InDesign Backwards Compatibility in CS5 an MAJOR issue

[Cynthia Ryan Graphic]

I am a print designer who works in InDesign. I bought CS3 Design Premium in late summer of 2008. Shortly thereafter CS4 came out, but after just having forked out a big chunk of change, I decided against upgrading to CS4 right away. Recently I considered upgrading but then heard CS5 was coming out so I decided to postpone the upgrade and wait for the new software. I've just checked out the trial version of CS5 InDesign and after speaking with Adobe Support have come to the conclusion that I can't upgrade to CS5. Why? BACKWARDS compatibility to CS3. The previously offered export features that supplied a path for backwards compatibility via an .inx file are gone.

I design freelance for a lot of different customers and once the design is complete, I have to deliver the InDesign file along with all associated fonts ad images to my clients. Most of my clients are still on CS3. If I upgrade to CS5 I will instantly not be able to work for 2/3 of my clients, as I will have no means by which to save a file backwards to CS3. I was informed by Adobe support that I would need to buy CS4 and CS5, as I could save my CS5 file in the IDML format and open it in CS4 and then I could save the file from CS4 as an INX file and open that is CS3. ARE THEY INSANE??? First off that requires keeping 3 version of InDesign up and running on my machine all of the time and secondly, why should I have to buy CS4 when I'm paying an additional fee to upgrade to CS5 because I didn't upgrade from CS4? This is so screwed up that it has to be an oversight---please tell me there is a patch in the works!!!

PS- I've never posted to a forum before, so if I have broken any rules of forum etiquette or offended in any way, I offer my apologies now and if I (and the Adobe Support staff I spoke to) have overlooked something, please enlighten me!

[aart_depaartment]

Thanks...I should've been more specific. It's not available for the

Creative Suite Design Premium. I had it bookmarked from Amazon and

JUST as I was about to buy one copy of the suite, it was marked "not

available". We had combined/bundled our serial numbers years ago, now

we can only ugrade each license but it has to be the whole suite. I

spoke with Adobe directly, and they said they can install it

backwards compatible for an additional cost - which would have been

like buying BOTH CS4 and 5.

Thanks so much for your help, much appreciated!

Best,

N

[blustery]

Wow. After just slogging through this entire thread I must say I'm quite turned off by the condescension present here. In my past experience with Adobe forums (I had another username prior to my current one) the "elders" were helpful, considerate and generous. I felt better and more knowledgeable after visiting. Definitely not true here.

I came to this forum with a question: Even if it means loss of some data/features, can I save down from CS5 to CS3? Suddenly I found myself in a flurry of crap and errant assumptions. I am disappointed in the posters who have taken a legitimate question or concern in this thread and answered with (I paraphrase) "That's stupid. Also, why can't you see that you're an idiot and cheapskate?"

I am a young designer. I saved up my money through wise planning and fiscal responsibility and purchased CS5 Design Premium. This was a personal investment because I take my career seriously, though my money and how I use it is really none of anyone's business and should have no bearing on this topic.

Persons I need to share files with have InDesign CS3. Again, the reasons or circumstances for which I need to share InDesign files instead of PDFs have no bearing here. It is not my place to force upgrades on these people. It is not my place as a young graphic artist to turn my nose at clients who are "less sophisticated" than others. (Which isn't even the case, as these particular persons have not upgraded due to this very compatibility issue and their relationship with vendors using CS3.)

So, apparently, the only answer to my question is that I'm supposed to go find every past version of InDesign? Though I can't get them through Adobe? And though when I checked just now on Amazon, for instance, InDesign CS3 for Mac was "currently unavailable?"

Bob, you said:

If it was every customer, these forums would be flooded with complaints. While I understand the frustration, the evidence points to a very small number of people that have been horribly inconvenienced.

Perhaps it could be considered that this particular thread has not progressed as a very welcome place for people to express their concerns.

ETA: Before anyone brings it up, yes, I already submitted my complaint/feature request to Adobe.

