P: Transform/Resize is constrained by default - Want ability to go back to legacy behavior

Everyone who'd like to see this behavior changed back without having to write a custom script to do it (steps are described earlier in this thread) or to revert to an older version of PS, remember to click the "Me too" button at the top of this thread.

If you've already done so, thanks!

I absolutely agree ! I am a professional retoucher for the last 15 years.  I make my living using photoshop. If photoshop wants to be a professional program it has to focus foremost on it's professional users.
I retouch a lot of e commerce and there time and efficiency everything. If for some reason something slows me down I loose money.
Creatives who make their living using it have to be the main focus before creatives who don't make a living with it, however super talented or amazing they are.

@Cristen 'I'm one who is having trouble adjusting'

Adjusting would be the case if Adobe did this properly. i.e. identify it needed to make a fundamental change to all graphics software, then change it everywhere (both within PS and across CC). Then we could simply 'adjust' to the change.

But Adobe didn't do it properly. The implementation is a half-baked embarrassment that creates huge inconstancies fundamental to everything we do. I actually have no issue with changing the behaviour but the way Adobe did this is incompetent on so many levels.

 ALL of Adobe's customers deserve better IMHO; 'pro', 'amateur' or whatever. 

I don’t know that anyone has been saying that amateurs should be treated as second class users. The point is that Adobe made some fundamental changes with no simple way to revert to a preferred legacy setting. Ignoring day-to-day users is insulting. I literally lost money because of their choice. I don’t think enthusiasts are put out economically.

I just want to say thank you to Cristen.  Just because I am semi-retired and have income that makes it unnecessary for me to earn money doing Photoshop does not mean I should relegated to using Elements.  I know a lot of so-called amateurs who are very very good using Photoshop.

I've always viewed the PS market as one made up of: Professional of ALL Expertise Levels!

I completely disagree that anyone who works with "amateurs" should push them in the direction of using Elements, or that they should themselves use Elements and "influence" it. Some of the best photographers and photo artists I know, or whose work I have seen, are "amateurs." Some people start out as amateurs and wind up professionals. Some professionals go the other direction. It's fluid, since "professional" only implies money exchanged for services or product.

The word "amateur" itself only means "one who loves." Not "one who is too lazy to learn to do anything." They know the software, are less limited than many a "professional" who specializes in a single workflow, and require far, far more from a program than Elements is capable of providing. In fact, many came from Elements. It was far too restrictive for their needs. Photoshop is, in fact, easier to use if you bother to learn how.

So I would respectfully request that "amateurs" be shown a little more respect. There's no meaningful fence that keeps amateurs out. Money earned isn't is. Some of them work harder to learn Photoshop and use all of its potential than designers I've known for decades who still won't use Curves, but have been making a living at it since v2 of PS, and are d*mn good designers.  They're just unwilling, and feel too busy, to learn new workflows—Levels work fine for them. I see professional photographers whose go-to is Levels and Color Balance, and not much more. They're still good photographers.

I sympathize with all who are upset with this. I'm one who is having trouble adjusting. None of us like to be thrown off badly by a "simple" change that isn't simple for us to adapt to. It hurts many professionals the most, short term anyway, because of time constraints on getting product out. But professionals DO use touch devices. Serious artists, whether they get into galleries or sell online, or not, DO use touch devices. Professionals who don't use Photoshop as their main program, but have to use it for their work, DO use Photoshop AND touch devices. And so do a lot of "amateurs." Why wouldn't Adobe do anything at all to accommodate all of them?

These are ALL Adobe's customers, and all deserve some attention. I don't believe that Adobe looks at the person who takes selfies and lunch pics to post on Instagram and FB as their most important customer base—though who knows but what these folk might not be tomorrow's professionals. I think Adobe pays attention to far more of their base than just one element.  I could hope for  more accommodating attention than we got with this feature, but this IS an outlier from Photoshop's usual way of dealing with accommodating as many people as they can. Think of all the "legacy" we have now, which didn't use to be the case in ancient days when a change was a change and that was it. They started introducing "legacy" back with changes to Adjustment layers and Brightness/Contrast, and it's been not quite a standard since then, but very common.

I hope the way this feature was handled isn't the future, but I also hope people don't say "get rid of the amateurs" from being a part of the Photoshop (and Lightroom) family.

Mark, I know that. I didn’t say ‘everyone’ who worked on it was an amateur, far from it. However there are certain groups with ties to Adobe who cater to amateurs or occasional users and in my personal opinion I don’t think such groups should influence the development of Photoshop which is a professional software program. Those groups should influence the development of Elements.

There are too many good aspects of the software for me to presume that no professionals are involved with the architecture of the software. For the most part, I don't have too many issues overall with the software.

I think this was an ill-informed update, perhaps, as some suggest tied to an overzealous idea to consolidate functionality with iOS. I'm not sure what happened here, but surely they did not consult people who are long time users.

I really have no idea what happened TBH, it's a very odd decision.

I don’t think “Adobe” doesn’t care; what I do think and sort of know to be true is that Adobe is influenced by people who are not actual professionals. Professionals in Graphic Design with a four year degree that is. None of those would decide on a whim to constrain the “free” transform tool.

Photoshop is professional software. They should have done that to Elements which is for amateurs & occasional users.