topic Re: Why Archicad ? in Modeling

Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:59:04 GMT

I have worked in Archicad for the past 1.5 years after being trained in Autocad for a year. I fell in love with Archicad and am about to purchase version 9 from a Graphisoft Dealer. My question is just a general one to open up some pro's and con's. Why should I continue to stay with Archicad when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to Autocad and what sets it apart from Autocad ? What about products like Intergraph has like Smartplant 3d. Should I learn it instead of investing more time in Archicad ?

Thanks and thanks for a great forum.

Born2Draft

Re: Why Archicad ?

TomWaltz — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:06:56 GMT

Steven

I think it really depends on what you are doing.

If you have your own company, you can pick whatever software you want.
If you are CAD Manager, you can recommend switching the company to a software you believe will be more profitable for the company.
If you have your own license, and are exceptional at Archicad, it may be enough for you to be able to use it for models and some tasks at a new company. If you do well enough, it may be enough to make the company switch over.
If you already have a job, you can afford to be picky while you look for a company that uses a certain software (in this case, Archicad).
If you send a resume to a company that does use Archicad, you are likely to have an advantage over candidates who do not.
If you are unemployed or underemployed, you may have to go with the flow and use whatever your next employer uses.
If you are planning a career in the Architecture/Engineering/Construction industry, it will benefit you long term to be familiar with some form of BIM software.

Re: Why Archicad ?

__archiben — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:39:19 GMT

Born2Draft wrote:
Why should I continue to stay with Archicad when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to Autocad and what sets it apart from Autocad ?

depends whether you're born to draft or born to build . . .

~/archiben

Re: Why Archicad ?

Petros Ioannou — Wed, 26 Oct 2005 07:38:41 GMT

Either way you have to enter the BIM world Born2draft
It is a fact that AutoCAD is widely used but are you sure that things are going to be the same after 5 or 10 years??
So maybe re Born-2BIM ???

Petros

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Oct 2005 13:11:21 GMT

I have run my own show for a while (17 years) and delegating production is a pressing issue.. The irony is the move to Archicad/BIM reduces this possibility until I have templates any monkey can use, including me

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:23:53 GMT

Born2draft
This is supposed to be funny, in a serious sort of way, but by no means am I making fun of you, just of the whole situation.
Disclaimer done, here is your post, version 1985:

I have worked on a computer for the past 1.5 years after being trained on paper and pens for a year. I fell in love with the computer and am about to purchase one from a IBM Dealer. My question is just a general one to open up some pro's and con's. Why should I continue to stay with the computer when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to drafting with pencils and what sets it apart from CAD ? What about products like Apple has like Macintosh. Should I learn it instead of investing more time in PC IBM 8088 ?

Does this answer your existential doubts?

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:10:42 GMT

Well, so far reading this, I don't see any reason for choosing archicad, just a well I have archicad is it is the best...

The comparrison with the IBM computer and Apple might not have been a good one, as Apple almost went under not so long ago and had to be rescued by Steve Jobs... luckily they are back on top, but remember that they will be building macs with intel chips soon, so how far away are they from PC's?

Have to say I have used a few different Cad programs in my time, Sonarta, Gable to name two good packages of their time, both now no longer here. Autocad itself has changed so much in the last 3 years, with a much easier to use Architectural Desktop than ever before. If Archicad is to stay on top then we need to tell Graphicsoft what the failures are, and ensure the product is far supprior to anything else on the market. Plus the question asked should generate a long list of why you should buy archicad over any other product. So far I don't really see anything in this thread, and as a new user to archicad, it doen't fill me with confidence.

Alsom what is BIM, and is it easy to use or is it like GDL, another thing where you need specialised knowledge to use it. After all the best thing you can have is a product anyone can use with minimal effort, rather than have something only a few can use with training.

