Are you talking about the animated zoom when using Ctrl-Alt-Spacebar keyboard combinations? Adobe Illustrator only enables animated zoom when GPU acceleration is enabled. In Illustrator CC there is a little Rocket icon along the top menu bar at the far right. Click that icon to bring up the dialog box to enable or disable GPU performance. There is an option in that dialog box to enable animated zoom. ... View more

jcop99, this is a pre-release version of Illustrator. In case you haven't already signed up for the pre-release program, visit the "invitation to pre-release" link at the Illustrator forum's home page and follow its instructions. That should remove the denials for access. As to whether this pre-release solves the error box problem shown at the top of this thread: SUCCESS! No more annoying error boxes. ... View more

I'm confused by some of what you wrote in your post, such as trying to adjust the artwork for the thickness of the plywood being laser cut. Are you cutting 2D shapes through the plywood or actually doing something in 3D where you are both cutting shapes and varying the depth of what is being cut? I'm not aware of cutting depth being something that is adjustable with a laser. Do you have an image or two of what is being cut out of the plywood? I work quite a bit with a standard 4' X 8' routing table that uses traditional metal routing bits. Most of what I cut is just 2D elements, such as letters cut out of aluminum or colored acrylic. Anything 3D has to be done within the specialized routing software we use (EnRoute). The thickness of the router bit used has to be factored into the artwork, be it 1/8" or 1/4". Lasers cut a much thinner line, so not as much offset is needed. If I had a bunch of parts I needed to rout, but decided I was going to use a 1/8" bit rather than a 1/4" bit I could make a new copy the objects I was going to cut and use the path offset command to create a new tool path closer to the original letter forms. I'd "expand" the effect and save it as a .DXF file to feed into Enroute. Of course, EnRoute does this function as well. For shapes that interlock with precise corners. I'm not sure if there's any way to quickly adjust an entire group of objects. Some tricks with the path offset command or apply outlines to the shapes and expanding those outlines can quickly create shapes that either fit together more tightly or loosely. ... View more

Yeah, the error box is really pretty annoying. I'm also pretty annoyed at how much longer it takes for Illustrator CC 2017 to launch. I have to go on to other things, like checking my email or getting a soft drink, while Illustrator loads. But I suppose things could be worse. CorelDRAW X8 has been a pretty excruciating upgrade. Its "font playground" and some other bells and whistles have bogged down the problem badly. I often have to jump back to version X6 to be productive which sort of defeats the purpose of upgrading in the first place. ... View more

I understand the notion of just using the keyboard to press the "Command" and "+" combination (or "Ctrl" and "+" on a PC) to zoom in. My complaint is I literally have to take my right hand off the mouse or stylus just to press that combination. That's lousy. I'm not going to use that combination because it is disruptive to my work flow. As long as I can still toggle "Ctrl" "Alt" and "Spacebar" to zoom in/out and hand pan I'll be happy. I can press those combinations with my left hand while continuing to keep my right hand on the mouse or stylus. Plus those zoom and hand pan tools are not persistent; the previously used tool returns when the "Ctrl" "Alt" "Spacebar" combinations are no longer pressed. That's even better. ... View more

In the Windows version of Illustrator CC 2017 the Ctrl Alt Spacebar keyboard combinations for zooming in/out and hand panning the view still work just as they always have, with animated scrubby zoom working with GPU performance enabled. Did Adobe eliminate the equivalent of this on the Mac version? ... View more

One zoom feature I would like is a "one shot zoom," similar to one of the zoom commands in CorelDRAW. With that tool you just click and drag a box to frame the area you want magnified. One thing I like about it: the tool is not persistent, unlike the application's other zoom tools (where you have to bring up another tool to get rid of the magnifying glass). With the one shot zoom tool when that new level of zoom comes into view the zoom tool disappears and reverts back to the previous tool that was being used. The one shot zoom tool is especially handy in CorelDRAW since its other screen navigation tools are kind of cumbersome. I really wish (and have repeatedly requested to Corel) that CorelDRAW supported the same Ctrl-Alt-Spacebar zooming and hand panning screen navigation standard in Adobe Illustrator and Macromedia Freehand. Corel has tried to make up for that by including all sorts of other zoom commands long ago, such as zoom to selection, zoom out to all objects, etc. There's a bunch of these commands you can add to custom tool bars. But you have to mouse over to those tool bars and/or scatter tear off palettes across your work space. It's possible to map keyboard combination commands, but the user must be careful not to write over other existing keyboard short cuts. ... View more

