!Restored: ¿News about AC 12?

[Anonymous]

Hi all!


¿Anybody knows anything about AC 12, please?


I'm hearing rumours, but nothing concrete...


Thanks a lot and regards.



P.S. Like another user says: "forgive my spanglish..."

[Anonymous]

greysheep5 wrote:
come on...

expensive application and the don´t even offer you a "save as previous version" option in their new version.

Hellooooooooooo. Did you read what i said.

I said OPENING not SAVING. Can you see the difference? Its HUGEEEEE. EXTREMELY HUGE

And a GDL file is a TEXT FILE.... so there is no need for compatibility issues.
It may only draw a line and this still is incompatible.

SAVING even in word warns you.... beware.. some elements may not be......
But OPENING???? I was not talking open a V12 file in V7 but a v7 file in v12. I have not lost it (yet). I know what i ask

As for plugins. Look for example C4d. Most plugins spread 2-3 version and break when substantial change are made.
In archicad, this is not the case. Based on what is going on with simple GDL , i have reasons to believe that this is a decision by GS (for obvious reasons)

[greysheep5]

and why would you open the said object in v10 and SAVE it there and would now want to open it again in v7? are you developing stuff in archicad 7? you can open files and copy/paste stuff and close without saving if you want to keep it backwards compatible, can´t you? sounds strange to me to be honest. the productivity enhancements alone being made from version 7 since 11 are worth not to use the old version anymore. at least for everydays planning and modeling work. and by the way, archicad 7 is like using win98, isn´t it? just curious....

[Anonymous]

Its very simple. I have v10 you v11.
I send you the object i have created in gdl to do some corrections.
You edit it (even a single line) save it... i cannot use it.

If i want to publish an object that can be used in v7 i have to install v7!!
Even if this is a simple line i have drawn.

Simply it is STUPID

[Karl Ottenstein]

oreopoulos wrote:
And a GDL file is a TEXT FILE.... so there is no need for compatibility issues.

GDL files are NOT text files. They are binary files stored in a a custom format. Just like the PLN file, this format may change from version to version. Certain GDL files can be text files, but that is the exception, not the norm.

Further, even if they were 'merely' text files - for example XML - newer versions may have new XML tags/sections defining new information, or defining old information in different ways.

It is true that there is no "Save As Version X" option for GDL objects, like there is for projects (pln). GS could provide a warning. But, otherwise, you have backup files, right?

I just don't see any validity to any of your complaints...whether about add-ons (not GS's issue - a 3rd party business decision as others have said) or about file formats. If you haven't convinced me, I doubt if any GS staff reading your posts are convinced...

Karl

[Anonymous]

Karl wrote:
GDL files are NOT text files. They are binary files stored in a a custom format. Just like the PLN file, this format may change from version to version. Certain GDL files can be text files, but that is the exception, not the norm.

The code part you write is stored as text. There are binary parts ofcourse and those parts cause the incompatibility. If its was a text file there would be no problem. If the code was incompatible it would simply not run

Karl wrote:
Further, even if they were 'merely' text files - for example XML - newer versions may have new XML tags/sections defining new information, or defining old information in different ways.

If the code has new definitions it will simply not run. This is smthg else.
If a function has changed it wont run as it wont run if you misspell a function.
You are trying to defend smthg ridiculous (i understand since this is how you make a living)

Karl wrote:
It is true that there is no "Save As Version X" option for GDL objects, like there is for projects (pln). GS could provide a warning. But, otherwise, you have backup files, right?

I guess i have to repeat my example again. I have created an object in v10 you have v11. I send you the object to make some corrections or additions. You send it back. I cannt read it. This is as simple as it gets.
I decide to edit a gdl object i wrote in v7 and i have only 12 install. What do i do? For a simple edit i loose my object for previous versions or install back 7? Come on. Its ridiculous

Karl wrote:
I just don't see any validity to any of your complaints...whether about add-ons (not GS's issue - a 3rd party business decision as others have said) or about file formats. If you haven't convinced me, I doubt if any GS staff reading your posts are convinced...

Karl i know you make a living from training AC, so i dont intent to convince you.
Look what most of you said about the curtain wall, and how useless it was and now how you praise it now.

You dont make a living as an architect and you dont PAY it for your job, so your opinion for me is useless and totally driven by personal interest. PERIOD.
Forcing users to pay for plugins is GS decision. Developers look for their interest. I dont blame them for charging. I blame GS for letting that happen for no reason.

