Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not backwards compatible?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Not backwards compatible?

    Ok,
    So seeing that i am brand new to REVIT MEP.
    NOT EVEN KIDDING there...
    I have to learn Revit on the go.
    My question is.
    We are about to get a job, the company that we would work with is utilizing Revit 2011. We have Revit 2012.
    I was informed that these two are not compatible? WHY!!!! would you not have a backwards compatible program? Autocad is/does....
    SO, is this correct? We have the 2011 version. i guess no biggy there. but seems a bit retarded.. :bb::bb::bb::bb:

    also,
    i see the minimum requirements on the sites.
    What do you all run? what do you recommend as basic NEED TO HAVE requirements? I am tired of having the minimum. i want a workstation that will not hinder my work. no waiting. no crashes. no issues.....

    thanks
    Last edited by revit-mcs2011; May 27, 2011, 04:58 PM.

    #2
    Welcome to the forum, from a fellow Texan.

    Its not retarded, once you get in and understand the complexities of the program. My guess is it wont be backwards compatible ever, but thats just my guess.

    We are all running i7 2.67's with 8GB of RAM, minimum. Our current spec for desktops are i5 3.47's with 16GB of RAM.
    Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
    @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by revit-mcs2011 View Post
      Ok,
      So seeing that i am brand new to REVIT MEP.
      NOT EVEN KIDDING there...
      I have to learn Revit on the go.
      My question is.
      We are about to get a job, the company that we would work with is utilizing Revit 2011. We have Revit 2012.
      I was informed that these two are not compatible? WHY!!!! would you not have a backwards compatible program? Autocad is/does....
      SO, is this correct? We have the 2011 version. i guess no biggy there. but seems a bit retarded.. :bb::bb::bb::bb:

      also,
      i see the minimum requirements on the sites.
      What do you all run? what do you recommend as basic NEED TO HAVE requirements? I am tired of having the minimum. i want a workstation that will not hinder my work. no waiting. no crashes. no issues.....

      thanks
      Autocad is CAD, Revit is a BIM product...because of what BIM is there are no BIM products that are backward compatible, and there never will be. Autocad 2012 uses a buch of lines and so does Autocad 2010...a line is a line so there is no issue. With Revit everything has information built into it, lets say you take something from 2012 that you used some new materials on or something and took it back to 2008 where they used an other rendering software...how would it handle this change?

      Bottom line...Revit never has been and never will be backward compatible because of how programing works...

      Comment


        #4
        "...WHY!!!! ...Revit... isn't/doesn't...? AutoCAD is/does..."

        First advice if you want to learn Revit: the less you ask that kind of question, the better.

        In English, you say "blue car"; in Spanish, you say something like "car blue" (carro azul). Why? simply because these are two different languages. Still, people get to identify their cars in their parking lots anyway.
        Freelance BIM Provider at Autodesk Services Marketplace | Linkedin

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by revit-mcs2011 View Post
          i want a workstation that will not hinder my work. no waiting. no crashes. no issues.....
          *snicker* Good luck there.

          In regards to backwards compatible. Some people think this is just a ploy by Autodesk to force everyone to buy the latest and greatest. However, if Revit were backward compatible, how many people would still be using Revit 5.1? The fact of the matter is backward compatibility is probably one of the greatest weaknesses in any hardware or software; you're essentially having to code to accommodate for people who refuse to accept the improvements you've worked hard to make.

          Imagine coming out with a revision on your M/E/P system for a client, and saying "You really need to put this new revision in your project. Not only is it it more efficient, but we've put a lot of man hours to make it that way. It may cost you a little extra but in the long run you will save time and money because of it." But the client says "Nah, this older version is good enough for us."
          .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

          Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
            My guess is it wont be backwards compatible ever, but thats just my guess.
            I heard that Ade$k is shooting for Revit backward compatibility in 2014-15 (95% reliable source).

            Originally posted by gdoherty0102
            lets say you take something from 2012 that you used some new materials on or something and took it back to 2008 where they used an other rendering software...how would it handle this change?
            If it's the same platform then the only thing that would happen would be loss of functionality. Ade$k did this with object enablers for ACAD MEP and ACAD. It can be done.
            Take point clouds for an example. You can't just plug and play, you have to manipulate, re-model assign new systems etc. If we were able to import or save down is it really any different to have to "fix it up" and a majority of it really wouldn't even have to be.


            Originally posted by revittotd
            if Revit were backward compatible, how many people would still be using Revit 5.1?

            Imagine coming out with a revision on your M/E/P system for a client, and saying "You really need to put this new revision in your project. Not only is it it more efficient, but we've put a lot of man hours to make it that way. It may cost you a little extra but in the long run you will save time and money because of it." But the client says "Nah, this older version is good enough for us."
            If 5.1 is good enough than let em use it. I don't understand why 1 version should be dictated by the Architect. Also this software isn't cheap, there are plenty of companies out there that are having a hard time having to shell out $7,000 for one seat once a year, it can add up.

            This comment "Nah, this older version is good enough.." is what is hurting MEP. Revit MEP 2012 has some decent improvements. Creating multiple pipes systems and controlling their individual visibilities is actually a HUGE improvement. I am dealing with an Architect on a new project that won't upgrade, because 2011 "is good enough for them". We'll it's not for us. So I'm forced to use an inferior product.

