P: Support scalable user interface UI for high resolution monitors

oh, huh.
Well. No, I guess I had no clue whatsoever that Microsoft required changes in any way.

I'm sure they are working diligently to improve their services for you

Well... in the meantime, maybe you could chat with the people over at Corel...
http://coreldraw.com/forums/t/33935.aspx

They also seem very helpful.

i think they use some strange newfangled technology called, um.. XML or something for something called a user interface?

http://painterfactory.com/blogs/dans_...

See, they didn't worry about "scaling" within the operating system per say, they just made physically larger icons, and a preference for the user to choose small, medium, or large - and apparently for those much smarter than me, the ability to swap out icons, so a person could make their own.

So regardless of MS's issues, um, Corel found a work around, and a rather "simple one" at that.

Simply put, Adobe programming staff wants to pass their 'Monkey' on to Microsoft. There is sufficient technology already in place to facilitate a fix to the UI scaling problem. Why they are not getting on with the fix is clear: management has not built a fire under those responsible for the fix. This is evidenced by the lack of commitment that would include a plan of tasks, a timeline of milestones, and a budget to get the job done.

You might not be aware that there are significant changes needed from Microsoft, and we have been working with them on this issue for quite some time. Yes, there are quite a few "under the hood" changes in Win8 that are not apparent to the end user, and that help get us all closer to useful UI scaling.

This request is a priority for us, but we are are dependent on the OS for functionality that is not available at this time.

When we have details that we can share, we will update this topic.

yes, Jeff already said that in a nicer way and William here was talking about adobe's road map and how it would be nice as a customer to know when to expect things so that Adobe itself is "accountable"
Joomla does this and it's used by millions and it's free.

So saying it's Microsoft's ball is not accurate nor fair - especially since there is no UI change planned for Windows at the moment as it's been the exact same since windows XP - I can use Win XP "themes" in win 8 so the UI isn't really different "under the hood". The only change is that win8 "removed features" like Adobe did with the window tile button and hid them in other locations - or turned over their control to developers, like, um, Adobe.

Again, since Adobe controls it's own UI it is in Adobe's hands to rectify the issue. Other software non Adobe described in this thread does this, so it's not an OS issue that is insurmountable., it simply requires some attention.

We cannot commit anything about Microsoft's release dates.

What are needed here are updates to products in the field as well as new releases. In comparison, a description of vapor-ware serves no useful purpose. A commitment to release an UI updates by dates certain, followed by interim progress reports, might save your day. For any other solution, Adobe is going to have to sustain an additional loss in market share.

Hi Axiom, Windows is a different beast than Mac, but you should be able to achieve what you describe in the future - Sorry, I can be more specific. We'll update the topic when we have more details to share. Again, supporting HiDPI is a priority for our team.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes, that is part of what we are hoping to address, in addition to higher DPI displays.
And yes, there are frequently hidden complications that only the programmers see when they start trying to use the OS APIs that are supposed to provide functionality like that. Yes, it's always more complicated under the hood.

Thank you for answering my question. I guess I don't understand why it's so difficult either. However, I am not a Windows programmer. As an end user all I can do right now is to move to another program, which I have. My issue is not with any hi-dpi or "retina" type support, mine is with physical size of the interface. Let me see if I can explain this better. The competitor's vector/raster suite's interfaces are quite customizable. They allow the user to choose Small, Medium, and Large for toolbar icons, and most other interface items. My issue has to do with physical size in pixels of the interface icons and text, but maybe that is still to vague, so I will try explaining below.

Just to give you a rough idea of the size differences in the competing program's icons and nodes, I roughly measured them. My resolution is 1920x1080 on a 17" screen. I don't pretend to be an expert at measuring interface icons with scientific precision, but I used screenshots of Illustrator and the Competing Program, and opened them in Photoshop. I roughly measured one of the toolbar icons, the magnifying glass. I did not include blank space around the icon.

Adobe Illustrator's magnifying glass icon from the toolbar was approx.17w x 17h, the competitor's approx. 18w x 18h. However, the competitor's icons are sharper and have better color and line contrast so they are much easier to see. The competitor's Medium magnifying glass icon is approximately 25x25 pixels, the large is approximately 33x33 pixels. The latter is way way larger than I need. If I set toolbar icons to "Medium, then the whole toolbar changes from 18x18 icons, to 25x25 icons, so the graphical icons are bigger, and the toolbar becomes longer and wider in appearance.

I feel if they can do this, then Adobe can too. If they want to.

The competitor's menu and toolbar text (File,Edit, Image, etc), and the drop downs for those, as well as almost all the text in the interface listens to my Windows settings and displays text at a size I can see without squinting. I have the toolbar on medium, but everything else (there are dockable toolbars at the top with loads of icons and text) on small. This setting satisfies me.

Additionally, the selected/on hover nodes in a path are also approximately twice as large (A: 5x5, CP:11x11) , with handle ends approximately three times as large as Adobe's (A:5x5 circle, CP:11x15 arrowhead). This and other visual cues and variations make a huge difference after staring at nodes and paths for hours on end. I know this thread is about Photoshop, but I have to compare apples to apples, and Photoshops interface, most probably, is exactly the same size as Illustrator's.

Due to the above, I can work for hours without migraines in the competitor's software. I had to move from Illustrator for my health and to get work done. The interface led me to stray but the other changes currently at Adobe, which are not on topic, have led me to stay with the competitor for now.

Thank you for listening. My hope is that this explains my issues a little better, provides feedback for possible future improvements, and that this has been helpful in this discussion.

Hi Jeff, welcome!
If you don't mind me asking, when you say adding support for HiDPI on Windows - do you mean making a scalable UI for any resolution monitor?
Or simply making Icons appear the same size as they are now on a "retina" monitor?

See, we need the ability to enlarge the UI in general - regardless of monitor resolutions. It's pretty much what all this is about.

The examples citing larger displays were to illustrate that the UI gets even "smaller" as you use large monitors, and though we can enlarge the UI fonts, we cannot enlarge the icons to allow for a more comfortable work flow.

I only ask as there seems to be a large amount of misdirection from another "employee" as they keep talking about retina support and other "complications" - when the rest of us are pretty much simply asking to make things bigger or smaller - like the UI "font size" preference.

We have asked for progress, and keep being told only about retina support progress - which is not what we are asking about.