!Restored: Vectorworks 2009 BIM: Its Happening... Its Not Happening

[Aaron Bourgoin]

The press release and the white paper on this product are reminiscent of the American Presidential Election: casting doubt on the competition's experience and outlook.

"From a conceptual and philosophical perspective, BIM is a better way to design, construct, and manage buildings. It allows architects to design more efficiently, construction firms to better manage costs, and owners to stay on budget and control day-to-day operational costs. BIM fulfills the promise
of economic gain and also better business relations. Excessive change orders, resulting from communication errors or missing information, negatively reflect on owner’s perception of architects and construction firms. Architects and construction firms with a reputation for costly overruns tend to lose business.

"As the key technology shared between architects and construction firms, CAD applications have taken center stage in the movement to take BIM mainstream. CAD’s ability to capture and represent the geographic information, building geometry, component relationships, and quantities and
properties of building components is at the heart of BIM. Several CAD vendors tout their applications as central to the BIM process, capable of managing the complex 3D information model generated on a BIM project. But are they really? As BIM evolved, architectural intelligence was built on top of primitive foundations. Many BIM applications have limited functionality and key elements of the model cannot be represented in 3D; most do not have a modeling kernel reliable or fast enough to handle large, detailed 3D models. Without the efficiency of a purpose-built 3D modeling kernel, good visualization becomes an extremely time-consuming process.

"We have the answer to BIM’s technological problems: adopt the time-tested platform used by the MCAD industry to build the best architectural 3D CAD solution available. With a purpose-built 3D modeling kernel, Vectorworks 2009 manages building complexity which previously tested the limits of
most BIM applications."

But then, Boingo:

At the Nemetschek Press Event, Ralph Grabowski reports this about Jim Flaherty's keynote theme which is

"BIM Isn't Happening...

...because it costs architects to implement BIM [building information modeling], but they do not get paid more for using it. (In the row ahead of me, Ed Goldberg was vigorously nodding his head in agreement.) Architects want a payback for themselves; they care not if the owner saves money down the road with BIM, because architects don't get any of that savings paid back.

"The key strength of Vectorworks is its free-form modeling, which products like Revit can't do. Mr Flaherty is pleased that Autodesk helps out Vectorworks by marketing BIM and Revit -- but then ends up selling AutoCAD.

"For five years, the #1 selling point of Vectorworks has been its presentation graphics -- outputting good looking drawings with gradients, transparency, 2D Booleans, and non-photorealistic effects in 2D and 3D. All this generated within Vectorworks, again something competitors can't do.

"Now there is a new key mission: Design. Mr Flaherty segregates design into four steps:

I. 2D.
II. 3D Conceptualization or Visualization.
III. Integrated Design and Development.
IV. Model-centric BIM [building information modeling].

Most customers are at step II, 3D Conceptualization; he's trying to get users to the next step, Integrated Design.

Step IV? It's a long way off. Model-centric BIM is the future that everyone talks about today. But there are lots of holes in the process, such as legal issues. Today, BIM works only for owner-builder-operators, such as GM building its own plants.

So, what are some of the limitations of competitors -- Revit, in particular?

* Modeling limitation; freeform modeling is needed to design things like spline-shaped roof edges. Vectorworks is the only one with NURBS surfaces.
* 3D speed and robustness; purely parametric modelers can't handle the model size once details are added.
* Complex UI; users face varying user interfaces when they switch between 2D and 3D packages from the same vendor. Vectorworks has the same UI for all its software.
* BIM slows down design; users spend too much time wrestling with the system.
* Good visualization is hard to get; customers find they have a hard time reproducing the beautiful renderings pictured on the vendor's Web site.

Mr Flaherty sees BIM as something that excites accountants, but not architects, and thinks that paper drawings will be the preferred output method for his lifetime -- as opposed to exchanging drawings electronically."

see the whole article at Issue #572 : : Setpember 16, 2008
http://www.upfrontezine.com/2008/upf-572.htm

Seems Mr. Flaherty has a different idea of what BIM is. His approach seems to be to say, everyone else's ideas about BIM are wrong or wrong headed. And then to take BIM back to CAD circa 1993.

[Anonymous]

Interesting stuff.

Speaking of three pronged approach... how is VectorWorks Architect marketing position different from Archicad's?

Does anyone remember when Mercedes "merged" with Chrysler.... and it later became apparent that it was actually a takeover? Is there any reason why this cannot be the case here?

[Thomas Holm]

LINZ wrote:
Interesting stuff.

Speaking of three pronged approach... how is VectorWorks Architect marketing position different from Archicad's?

VW's cheaper

LINZ wrote:
Does anyone remember when Mercedes "merged" with Chrysler.... and it later became apparent that it was actually a takeover? Is there any reason why this cannot be the case here?