I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about regarding this new zoom feature. IMHO, the keyboard short cut arrangement for it is not a fast and comfortable combination. I either have to apply the "Ctrl" and "+" combination right handed (which isn't very comfortable at all to do) or use both hands to press keys from either end of the keyboard. Either way it requires me taking my hand off the stylus or mouse. The scrubby zoom still works just fine via the Ctrl, Alt and Space bar combo, all of which can be done left handed without taking your right hand off the mouse or stylus. With Ctrl and Space bar pressed, I just left click where I want to zoom and then drag. This zooms to the desired point, such as the selected object, every bit as quickly as this new "Ctrl" and "+" combination. ... View more

Percentages of colors, tints, etc. in an object will depend on the color model used, as well as any effects such as transparency that are applied to the object. If the selected object uses process CMYK colors there is no percentage of brown. The brown is going to be created by mixing percentages of primary cyan, magenta, yellow and black colors. The same thing goes for RGB colors; it's a mixture of red, green and blue primary colors. If the selected object uses a spot color, such as Pantone 469, then that is indeed a brown color. The color can be applied in various percentages to lighten it. Spot colors often have qualities that cannot be reproduced within the gamut limits of normal CMYK process printing. The downside is each spot color will require a separate printing plate, which drives up the cost of a printing job. Spot colors usually must be used sparingly. It can be a chore to adjust CMYK or RGB percentages to get the fill color right on an object or even just part of a gradient. This is why it's usually a good idea to carefully develop a good color scheme of pre-mixed colors in Illustrator's swatch palette. It's a good way to keep colors consistent. ... View more

I just sent an email. Thanks for the email address. ... View more

From what you've said it sounds like a long time ago the canvas was smaller than it is now - how much smaller and when was this?  And why did they increase it back then? Illustrator previously had a 120" X 120" maximum art board size. If I recall correctly it changed to the current 227" X 227" limit in the year 2000 with the release of Illustrator 9, the first AI version featuring native PDF support. Adobe had released the first version of InDesign late in 1999 and it was completely built upon PDF technology. It too had a 227" X 227" maximum art board size. I still remember how some Quark users laughed at it, dismissing it as another version of PageMaker just with a different name. Tech is always increasing, getting bigger, better, faster etc.   If Adobe don't scale and improve all the features of all their products, that's when they start to become outdated...  And from my perspective the 227" limits are waaay out of date.  Our designs are bigger and better and more complex then they were 5 years ago, and we need software to suit - and don't give me stuff about computers not being able to handle it!  If anyone's doing serious design then they'll usually have a computer that can handle a decent processing workload I still see the 227" X 227" limit as something which affects only a niche group of users, such as myself. There's plenty of other basic things Adobe could do to improve Illustrator that would benefit all designers. Being able to numerically size, position and align text according to capital letter height would be a huge improvement, not just for sign design tasks, but also pixel-based design tasks too. That's just one example. BTW, I've requested that feature numerous times over the years to no avail. Sign making applications are able to do it, but nothing else apparently. A different "big" Illustrator format, similar to Photoshop's .PSB file format, might be a worthy solution. But such a solution is only as good as its ability to transport artwork outside of Illustrator and into other graphics industry applications not made by Adobe. There's already plenty of headaches involved porting artwork between CorelDRAW and Adobe Illustrator due to certain effects and functions that are entirely dependent on their host applications, as well as various "lost in translation" glitches that occur in the export/import process -which is one of the big reasons why I use both those rivals applications. I'm using two different RIP applications for two different large format printers, VersaWorks for an older VersaCamm printer and Onyx 12 for a newer HP Latex 360 printer. It's critical for artwork generated in Illustrator to work correctly in those RIP applications. Add Flexi Sign 12 into the mix for a lot of general purpose sign making tasks and some custom computer routing table software. No one single software vendor has all the bases covered fully in my line of work. Edit: regarding computers not being able to handle work load, etc., it doesn't take an especially powerful modern computer to run mainstream graphics applications like Illustrator well. I wouldn't recommend a cheap, entry level PC, but Illustrator does not demand a top of the line machine either. Most modern desktop computers and notebooks have to do all sorts of demanding things just for entertainment, like running HD quality video smoothly. A little over a decade ago it required a pretty stout machine to play 1080p content without dropping frames; today it's no big deal. There are things you can do in Illustrator that will really tax any computer system, but it's not something you're going to do by accident. These days I would put a greater premium on high quality monitors and good color management hardware/software. ... View more