[Jongware]

Blustery, it's more a reaction to the "outrage" of apparent new users of CS5 who seem to perceive the 'usual' back-saving abilities has somehow been crippled with this new version.

InDesign cannot save back more than one version, and it never could, and it's not the only program that cannot do this.

[blustery]

I understand, Jongware. Though I just recently purchased CS5 for myself, I've been using InDesign since CS in college and have run into the problem of version compatibility numerous times before.

I have a lot of faith and loyalty in Adobe, despite things that don't work quite the way I want, and I guess I wish they would take the time to figure out ways to make files able to be opened [obviously with limitations, I understand] in previous versions, even though this has never been true before. Adobe is consistently trying to make things true that have never been true before.

It also needs to be said that for people just starting out, with only CS5 available to them for all practical purposes and without the luxury of previous versions installed on their machines, this lack of backward compatibility really sucks. Even if it's nothing new. Even if other programs have the same issue.

ETA:

But I will take issue with some of your points. You can't just pop into a support forum with a complaint without being willing to listen to questions and explain why you're trying to do something. Those questions are being posed to you to try and help.

I did not at all mean to "pop into a support forum," complain, and leave. I think my point is that it's a legitimate question, no matter what the circumstances.

[BobLevine]

I'm afraid you're reading way too much into what's been said here.

For the most part, the people who want to save back two versions have phrased that in the way of rant, as though anyone here could do anything about it and even more so, that it was our fault.

But I will take issue with some of your points. You can't just pop into a support forum with a complaint without being willing to listen to questions and explain why you're trying to do something. Those questions are being posed to you to try and help.

I'm sorry if you find it somehow offensive, but it is what it is. InDesign can only save back one version and has never been able to save back two versions. Since you've already filed your request with Adobe, you've done all you can.

Good luck in your career and be aware that Adobe has historically put out upgrades every eighteen months or so. If you bought Design Premium you can start saving about $1.20/day for an upgrade to CS6.

Bob

[peterpica]

For what it's worth, I'd like to add to Bob's rationality here... InD

upgrades have always more than paid for themselves in a very short ROI

period. What more can one REASONABLY expect from Adobe here?

Enough said.

[AZ_Devman]

Just as an FYI, we have attempted the CS3>CS4>CS5 change path as suggested by Adobe and the issues carry from one version to the next to the next.  It is ridiculous that you cannot open a CSx file in CS5 and expect stability or AT LEAST the ability to covert the file to a working format.  We have tried everything under the sun on multiple systems and both PC and Mac platforms and nothing has worked to resolve this for us. 

So basically we just spent the equivalent cost of a small car to upgrade to the latest and greatest release from Adobe only to bring our department to a stand still.  Converting hundreds of files manually via copy/paste and reconstruction would be a huge expense in time and effort we cannot afford, so we are forced to roll all of our systems back to CS3 and pray that someone at Adobe starts to care enough about their customers to fix the issue.

[BobLevine]

Your issues is considerably different from what's being discussed here.

Bob

[Jongware]

Just as an equally off-topic FYI, you don't have to rollback your system to run CS3. If you had it installed, you can still use it as before. The only thing newer versions add is, by default, all documents will open with that new version.

[AZ_Devman]

While we should be able to install both versions, our volume license forces removal of the previous version prior to installation. I have posted a separate thread to address our issue which is backwards of this one.

[BobLevine]

There is no license I know of that forces the uninstallation of an earlier version. The license as I read it calls for an unspecified transition period though the terms of the license are ruled by the current version.

Bob

[aart_depaartment]

Hi! What's the title of the new thread? I'm interested in following

it, as I'm in the process of upgrading our department to Snow Leopard

and CS5 and still maintain productivity as we move from 3 to 5.

Best,

N

[BobLevine]

Here's my advice re:Snow Leopard. Do a clean install.

Bob

[Peter Spier]

You say you've tried everything. Did that include exporting as .inx from CS3 and opening that in CS5? Probably not, if you uninstalled CS3 first.

