I do fine this interesting in that I just recently decided to give Sketchup another try. I am what nats referred to as "a house designer", so I can't comment on much outside that box. nats refers to architects as "creative people" and AC is fine for those house designing professions, but since I am also an architect, just one who prefers housing over commercial, maybe my experience has some value.
I grew up designing way before computers became the tool of choice. If you are looking for tool to facilitate creative efforts, then why not close you eyes and let it rip. Then once the essential elements are formed, pull out the old sketch paper and go for it. I am not sure what is taught in schools these days, but I sure hope they have not limited there creative expression to Sketchup. Personally, I find using Sketchup one step forward and two steps backwards. I did not help my process. I find it much faster and more efficient to model in my consciousness, then verify a few things on paper, then model in AC. Once in AC, which is extremely quick once you have mastered the tools and developed your templates, it is a very simple process to generate all sorts of documents (working drawings, material list, renderings, etc). It baffles me when someone says AC is not good for generating working drawings. It is simply too many peoples experience otherwise, and too bad for those who form a judgement based on lack of experience.
I am all for anyone using whatever tools work best for them, but when nats declares AC's limitations as above, which is misleading to someone open minded and searching for solutions, I do feel it important to state otherwise. nats asked someone to try Sketchup and then tell him he is wrong. Ok, you are wrong.
