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

Them's aint bugs.

Them's Undocumented features.

Intended to keep our productivity in check.

I knew Rodney in school thirty-five years ago. I used to talk to Schewe once in a while back in the late 90's. There used to be a ColorSync newslist I subscribed to (maybe there still is) and a lot of those folks would be on it. You could figure out who the Alpha testers were pretty easily. Being a Beta tester was pretty much a wasted of time as almost all the real work had been done in Alpha. Adobe got volunteers, and I emphasize that word - to Beta test for free. They expected that you'd put a certain number of hours a week basically looking for bugs and there were crappy little door prizes if you found one. A complete and utter waste of your time if you were a working pro, but I suppose it gave some a sense of prestige. I mean, if you were really lucky you might win a free license. Whoopdeefrickingdoo. If you just worked all the hours you put in for free, you'd have bought the thing many times over. The biggest point is that Beta testers had no say whatsoever in the feature set. That was done by the time it got to Beta. Bug chasin' was pretty much it. I was signed up somewhere around Ps 7.0 I think - y'know I think when you could first do layers in 16 bit and never participated because I immediately saw what a complete waste it was. But hey, they got a lot of folk to work for free. Good work if you can get it.

The most protected secrets these day is how many bugs we'll have to deal with 😉

They overuse CC program. When they are sure we are in with our money they don't care to release good product (one of those of CS era), so like politics after beeing elected forget their promises.

> How you got to know names of those testers?>

Adobe stopped being so secretive. When they were hard at work, what they were working on, when a release was scheduled—all that was a secret, but those big names, along with Katrin Eismann, were at least an open secret in the Creative Suite era. I just can't remember exactly when.

> This wasn't such a problem when Adobe had a formal beta program.>

And the cycle was at minimum 18 months and the whole industry moved a little slower and sometimes it seems that gave them time to do it better. Hard for me to really remember that accurately.

Personally, I wish the cycle were 18 months and we could get more features  enhanced every release so they weren't a V1 for so long, and more little things fixed. Even though some of the stuff they've showed off at MAX would be awfully nice to have someday. If the one year cycle is working, or even needed by us users, I'm not seeing it. All the companies seem to have gone there, though. Apple releases an OS every year now, and drops support for older versions even faster than it used to.  '-(    I can only say that I also am not an insider, so don't know what's really going on.

I don't even know if they still have an alpha program. I have to wonder when they'd have time for that these days? But those who haven't died no doubt still have someone's ear.

How you got to know names of those testers?

They have beta vers., I know it. Selected users are in, but maybe everyone is focused on something important only for himself, not on each feature Adobe introduces to Photoshop, or else not each of features is provided for those beta testers. Then is there some other inner group of people who test it as well but fail? Probably not.

This should show up and be fixed in Alpha - long before it ever gets to Beta.  That it made it all the way to final release tells you a lot about the internal workings of the Ps team these days. There used to be something like fourteen or fifteen Alpha testers - y'all know the names - Andrew Rodney, Jeff Schewe, Bruce Fraser before he died, etc. How many are left and how many are active. 

This wasn't such a problem when Adobe had a formal beta program.