I have personally not seen any issues with legacy files in CS5, though I don't do a lot of work that requires opening legacy files. I have a suspicion, though, that at least some of the issues may be related to work habits like re-using the same file by deletting content, doing a save as, and renaming for a new issue of a newsletter or magazine. I don't know if that's something you do, but over time it tends to magnify any minor corruptions that creep into a documment. ID is far stabler than PM was in this regard, or, in my opinion, Quark, but it is not immune and we see occasional reports of file loss because of it. If you have a recurrinig-layout type of publication you really should be using templates and starting each document from a fresh copy of the template.

[peterpica]

Boy does that sound like a Quark Syndrome if I ever heard one!

'-(

[Peter Spier]

I didn't have all that much trouble with Quark (or maybe I've surpressed the memories -- I certainly know how to copy everything and paste into a new doc), but ee used to use PM at a newspaper where I worked briefly, and it wasn't a lot of fun when the whole edition self-destructed an hour before it was supposed to be on press.

[peterpica]

deja vu!!!!!

We used PM too only because of Quack's undependability (relative to PM of course)...

plus at that time, Quack was limited to single pages, so I'm going back quite a few disasters.

[AZ_Devman]

Actually we have tried exporting from CS3 in inx file format and opening that in both CS4 and CS5.  We currently are working with some of my team on CS3 and some of us on CS5 while attempting to troubleshoot the issue.  As of this morning we are installing the entire CS5 suite on all of our systems and InDesign CS3 as a dual install so we can actually get some work down for the first time since Friday.  I have detailed what we have tried here...

http://http://forums.adobe.com/post!reply.jspa?thread=689483

As Bob pointed out, my issue is the complete opposite as what was originally noted in this thread (sorry, didn't read it correctly before posting), so I created another thread so as to not jack this one with my issues. 

[SuperMacGuy]

Your link is wonky there: 2 http://'s in it.

[Guest]

I work full time and freelance on the side. My employer did not upgrade to CS4 due to the economy and other considerations. When we found out that CS5 would only work on Intel Macs, it necesitated the upgrade of about half of our computers--a costly affair, but we do build regular upgrades into the budget, so we gritted our teeth and did it. As soon as CS5 actually went on sale, we ordered 3 new computers and put in an order for (not CS5) CS4.  We installed CS4 on everyone's computer and then ordered the free upgrade to CS5. Most of our computers now have all 3 versions installed. Our contract editors had to buy their own versions of CS5 Incopy to stay with us.  Unfortunately for at least one of them, this included a necessary computer upgrade because the Macbook purchased 2 years ago wasn't Intel. This particular editor is switching platforms since she can't afford a new Mac (she can get a new PC notebook with all the software for less than the purchase of an Intel Mac). Because the main corporation did the upgrade, it forced everyone else to do it too.  It made some people unhappy, but it's part of the cost of doing business.

On the personal side, I upgraded to CS4 a year ago.  I can't afford the CS5 upgrade quite yet, but I am planning to get it eventually. I still have CS3 on my computer. I don't have a lot of clients, but when I deliver files to the ones I have, I just tell them what version the files are and that's it.  They want the files for their archives, whether they can open them or not. I support all my files for as long as the client needs me to support them, so it shouldn't matter to them whether they can open them.

The backwards compatibility of ID may be an important issue for collaborative users. . . however, I have to side with those who want a stable ID over one that is able to backsave multiple steps back.  I've been in the business long enough to remember how unstable PageMaker was because it was built consistently on old code and never cleaned up and truly updated. ID is staying fairly clean and stable because Adobe doesn't try to maintain the compatibilty that would bulk up the program and make it unstable. I like having the new features and a mostly stable program. If Adobe hadn't offered the CS5 upgrade free to recent CS4 purchasers (once CS5 was announced), I'd probably be unhappy because we'd have had the same issue people are complaining about here. But Adobe did support that concern by allowing users to upgrade to CS4 (for a period of time) and get CS5 for free. I think that fulfills their obligation to their users regarding backwards compatibility.  I don't mean to be insensitive, but I really don't see that this is  Adobe's problem. I agree that they should concentrate on producing the  best product and not spending an inordinate amount of time on maintaining the users that won't upgrade--for whatever reason.