Have you ever seen someone from GS answering users questions in the forum?

[Dennis Lee]

Just to shed some light on the other option (revit):

1. No plug-ins at all. If Revit cannot do it, then you are stuck.
2. No option of using older version, period. If you don't pay subscription fees and keep up w/ the newest version, you are out of luck.

As an architect , I still think archicad is worth my money relative to other options out there.

[TomWaltz]

Dennis wrote:
1. No plug-ins at all. If Revit cannot do it, then you are stuck.
2. No option of using older version, period. If you don't pay subscription fees and keep up w/ the newest version, you are out of luck.

Neither of these are accurate. Revit recently released its API to write add-ons and most firms run their old versions of Revit because, like Archicad, upgrading projects can be painful, if possible at all, so older projects are kept in their old versions.

[Anonymous]

Oreopoulos wrote:

You dont make a living as an architect and you dont PAY it for your job, so your opinion for me is useless and totally driven by personal interest. PERIOD.
Forcing users to pay for plugins is GS decision. Developers look for their interest. I dont blame them for charging. I blame GS for letting that happen for no reason.

Well, I haven't read all of your complaints in detail to know how truthful or accurate they might acutally be. I gave up on that awhile back. But I am a practicing architect who makes his living using ArchiCad and I haven't found any of your gripes to mean a whole lot on how I use ArchiCad.

Mostly, I find your recent comments to be way out of line and just plain rude.


Don Lee

[TomWaltz]

oreopoulos wrote:
I guess i have to repeat my example again. I have created an object in v10 you have v11. I send you the object to make some corrections or additions. You send it back. I cannt read it. This is as simple as it gets.

The same problem occurs in most any other program on the market today. Open a file in Autocad 2009, Revit 2009, Word 2008, etc, save it, then try to open it in an old version from 1999. It won't open.

Old programs rarely can read newer files. If you got out from under your rock once in a while, you might realize that.

I'd address your long diatribe to Karl, but I realize that you don't know a thing about software development. I'm starting to think the only software you do understand is the web browser that lets you post your lack of knowledge for the rest of us to see. It's demonstrative that you show total disrespect for the one guy who knows more about software development and programming than all of us combined.

[Karl Ottenstein]

oreopoulos wrote:
...
You are trying to defend smthg ridiculous (i understand since this is how you make a living)
...
I decide to edit a gdl object i wrote in v7 and i have only 12 install. What do i do? For a simple edit i loose my object for previous versions or install back 7? Come on. Its ridiculous
...
Karl i know you make a living from training AC, so i dont intent to convince you.

Kostas, in the past, you've made emotional arguments, but with facts. This time, it is all emotion and no sense of reality.

First, I don't work for GS and don't need to defend them to make a living. My time as moderator/contributor here is voluntary; my time with clients is to help them be productive, even if that includes letting them know where GS has screwed up. That is not the case in the issues you have raised. I'm not defending them per se - as much as trying, as others, to convey the sense of reality in software development. I'm a computer scientist ... I honestly do understand this part.

What you're talking about is no error on GS's part - and it is typical of all software, as others have mentioned.

You cannot open a Word 2.0 file in Word 2007 and save it in Word 2007 format and expect Word 2.0 to read it again. MS frequently includes translators to get you back to something that an old version might be able to read, but features will be lost. ArchiCAD is no different. No earlier version can open an 11 PLN. From 11, you can open older files and may be able to save backwards a few versions, but any new features will be lost.

Why is GDL any different? So you open an AC 7 object in 11 and you somehow expect the modified object to be saved in a file format that 7 can read? That is unrealistic.

If you need to edit the AC 7 GDL object in a way that you can use it in AC 7 ... then edit it in AC 7! You can move that object up to any version including 12 ... but you cannot move backwards. Sure, scripts are text. But parameters, subtypes, GUID and other internal binary data are not.

This entire discussion has been held in these forums in the past. Forwards compatibility is essential so that files can evolve to be used with newer versions of software. Backwards compatibility is rare and challenging.

The add-on issue is no different. All kinds of resources change as software evolves and, hopefully, improves. Recompilation is essential for plug-ins so that they can properly access restructured resources. Sometimes this is a simple matter. Other times, things change enough that some reprogramming is required for the plug-in to interface with the latest version of the software. The business model of the 3rd party developer determines if they want to charge for their recompiled version or not. Graphisoft provides all of the tools for add-on creation and maintenance at no charge. What more would you have them do - simply stop improving the product?

Karl