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:04:06 GMT

Lighting90 wrote:
The comparrison with the IBM computer and Apple might not have been a good one, as Apple almost went under not so long ago and had to be rescued by Steve Jobs... luckily they are back on top, but remember that they will be building macs with intel chips soon, so how far away are they from PC's?

I think the comparsion remais valid.
For me, the question is BIM or CAD, as it was 20 years ago between pencil or computer.
If you choose ArchiCAD, Revit, Allplan, Microstation, its all BIM/"computers".
If you stay AutoCad, you stay "pencil".
As it turned out 20 years later, it was not really important (albeit personal taste) if you went Apple or IBM: Everyone is working more or less the same, i.e. on a Personal Computer with a Windowlike O.S.

Lighting90 wrote:
Plus the question asked should generate a long list of why you should buy archicad over any other product.

The question was:"Why should I continue to stay with Archicad when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to Autocad?"
As I see it, this question really means "Why should I continue to stay with BIM/VR when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to CAD ?"
After all, it is a drafting versus building question.
So, my answer pointed out this is not a real question, as it was not a real question 15 years ago "Why should I continue to stay with computers when it is so hard to find a job in it as opposed to pencil drafting?"

As for the specific BIM software, whatever tickles your fancy...

Lighting90 wrote:
Alsom what is BIM, and is it easy to use or is it like GDL, another thing where you need specialised knowledge to use it. After all the best thing you can have is a product anyone can use with minimal effort, rather than have something only a few can use with training.

If you work correctly with ArchiCAD, BIM is mostly automatic.
GDL is programming. Its a whole different ballgame.
So, as long as you prefer to model instead of drawing, you get BIM.
Bingo! Or should I say BIMgo?

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:01:13 GMT

I see wher your coming from... regarding the computer statement, i.e. drawingboard or computer, though the latest things I have been seeing are the computer screens you draw on, will this make return us back to a board based drawing system, abeit with computer technology under you. Not sure personally as I have yet to try this syetem out, though I know surveyors are taking to it with portable tablet pc's and it makes onsite sketching very easy. But that is a different subeject and maybe something for a new thread...

The fact of the matter is, i have only recently started with archicad, (I am a fan of it, don't get me wrong) but already it seems difficult to create new library items, simple due to the GDL knowledge needed. Where as in autocad it was very simple, though of course it was not as flexible as archicad.
Though the new versions of architectural desktop have come a long way, I have been using 2005 for sometime and it is very easy to create a whole building rather than the tradditional pencil drawing approach you tended to use with autocad. (even now has fully rendered walls with bricks of the right scale... which it never had before without lots of effort)

I have yet to to use V9 in anger, as they say, so maybe some of the problems I am having with the program will be sorted, but the prevous users in this office were not using archicad as it was intended, but using it in the same way as autocad, creating plans with the wall window functions and then creating sections using lines and the same for elevations, on the flat, when you do that archicad seems a terrible program, which it isn't.

With finding a job, I can say it has never affected me whatever system I have used, and I started with Sonarta, then Gable, then Autocad, then Powercadd, (worst progam I have ever used !!!) then vectorworks, back to autocad and now into archicad... I think it is a question of attitude of both you the job searcher, and also the potential employer, always showing willing to learn, and if the system they have is not as good as archicad, then you simply convert them or as mentioned find another job.

At the end of the day, here in Scotland, you are not judged on your cad abilities, but your building technical/design skills first, if you don't have those, it doesn't really matter how good you are on any computer system unless they are only looking for drawing fodder.

One thing archicad users should remember is not to become blinkered, and forget the rest of the world is also moving forward, always good to know what the competition is like, and then you can always advise Graphicsoft of things they can do to keep archicad ahead of the game.

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:30:51 GMT

Lighting90 wrote:

At the end of the day, here in Scotland, you are not judged on your cad abilities, but your building technical/design skills first

There is a big difference between architecture quality and project quality.
Archicad and other BIM software allows you to make really good projects.
You get every (almost) technical document automatically, which means a LOT of less errors.
This is not to say that your architecture becomes great.
I like to see myself as an responsible architect, so documenting a project as good as it is possible is really what I consider 90% of my job description. If, after this is guaranteed, I can make some nice architecture, so be it. But my first responsibility is to the paying client, who demands an error free project.