Regarding new users who are not compatible with old users because they don't have the older versions. I agree that could be a problem, and I sympathize with you, but I honestly don't think that is Adobe's fault. It's bound to be a problem regardless of whatever you do for a living that newcomers to an industry may be at a disadvantage--part of being new.

To be honest, I think the Mac Intel only requirement for CS5 is the bigger issue than backward compatibility. It's costing a lot of people a lot of headaches.  Especially when the new Macs come with Snow Leopard, which brings a whole new load of issues to the table. I'm happy that personally I've chosen to use a Windows platform, which so far has mostly run the various versions of Windows and Adobe apps without too much trouble.

All that said, I agree with the person who asked for the files to associate with their last-saved-in version. For those of us working in mutliple versions on the same computer, it would be nice to be able to tell which version of software the file was last opened in, rather than have everything default to CS5. I don't mind dragging the files to the correct app, but it's really annoying when I'm trying to quickly output files and I can't remember which file was last opened where and then I waste time doing the trial error method. I also wish that third-party plugins were easier to erase when converting files. It's not helpful for CS5 to tell me it's missing the plugin if it doesn't give me a way to strip out the plugin (the IDML export does it, but you often don't know that you need to do it until you reopen the newly converted and saved file and it opens untitled with the plugin warning again). Most of the documents didn't even use the plugin to begin with.

[KVL_NY]

There are things in CS5 that dont' translate properly to CS4 like Spanning Columns feature etc.  So no matter what, there will be a fair amount to rework when having to take a document from 5 to 4.   That just makes starting the file in the native program CS4, 3  or 5 all the more important in regards to the final end user.

I think part of the problem is that CS3 worked great, and CS4 worked really great, so there isn't a lot of motivation for people to upgrade really fast to the newest thing.  That's why some people have older versions and are happy with them.   A lot of people view the philosophy of 'if it isn't broke, don't fix it', and don't upgrade.

So when initially creating the document, just keep in mind the end user for the file.  If they are on CS3 or 4, create the file in that version, so as to save yourself a lot of work later down the line.

[peter_minneapolis]

E Diane King wrote:

[SNIPPED]

To be honest, I think the Mac Intel only requirement for CS5 is the bigger issue than backward compatibility. It's costing a lot of people a lot of headaches.  Especially when the new Macs come with Snow Leopard, which brings a whole new load of issues to the table. I'm happy that personally I've chosen to use a Windows platform, which so far has mostly run the various versions of Windows and Adobe apps without too much trouble.

All that said, I agree with the person who asked for the files to associate with their last-saved-in version. For those of us working in mutliple versions on the same computer, it would be nice to be able to tell which version of software the file was last opened in, rather than have everything default to CS5. I don't mind dragging the files to the correct app, but it's really annoying when I'm trying to quickly output files and I can't remember which file was last opened where and then I waste time doing the trial error method. I also wish that third-party plugins were easier to erase when converting files. It's not helpful for CS5 to tell me it's missing the plugin if it doesn't give me a way to strip out the plugin (the IDML export does it, but you often don't know that you need to do it until you reopen the newly converted and saved file and it opens untitled with the plugin warning again). Most of the documents didn't even use the plugin to begin with.

Hi, Diane:

It may not be helpful to everyone, but for some folks, running InDesign Windows versions under Parallels, Fusion, or Boot Camp, on IntelMacs is a useful approach. The unibody-generation MacBook Pros can install as much as 8GB of RAM, which is probably the minimum useful amount to run the virtual software on OS X, the preferred Windows version, and one or more CS5 applications at once. My pre-unibody MBP can take up to 6GB, though I've stopped at 4GB - a reasonable balance between money and computer power.

