Backwards Compatibility - PLEASE

[bpoppe]

After thinking about this and that feature I'd like I've settled on one that would make me so happy.

Backwards compatibility! Please! I'd like the file to survive one generation back. Perhaps that could be a standard from now on. The file format stays static for two releases. i.e. 2007-2008 Revit format, 2009-2010, 2011-2012, etc....

My main project is still in Revit 2010 because one of our consultants is not using 2011 (and now 2012) software. Instead of Architects leading the way to new versions of software, we're the caboose, waiting for all other team members to upgrade so we can all still communicate.

That's all I really want. Keep the format static for two releases, OR.... provide the capability to save back to a former release.

Please, oh, please!

Thanks.

[cdatechguy]

Isn't gonna happen.....code is changed way too much release to release...If something got fixed in a later release that had issues in a previous release....what do you think will happen? It will just break again as the previous release won't know how to operate from the new release.

As for your current project....could be worse...you could be using 2009 still (one of our projects is still in 2009)

[Scott D Davis]

Simple really: you as the architect hire the consultants. They work FOR YOU! If they don't want to listen to their client and upgrade when you do, you find someone else that will. Especially when it comes to MEP and Structure! The 2012 release is 100 times better than the 2010 release.

[Alan aka cadalot]

Scott - How long is it since you worked in the real world.

The Architect is no longer King!

[bpoppe]

Scott,

Please take this with the the good manners it's intended to have, but I have a real problem with someone from AutoDesk saying that the solution is "just send money".

We're an office of (right now) under 10 architects. Some of our consultants are sole-proprietor and are making choices on how to keep their doors open rather than whether the new release is worth it.

The point is, in this model, we have to stay at the level of the lowest release number in our design team. I would love to be on 2011 or 2012 but without the capability of saving down a release or even having a file format stay constant for just two releases I can't.

Added to that's there's the fun of running multiple projects, some with the "lowest release" consultant in 2010 and another in 2011. Go ahead, double click that .rvt file. Which version is going to open? Do you feel lucky? Well do you?

And if you think it's just $X for the release, please also consider the $Y increase if the workstation needs upgraded or replaced.

Please consider these three options.
1. "Save As" to a previous version,
2. Keep the file format constant for two releases (or provide a support pack to allow, for example, 2010 to read 2011 files),
3. Provide a stand alone file converter to roll back a file to a previous release.

Please consider one of those options. Any of the three would be welcome.

Thanks!

[Scott D Davis]

someone from AutoDesk saying that the solution is "just send money".

First, this is my own opinion, and does not necessarily reflect the views of Autodesk. I also worked in the industry for 14 years.

Next, I never said "just send money". I said, tell your consultants that you need them to work following your lead. You, as the architect, hire these consultants! If they are fighting to keep you as a customer, they will upgrade. And this doesn't mean "send money". They are almost certainly on subscription, so they have already paid for the upgrade. The tools are better, so the consultants can be more productive and produce better work. Why are you letting your consultants hold you back?

As for the cost of doing business ie: computer upgrades, downtime for installation, etc., that is just a normal price of running a business. Computers/hardware/training/pencils/paper all need to be part of the budget.

[bpoppe]

Scott,

I understand your point.

However, I am still asking for the ability to "save down" or "save as" a previous version to be included in a future release.

Respectfully,
Brian

[Alan aka cadalot]

I also worked in the industry for 14 years.

You, as the architect, hire these consultants! If they are fighting to keep you as a customer, they will upgrade..

Not a very IPD or Partnering view I must say!

OK we have established that you worked in Industry for 14 years, but how long have you been out of the snakepit? There are many cases where the Architect is no longer the person in control of the project team, and does not hire the consultants. Clients and Project Managers, Quantity Surveyors have taken that power that Architects enjoyed 30, 20 or even 15 years ago away from them.

Re The current economic climate, I let the Architect spend a week working from my office because he no longer had an up to date copy of the NBS to create a specification as he did not pay to maintain it as he had not used it for over 12 months and he was having to let good people go due to the recession and the general reduction in workload.

These are hard times, Autodesk did the same with AutoCAD for a while until a compeditor (Bently I seem to recall}, produced a way of rolling or saving back, then Autodesk changed their mind, shame Tekler can't do this for Revit instead of giving their version of Navisworks away for FREE

I suspect the real reason that Autodesk does not want to do this is because it takes programming time and that currently you still have not fixed the BASICS in Revit and hopefully would rather do that.

It is possible to do, it takes time and money like everything.

At lease try and make the shortcut icons significantly different, and get the installing program to install the correct ones. see http://cadalot-revitlearningcurve.bl...todesk-uk.html

My 2 pence worth.

[tomnewsom]

Simple really: you as the architect hire the consultants. They work FOR YOU!

Hah! If only! Can't remember the last (larger than domestic) project where we sat in the biggest chair. Project managers and quantity surveyors run jobs now, and keep all the consultants on short leashes.

That said, I understand the technical reasons for the lack of backwards compatibility. Bit of a shame that they clash with the subscription-handcuffs method of distribution.