"That's not an accurate statement." Please explain why my statement about Illustrator's math limits is not accurate. My observations are based on using a lot of different vector-based drawing applications. "I wouldn't call CorelDRAW a professional mainstream application." This is another blanket statement that demands specifics to support it. Usually I hear this statement coming from Mac users who have never actually touched a copy of CorelDRAW before but use their Mac-bias to dismiss CorelDRAW anyway due to its PC roots. I've been using both Adobe Illustrator and CorelDRAW for over 20 years. There are some things Illustrator does indeed do better than CorelDRAW. There are plenty of things CorelDRAW does better than Illustrator. That includes a lot of very basic things, such as positioning and controlled alignment of objects, type and anchor points. Those things make CorelDRAW a breeze to use for tasks like technical drawings or artwork that needs a precise, technical look to it. Illustrator just kills you with all the extra, wasteful clicks and jumping around through different menus and palettes just to do simple things. Freehand even beat down Illustrator in this regard. Even with hundreds of dollars worth of plug-ins added (like Hot Door CAD tools) Illustrator is still cumbersome to use. "If we all designed billboards with simple grid systems of 1"=1' then yes it wouldn't be a big issue. But we use different grid systems and different units. Pixel based grids are very hard to manage if you need to recalculate them al the time and then export assets in 1=1 scale." First, designing for outdoor is a very different animal than designing for a printed page a reader holds in front of him or reads from some kind of electronic screen. Keeping the elements organized on a grid, as opposed to eye-balling the placement of objects, is good. But the designer has to be thinking about elements like lettering in terms of actual character size and the legibility of the message to a driver in speeding vehicle rather. Thinking about type in point size and distance from one baseline to the next doesn't work in sign and billboard design. I see lots of bad billboard and sign design on the landscape. The designer makes choices that seem to look good on a computer screen or printed proof, but fails to be legible when actually installed in the real world landscape. It's especially frustrating when the designer knows better, but has a client overriding his advice and forcing the design to be ineffective. I've been through that situation many times. Second, it's not difficult to choose a pixel grid that divides easily in scale. If I'm including rasterized art from Photoshop in a billboard layout 300ppi artwork on a 1" = 1' scale layout is perfectly acceptable. At full size the raster imagery is 25ppi, which is more than enough for passing vehicles. "Also, the canvas size limitation makes it notoriously difficult to manage multiple pages, especially if they are long and need to be rearranged / realigned. Multiply it by ill-thought canvas based grids and you get a real issue on your hands." If I'm going to design a multi-page document, especially one with lots of pages I'm absolutely not going to use Illustrator for that purpose. InDesign is far more appropriate. ... View more

In my opinion, Adobe has a bunch of other more important issues to fix regarding Illustrator rather than completely revamping how its art boards work (and possibly creating a bunch of other problems in Illustrator and other CC apps in the process) just to achieve a larger max art board size. If a project I'm working on is too big for Illustrator's size limits I work in scale, such as 1" = 1', 10% of actual size, 25% of actual size, etc. Most the time service bureaus, such as ones that do grand format billboard printing, are going to want artwork submitted in some scale, with 1" = 1' being the one most often requested. They can blow the artwork up to full size in their RIP software/hardware they're using. A 227" X 227" limit may seem ridiculous, but that's a big enough work space for most people and the scale workarounds I described are not difficult to manage. I can remember when Illustrator had a much smaller max art board size. If Adobe did get around to messing with Illustrator's math foundations, a bigger max art board size might be one thing to put on the check list of things to fix. There's several others as well -issues that didn't affect Illustrator's dead rival, Macromedia Freehand. ... View more

In regards to Acrobat DC, that is included in a full Creative Cloud subscription. I use Acrobat DC quite a bit. Typekit is another CC service one didn't get in a regular Master Collection CS suite. Adobe does have quite a few commercial typefaces from many foundries that would cost an arm and a leg to buy in the regular way versus sync-ing the fonts to the computer. Nevertheless, I get pretty annoyed by "gimmick" features and lack of attention being paid to issues that have frustrated users for many previous version releases. I don't have very many complaints about Photoshop in this regard, but I do have quite a few long-standing ease of use complaints about Illustrator. Take object alignment for instance. Too many extra clicks involved and other hang-ups. Meanwhile supposedly inferior applications like CorelDRAW do it a whole lot better. That app in particular is so much easier to use for creating technical drawings than Illustrator. The engineers need to pay more attention to improving ease of use, precision and application speed rather than piling in more gimmicks. Illustrator has strange math issues dating back to its earliest days that remain unsolved. Rival and now dead apps like Freehand didn't have that problem. ... View more

