Ben

What link???

Are you trying to write to a network share or USB? Is the destination folder locked or have permissions? Or are you trying to overwrite an existing file?

That's why I can only be accurate to three decimal places when giving a % complete figure. But, as some people will already know - the last 10% takes 90% of the time.

Yeah - some of us like to sleep in between working days.

Sure. Precisely 63.174%. Precisely. ...if that makes you happy. I measured it with my "finger in the air". Of course, that has absolutely nothing to do with what day we will actually start the Beta.

That will be because this feature has not been released yet. It will all be in 1.7.

Maybe they were added as an overly complicated way of achieving what we have tried to make simpler with the grids and axis feature...? I've only ever seen people use this for setting up isometric angles.

Does Illustrator just offer you this because it doesn't have the grid and axis features that we have?

ok - it's something I can definitely look into for 1.7.

It's a tricky one...

The 15° increments only applies to rotation steps - it's not used for constraining (which is what happens when you hold Shift during a move or creation action). Constraining is performed on grid axis, and with an option to constrain to "intermediate angles". On a regular grid - that equates to the 45° position. On another grid, such as an isometric, it'll be whatever angles is half way between the respective grid axis. So - internally, there is no concept of an angle as such - it is derived from the grid axis angles. We define these things in generic terms internally, so what I'd probably add is an option to set the divisions at which constraining occurs - currently only 1/2, but could add 1/3, 1/4, etc, up to a sensible maximum. We currently don't have the concept of "fixed" angles, and I'd have to think hard about how I could add that without compromising the way we define our grids. As Alred says, we don't want it to get too cluttered - as it would detract from usability. 1/4 divisions might be a sensible maximum.

The concern I had was that the OSX installer has comments saying it's going to require third party libraries related to file system extensions. Not something required by any other cloud service, so I'd have my concerns as to why its needed specifically for this. Also - if it is that closely coupled with Finder, but not using the standard methods for file update watching, I'd be very hesitant to install it on my dev machines. We'd have to find a machine that we don't mind having to reinstall if everything starts misbehaving. Also, if it is that unstable, doesn't sound like a very reliable solution for file backup. This is also the first time I'd heard of pCloud - so I doubt many of our other users use it. Usually it's iCloud, OneDrive, GoogleDrive, DropBox.

This should be fixed in 1.7.

And, to end the discussion, I'll just say that 1.7 will let you snap curve handles to grid, geometry, anything you want... it will be an option, to allow snapping handles to happen the same as snapping nodes, so it can be turned on for those that require the feature. This will be separate to the constraining features I demoed earlier showing constraining of handles directions and snapping lengths. the two features will live together, but you can use one or both.

I'm guessing that the grid pitch you'd use for this approach would be quite tight/small? Essentially giving you something similar to snap to pixel, but in your own units? The use case presented early on showed a very coarse grid - that did't leave much control artistically speaking. As I've said before, if people present a real use case to justify a feature, then I'm more likely to find ways to make it happen. Wanting snap to grid where the grid is 10% pitch of the design size, that just seemed counter-productive and very restrictive from an artistic point of view. Of course, you will be able to do that now, if that's really what you need. *ahem*