Cura 3.6 profile not backward compatible ?

[phantom 17]

Hi,

 

I exported my profile because of my previous post about the sluggish slicing in this version so i could test the same model with the same settings on 3.4.1

However trying to import the profile in 3.4.1 does not work, it says it imported it succesfully, but the menu does not show the profile no matter what i do.

 

So is 3.6 not backward compatible ?

 

Greetz Phantom

[ahoeben 1,948]

Generally it should be possible to import profiles and configurations from older versions, but newer versions may not import correctly.

[phantom 17]

Could you maybe give it a try?

I have not experiment this before with any Cura 3. version so it stuck me as odd that it does say it is imported succesfully but doesnt show up to select.

[ahoeben 1,948]

> it does say it is imported succesfully but doesnt show up to select.

 

Bugs happen.

[phantom 17]

Did you try of it worked?

And yes bugs happen, but isn"t that the reason we mention issues, so they get checked and resolved ?

[mastory 44]

Personally speaking, I don't consider backward compatibility of profiles to be an issue.  At some point we as users have to understand and accept that the development direction is forward.  Should I expect that a profile made in 3.6, with many more and different options, should work within 3.4 or 3.1.  Where should we draw the line?  If we happen to be lucky and it does work then great, but zero reverse compatibility is acceptable to me. Mainstream software developers are not concerned in the least with backward compatibility.  That's why there are newer and hopefully better versions constantly coming.  Issues with forward compatibility are more legitimate, but even then sometimes the road forward must sacrifice some functionality in the name of progress.  Don't forget this software is free for the asking as a great value added if you happen to be a UM buyer.

[phantom 17]

It might be acceptable to you, but that's not generally speaking every ones opinion.

 

There are still lots of users going back to previous versions as not each version seems to be an improvement in print quality especially the latest versions. This would also included professional users. 

Forward compatibility seems to be an issue too with this version seeing recent posts so it worth bringing this issue up. 

 

I keep seeing more replies stating that the software is free, hence users should be less demanding...??

If you want to be the number 1 selling printer manufacturer, top notch software is key if you want to differentiate yourself from the rest.

 

Be glad that the many users point out all the different errors showing up, makes for a better more stable program in the long run. We should be demanding or else you wouldn't have such a great community and sell less printers.

[ahoeben 1,948]

My previous reply ("bugs happen") was not very helpful, sorry for that. I'll try to do a better job at explaining why what you are asking may sound obvious, but is actually more complicated than you would think.

 

You use the word "backwards compatibility" from the perspective of the file. "Backwards compatibility" sounds like a very obvious thing to exist with any software, right? But there's the thing: from the perspective of the software, what you are asking is *foreward compatibility*.

 

Backward compatible software can (eg) load files created with previous versions of the same software. Cura can do that; it contains code that detects the version a file was saved with, and version-by-version it applies changes to the file until it matches the version you are trying to load with. So if you are loading a project file, or a profile file created with 3.1 into 3.6, the file will be converted first from 3.1 to 3.2, then from 3.2 to 3.3, from 3.4 to 3.5 and finally from 3.5 to 3.6. Not all of those steps are complex (because the settings format does not normally change all that much between versions), but all these steps are performed.

 

Foreward compatible software can load files created with future versions of the same software. This is a lot less straightforward. You could think "just do all those steps backwards". That *could* work (even if creating the backwards step is not always straightforward), but the real problem here is that the old version of the software cannot yet know what changes are made in future versions of the files, because the future software did not exist yet when the old version was made. So Ultimaker would somehow have to update all the old versions of Cura with information about how the current version has been changed. And the result would still be less than perfect, because the new files could still rely on features that are simply not available in the old version.

 

The bug that "happened" is that Cura tells you that the profile was succesfully imported, whereas it should tell you something like "sorry, this file was saved with a version of Cura that is newer than what I can handle". Also note that this bug will probably not be retroactively fixed in previous versions, because Ultimaker has not released updates for previous versions since Cura 2.3 was released.

Edited November 26, 2018 by ahoeben

[phantom 17]

Thanks for the explanation :-)

[drill1000 0]

Adding to the question of Cura's backward compatibility debate, I too am having issues whilst using Cura 4.13.1

After slicing an STL file, previously used in2018 successfully, the G-Code details show the following message:
"Make sure the g-code is suitable for your printer configuration before sending the file to it. The g-code representation may not be accurate."
The model is then shown in red and cannot be selected, modified or moved.
Before resuming 3D printing in 2022 I was successfully printing these models on a previous version of cura. Can you confirm that it is NOT the installation of the latest version of cura that is causing this issue and give me some guidance on what it could be?

If I need to install an old version of Cura, can you suggest which release I should try?
Thank you
Best regards
David

Edited February 24, 2022 by drill1000

[ahoeben 1,948]

14 hours ago, drill1000 said:

After slicing an STL file, previously used in2018 successfully, the G-Code details show the following message:
"Make sure the g-code is suitable for your printer configuration before sending the file to it. The g-code representation may not be accurate."

That message is shown when you open a previously sliced G-code file in Cura. G-code files are not 3d models, so they can not be sliced again. This has nothing to do with backwards compatibility.