PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave not the best choice for corporate users



pnevai
08-21-2009, 06:35 AM
Can everyone say Bckwards Compatibility? I do not know why Newtek threw out backwards compatibility with their own scene file out the window. But this has wasted much valuable time and money in our organization.

I guess Newtek never intended to be used by a large corporation where upgrading user workstations is a planned roll out process, taking perhaps several weeks to accomplish through out the organization.

When a user has no ability to open a file created on a newer version of a software package with a version within the same point release, it effectively kills future investment in that companies software product.

We have just wasted 3 days of a very time sensitive project because we could not open a Lightwave 9.3 scene file on a 9.0 machine. To export all the way back to 6.0 makes the scene file worthless. Having not viable backwards compatible option in the within the same major release 9.X is suicide in most software circles especially for larger corporate environments where one office may get software upgrades months before others.

I guess I will not be recommending upgrading to LW Core to our IT department anytime in the near future.

Thanks Newtek

probiner
08-21-2009, 06:47 AM
Wasting time for stuff like that is always crap...

Maybe someone here already went trough crap like that and could have helped.
Next time you go through something like that try to check out, just in case, with other users. They might have just wasted time like you and found out after how to solve it.

Cheers

RebelHill
08-21-2009, 07:33 AM
well... you could export to 9.2 rather than 6.0... but still...

if there are new features of a program in x.5 that didnt exist in x.0 exactly how would you suggest that backwards compatibility would work?? Obviously... it cant.

Otterman
08-21-2009, 07:49 AM
Yeah i dont see the problem.....9.6 will save down to 9.2 which is compatible with v9 is it not!...correct me if im wrong. Even so-other 3d packages are just as troublesome when backwards compatibility is concerned.

Anyhow this should of being factored in before taking on the project....its common sense. No good me saying this now but a hard lesson learned perhaps. Ive been there my friend

safetyman
08-21-2009, 07:50 AM
This problem exists in a lot of software. We have problems with moving from Office 2007 down to Office 2003 to the point where it's considered unusable. And don't get me started on Illustrator. What a joke. Don't come down too hard on LW -- it's not the exception to the rule.

SplineGod
08-21-2009, 07:57 AM
Why not just uupdate the old versions of LW to newer versions?

jasonwestmas
08-21-2009, 08:18 AM
This is true for almost all software. Just use 9.3.1 and you will be able to export between the programs, it's free. 9.6 works pretty good too.

shrox
08-21-2009, 08:48 AM
Can everyone say Bckwards Compatibility? I do not know why Newtek threw out backwards compatibility with their own scene file out the window. But this has wasted much valuable time and money in our organization.

I guess Newtek never intended to be used by a large corporation where upgrading user workstations is a planned roll out process, taking perhaps several weeks to accomplish through out the organization.

When a user has no ability to open a file created on a newer version of a software package with a version within the same point release, it effectively kills future investment in that companies software product.

We have just wasted 3 days of a very time sensitive project because we could not open a Lightwave 9.3 scene file on a 9.0 machine. To export all the way back to 6.0 makes the scene file worthless. Having not viable backwards compatible option in the within the same major release 9.X is suicide in most software circles especially for larger corporate environments where one office may get software upgrades months before others.

I guess I will not be recommending upgrading to LW Core to our IT department anytime in the near future.

Thanks Newtek

Well, not updating when the update is free isn't good business practice either, it is the 21st century. By the time the OP was written, 9.6 could have been downloaded...

colkai
08-21-2009, 09:28 AM
Having not viable backwards compatible option in the within the same major release 9.X is suicide in most software circles especially for larger corporate environments where one office may get software upgrades months before others.

This baffles me, MONTHS? before another office?
If the corporate structure is so huge and disparate, problems like this are bound to occur.
It is not the fault of the software if there is not a consistent and unified approach to updating software.
LW 9.X can be put into one folder and very easily uploaded to various machines. You can even have it as a single ZIP file complete with a folder for shortcuts and configs. I personally have a USB pendrive with a RAR'd folder containing everything I need for LW, plugins, shortcuts, software, it allows me to put it on any machine I go to providing I have my dongle.