Yeah, I've been wondering about "CC 2016" (months overdue now) much less thinking about 2017. We're paying $600 per year, which is the equivalent of buying a Master Collection upgrade every time it is released, regardless if it's a great upgrade or not. Under the subscription model Adobe is under pressure to deliver product improvements on a steady, sustained basis. Can't really take 6 months to a year off and still collect all those checks. IMHO, there is far too much influence coming in from stock investors who don't even use the products. Investors just spit-ball stuff about mobile apps, iPads and other toys and demand far too much of Adobe's development efforts be concentrated on that rather than the "tent pole" applications like Photoshop & Illustrator that provide a foundation for the rest of the suite. Adobe's actual customers don't spend the bulk of their work time creating art on little devices. The work is done on real computers, mainly big desktop machines with huge monitors and notebooks if you're on the go. Phones and tablets might be fun, but they're impractical. The novelty of playing around in a mobile app on a phone wears off very quickly once the user figures out he can't do things nearly as fast or precise. ... View more

Application bloat and hodge-podge code seems to be the new normal in software development, although there's nothing really all that new about it. Adobe isn't the only vendor whose products are afflicted with it. The very operating systems we use are very polluted with this stuff. All sorts of different modules and libraries of pre-existing code are often Frakensteined together to create a modern Mac or Windows application rather than writing them carefully from scratch line by line. The applications are so huge in file size it takes an army of different software engineers to bring it all together. The companies are often out-sourcing a bunch of the coding grunt work overseas and possibly adding in a language barrier between software development teams. I'm sure quality control issues can arise from that. I still have my old 3.5" floppy disc installers of Photoshop 2.5 and Illustrator 4 from the early 1990's, partly to have for laughs to show how fat the modern programs are compared to applications 20+ years ago. Back when RAM cost $40 per megabyte and the OS had a very tiny amount of memory available for pre-loading various things it was far more necessary for software companies to fine tune their code. Not anymore. I think this is one of the reasons why computer security has turned into such a whack-a-mole situation. Or maybe a Hydra might be a better description for it. ... View more

The issue of the 227" size limit has been discussed across numerous threads in this forum and other design forums over the years. I wish I could remember (or find) the technical explanation of why that limit is in place. No mainstream vector drawing program or page layout program has an unlimited canvas size or unlimited zoom either. I think there are mathematical trade-offs with building in a larger maximum size canvas. Corel DRAW has a 1800" X 1800" canvas size limit. Even with a page sized at 1200" X 1200" when you zoom out to see your entire design you'll get hit constantly with the message box: "this zoom has exceeded the boundaries of the drawing space; your window will be adjusted accordingly." There may be a math penalty involved Corel DRAW's much larger maximum canvas size and maximum zoom of 264439%. Corel DRAW can edit object dimensions only to three decimal places while Illustrator can edit to four decimal places. Corel DRAW only allows whole percentage numbers on CMYK or RGB fill formulas while Illustrator allows editing up to two decimal places on fill formula percentages. Corel DRAW's gradient fills have a maximum of 999 steps, but default to just 256. The gradients in Illustrator are far less prone to banding. I'm glad Adobe recently improved Illustrator's maximum zoom level. The 6400% limit was pretty bad. At least 64000% allows for more precise editing. Some sign making programs, like Flexi, allow for much larger page sizes. But I've seen object editing and placement accuracy take a hit at giant scales. And application performance can get unpredictable. I used to crash CASmate when trying to do weld & cut operations on some really huge objects. Sometimes I'd see a warning box pop up, saying "floating point: square root of negative integer," then the program window would disappear right along with my work. I've been using both Illustrator and Corel DRAW for things like sign & billboard design for more than 20 years. Both have their own unique strengths, weaknesses and annoying limitations. So far there hasn't been enough overlap where one matched the rival's strengths enough for me to go with either one exclusively. One thing I don't like about that situation is it confines me to only using Windows. ... View more

