Indesign is the most needlessly cumbersome and disfunctional piece of software I've ever dealt with. It's a [abuse removed by
moderator] joke to be honest. The simplest things that you would expect to be straightforward just do not work and you end up wasting your time digging through scores of pointless posts in the "support community" that basically just represents a years-long log of work orders to make fixes and changes that Adobe obviously just ignores, otherwise these posts wouldn't still be sitting around! Unbelievably frustrating experience with this piece of [abuse removed by moderator] software. And to think it costs over $200 DOLLARS A YEAR!!! Adobe clearly has control of the market and does not give two [abuse removed by moderator] about the quality of its product anymore. What a joke.
Welcome to the forum.
It would help if you stated your version of InDesign and OS?
How much RAM and spare hard disk capacity you have?
And describe the issue you are having, as we are not mind-readers!
None of the OP's rant has anything to do with program functionality, but the clumsy and convoluted user interface. I happen to agree that the UI and navigation layout has come to look like something on a piece of alpha software, from a team that has lost sight of how the user base actually works with all the features embedded within. It needs a wholesale revision with some UI/UX/interface experts in the loop.
Functionality is wonderful, but not if you have to jump through needless hoops to put it to use.
I did not see the word "interface" in the original post. Perhaps it got deleted along with all the profanity edited out by the moderator.
The post is titled "General UI Complaints" and the OP is complaining about how hard features are to find and use — not, as far as I can tell, anything like the usual "gosh, this program isn't as easy as Publisher."
I agree that the OP's tone and choice of words is less than ideal, but it's an overall point I've stopped making because Adobe is clearly not going to address the issue.
That the interface can be mastered with enough time, patience and training is not a counter-argument. There are many equally complex programs that have far more intuitive and transparent user interfaces; it's not a given that function-complexity has to incur use-complexity.
Would I change some things--Yes.
Would I remove some outdated features--Yes.
Would I fix some half-vast features--Yes.
Does "The simplest things that you would expect to be straightforward just do not work..." actually convey any information--No.
I will be the first to agree that the OP expressed him/herself poorly and there's evidently frustration at the program's complexity; we see five new users here every day who came from Word or Publisher or something equally 'secretary friendly' and is baffled by the learning curve ID presents.
But the core point s/he makes is more than valid. ID was not 'best designed' at the start and has simply accreted features without much effort given to integrating them into the overall plan. It's past a few patches and fixes and needs a wholesale revision. With some known bugs, limitations and flaws aside, ID is a spectacularly powerful and capable program; I once called CS3 the publication app I would have designed had anyone asked me. (That's meant in humor.) But it's evolved and evolved and almost every addition brings pointless complexity along with the functionality, all at the UI/Menu/UX level.
So 1/10 for the OP's presentation, but 10/10 for his/her point.
>>...but 10/10 for his/her point.
Not to belabor a point, but MY point is that where was NO point in the original post. What does "the simplest things" mean?
I certainly don't know and there is no way of knowing what the OP meant unless they provide more info.
Okay. But I'm not sure deflecting a topic not expressed in classroom terms serves any useful end.
What is it you are having so much trouble with?
InDesign is not Microsoft Publisher--it is a high-end program that requires high-end skills.
...a years-long log of work orders to make fixes and changes that Adobe obviously just ignores, otherwise these posts wouldn't still be sitting around!
What? Where would the posts go?
Your post lives up to the "General" part of its title, but contains nothing about the UI, or any specific complaint. Where should it go?
The simplest things that you would expect to be straightforward just do not work
We understand that you are very frustrated. How about giving us a chance to help? Can you share one thing from your list and perhaps we can explain to you how it works.
At this point we are talking among ourselves, but I'd say the interface is one of the more flexible parts of InDesign. There are so many ways to accomplish basic tasks. People like Dave (@Creamer Training) and myself—who spend a great deal of our time teaching new users—need to familiarize ourselves with all the ways of working with the interface, because we will encounter students who can't (or don't want to) take the designated path offered in our workbooks.
But we can't help until @Ben226259904072 decides to share additional information with us. And who knows, maybe he just needed to vent and now he is good to go?
>>And who knows, maybe he just needed to vent and now ... is good to go?
Unfortunately, I'm familiar with this concept on many levels. 😜
In other words, enough expertise is all that's needed. Which is an easy conclusion to come to... for the exceptionally expert. (And trainers, I suppose. 🙂 )
I'm not going to get my point across here, so I'll stop. Suffice it to say that I don't agree greater expertise is always the solution and that all problems with software (or any other tool) are caused by insufficient expertise.
I think we should keep a sense of proportion in criticising InDesign. I come from a traditional letterpress printing background. And, as an example, to produce a simple box like this would have taken about a quarter of an hour (and the corners word not usually join!). Nowadays, to create a box with InDesign, and similar applications, it would take a couple of seconds!
Derek (and Barb, and David, and all other experts)... I've been doing this for about forty years. I am formally trained in all the processes that preceded computers making it easy. I have used almost every tool in the spectrum (from, if I remember, Ventura Publisher and Arts&Letters) to mastery/expert/trainer level. (One of my occupations is building publication departments for small and medium companies.) I have been using ID since it became a useful tool, probably at the CS2-CS3 revision that took it from a promising start to the superior tool in the field. (That I have lurked here for most of a decade and only recently begun posting has more to do with some changing interests than, say, newly-acquired expertise.)
I also have considerable experience designing software, mostly at the UI/UX level long before those terms were developed, and have designed hardware equipment interfaces and controls. I am a usability/intuitive/self-teaching maven on the point.
So when I say ID is probably the best overall publication tool ever released to the public, I'm neither likely to get much argument from the skilled and experts here nor am saying so from reading the marketing materials.
And when I say the UI is by far its worst aspect, with some functions all but crippled by the poor menus, controls, interface and accessiblity, I'm prepared to argue those points until the Dell cows come home. My viewpoint on that is a long, long ways from the newcomers who can't make Word processes work in this strange new tool.
So again: expertise is not the ultimate solution. Lack of expertise is not the whole problem. And making soothing sounds along the lines that "it's such a great tool we shouldn't criticize it" has a shill sound to it. 🙂
I enjoyed reading about your background earlier this week, Derek.
Thank you Barb.
Ah yes, Rapidograph pens. How I miss them. I still have a number of my plastic templates for doing round and inverted corners.
Raise your hand if you remember looking up characters-per-pica in a book...🤣