Revit Architecture Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Revit Architecture Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Revit Architecture topics.
abbrechen
Suchergebnisse werden angezeigt für 
Anzeigen  nur  | Stattdessen suchen nach 
Meintest du: 

Idiocracy/Impractical: Not allowing saving files/families to previous years

11 ANTWORTEN 11
GELÖST
Antworten
Nachricht 1 von 12
elani-sciotto
740 Aufrufe, 11 Antworten

Idiocracy/Impractical: Not allowing saving files/families to previous years

On all the posts I've read, it seems to be the consensus that Autodesk will never allow saving elements like families or projects to previous versions. While I can see why this was just happenstance in early development, as the most commonly used tools have pretty much leveled out, why can't Autodesk allow saving to previous versions, especially for families? (!) We spend a lot of time in different versions for different reasons, most especially based on our consultants' widely varying capabilities. To be autocratic about which year we can develop our libraries for, ex. all my families in 2023 aren't able to port into a 2021 project which isn't going to upgrade due to small firm consultants. In case you're not aware, to keep multiple versions of any project or family is a nightmare to manage especially for small firms without a dedicated BIM management team and who aren't in the business of selling content. 

In other words, this post is a pointed rant at Autodesk for unfair practices, and will eventually make its way to a governmental board like the FTC or BBB. You're basically creating a B2B situation that is similar to denying us the "right to repair".  Outmoding our EXPENSIVE and TIMECONSUMING property, while writing yourself into the future no matter what.

Be aware, it is abundantly clear that the community is not behind you on this topic. All you have to do is look up how many posts there are and how much frustration they represent. Either create a plugin to do the job well and/or open this feature in Revit, or you'll start hearing from those with more power than your poorly treated client base. 

Beschriftungen (9)
11 ANTWORTEN 11
Nachricht 2 von 12
ToanDN
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

Wrong venue, this is an users forum. 

Also, if you want to succeed with your lawsuits in general, keep them between you and your lawyer, not broadcast it in public.

You are welcome!

Nachricht 3 von 12
elani-sciotto
als Antwort auf: ToanDN

Not threatening a lawsuit, only stating that this will eventually happen – it’s inevitable. Venue, okay – forums, don’t know what they’re for if not for conversing, even about things that aren’t technical or positive in nature.
Nachricht 4 von 12
HVAC-Novice
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

there are good reason backwards compatibility isn't possible. This isn't a conspiracy.

 

This is a forum for users helping users. Your post isn't designed to be helped, or to help anyone. The number of similar posts doesn't proof this is a wide-spread issue. It only proofs that people can't google. 

Revit version: R2025.4
Nachricht 5 von 12
mhiserZFHXS
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

Listen, subscription based services are a scam that needs to start being regulated, but one of the few positives of Autodesk's model is that there is NO reason not to stay up-to-date on software. Just upgrade your models and tell you consultants to do the same.

Nachricht 6 von 12
elani-sciotto
als Antwort auf: HVAC-Novice

I understand that there are good reasons – most status quo things, especially in software, have good reasons for whatever they are. However, I also believe there are VERY savvy folks working for Autodesk and complimentary companies that can solve this, even if it is a workaround like a plugin. The existing workaround, export as DXF or FBX is so time consuming and inadequate, it’s just silly. Obviously, I did google this, and I found a significant amount of frustration in many posts, also noted in posts on this exact forum. It is because of this, and the inadequate responses to the previous posts, that I believe this original post can be helpful to a lot of people.
Nachricht 7 von 12
elani-sciotto
als Antwort auf: mhiserZFHXS

I think you’re right, and that’s ultimately the way of the beast. But if there’s precedent set through AutoCAD re: back saving, then I’m a firm believer Revit teams can figure it out. Squeaky wheels get the grease, as they say. So when we relent, we’re saying okay – keep on keeping on just as you are. If we keep squeaking then, maybe, we’ll get the attention this topic needs. Unfortunately, I will most likely accept your comment as solution. Some of my consultants are 70+, and ain’t no way they’re upgrading – they’re on their way out, and my team will pay the price having to retrograde the elements in our library that we need. We live in a relatively limited options area, and this effects our operational costs and the price we can give to our clients in more ways than one. I suppose when those that won’t upgrade are out of the picture, it will no longer hurt as much …. Just disappointing.

Also, regulation = yes. Subscription + right to repair precedents go hand in hand as I see it (no, I’m not a lawyer, just a lay, frustrated architect).
Nachricht 8 von 12
syman2000
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

Sadly this isn't happening to Autodesk but to many other software. I've dealt with the Affinity product which follows the same method - you must upgrade to open the latest file. As well we see Microsoft, Apple and many others push for the same workflow and force users to upgrade to the latest and greatest version. It is like the entire software industries are pushing for the same hive mind. For users, it sucks to have to deal with this plan obsolesce.

Check out my Revit youtube channel - https://www.youtube.com/user/scourdx
Nachricht 9 von 12
mhiserZFHXS
als Antwort auf: syman2000


@syman2000 wrote:

For users, it sucks to have to deal with this plan obsolesce.


