Copy link to clipboard
Copied
A co-worker has InDesign 5.5 and wants to edit my InDesign 5 documents. Is this possible and will it cause problems with formatting and the fonts?
Thanks
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
ID 5.5 has a new file format. Files created or saved with 5.5 don't open in 5.0. The solution is to export in interchange format (IDML) so that 5.0 can reopen the file.
What a pain!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
When I save it in an IDML file and then he edits it in InDesign 5.5, and saves it in a IDML will formatting be changed or any other problems when I open it in InDesign 5?
I did not get my upgrade for CS5 wen it was free and now it costs $400. Do you see any reason to upgrade to CS 5.5?
Thanks Carol
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
When I save it in an IDML file and then he edits it in InDesign 5.5, and saves it in a IDML will formatting be changed or any other problems when I open it in InDesign 5?
It may.
If you use CS5.5-specific features, then it certainly will change.
If not, it probably won't, but it could... if you test it, you should see consistent results.
But it's not a recommended workflow and nobody is going to give you a guarantee.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
schwieterman wrote:
I did not get my upgrade for CS5 wen it was free and now it costs $400. Do you see any reason to upgrade to CS 5.5?
Thanks Carol
If you purchased CS5 during the free upgrade window you still qualify for the upgrade. Just call customer service.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Milk that cash cow! Never-mind that you piss off your customers. I guess we'll have to expect an upgrade EVERY SINGLE YEAR from now on.
You know Adobe, Quark was once as arrogant and careless about customer service as you have become. Keep that in mind.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I can assure yout that nobody cares if you upgrade or not. If there are features you think are worth it, buy it...if not, don't.
It's called capitalism. Someone makes something and others decide whether to buy it or not.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You couldn't be more wrong. It's imperative that I upgrade to every new version. It's not about relatively minor new features, most of which are uneeded by anybody, but COMPATIBILTY with existing and new customers. It's not a matter of choice.
Coming out with a new version every 12-18 months is completely unecessary from a customer point of view. And if Adobe doesn't care about pissing off customers with another too-soon upgrade, like you assert Bob, then why are they in business? And by the way, what's it to you?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You post something on the internet and everyone is free to respond...even people who disagree with you. And now that you've explained further I disagree with you even more.
If you have customers upgrading then you're using this software to make money. So what you're saying is you have the right to make money but Adobe doesn't? Interesting take on things especially when the upgrade cost can easily be covered in one job.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I never said anything about Adobe not making money. My complaint is that it is unduly exploiting its customer base, many of whom (like us) must regularly upgrade multiple licenses. And who wouln't be using Creative Suite to make money? I don't know that anyone would purchase this expensive software for any other reason. If I pulled a stunt like this (forcing needless upgrades) with my customers I could expect a similar reaction to mine. In fact, many of them would likely walk. Adobe can get away with it however, because it's software is so popular and wide spread. There is really no other option but shut up and pay.
I understand your point John, but do you honestly believe it's okay to pay (large sums I might add) for bug fixes? The subscription model is a good start towards placating annoyed customers, but Adobe could do a lot better. A mid-cycle bug fix upgrade (and actually called that instead claiming it's a major upgrade) with a low cost fee would be a lot easier to swallow.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You keep insisting that these new features are worthless.
Tell that to someone who works on Epub and they're very like to laugh in your face.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I'd prefer not to get into marketing and product management questions, but I think there are reasonable answers on both sides.
We buy a volume license and with it buy automatic upgrades. I hear anecdotally that there's really no minimum purchase requirement to do so, so perhaps that's an option for you.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It's wonderful to have new features. What is NOT wonderful, is the apparent, shall I say, self-interest of altering the file system to the point of incompatibility. We all know this not a REQUIREMENT of the upgrade design, it's done for programming ease and the specific purpose of squeezing more juice from the orange. Another one of Adobe's loathsome characteristics. They've been doing it forever. But between 5.0 and 5.5? Really, that is shameful.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The file structure was altered not to require you to purchase an upgrade, but to make certain new features work better. They didn't work well in version 7.0. They work better in version 7.5 because of the changes.
Now, if you don't use or need those new features, the only reason for purchasing the upgrade would be to enable opening of files saved by someone else in 7.5. If those files are not making use of the new features, having that person export .idml should be satisfactory.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Coming out with a new version every 12-18 months is completely unecessary from a customer point of view. And if Adobe doesn't care about pissing off customers with another too-soon upgrade, like you assert Bob, then why are they in business?
This is a debate about progress and features versus stability, and it is hard to find a good balance that works for everyone.
I think Adobe is listening and that's why they have started the subscription model.