Lighting90 wrote:

One thing archicad users should remember is not to become blinkered, and forget the rest of the world is also moving forward, always good to know what the competition is like, and then you can always advise Graphicsoft of things they can do to keep archicad ahead of the game.

That is one of the reasons I spend so much time here in the forum

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:51:18 GMT

Krippahl wrote:
There is a big difference between architecture quality and project quality.
Archicad and other BIM software allows you to make really good projects.
You get every (almost) technical document automatically, which means a LOT of less errors.
This is not to say that your architecture becomes great.
I like to see myself as an responsible architect, so documenting a project as good as it is possible is really what I consider 90% of my job description. If, after this is guaranteed, I can make some nice architecture, so be it. But my first responsibility is to the paying client, who demands an error free project.

That is something apparent here with some firms too, the difficulty is the balance between the two, with regard to standard stuff in archicad, well, no doesn't work as well when your working on some of the existing buildings in Edinburgh. (at least I shoudl say, not that I have learnt how to improve on this yet) But agree with you when it comes to new build, what ever type it is. For me, design is the most important, followed by project follow through, with everything nailed down to the last nut and bolt, as you rightly say, our duty is to the client wanting an error free project. Here we already have some pretty good stuff to help us with that, strong contracts, the National Building Specification, and normally on projects over 100,000 a Quanity surveyor, who keeps his beady eye on the costs for us.

I suppose that is the most difficult thing for Graphicsoft is producing a package that works in any country with any traditional detailing that may occur, the danger with too much automated stuff is that inappropriate detailing is carried out for a particular location.

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:41:25 GMT

Lighting90 wrote:
I suppose that is the most difficult thing for Graphicsoft is producing a package that works in any country with any traditional detailing that may occur, the danger with too much automated stuff is that inappropriate detailing is carried out for a particular location.

This is more of a mindboggling problem that may seem at first glance.
After all, if you travel around the world, you see so many common things in architectures: walls, roofs, pavings, structure, renderings, etc.
What you do not realize is the incredibely diverse situations you get on the contractor, materials, legislation, prefabrication levels.
There will probably never be a 100% customized software to takle with this issue.
The best you can hope for is a very robust platform that lets you fiddle around and make your own templates/favorites.

We also do a lot of renovation and I have never encountered a problem that could not be solved on ArchiCAD. And I do not do GDL scripting

Returning to the subject,or part of it, I would state, IMHO, that ArchiCAD is better prepared than, say, revit (here comes Scott...) or Microstation to deal with all the quirks of Europe construction market.

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:50:31 GMT

Have to agree with you on the been better prepared, but, and here is the but, Graphicsoft can not just sit and think arh we are the best, as the others will catch up and be past them in no time at all...

Good discussion, some of it might seem off topic, but I am learning myself at least why archicad may be a better cad program than others. and this is something the question was aimed at....

Give me a few weeks and I get going with 9.0 and we will see if I can put more down towards why archicad should be choosen over others...

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:55:08 GMT

This job was a restauration work, all done by the BIM principle, and it worked fine.
Special objects (ewe? of roof, windows) where build as a non parametrical CGL free object, no hassle.
BTW, rendering was done in the new ArtLantis, which I cant recomend enough (no, no comission here )

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:59:08 GMT

Lighting90 wrote:
Have to agree with you on the been better prepared, but, and here is the but, Graphicsoft can not just sit and think arh we are the best, as the others will catch up and be past them in no time at all...

No danger on that. market forces wont allow

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 23:21:16 GMT

Oh, sunshine, whats that?

The render looks great, these are the sort of things we need to do in my office, (I am new to the office, and so far the archicad 7 has been used incorrectly, a problem I think with regard to lack of training and autocad users using the program.)