I wish Adobe Illustrator would give users the option to delete extraneous anchor points on paths (such as those that occur in auto-tracing) without deleting parts of the path itself. The "simplify" option is an arguably crude tool that affects the path on a global basis. Sometimes only a small portion of a path needs clean-up work. I can't delete errant points on a path with the Direct Selection tool without deleting segments of the path. One of Illustrator's rivals, CorelDRAW, has a similar "simplify" command to clean up junk points on a path. However, one can use the "shape" tool to individually select anchor points and delete them. When the points are deleted the overall path still remains. CorelDRAW does its best to maintain the original shape of the path, but with junk points deleted the resulting path will be more smooth. If parts of the path itself need to be deleted the shape tool can be used to quickly break apart the path via selected anchor points. ... View more

A recent episode of "Silicon Valley" on HBO reminded me of this situation. Richard Hendricks and his genius software engineer cohorts, Gilfoyle and Dinesh are suffering working for a CEO who is now running the company Hendricks started. During one conversation the old CEO Jack Barker tells Hendricks the product they're really selling is their stock, not any great software that advances computing. Investors are the real customers, not computer users. I know I have repeated this before, but Adobe has the creative computing industry over a barrel. That will continue to be the case as long as there are no truly viable alternatives to industry standard applications like Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and After Effects. If anything, more of Adobe's applications are rising to "industry standard" level due to missteps of rivals. Premiere Pro is nearing that status thanks in part to Apple's mistakes with Final Cut X. Adobe's competitors simply have to try a lot harder. They're not doing good enough to challenge the near monopoly now. The only short term alternative many of us have to digging out older perpetual license versions of Adobe's software and trying to get by with that. Changes in new computers and new versions of operating systems kills compatibility with that stuff unfortunately. ... View more

The issue with Adobe doesn't seem unique to me. Investor demands have created a tail wagging the dog situation with a great deal of the personal computing industry. Investors wonder why sales of new PCs are in the toilet, but they fail to realize they're part of the answer to why. Investors have forced developers to throw lots of resources into making software for tablets, phones, watches and other toys. These people must have serious ADHD issues. News flash: I still do the vast majority of my real computing work on a real personal computer. The computing industry needs to return its focus back to PCs and stop having developers running madly in circles (not to mention off-shoring so much of that work). The current Mac Pro "tower," which looks more like a little coffee bean grinder for the kitchen is a clear sign the money people have no clue just what power users need. That little micro tower was built so it could only accept any expansion cards made specfically for it. For video acceleration it is stuck with mid-range level AMD D300 and D500 FirePro cards. Top of the line beasts like the AMD FirePro W9100 or nVidia Quadro M6000 won't fit in that little dinky cylinder. Meanwhile an off the shelf PC tower can fit 2, 3 or even 4 of those cards, provided the buyer's wallet is deep enough. I've tried playing around with some of the mobile apps Creative Cloud has available for Android. The novelty wears off very quickly. The tools are too primitive. The Samsung Note 5 screen is big for a phone, but it's too tiny for getting real work done. At best I can only get started on something, but I still have to take the project to a real desktop PC or notebook to get it finished. It would be nice if there were real viable alternatives to Adobe's software. From what I'm seeing, Adobe's rivals don't have their act together any better. I use Corel DRAW for a great deal of my sign design work since its technical drawing tool set just blows the doors off Adobe Illustrator. The Illustrator team can't make something as simple as anchor point alignment easy to do. In Illustrator it takes lots of extra clicks to do something I can get done in Corel in only a click or two. With that being said, Corel DRAW has its own problems. I frequently deal with the same kind of choppy performance I've been seeing in the Adobe applications running on my workstation. This is why I suspect there are even larger issues present in Mac OSX and Windows. Corel DRAW still can't do some simple things Adobe Illustrator has always been able to do, like paste vector paths into Photoshop. I've tried all kinds of graphics applications over the past 20 or so years and have yet to see anything that would be a truly worthy replacement to Photoshop and/or Illustrator. Every "Photoshop-killer" that comes along always has some serious limitation to it. Until Adobe's rivals can step up their A-game Adobe will continue to have much of the graphics market cornered. ... View more