Personally, I am much happier with a faster release cycle because it means my bugs can be fixed faster, and I can get the features I need as the marketplace evolves. If I cared more about EPUBs and interactive stuff, which are not really my space, I would be much more interested as well.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
This is one of those “you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't” types of issues.
In a perfect world, software developers would have the tremendous foresight to be able to plan for every feature that one would ever want now and in the future (and how the users want those features to be implemented), the insight into every operating system developer's plans for the next n years, and the skills to be able to implement such a miracle with the further miracle of no anomalies. Unfortunately, that perfect world simply does not exist and in fact is an impossibility.
(1) There are features that were put into InDesign 7.5 for which no specification nor demand existing for InDesign 7.0 and well as features and standards that changed in a short period of time. Examples of this include ePub support, support for PDF/X-4:2010, support for VAR plug-ins for generation of PDF/VT, etc. I can give examples of similar features for every version of InDesign going back to InDesign 1.5. Getting these features out to our users as quickly as possible is a very strong requirement of many of our users, especially our users who are on the bleeding edge and must be able to take advantage of new technology, market trends, etc. Dare I say, such users are trying to make sure that they aren't the collateral damage of the changing requirements of their customers.
(2) In the last several years, we have seen fairly upward-incompatible updates to MacOS X that required major changes in the MacOS versions of Adobe software and especially the installers for same. Windows hasn't been nearly as difficult in this regard, but there still has had to be some significant re-engineering to be able to fully and properly interface with new Windows versions. I know of very few Adobe customers who would be content to remain on old OS versions for any significant period of time after new OS versions are released simply because these new OS versions aren't compatible with their existing applications. Many of these OS changes are absolutely not simple changes or patches that could be easily applied to existing versions of Adobe applications.
(3) And of course there are bugs that need to be fixed on a regular and ongoing basis. Users rightfully want them fixed yesterday. The only economically viable method of dealing with such fixes when new versions are under development is to put those fixes in the new release under development.
On top of all of this, there are accounting rules, at least in the United States, which prohibit us from adding significant features to existing software without some severe financial consequences. (This is associated with the rules of “revenue recognition.”)
Thus, the choice is that Adobe (1) rapidly releases new application and gets new/updated features as well as OS support to users in a timely fashion or (2) waits two to three years between releases and let the users stew about us not meeting their needs and OS incompatibility. The first option gets the advanced users what they need ASAP, but with a certain degree of pain (additional training, software installation, upgrade costs, etc.) The second option is less directly painful to the user in terms of the same factors, but also serves to throttle our users needs.
In many cases, Adobe has elected to go with the first option. There is no requirement that every user upgrade their software every time Adobe issues a new release. It is the users' choice. On the other hand, the users who chose not to upgrade cannot ethically complain that Adobe isn't moving quickly enough to provide tools for the latest and greatest standards and market conditions.
- Dov
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I can’t believe the complaints about updated versions of any Adobe product.
People need to get it in their head that as time moves on, new features are created or edited or added or... to the programs. Look at all of the upgrades that Adobe’s done, and continues to do, to the InDesign program. New features are added and/or fixed with each new upgrade. Do you think that if you buy a version of InDesign, you should be able to upgrade it to the newest for free each year? How could Adobe continue to pay their staff to fix any problems or add anything new? Should they have just made InDesign and then made another "program" the next year with a different title? They take their time, after it’s been released, and try to see what new features could be added and/or what needs to be looked at and fixed. I agree that the prices are tough, but they can't do it for free and I'm pretty sure they don't do it on purpose.
There are only a couple of ways Adobe COULD change, if they felt it was needed.
I’m just running out some ideas, but the point is that Adobe doesn’t make and/or update their programs free. They spend millions, in the studies, supplies, employees… to make these programs and keep them up to date with the latest technology. They continue to put out new programs/upgrades that help people all around, whether it has to do with photographs, architecture, any kind of designing, video editing,…or just using their computer(pdf). One problem they face is that some people just take them for granted and don’t understand why they’re being charged to keep up to date. People need to understand that even though they paid for the basic programs, to stay up to date is not free. If a doctor, who graduated from Duke in 2009, needed to take a course on a new computer control that’s now being used in surgery, would Duke tell him it was free to come back and take the course? He spent years there and has already paid them thousands, doesn’t he deserve it?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I found this post because I'm looking for a way to export a cs5.5 for cs5. I found that answer, and for me, it's not a huge deal because I rarely have to do it. I don't mind paying for upgrades — as someone pointed out, I make money with this software, I just never thought the cs5 to cs5.5 upgrade was worth it. I've upgraded every creative suite since cs1 (and even before that I upgraded my software with every release).
