Who designed ArcGIS Pro?
It is absolutely the most cumbersome piece of software I have ever used!
It is so poorly designed compared to ArcMap, which is awesome. QGIS is not as difficult as ArcGIS Pro.
I have a strong feeling, if something is not done to correct this piece of shist, it will go the way of the dodo!!!!
It has such a huge learning curve and poor functionality I am sure most will reject it and you will need to keep making ArcMap.
The whole Microsoft toolbar approach is absurd. It may work on small programs such as Word or Excel, but using it on software as complex as ArcGIS Pro........not a chance for success. My work takes twice as long to do with Pro and I am sure this feeling is not mutually exclusive.
Give me ArcMap or Give me Death!!!!
Are you by any chance using Attribute Assistant (AA) to update SDE feature classes that are contained in feature datasets? If you are, you want want to look at this link and see the caveats to this setup as Pro with Attribute Rules (AR) is not even close right now to matching AA functionality in ArcMap.
Towards the bottom of this thread Joe Borgione mentions major deficiencies with AR compared to AA.
Michael Volz- since that post I've re-considered the 'why' AR is designed as it is: while I've been a fan of geodatabase replication since it's inception, feature data services are a more modern approach to data management. The workflow of the particular project I alluded to is more than likely going to get a complete re-alignment, or should I say adaptation...
Yes I am using AA and I love it!!!!
I run ArcMap and Pro on a machine with Server specs and Pro is still slow compared to ArcMap. I just don't think people are going to like it. I am not trying to be stubborn, I love new things, I use Linux OS's at home, so I am up for a challenge, but if I have to learn how to use ArcGIS all over again I may just switch to QGIS, free and has come a long way since it's inception. I do like the apps which come with Esri now though, but if ArcMap goes away, I may also.....
We use AA and would move to pro if it wasn't for this. We have AA set up for utility edits in a geometric network so that data is shared between upstream and downstream nodes and respective mains. I talked to developers at the UC and it sounds like a couple years before "Rules" is at the same level as AA.
I felt the same way for a while. Once I got used to it, though, it is now ArcMap that seems clunky. I'm not saying it isn't frustrating at first, but it gets better.
I understand as I have used ArcMap since it's inception and it crashed a lot. If you use Attribute Assitant (AA) you would beg to differ. AA saves me tons of time, I lose time using Pro. I will wait to see what happens with it and only test with it, but I can see any benefits other dual maps, projects, and profiles for my utilities, but I really don't need these things now.
Same here. I use AA daily and Pro "Rules" don't currently meet the needs of geometric networks. We keep getting pushed to move to Pro but AA is the deal-breaker; I asked about it at the last UC (rules for networks) and the Pro people said it's on the road-map but not a priority at this point.