Of course it is a takeover. Nemetschek AG, who developed and still own Allplan, and also own Maxon/Cinema4D, first bought Vectorworks' holder and renamed it Nemetschek North America, and then Archicad. They took them all over.

The problem is that still we have no indication of their plans. Are they just a holding company, milking as much as possible out of their purchases, or will they actively DO something, to merge, kill, consolidate or diversify any or all of them.

This is the first sign something is happening. They bought Siemens' Parasolids modeling kernel for inclusion in Vectorworks. They've also bought some PDF creation code from Adobe for the same purpose.

They have not announced anything for Archicad. But to me it seems logical to turn to the same suppliers when something is needed there. It should be the cheapest solution! Because of market reasons, I don't think they will kill Archicad or their native Allplan. It would be logical to try to consolidate them internally, so as to lower development costs.

But whatever, I'm just guessing. We'll see.

[Anonymous]

Thomas wrote:
Because of market reasons, I don't think they will kill Archicad or their native Allplan. It would be logical to try to consolidate them internally, so as to lower development costs.

But whatever, I'm just guessing. We'll see.

It seems to me they have a Ford Focus, and a Toyota Corolla, and Honda Fit sitting in the same showroom. I really see no 'market reasons' why they won't dump or merge AP, AC, VW and come out with one package. I see with VW 2009, they have already incorporated things like the eyedropper and other innovations first seen with AC.

Just speculation, but it seems overkill to flaunt multiple platforms.

[Dwight]

Like we should worry what happens to Archicad?

It is quite clear that all of the Nemetzski's applications have their shortcomings, but they also have strong cultures and invested users. It is small minded to think that a certain package might be developed or dropped when what is required is a completely new thing - an application that properly exploits a new paradigm suited to a generation of computer users rather than archaic paper and ink concepts, since that is the only way to defeat REVIT.

[Anonymous]

Dwight wrote:
...what is required is a completely new thing - an application that properly exploits a new paradigm suited to a generation of computer users rather than archaic paper and ink concepts, since that is the only way to defeat REVIT.

REVIT? What's that?

Let me know when you've put the finishing touches on the new paradigm... I'd like a copy!

[Dwight]

It won't be me that does it.
I'm too old.
I still own working rapidographs.
Maybe you have a chance.

Here is the torch.
I put in fresh batteries for you.

[Anonymous]

Information from the Nemetschek AG website on user numbers:
http://www.nemetschek.com/en/home/the_company/brand_portfolio.html

- AllPlan 60,000+ (architecture and engineering)
- Archicad 100,000+ (architecture)
- VectorWorks 400,000+ (architecture, landscaping, events and exhibitions, mechanical and general)

According to NNA 68% of their users are in architecture, or around 270,000 in total.
http://architosh.com/news/2008-09/0917_press-day3.html

[Anonymous]

Saying that BIM is not happening is typical obfuscation from the VW camp. Of course BIM is happening -- anywhere AC or Revit is being used. I can't make NURBS in Revit. I can't make organic forms (yet) either. But if my clients were that rich, I could build the forms elsewhere and import them into Revit.

BIM isn't happening in AutoCAD, Autocad Architecture or VW shops either -- of course VW says BIM isn't happening -- you can't do it with their software. And because BIM is harder (or at least more) to learn than CAD, the majority of people are still doing CAD. VW is hampering the expansion of BIM because people continue to use it because they like it. That's fine -- but every minute they continue to use it is another minute where they work in an outdated paradigm.

[Dwight]

Let me be really condescending and observe that in general, BIM won't happen because the general user doesn't bring the discipline or aptitude to the situation.

Not that it was easy for me. It took years to properly employ many of Archicad's background tools like GDL, calculate, etc, so when i go into an office and see many staffers fail the challenge of holistic thinking that BIM presents, I understand that they would like to go home to their families at 5 PM and not stay 'till midnite until they get it right.

[Anonymous]

In 1996, here in my country, I was part of the firm Moré Arquitectos. They used Vw, ops Minicad 6 or 7. The project was a building for the Supreme Court, it was completely modeled in 3d, we got construction drawings, renderings and volumes from the model. The firm won the project. It's built. The digital concept was to use the model as a centric information unit. It has more than 15,000 sq m of construction. It was made on Macs (G3 with 32mb RAM).

These are the coordinates of the project:
http://caedro.com/descargas2/SupremeCourt.kmz
You can see it on Google Earth.

I think the concept of BIM is not only a set of tools but a way of approaching the project. Some softwares, as Vw, are flexible enough to support these approach. Others Not.

NNA is doing great with the new implementations, especially with parasolid (more modeling tools and more interaction).

Autodesk users are always thinking things occurs when they are doing it. Why?