            I am an advocate of upgrading and saving down, because every release trumps the release before and we all now MEP needs improvement. On the Arch side Revit has been out since 2002 ver 4.5 2002 05 09. There has been time for that version to mature. MEP needs to use the latest, Arch's don't fell that need (my experience).

            Do you guys honestly think that backward compatibility can't be done? Of course it can, like I said you'll just loose some functionality, but c'mon this is Revit, It needs a code, API functionality overhaul anyway.
            "Keeping my view range hopeful"

            Comment


              #7
              Why don't we just use an operating system that's legacy-compatible with, uh - DOS. Not like having your shoes nailed to the floor, is it?

              We need to continue to see improvements & brilliant ideas from the factory, all the while purging out the dregs. MS Windows should take a hint. Clean sweep, clean break for once, and get rid of all the tons of useless code.


              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by revit-mcs2011 View Post
                We are about to get a job, the company that we would work with is utilizing Revit 2011. We have Revit 2012.
                I was informed that these two are not compatible? WHY!!!! would you not have a backwards compatible program? Autocad is/does....
                SO, is this correct? We have the 2011 version. i guess no biggy there.
                There's a lot more to it than just "loss of functionality." There's a bit more info here if you're interested.
                Kevin Dolley
                Autodesk Revit User Experience Team
                Follow us on Twitter! @RevitWikiHelp

                Comment


                  #9
                  Well if your want is to just have it dummed down so that the older versions can handle it then just export as an IFC in 2012 and import the IFC in 2011. It would have the same functionality as having a backward compatible Revit. I would put a large wager that Revit will never be backward compatible. They are not going to go back and rewrite code in Revit 5 to handle all the new things in Revit 2012. That would be nearly impossible to track all the changes and manage all the new things over 13 differet Revit releases.

                  Autocad may have done this, but autocad no matter how much intelligence you try to put to it is still CAD and Revit is still BIM...

                  Who pays $7k a year for a seat? The upgrade price of Revit is less than $1k a year per license not $7k.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Jrobker,

                    I just wanted to clear up somethings regarding my post. Knowing that a conversation like this can quickly turn in to a flame war, I want this to be read in all sincerity for the betterment of the understanding of those who end up here.
                    ----
                    No one said this can't be done. In fact reading the thread again, and again, I'm not sure how you could get that from what has been posted previously. As it is, being programmed for windows, they're already forced to program for legacy code as it is to maintain functionality with the operating system (a side effect of allowing for backwards compatibility none the less).

                    I wasn't defending the people who use older versions by any means and it seems from the tone of your post that you may have a bitter taste in your mouth from an experience with a firm use an older version. Look at the forum here. How many firms do you see using 2012? If companies based their research and progress on a minority of their research response, we'd all still be using rotary dial phones to accommodate the
                    minority of responses that come in from that generation that is still around (no offense to anyone still using a rotary phone >_>). Autodesk certainly isn't letting that minority of firms still using 9.1 to dictate how the progress with their product, and kudos to them for that.

                    You say that by having to open 2011, you are using an inferior product. Let me see if I have your argument understood: So what I'm gathering is that using that inferior product wrapped in a new license (ie: backwards compatibility in a recent software release) is ok but having to open the file in its original release is not.

                    Let's take some scenarios using your situation, you are sent a 2011 model but you are in 2012:

                    1) Not backwards Compatible: You have to open Revit 2011 (which by the way is still supported by your license server) to open the file. No upgrades needed. You loose the ability to use some of the 2012 features. Do your work. Hit save. No exporting or stripping of excessive database entries needed. Coordinate with other discipline who won't upgrade.

                    2) Backwards Database Compatible (meaning you can read the database, but the software features are disabled): You open Revit 2012. Choose to keep 2011 database format. You STILL can't use the 2012 features but do the work you need anyway making do with the inferior tools that you still have. Hit save. Saves to old database structure, which shouldn't take too long because you didn't have the opportunity to use any new features that the old database can't handle.

                    3) Backwards Feature Compatible (meaning you have full access to the whole gambit of 2012 feature): You open Revit 2012. Wait for the project to upgrade (has to be done because you are using the new features). You use all these wonderful new features that 2012 has in record time because the newest always makes you more productive. Hit save. Select 2011. Dialogue box pops up telling you that some features that you have just used will not be able to be saved to the old database structure in order to maintain compatibility. You hit ok. Save as 2011. Coordinate with other discipline. Answer phone calls for a week about why the model is jacked up. (If you think this isn't how it would work, you haven't dealt with many backwards compatible systems before.)

                    Do I have this right?

                    In regards to Archs not feeling the need to use the latest; well all I can say is that until the last 2 or 3 releases of Revit, I had not worked with an arch firm who could find an MEP firm to work in Revit. Maybe if more MEP firms used Revit to begin with they would have more of a reason to stay up to date.

                    And to wrap up, I want to repeat: I know that a conversation like this can quickly turn in to a flame war so I want this to be read in all sincerity for the betterment of the understanding of those who end up here.

                    :beer:
                    .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

                    Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X