Really, the only reason I'm posting is to add my 2¢ to this as a loyal (and long-term) Adobe customer. CS4>CS5 made total sense. There were lots of new features and every program was upgraded. I can't imagine being on CS4 anymore. CS5>CS5.5 makes no sense to me. I don't use Dreamweaver (loyal Textmate fan), so what's left are some minor upgrades. I'm not doing epub books, but even if I was, to me that's a free upgrade (InDesign 5.1 or whatever).
CS5.5 is the only upgrade I've not bought (and likely won't). I'm sure I'll buy CS6, I would just encourage Adobe to discontinue their policy of (charged) .5 upgrades. I don't care how often you upgrade as long as you're improving all the products in the suite with substantial changes.
And for the Adobe employee above complaining about how hard it is to keep up with Apple's OS updates: You might want to run that by your PR dept because it has already shown to be a serious problem for your PR and Adobe's been trying to back out of those statements. I'm sorry your engineers have to redo their code to keep up with recent operating system updates. I'm sorry you seem to be one of the rare few who'd rather develop for Windows. There will be a day when there is serious competition in the market for Illustrator, InDesign, and Photoshop; for your sake, I hope for your sake you have learned to keep up with Apple when that happens.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I'm not very sympathetic to Adobe right now. The justification for changing a file format (yet again) sounds hollow, and in agreement with other posts, has the outward appearance of being designed to force an upgrade chain-reaction.
OK - I get it. The rapidly changing technology landscape necessitates changing the file format to accommodate new innovations. But somehow I'm not convinced. Perhaps the lawyers and the accountants were put in the same room to figure out how to get past the accounting rules. And perhaps you've made us jaded Adobe. The PSD file format is backwards compatible to the point of being useful, but for InDesign (and Flash) there seems to be consistent file format incompatibility from each major verison (and now minor verisons too?!).
So it seems there is either an apparent (and recurring) lack of vision on the part of the engineers during the development of major product releases, or an inability to create a versitile adaptable file format (really?), or there is a revenue strategy. Or some combination of all of the above. Regardless, it makes me and my clients hot under the collar to suddenly have to wrangle different file format versions while on a deadline because someone blindsides the workflow with a file format change -- this time based on an incremental version change?!
So Adobe hasn't compelled me to upgrade based on new indespensible technology or productivity advances. No, it has forced the upgrade based on a file format change they claim is needed to implement features that I don't require -- in an incremental upgrade. I wonder what percentage of the install base will actually use it.
And now for the real issue: The nightmare begins yet again - trying to service different clients with their various CS versions. Trying to keep them happy while training them to export (continually reminding them about the "don't forget to export to IDML" extra step), not to mention the apologies for Adobe messing up the workflow. Sure I can upgrade, or not. But I have no control over their budget cycles, and their ability to keep in step. And given that it was about a year ago that they made their way to CS5 (or not), this is a royal pain.
Adobe - you haven't improved my productivity with InDesign 5.5. You have actually made it more difficult to get things done. Hopefully I can appreciate what you have created in the future, but right now, I'm just plain angry. Call me when CS6 is released and the file format has changed yet again.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Lose the conspiracy theory. If that were case Illustrator, Photoshop and Dreamweaver would have the same issues.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Maybe they are being run by the A-Team. How about not forcing $500 incremental version upgrades that disrupt workflows as they ripple through the user base.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
For the umpteenth time, nobody is forcing you to upgrade. Software / hardware upgrades are a part of doing business. If you need an upgrade to support your clients you can make that money back in a job or two.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Maybe you miss the point that an upgrade causes a chain-reaction of file version conflicts. My upgrading means I'm removing effiency from the workflow of all the clients that have not upgraded. While not upgrading puts the burden on the other clients to follow the workaround process to accommodate me.
The over-riding complaint isn't a new file format, a new feature, or the cost of the upgrade. The complaint is the absence of backwards compatibilty outside of the juggling of exported and imported file formats. And it keeps cropping up with every release.
In the real world that means someone forgets, so the files need to be reposted or resent, then there is a timelag associated with that and all the wasted productivity accompanying the process. In my case it's not the money - it's the time.
Look. I've had to dig up passwords, figure out screen names and all sorts of misc. to be able to voice my frustration over an incremental version change.
And what was the lifespan of the release version of the 7.0 .indd file format anyway? I would so much rather be excited about new features than dreading the next release and how that impacts workflows and the required workarounds.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Have you not bothered to read anything about this? If you need to send a CS4 file to a client then you work in CS4.
Upgrading to CS5.5 doesn't mean removing earlier versions from the machine. And if you have people working for you that can't understand something that simple, fire them, because they're totally incompetent.
Bob
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Oh brilliant Bob - stick to defending Adobe instead of dispensing 3rd rate business advice. Yes, let's fill the machine with multiple versions of software releases until the system is a bloated pig (funny how quickly that still happens). It would be much better if I could uninstall them.