(For awhile recently, my machine became a real slug on both OS X and Windows XP under Parallels. I was inclined to blame Parallels until a Google search revealed threads on the Carbonite remote online storage application that I run, which cite Carbonite's consumption of unspeakably-large amounts of CPU, with no fix offered yet by the company, after about a year of complaints, other than disabling it until you want to back up your files, then disabling it again when backups are completed. A companion unresolved-complaint thread notes that backups seem never to end - large amounts of content are always waiting, even though there's little or no new or changed content.)

There's an obvious advantage to not having to cross-grade or replace one's existing software because of changing computer CPUs or OSs; and, for some folks, there's an opportunity to use any Mac-only product that provides something absolutely essential, whether it's business software, or entertainment.

I have found one product - not for my business needs - that is designed to detect virtualized Windows and display a message that it's not supported in the virtual environment. Frustrating as it is, it's at least courteous to display a message, than to let the computer hang and possibly corrupt existing content. I can't recall if the message appeared at the start of installation, or only when the installed product was launched. It would most courteous, of course, to support virtual operation, but second to that would be to warn at the beginning of installation, not after.

So, there's a middle area that may help many folks balance their costs of keeping up; they won't have to decide either/or, but both/and.

HTH

Regards,

Peter

_______________________

Peter Gold

KnowHow ProServices

[Guest]

peter at knowhowpro wrote:

It may not be helpful to everyone, but for some folks, running InDesign Windows versions under Parallels, Fusion, or Boot Camp, on IntelMacs is a useful approach. The unibody-generation MacBook Pros can install as much as 8GB of RAM, which is probably the minimum useful amount to run the virtual software on OS X, the preferred Windows version, and one or more CS5 applications at once. My pre-unibody MBP can take up to 6GB, though I've stopped at 4GB - a reasonable balance between money and computer power.

I don't see how that helps the people who have a Mac that is not Intel, and that's why they have to buy a new computer to upgrade to CS5. You have to admit that Macs are costly.  It's a lot cheaper to buy a comparable PC running Windows than to upgrade to an Intel Mac.  That's what this particular editor is faced with, she's crossing platform and going for the full version IC instead of buying a new Mac and upgrading.  It saves her money, even if she loses the cool factor.

Myself, I'm unlikely to ever invest in a Mac. I just don't see the draw. Sure they are cool and all, but I can do the same work on a PC and save a lot of money. I'm completely cross platform and will work on whatever I'm given to work on, but I love dissing Macs just because it's fun to stir the ants nest.  We use Macs at work because most of the design group are Mac devotees who have convinced our boss that they simply can't work without a Mac. The IT dept would dearly love to toss all the Macs in our lake, especially now that Snow Leopard isn't playing nice with our network.

But this is not the place for that debate. I was just stating that the forced upgrade to Intel Macs was a costly issue with the CS5 product that I see as causing a lot more expensive headaches than the backsaving issue. I doubt everyone will agree, but that's what I've seen with our upgrade experience.

[Peter Spier]

Not supporting non-intel Macs is a business decision just like not supporting System 9, Windows 2000 or older or a 386 processor. Apple hasn't sold a PPC machine in several years, in this business three years is a lifetime for hardware, and it jsut doesn't make a lot of economic sense to spend development dollars on supporting what is essentially a dwindling and obsolete market segment.

[Guest]

I'm not disputing the decision at all.  I'm just glad that I chose the PC route because it's causing expensive headaches for those who are on older Macs. Considering that Macs sold even two years ago were not Intel, some people are not even getting a full life span out of their Macs before having to turn around and replace them in order to upgrade Adobe.  Even for me, I don't consider a computer old enough to replace until it's at least 3 years old, and I typically run computers that are easier and cheaper to replace than a Mac. I also seem to remember that people were avoiding the Intel Mac when it first hit the market because it was so buggy, and they needed functional computers.  Now that decision is hurting them big time.