talking about.
Photo of Jaroslav Bereza

Jaroslav Bereza

  • 833 Posts
  • 201 Reply Likes
Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that Adobe does it right. I think that the testing system can be improved. But also keep in mind that 30 years of development means a huge amount of features and small hidden improvements so it might be a more complex problem than it seems to be on first look.
Photo of bowek

bowek

  • 14 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
It's been a boring Sunday so far, that's why I was following this conversation. For me it is very simple:

Adobe's CC photography package was running on my machines, achieved at least my satisfaction. This is not the case with the latest update.

Adobe's add functionality, bug fixes etc. This is very much I appreciated. However, there seems to be a break in their process of launching new releases. What has been working in the past didn't work this time..
I'm sure Adobe's got system architects who designed new funcs with all dependencies, interrelationships and compatibilities. They also created schemas clearly pointing out such needs for integration, testing and related effort. However if software development falls behind schedule, typically testing is cut in order to meet deadline. Has this happened? It looks like it.

I agree that nobody knows all issues which might come up in the field. As a world leader in digital picture editing Adobe should put all system engineers on duty to catch up with reported issues and update the update as the fixes become available.
Photo of Hannah Nicollet

Hannah Nicollet, Quality Engineer

  • 720 Posts
  • 315 Reply Likes
Hi Andrzej,

It's not too much to ask. Quality engineers test all of the menu items in Photoshop before each release. We have a database mapping out all areas of Photoshop with QE assigned to every area. That isn't to say that things aren't missed, but typically when we run into problems the issues are system-specific or workflow-specific. For instance, I am currently verifying a bug fix that was difficult to resolve because we weren't seeing the behavior in-house. Once we identified the reproducible environment for the behavior it was resolved. Many things come into play -- different GPUs, different OS, etc. 

What action are you referring to when you say that "distort" isn't working for you? Is your issue reported on another thread?

Thanks,
Hannah