No matter what the reason is, no matter whether they are going to fix it or not, this is wrong, and causes problems. Even if you are planning everything ahead. Believe me.
Jeff, I also think this is a big problem. There is something no one is taking into consideration. Autodesk nowadays releases a new version every year, and it is not possible for EVERYBODY to keep up to date. Software is expensive!!! So the whole idea of making every consultant in the different fields to work BIM is actually taking business off from Autodesk. Why? Because it is not attractive to update to the latest Revit release when all the team and other consultants are still working on earlier versions. With all respect I also feel Revit's backward compatibility is something Autodesk needs to work on.
all the team and other consultants are still working on earlier versions.
This is what BIM is all about. All disciplines working together as a team
and all using the same tools. Otherwise it's not BIM.
abilyeu - Please continue to post your questions and thoughts - they are inportant to our community here. There are a few posters that you will need to take with a grain of salt - but please stay! We need people like you here. I am also an instructor at a local college and use this area a lot to get answers to my questions and answer the ones I can.
Revit users can be a bit dogmatic - forgive us!
No, it didn't need to be said. This is a forum and a question was asked. The answer was then given. You did not have to go off on this and try to pound your chest. Somewhere, someday, you will actually not know something and need information. Yes, it will even happen to you. And when that day comes, I hope Karma remembers...
I too am an instructor and if I taught my students that asking normal questions deserved a "rant" like this, the industry would suffer. Thanks to the rest of you who use this forum as a means of bettering ALL Revit users...
I am in agreement with Abilyeu, I believe this to be a serious design fault by Revit.
If other common drawing software [ which is most such as Auto Cad / Sketch up etc ] has the option to save back to a previous release –why not Revit ?
This is a necessity; consider any Architects office which may have various different versions
of software – with different release dates – think of the headache this would cause!!
Judging by many of the replies above, it would seem you all have shares in the product!
I have been requested by my office to give Revit Lt 2013 a trial run –
Which I have – now to learn I cannot save back to a previous version is a joke –
This flaw will be highlighted .
In general, I imagine that backwards compatibility would be an absolute nightmare to incorporate (if even possible without major flaws) as Revit is a program in constant evolution and development. Revit has often changed drastically between releases, as major functionality is revamped, new concepts are added, and existing tools and functions are completely revised or even outright removed.
Take, for example, Electrical Conduit. This was just added a few releases ago, so how would you image that Revit could translate that to a version prior to the introduction of Conduit? Mind you, and also maintain the functionality of related Conduit Schedules. And that's just one matter of concern.
Now regarding simple projects/families that use functions that haven't fundamentally changed, I image that it could be possible for someone to create a basic "translator" that could recreate the project/family in a previous version based on the data. However, this would probably be a massive undertaking and investment.
As mentioned previously, AutoCAD will lose advanced functionality and potentially run into problems saving previous versions. And since Revit is changing and contains so much information, one would likely have to suffer a huge loss of information to save backwards. (Probably only slightly better than the 'export to IFC, and import" trick!)
And its not that I'm against the concept of backwards compatibility, it just seems like it really would not be practical.
Welcome to the Autodesk forums, mswiertz and dftoon!
Feel free to post any questions you may have! There are many experienced users here who generously contribute their time and effort to supporting
their peers. This is an open, peer-supported forum, so feel free to contribute any useful information or experiences to any of the topics you see here.
We hope you'll stick around a while and help strengthen the value of this community!
Be sure to review the Ground Rules, visit the FAQ Forum, and use the Search feature prior to posting a question, as it's likely been asked before.
At the end of the day. We need to print the documents in black and white. im all for Revit. im the leader in the office. but right this exact moment I having the same dilemma. We are not asking to have the ability to save up, but to save down is crucial. Is the only way people will see the true advantages of having the latest version. It works for all software.
architects and engineer give great value to autodesk and the such. As the majority consumer shall have a voice in the overwhelming demand for an improvement by autodesk.
I am a student, and I have Revit 2012 on my own computer, but when I work from school, I use machines with Revit 2013. Many of my classmates are done using Revit, because they can not save down. One possible solution is to allow existing 2012 licenses to transfer to 2013 for free.
I don't think it is our duty to think if backwards compatibility is difficult or not, practical or impractical, etc. As with any other software, it is MANDATORY. It is up to the Autodesk software development people to figure it out. I mean, come on, they've built an exceptional piece of software, it's clear they have enough brains and creativity to make each new release work with previous ones. It is their job, not ours to figure it oug.
This compatibility takes place every single day in amost all software available, and it is really necessary. In fact I find it difficult to understand why some people are actually against the idea.
Not only that. If you try to workshare a project it turns out that not only the year version must be the same. But also the build version must be the same.