Release Notes for Beta should say NOT BACKWARD COMPATIBLE

rickbreen · Post by **rickbreen** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:38 am

Just a suggestion,

The notes on the Beta mention the restrictions, but I think it would be important to mention that any work you do in Live 5 Beta, as far as Build 16 (not sure about the latest) will NOT be backward compatible with Live 4.

I know it is a beta, and it's wonderful, but I know a bunch of folks (students mostly) who did a bunch of work in the Beta, myself included, thinking I might be able to open it up in Live 4, but found out that is not yet supported.

I'm just asking that you mention that backward compatibility is not supported yet. I realize we're using it at our own risk and it was silly to do too much work in Version 5, but hey, I got carried away.

Live is sort of addicting, you know.

Thanks and Best Wishes,

Rick Breen
Engineer/Musician

zion15 · Post by **zion15** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:47 am

the standard practise with software seems to be that documents aren't backwards compatible across major versions because of all the new features and adjustments in new versions.

if the backwards compatibility is explicitly mentioned or there's a clear export function in the software then it's safe to assume it works, otherwise not. i'm not even sure if live 5 final will be backwards compatible with v4...

StompyJ · Post by **StompyJ** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:21 pm

This is the wrong forum for this post.

Eduard · Post by **Eduard** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:35 pm

Moved to general.

mikemc · Post by **mikemc** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:59 pm

Live 5 is backward compatible: it loads sets from previous versions. Live 4 and below are not forward compatible, and will not load sets produced by Live 5, because although Live does timestretch, it does not yet do time travel.

kronk · Post by **kronk** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:16 pm

but live5 IS backward compatible as you can open live4 files.

what you are asking for is live4 to be forwards compatible. this has never existed and will never exist. live5 has new options. how would live4 be able to cope with that stuff?

cheers

difference · Post by **difference** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:41 pm

mikemc & Kronk are correct, obviously.

(unfortunately, mikemc got in there before me with the time travel gag

)

The only way of making something compatible in the way you say is by bringing in no new features. How can the old program suddenly learn the new tricks in the new version!?

divonic · Post by **divonic** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:32 pm

Or they could give it the option to save a file as a live4 file. Some programs do this some just ignore information that they can't use. It is great for sharing with people who don't have the latest and gretest. like my friend who just got 4 a couple of month ago and upgrading isn't in his foreseeable budget. But that's up to ableton.

If you don't plan on getting 5 why are you making tracks in the Beta that you want to edit in 4? The idea of the beta is to help ableton with it's bug fixes not to get you a free advanced copy of the software.

telekom · Post by **telekom** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:37 pm

Save the clips or tracks you have made in L5 as audio files or midi clips so that you can still load them into L4. You won't be able to edit things like beat repeat settings but you will at least have the audio output of the beat repeat. Then use L4 to continue. You won't have lost anything except the ability to do L5 tasks. Which being a L4 user, you never had anyway.

rickbreen · Post by **rickbreen** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:30 am

First, I was only asking that the Beta release notes state the incompatibility issue, as a courtesy. I was not asking anyone to implement cross-version compatiblity.

Second, the release notes for Live Beta 5 did say to post such issues to the place I had originally posted to (Live Beta 5 topic). Maybe you need to change those directions.

As to the name for cross-version compatibility, call it "version neutral" compatibility, if you wish, or call it backward/forward compatibility, whatever. Live is not the only computer program to face such a challenge.

It is not unheard, in fact, it's common, for new versions of a program to be able to save in a format such that older versions of that program can still read documents in the new format. I see it all the time.

I'm a software engineer, so I've seen this issue arise with many different kinds of programs. It's pretty much up to the ingenuity of the file-format designer to have designed a flexible document structure in the beginning. If that wasn't done in the beginning, it's real pain to add it later.

It is generally a good thing for everyone, users & developers alike, to maintain compatibility within one major release, not just dot releases, unless you happen to have a document file-format that is particularly difficult to work with.

When the document format is designed with such flexibility in mind, then the new features are simply ignored by the old versions of the program.

In the word processing or image processing world, backward/forward compatibilty within a major revision is common. MS Word and Adobe Photoshop both have no problems opening documents one major version ahead.

Respectfully,

Rick B.

mike holiday · Post by **mike holiday** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:46 am

shoot the beta sets might not open in the final release

that's the nature of testing

scientist · Post by **scientist** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:13 pm

i swear this comes up with every new version of audio software...it is NOT POSSIBLE. what you want is a "save as (earlier version)" command in live, not backward compatability. we can't compare an audio app to something like illustrator, because they work fundamentally differently. they have new tools in every new version, but those tools are usually applied to the document before a save, so they are not referenced by the document; this makes a 'save as (earlier version)' an easy thing to do because the doc itself will look the same even if a few features are lost. an app like live's new tools (effects) are continually referenced by the document (like the new beat repeat for example) until a track is rendered and the effect deleted. even if live had a "save as..." function, you'd run the risk of it dropping certain effects, routing, even losing whole midi channels, and fundamentally changing the sound of your file...which of course is not good. AND this is beta testing, which already implies 'use at your own risk'. whew...so no 'disclaimer' is needed because this should be obvious. if they include this note, then they'd have to have pages of disclaimers for other obvious stuff, like "live makes noise" and "importing of hiphop beats may cause spontaneous freestyling". as someone else already said, just render the tracks and open em in 4.

sidownes · Post by **sidownes** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:07 pm

I'm a software engineer

LOL, can't help but laugh when I see a developer insist on being called an 'engineer'.

telekom · Post by **telekom** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:22 pm

rickbreen wrote: In the word processing or image processing world, backward/forward compatibilty within a major revision is common. MS Word and Adobe Photoshop both have no problems opening documents one major version ahead.

Hi Rick,
Word is just a fat loser when it comes to opening even it's own current version documents... And the very idea of opening a Mac word document on a PC... 92 pages of formatting spaghetti later... you find your document... sometimes...

Regarding Live I think FORWARD compatibility IS important, L4 sets should open in L5. However the disappointment of saving a L5 file in L4 format and finding virtually none of the good stuff is there would get everybody bitching about Ableton. I think we're spoiled already.

ewik · Post by **ewik** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 8:15 pm

who cares about the error in word usage(backwards/forwards crap)? the problem is that it's way too easy to accidently screw up a file, the live 5 beta should remind you that you are using live 5, not live 4 before you try saving a live 4 file for the first time

Release Notes for Beta should say NOT BACKWARD COMPATIBLE

Release Notes for Beta should say NOT BACKWARD COMPATIBLE

not it should not!!!

Backward/Forward compatibility

Re: Backward/Forward compatibility