Failure to update your sites suggests a much more deep seated problem with the corporation. :screwy:

We send out updates which cover large areas, both in terms of offices and geographically. In the 20 years we've been doing so, we have never allowed an update of software to roll out in only part of the organization and our updates are nowhere near as simple to perform as rolling out a new version of LW.

As others have also stated, why only "part-upgrade" when the 9.6 version is free and is, by all accounts, superior to 9.5 or 9.3 and most assuredly 9.0?

Dexter2999
08-21-2009, 09:42 AM
As someone who has dealt with the sting of being at the mercy of the IT department of a corporate giant, I can tell everyone who has said "just upgrade" you don't know what you're talking about.

When your company has 50,000 plus employees it just doesn't work that way. The IT department does what it want's to do. They roll out software in areas. And at the company I work for they iron out problems in one area before moving to the next. They simply can't manage a company wide roll out then deal with all the fallout at once. You as a user can't "just upgrade" because you usually don't have admin privledges. This guy is already frustrated as it is and this type of advice is really just salt in a wound.

Now, the bad news, I don't think I own a single program where an older version of the software will open a newer version. It doesn't work with MS OFFICE 2007 documents trying to open in 2003. It doesn't work with Adobe CS4 doc's trying to open in CS2. And no it doesn't work with LW either.

I have dealt with this kind of thing for years. The artists at the top of the pile get all the new toys and I get what I get when I get it. So when I have to pick up a print graphic and make it a video graphic for my department, I always have to tell them the spec for files so I can work with them. They have to do a "SAVE AS" an older version so I can use the files. Been doing this for going on 10 years.

So, for bashing LW because the old versions don't open the newer versions, you are just wrong man. Backwards compatablility means newer versions open older versions. Anything else is like trying to tell the future.

I feel your pain in the IT department man, but I can't back you up on your argument about compatability.

shrox
08-21-2009, 09:51 AM
Maybe we could all write and call the company pnevai works for and tell them to get this guy updated...

probiner
08-21-2009, 10:33 AM
Maybe we could all write and call the company pnevai works for and tell them to get this guy updated...

LOL shrox, you sound like a LW Vigilante
The LW Vigilante's primary weapon is a sharp sign, followed by his deadly fart finger :lightwave "pull"

Seriously now, bashing old NT or frustrated pnevai doesn't help neither :P
I think dexter said it all.

After Effects has an option in wich it makes a copy of the project file but with the right version. I don't know why Photoshop doesn't do that or Microsoft just release a patch to make 2003 open 2007 basic values at least.

Cheers

avkills
08-21-2009, 01:42 PM
Illustrator lets you save all the way down to version 7 from CS4. Does LW have an export function to save scenes to older version...I am pretty sure it does.

BTW it isn't good business practice for a company using lots of seats of a particular software package and not having them be all the same version and point release, that is common sense to me.

-mark

Snosrap
08-21-2009, 09:34 PM
Our IT department knows crap about LW and we like it that way. We make our users responsible for keeping their versions updated and have a "group leader" communicate to all when upgrades have been downloaded and put on the servers. Most IT departments are ill prepared to deal with specialized applications. I see no fault with NT in this regard, the fault lies squarely on pnevai's corporate IT department.

Kuzey
08-22-2009, 05:56 AM
There couldn't be that much difference between 9.3 and 9??

I just loaded a 9.6 file into Modeler 9.3 and got a "plug-in missing" error with an option to load the plugins from disk...I clicked "no to all" and the model loaded fine.

I don't have 9 but it should work the same...unless it's a new feature.

Kuzey

jasonwestmas
08-22-2009, 08:33 AM
There couldn't be that much difference between 9.3 and 9??

I just loaded a 9.6 file into Modeler 9.3 and got a "plug-in missing" error with an option to load the plugins from disk...I clicked "no to all" and the model loaded fine.

I don't have 9 but it should work the same...unless it's a new feature.

Kuzey Backwards compatibility ended with 9.2 I believe. It depends on the version but there should be an option to export to a version 5, 6 or 9.2 scene. So if someone would export to a version 5 or 6 then the scene should work in 9.0.