I'm having trouble with InDesign CS6 crashing every single time I attempt to save or export a document I just finished. It has never been saved before, other documents save and close fine, I've tried removing all the links from the file, and it still crashes on save. I've tried copying it, and the moment I tell it to place the document on the clipboard it crashes. I don't know what else could POSSIBLY be causing this crash. There is no crash or error reports.
I already tried exporting, that's why in both the subject and body of this post, I specified it crashes on "save or export", unlike most, I actually do read through all the FAQ and troubleshooting tips before making my own thread.
Also the file can't be corrupted since there, as yet, isn't a file. The document is, as yet, unsaved. only automatic recovery has prevented it from being lost each time I try to save it.
Weird part is it puts the save I tried to make in the "open recent files" menu both in Windows Explorer and in the InDesign program, but the file doesn't actually save.
Either there's a problem in the file (and there can be corrupt images, text or frames in an unsaved file) or there's a problem on your system. If you can't export (and it wasn't clear you tried export to .idml), then the best bet is to try moving the pages to a new document, and when that fails, try copy/paste.
I am wondering why this issue keeps arising in different forums yet Adobe does not seem to have any accountability. It certainly does not seem to be an isolated incident. If you google it, you get a lot of feedback but no real solutions. I am having this issue in both CC and CS6. I never had it before downloading CC. CS6 was fine prior to the download, which I am now regretting.
What makes you think Adobe has no accountability? Just because the problem isn't solved with a snap of the fingers doesn't mean that nobody is working on it or that nobody cares.
This is one of those really unfortunate situations. ID CC was completely recoded to run as 64-bit, the release schedule was accellerated last year from 18 -24 months down to 12 months, and no matter what you do during beta testing you are working with a limited pool of testers using only a fraction of the real-world configurations (and sometimes real-world bad habits are also a factor that is not tested) that will install the software the day it is released.
There's no question there are some significant problems, and my instinct is this is the worst it's ever been for a new release. The problem now is to actually find the bugs, which requires good documentation of hardware and software configurations and reproducible methods for triggering them, and to find potential fixes whcih can require quite a bit of rewriting of code, and finally to thoroughly test the patches. You think things are bad now? What would you say if a patch were released that broke something else?
And no, I don't work for or speak for Adobe, but I've been a tester at times in the past and I know how it goes.
Of course, problems with CC should have no bearing on existing CS6 installations, so if you have an issue in CS6, as the OP, there is much more likely to be a problem on your end than a software bug at this point.
Peter on the matter of this problem, I tend to agree with you. I understand bugs and glitches as long as reasonable steps are taken to resolve the problem, and I'm kept in the know about them. Conversely a few weeks ago I had a problem with Photoshop CC changing my print driver settings during the print process. I don't know why, but it did. It's not supposed to, but it did. The answer I got was not "what's your configuration" or "we'll look into it, but it's not supposed to do that." all I got was "it can't do that, so it's your printer manufacturer's problem." and when pushed and clarified that no other product, adobe or otherwise, even including Photoshop cs6, had this problem? The response I got was "it's your printer. Sometimes even changing the name of a program can cause a print driver's bugs to be exposed."
Look at that, and look at their handling of CC Sync, and I think that DOES, however, show a lack of accountability on Adobe's part. You have people who made business decisions to invest in Adobe Creative Cloud on the premise of it being a CLOUD service, who have put in multiple hundreds of dollars into the system while that function is offline, It's been a month since it was supposed to go live again, and we're still waiting. Don't get me wrong, I understand the dev process and testing process is and should be ardurous. But give us some concept of when we should see it come online. Not just point to a month old post saying it'd be a couple weeks. That's where I get into accountability, Adobe scorned quite a few paying customers who are, unfortunately, locked into a contract. That IS a lack of accountability, but this isn't. Glitches and bugs happen, and in fact, Peter, your advice helped. I had one text field that was corrupted, I copied the rest, recreated that field, and got on with my day. So this issue was no problem.
I don't know what happened to you over in the Photoshop forum. I'd like to think that sort of unqualified answer wouldn't happen here in ID -- you might get a similar answer after giving more details, however -- but I'm sure it can and does happen here as well. Remember that forum participants are almost exclusively ordinary user volunteers, not Adobe staff, and that many of them are from other cultures or language traditions from yours so you may interpret posts somewhat differently from the way they were intended. Many users strike me as borderline rude from time to time until I realize they are from a culture where phrasing is understood differently or perhaps English is not their native language, so I like to err on the side of giving everyone the benefit of the doubt.
I'm a business owner myself, and I depend on Adobe software for my living. I haven't even installed CC for testing yet, let alone considered using it for production. I think anyone who thinks they were duped into purchasing a cloud subscription should take a good look in the mirror and complain to the person they see there that they need to do more testing of new software on their own systems before staking the future of their business on a new release.
And I'm really glad to hear that you found an error in your CS6 file that you were able to correct.
