I have come to the conclusion that my feelings toward Pro can be summarised as follows.
In ArcMap I looked for workarounds due to limitations. This process is rewarding and stimulating.
In Pro I feel as if I spend a lot of time looking for workarounds due to bugs, bad performance, or UI/UX design flaws. I experience this process as frustrating, mind numbing, and distracting.
You're on a roll doing some cool work for a client and then BANG - you get an error about spaces in a path.
I did the same workflow a few weeks ago on the same project with the same data so obviously I did something wrong? Wrong. I made the mistake of applying an update in the hope that something else is fixed!
OK. Now distracted from the client's slope problem, how do I fix the process problem?
Restart Pro and clear cache always !works... Nope.
It must be the data - something new was added? After 15 min - Nope.
Start another machine and do the same thing in 3.3.5 - guess what. It works fine.
There goes 30min of wasted time and 60min of distraction while trying to get back into focus to solve the client's slope problem.
Is Pro useful? Yes. More than ArcMap? Yes.
Was it good at launch in 2015? No.
Has it improved over the last DECADE? Yes. A lot.
Is it 'good' to use? Maybe, as long as what you're doing doesn't brickwall you into its issues.
Should 7 figures in licensing cost for a single person come with less frustration than stuff that cost a few hundred a year? For sure.
Where should Pro be in another 10 years?
Where can we lodge Ideas for ArcGIS Next?
Who should guide the requirement spec for ArcGIS Next?