Hopefully once I master this program, like I said, I will be able to write a list of reasons why we should use archicad over other products.

I have a lot of negative comments though at the moment, but I am hoping that the move from 7 to 9 wil clear a lot of those negatives up..

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:17:11 GMT

That's a hard topic
I tell you my opinion
In the beginning (of my CAD experience) it was only AutoCAD.
No more pencils and fatal mistake on the drawings It was great to be able to correct a design and reprint it in a few seconds.
But after a while it was annoying to make only lines and hatch.
Then it came ArchiCAD.Of course an engineer needs a plan to understand a construction and not beautiful pictures.BUT it makes our life more beautiful and our costumers more enthusiastic.
I like ArchiCAD.I work in an office where they use Autocad like pencils,I am using AC and i make a plan in the half time they do (and i am not a very experienced AC user)
I also use AutoCAD.Sometimes it is very convenient

conclusion:I don't know,try both and make your own decision

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:50:52 GMT

Why ArchiCad? A valid question. I've been getting a bit frustrated by GS lately. It's a wonderful piece of software, but I'm starting to wonder weather I jumped on the bandwagon a bit too early. For a company that puts out such a high end piece of software, I would expect a MUCH MUCH MUCH more aggressive marketing/educational policy. We've just gotten inches from possibly switching to that stonage software standard, Auto... whatever, for no other reason than there's hardly anybody that knows how to use the sofware and most people run away when they see that we're using... "Archi... what's it called again?".

I've also been looking at local schools (plenty in our area), and all they offer to teach is Autodesk sofware (ACAD 2006, Revit, etc). How are we supposed to be profitable if the cost of the sofware increases and nobody knows how to use it. You have to buy upgrades for all the seats, and lately more and more add-ons, and then you have to spend the money to train Autocad devotees who constantly bemoan the change. I understand them (I've been there too), but I don't understand GS.

Is it just me? Does anybody at GS understand what I'm talking about and interested in doing something? I even started throwing around the idea of teaching it myself at the schools, but seems like GS is too lazy to get involved. Don't know how much longer I'll be able to put up with this before I end up switching to... Revit? Don't think that it's better than AC, but at least there'll be more people who'll know it, and therefore more offices will probably use it and so...

K, that's all I had to say for now. Any amen's out there? How about solutions?

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:34:38 GMT

Sergio wrote:
Why ArchiCad? A valid question. I've been getting a bit frustrated by GS lately. It's a wonderful piece of software, but I'm starting to wonder weather I jumped on the bandwagon a bit too early. For a company that puts out such a high end piece of software, I would expect a MUCH MUCH MUCH more aggressive marketing/educational policy. We've just gotten inches from possibly switching to that stonage software standard, Auto... whatever, for no other reason than there's hardly anybody that knows how to use the sofware and most people run away when they see that we're using... "Archi... what's it called again?".

I've also been looking at local schools (plenty in our area), and all they offer to teach is Autodesk sofware (ACAD 2006, Revit, etc). How are we supposed to be profitable if the cost of the sofware increases and nobody knows how to use it. You have to buy upgrades for all the seats, and lately more and more add-ons, and then you have to spend the money to train Autocad devotees who constantly bemoan the change. I understand them (I've been there too), but I don't understand GS.

Is it just me? Does anybody at GS understand what I'm talking about and interested in doing something? I even started throwing around the idea of teaching it myself at the schools, but seems like GS is too lazy to get involved. Don't know how much longer I'll be able to put up with this before I end up switching to... Revit? Don't think that it's better than AC, but at least there'll be more people who'll know it, and therefore more offices will probably use it and so...

K, that's all I had to say for now. Any amen's out there? How about solutions?

I am FOR every word mentioned.
Thanks,
Joseph

Re: Why Archicad ?

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:00:34 GMT

Why not Archicad?