Actually, peter, the man who replied to me had the "staff" or whatever it's called icon next to his name, I don't know if that means he works for adobe, or for some tech support company representing Adobe, either way, it's representing Adobe. It was atrocious customer service, and he left little to misunderstand. We went back and forth for a few posts, each time he reiterated to me that it couldn't possibly be Adobe's problem. Now, here in ID forums, I've always gotten quick and concise answers that helped me when it's me doing something stupid. That's the first negative experience I've had here, and because of that I would give them the benefit of the doubt.
But I'm not talking about the CC suite of products. I still have both CC and CS6 installed, and I prefer to use CS6 because the software is more stable and robust, in my opinion. Because I still have that option, I still have no problem with Adobe because of that changeover. What I do have a problem with is that the primary reason I bought into the Creative Cloud membership was the automated file synchronizing across the cloud and multiple platforms. I didn't find out until after I had bought into the contract that it was only a beta function, and now it has been offline for 2 months out of the roughly 7 I've been a CC member. That's not me buying into a product without knowing what I'm getting, that's me buying into a product, knowing what I'm getting, and then Adobe taking it away after I've bought it. It'd be like buying the CS6 Master Collection and then having your licenses for Premiere and After Effects invalidated. I was happy dealing with the glitchy, buggy, slow Creative Cloud Connection application, because although it was glitchy and buggy, it always eventually got the job done. Now I have to manually upload and download one by one some one thousand files or so when I want to work on my current project from a different location.
And I don't say this in anger, nor is my frustration directed at you, Peter, I just want you to understand where us CC members frustration with Adobe's accountability comes from.
I'm sorry to hear you were treated badly by staff. It's not the norm, in my experience, but we all have our bad days. I can envision one of the Photoshop engineers giving you that sort of answer without meaning to be rude. They are quite busy doing paid work and sneak a few minutes here and there to help out on the forums, but they tend to be short in their answers, and in a case where the program code simply has no access to the setting that is changing I can see where they migh just say "that's impossible" without elaboration. I don't condone it, but I understand how it could happen.
And I think you have every right to be angry and frustrated with what's happening in the Cloud generally. I will say, though, that when we paly with cutting edge technology sometimes we bleed. Not that it helps any, but perhaps you've seen Bob Levine advocating the use of Dropbox for the kind of synching you do. I don't use Dropbox, but I do have a YouSendIt account that would let me do the same thing, I think, if I need to. These guys have been in cloud storage for quite a while compared to Adobe's experience and I tend to look to someone with a track record before jumping in with a new provider, even if the new provider has a good track record in other areas where I've used them.
Did someone call me?
And you know what, Peter? If the Sync guys were giving us the same level of care and compassion you are, I'd wouldn't be even a fraction as upset. But we're told to hold sync in one hand, their rhetoric in the other, and see which fills up first. Adobe should hire you for PR, because THIS is the kind of customer service I want to see out of a company charging multiple thousands of dollars for its products. As for sync, I understand the dev time, but why pull down the beta when it was still functioning? Why ignore the public that is asking simply for help making business decisions? As you said, you don't do it for business but you DO rely on it, so you can understand where even if we don't like the answers, we need to hear SOMETHING, we need to at least know the scope of the timetable we're looking at. Are we looking at a few weeks, a few months, or a year or two?
Telling people who are locked in a contract with adobe to utilize a different product for sync is like me buying a toaster and being told, when it doesn't work, to just go use a skillet. Yes it can do the job, and had I wanted it to do the job I never would have bought a toaster. But I wanted a toaster. I was offered a toaster. Most importantly I paid for a toaster and am still paying a protection plan for it, but when it doesn't work I'm told "Oh, we know. We're making a new toaster, so we turned off all the old toasters. When we finish our new toaster you'll recieve one of our brand new toasters." and while that scenario doesn't sound completely implausible, as there have been recalls in the past, instead of becoming irate that our perfectly functional toasters were turned off, we simply asked "well how long?" and we were told a month. So we waited 5 weeks, and said "Ok guys, your new toasters should be here by now. What gives?" and were replied to with "Oh, well thank you for your patience, but we've got another couple weeks on your toasters." now it's been two months, and still no toaster. Sure it's a Sony toaster. Sony's never made toasters before. But sony having never made toasters before is no excuse for locking people into a contract on the promise of a toaster, then you turned off their toaster, and just keep promising "the toaster's in the mail" Adobe may not have ever done cloud sync software before, but they HAVE done marketing, business to business relationships, and customer service. Saying they don't know about sync programs is a non starter argument, because they are failing in areas they've been engaged in for YEARS. I may not know a THING about software development, but I know you don't just tell your paying customers to sit on it and wait until it's done without any idea of when that will be, PARTICULARLY when doing so puts you in breech of contract.
Did Adobe tell you to use a different product, or are you referring to my advice? I'm certainly not privvy to the decision making process that went into pulling a beta, but I bet there was some sort of legal liability that popped up. That's also one of the big reasons that you don't get straight answers about timing. US securities laws are pretty arcane when it comes to what can be considered forward-looking information and a promise of performance that might affect a stock price, so companies like Adobe have to be pretty guarded about what they can tell us. Neddless to say it doesn't improve customer confidence, and I'd like to think that if they could tell us they would.