Close
Okay, lemme try this a bit differently. I fear I have been gravely misunderstood.

This is how Wikipedia defines "vector graphics":

Vector graphics is the use of geometrical primitives such as points, lines, curves, and shapes or polygon(s), which are all based upon mathematical equations, to represent images in computer graphics.
This is how Adobe (http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/11.0/WSFC1ADF5B-7FC2-472c-A823-8696008CECA8a.html) defines "Vector shapes" for use in Photoshop:

Vector shapes are lines and curves you draw using the shape or pen tools. Vector shapes are resolution-independent—they maintain crisp edges when resized, printed to a PostScript printer, saved in a PDF file, or imported into a vector-based graphics application. You can create libraries of custom shapes and edit a shape’s outline (called a path) and attributes (such as stroke, fill color, and style). ... The mode you choose to draw in determines whether you create a vector shape on its own layer, a work path on an existing layer, or a rasterized shape on an existing layer.
If you use the pen tool+shape layers to draw something in Photoshop, it will not create pixels, it will create a shape layer that is "resolution-independent" using "points and curves". If you rasterize this shape layer, it becomes like any other layer in Photoshop. It is no longer resolution-independent; it cannot be scaled down or up because it is no longer a vector. As long as the shape layer is not rasterized, it remains resolution-independent and is defined as a "vector."

The whole point of vectoring, as I always thought, was to create scalable graphics. Photoshop has this capability. If you want to use the pen tool+paths and stroke/fill your lines, that's totally different and all raster based, but that isn't what I'm talking about.

I haven't said Photoshop is the best program for vectoring, nor have I even said Photoshop is a vector-based program ('cause it isn't), but it DOES (unless Adobe is lying) possess BASIC (key word here) vectoring capabilities.

For example, Winamp is mostly thought of as an audio player, but that doesn't mean it can't be used for playing video. It doesn't have a screencap option (to the best of my knowledge), and its original purpose wasn't designed specifically for video playback, but that doesn't mean it can't play video at all.