Simple reason to avoid ArcGIS Pro-

[TheoFaull]

It's too slow.

The system requirements are too high. The program installed for me (just!) but using it is a jumpy, laggy experience. For geospatial analysis and editing, you need something quick and snappy. Pro (1.4.1) just isn't that.

I'm not in a position in my office to request having more RAM, a new CPU, graphics card etc. so I'm stuck.

I've change all the display options for best performance and it's still too slow. Here is my Shift+E readout:

Pro needs moire customising options relating to performance vs quality (one example off the top of my head: remove the glowing outline fade after editing a shape. Instead just have it change instantly.)

ArcMap 10.4 runs fine, using the exact same datasets. Other software runs fine.

I get that ESRI are going for a more flashy and graphical interface, but at the cost of slower performance? That shouldn't be the case...

My specs:

Windows 7:

[AlexanderGray]

More things change the more they stay the same...  I remember this exact same discussion when ArcInfo 8.0.1/8.0.2 and ArcGIS 8.1 was release.  The thing was a beast, it needed 1GB RAM to run properly, imagine.  At the time esri only had minimum specs which were for a relatively high end workstation at the time but ridiculously low for ArcMap.  Minimum spec, to me, means it will start up, play around and that's it.  Recommended spec means it will start up and I will be able to use it for real work.  Optimal spec it will fly but I will probably not be able to justify it.

[BillEveringham]

I'm not a fan of AGS Pro... I guess I'm just use to Desktop.  I've tried using it, but just get frustrated.

[TonyAppel1]

Ditto: Underspec'd machine.

The primary reason I use Pro over desktop in certain situations is the visualization of complex maps. Pro, with support of the GPU and 64bit , can draw and render complex maps with symbols, labels and the like far, far better than Desktop. There is no comparison

[thomasmontgomery1]

Pro is alright. The only thing I dont like so far is the tablet/phone type interface. Like microsoft did with windows 10 it looks like its designed for a touch screen but no one uses touch screen desktops.

[DanPatterson_Retired]

Microsoft Surface Studio ... and touch screen  

• 2TB Rapid Hybrid Drive

  32GB RAM

  NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 980M 4GB

[GrandLyon]

So I'm not alone in that case. We cannot install and use ArcGIS PRO just because system requirements are too high.

Second think is that we don't use ArcGIS PRO because we don't need it. ArcMap is just fine.

[CatherineBradley]

I have a memory issue also.  When I have the Pro help open, my email & Pro, I constantly have to minimize & reopen pro to have my screen update the Pro changes I made, like changing symbology or labeling or just moving screens around.  Very annoying & time consuming...

[DanPatterson_Retired]

I would consider 16 Gb the preferred minimum now.  I suspect that the "ok to run" tests don't reflect users having browsers and other fluff open at the same time

[JustinConnerWR]

I find the highlight fade to be overengineered in Pro (efforts that would've been better spent on bug-fixes).