1) Visio was ONE example of software that does basic object layout. There are many more. The point is this type of software has been done to death and is not complicated (Visio is much more complicated and I wasn't going to go though a laundry list of others). The original poster said PENG is complicated - it is not that complicated.
2) I haven't complained about "features".
3) If it's so easy why didn't you tell me how. If you want to show me how easy it is I'll post the code and you can show me. Is repeating a code normal? Why does it only happen in a macro? Which is broken, the button or the macro? I guess it's a feature it works differently in a macro. :-)
As for complete rewrites of software, that just means the first versions were poor and this version likely is as well since it's from the same people. Proper layering and encapsulation means you don't have to completely rewrite software. Making your GUI independent of the underlying data representation means continual improvement of the editor without worrying about data format changes. These are beginner topics for any programmer.
Also, proper unit testing of this software would not have allowed these obvious defects to reach the light of day. It's obvious that testing is lacking. Plus, proper testing makes software cheaper, not more expensive. Needless to say, system testing doesn't appear any better that any unit testing that may exist. One thing the rise of lightweight Agile development processes have caused is some of the most ardent hacks have realized the importance of test first. Some people still haven't realized it.
Let me reiterate for the people who have such strong emotion about a hunk of software, I don't think the product is unusable. It has some obvious bugs that point to poor quality control. Without seeing the actual development, at least we can see testing needs serious work. But, the defects could have been introduced in the design phase. Doesn't matter, they're still defects.