This performance thing going on with Photoshop is a huge mystery to me. Photoshop CC 2015 seems to run just fine on my now-aging, nearly 5 year old notebook computer (Dell XPS, Win 7 Ultimate, Core i7, 8GB RAM, 2GB GeForce GT 540M, 1080p RGB LED display). I've never experienced the lag issues on it. But my work PC has given me headaches. It's a newer Dell desktop with 24GB of RAM and a more powerful nVidia desktop video card. One thing I'm wondering is how many people running multiple monitor setups are experiencing this kind of lag. That's one difference between my work setup and notebook at home. I imagine it could have something to do with operating systems. However, I find it strange that both Mac and Windows users seem to be affected. How much of this lag problem is happening on systems running nVidia cards versus cards from ATI or some other vendor? My work PC will run fine for a period of time. But the lag seems to come back when the wrong combination of updates gets delivered from Microsoft, nVidia and Adobe. I had one update from nVidia last week that I had to uninstall by way of the computer totally crashing, getting into a reboot loop and finally faulting into safe mode. Thankfully selecting the last restore point got the computer back to normal, but the process ate up about 45 minutes of my time. I think Microsoft was pushing through some critical update while the nVidia driver was trying to install. It's a whole lot of fun booting up a computer in the morning and having various pieces of software shoving updates at the machine, seen or unseen. ... View more

Here's one possible tip for Windows users. It doesn't necessarily solve the problem, but may eliminate quite a bit of the lag. I turned off most of the UI bells and whistles in Windows 10. Go to Control Panel, use the search field in the upper right corner and type the key word "performance." I un-checked everything and re-started. The lag was all but gone. I had to turn on a couple features like Smooth on-screen type so the interface wouldn't look like it was vomited up from the 1990's. Still, the machine is running better than it did. Not perfect though. ... View more

Okay, so here we are on Tuesday with yet another series of patches from Microsoft pushed to my desktop PC not even a week after get a big load of updates last Thursday. nVidia pushed out another video card driver update. End result: the PC overall is running even worse without having launched any Adobe applications yet. The choppy performance has this machine behaving like a 12 year old museum piece relic rather than a still fairly modern and well equipped desktop PC. The only way this garbage seems to cure itself is when Microsoft, nVidia and Adobe get lucky and hit upon something that works. Then the machine runs pretty nice for awhile, all until the next security update or whatever breaks everything yet again. ... View more

What software company isn't outsourcing a bunch of its development to other countries? They're all in on that racket to shrink labor costs, especially if the company is a publicly traded one. The lag issues I've been experiencing on my own desktop machine at work have indeed been worsened or brought back from the dead immediately following a Patch Tuesday event. Disagree with me if you like, but I am seeing real cause and effect problems system-wide. Things will going along smoothly. Then I get a nice big Patch Tuesday update. The lag returns from the dead, rearing its ugly head. Then Adobe and/or nVidia releases new updates for software or video drivers respectively. That sometimes deals with the problem. Then Patch Tuesday rolls around again and goofs up the works yet again. Whether one vendor or another is developing their software, drivers, etc. correctly within the platform makes no difference to me (especially with a long history of "anything goes" development style with so many Windows-based applications). I only know that these companies are not on the same page with each other. I don't care who is at fault and I shouldn't have to care either. I just want the problem fixed. Obviously that means people from Adobe, Microsoft, nVidia, ATI, etc. all probably need to have some serious technical conversations with each other. As it stands, I'm stuck using Adobe's software because their competitors (such as Corel) don't have it together nearly well enough for me to ditch Adobe's software completely. There are no real credible alternatives. But I can switch platforms if the situation on Windows becomes a big enough mess. Strangely enough, based on comments in this thread, it looks like things aren't a whole lot better on the Mac platform either. ... View more

I can't speak to the issues of lag in Photoshop happening for Mac OSX platform users. On the Windows side, I very strongly suspect Microsoft is contributing to these issues with their various maintenance patches. A "patch Tuesday" -or in this case "patch Thursday" will come along and screw up the performance of Adobe applications. My desktop PC running Windows 10 Pro was running the latest versions of Photoshop and Illustrator just fine yesterday. This morning I'm seeing the return of some of the irritating lag. It's not just in Photoshop either. It seems to be a more system-wide thing, affecting Adobe Illustrator and even non-Adobe software like CorelDRAW. Sometimes I wonder if Microsoft is doing this garbage on purpose -sort of like its dirty tricks campaign it pulled against rival software developers back in the early 1990s, which led to anti-trust legal action against the company. They would change something in the OS to make rival office application software run poorly while MS Office wouldn't be affected. There are so many possible configurations for Windows-based PCs these days, everything from a cheap HDMI memory stick like device that plugs a basic Windows PC into your TV set all the way to ultra high end workstations that cost $20,000, $30,000 or even more. It's pretty difficult for the OS and software running on it to perform properly on all those different kinds of devices. It would be nice if Microsoft could at least nail down some real hardware and software standards for the Windows platform. I'm under the impression Microsoft is still letting developers do whatever they want to do to keep the platform far bigger than anything else. ... View more