Its not planned obsolescence when they are giving you access to the new version. Planned obsolescence is programming a battery to stop working after x years.

 

There are certainly issues with Autodesk's business model. The amount of money they are raking in from a subscription based model has not lead to an increase in improvements made to the software. Complaining about issues that don't matter or are just made up dilutes those of us pushing for real improvements, so please stop.

Nachricht 10 von 12
HVAC-Novice
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

Did you read the article I linked? It isn't possible to be backwards compatible unless you want to give up many new features that require change to the file format. If it was for "status quo", it would be possible since status quo means nothing substantial changed or improved. 

 

I'm just giving a very simple example: Imagine in R2014 you had walls, but no slanted walls. In R2015 now you can have slanted walls and that requires new parameters to define that wall. If you would somehow open that in R20214, it would not know what to do with those parameters and most likely create garbage or crash. This isn't just MS Word where you write a text and Word 2000 basically created the same letters that Word365 does in 2023. So if they wanted to be backwards-compatible, they couldn't add many new features used in a model.  I'm oversimplifying this and I'm not a programmer. But you can imagine with all the interconnected functions in BIM, this is very complex. 

 

IMHO, best for the design team to agree on an upgrade path. But this is the team's task, not Autodesk's task. I understand it may not be your personal choice that your peers use a variety of versions. But it isn't Autodesk doing that. And it was clear from the beginning that this is the deal. Autodesk never promised any backwards functions. 

Revit version: R2025.4
Nachricht 11 von 12
elani-sciotto
als Antwort auf: HVAC-Novice

Nope I missed the link, reading it through email rather than the actual forum. Welp, this is the most thorough answer and it totally sucks… at least until it doesn’t as outlined in this bit of text from your linked blog and referenced podast:

“So that brings us back to freezing the file format as the only option we can consider. I mentioned earlier that this would slow down our development process because it makes it harder for teams to fix bugs (yes bug fixes often require format changes) and hinder our ability to give you the improvements being requested right here in Revit Ideas. In truth, we are looking to change the process in the other direction. We want to give you the latest and greatest as soon as it is available. We realise that that means reworking our install infrastructure and experience so that it is easier for you to get the latest version and increasing the reliability of upgrades so that you are able to trust the quality of the upgrade. We have not done a fantastic job of this to date, so there is a lot of space for us to improve. The ideal state is the Google Chrome experience. How many of you know which version of Chrome you’re running? We realise that there is a lot more complexity to installing and updating our software than Chrome, so I am not implying that this is the right solution, but that kind of simplicity of experience is the direction we want to pursue. Wouldn’t it be nice if you didn’t have to care about Revit versions in the first place? We think so and that’s why we’re archiving this issue. We understand that there is a problem, but we believe there is actually a better solution than backward compatibility."

So, there it is. I for one, have few thoughts on the matter. Do I at least wish families could be backwards compatible? Sure, but I know how Revit works, I have systems in place to work with it, so I don't worry about it. To be honest, I rather the effort by the development team be put into the future tools I need as a designer. The idea that in the future, I may not even have to worry about what version I am in, sounds VERY appealing. “

Nachricht 12 von 12
HVAC-Novice
als Antwort auf: elani-sciotto

Loadable families also change from year to year. For example, they changed the "offset from host" parameter. They also added many categories over the years and added hard-coded parameters and functions. How would you save a "plumbing equipment" family to an older version that didn't have that category? 

 

The new file format (even if it always is called "rvt" or "rfa") likely also will be more efficient and less prone to corruption. Like when MS changed from "doc" to "docx" it was for smaller files and less data corruption. (I know, this can be saved backwards, but a letter in Word still looks exactly the same like 20 years ago). I'm not old enough to have used it, but many of the features you take for granted nowadays came in year after year. I bet at some point they had simpler roofs, no curtain walls and so on and all that was added and wouldn't work in older versions. Or if you have a hydronic system with hydronic separation, and then save to an older version before hydronic separation existed? There probably are 1,000s of examples why any back-saving at minimum would require manual repair and preparation and would very likely result in crash or a totally messed up project.

 

Upgrading from an older to newer format is easy and the PC does all the work (yes, you need to do that for all linked files in a collaborative project). And with everyone on subscription everyone has access to the new version. but not everyone has access to an older version. For example, if you project is 2018, and you need to hire another sub-consultant, and they just recently acquired the license, they don't have access to older versions. 

 

I'm actually not aware of a complex design software that can save to older formats. Forget AutoCAD, that is just lines and circles and not comparable to the complexities of BIM.  None of my other engineering software can save to older versions. You basically always have the current version and that is it. if you contact support, they don't even talk to you before you install the latest version. Revit actually is the odd one out that still doesn't require up-to-date software. Most other software manufacturers are already on rolling and forced upgrades. I don't know how realistic this is, but my hope is Autodesk will force upgrades. That probably will be the only way to solve this (the alternative would be not to implement any new features)

Revit version: R2025.4

Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.

In Foren veröffentlichen  

Autodesk Design & Make Report