Collaboration with other software
About model and data exchange with 3rd party solutions: Revit, Solibri, dRofus, Bluebeam, structural analysis solutions, and IFC, BCF and DXF/DWG-based exchange, etc.

The Revit Wishlist

Anonymous
Not applicable
I have been getting a little tired of hearing how great Revit is and how much ArchiCAD sucks (or is falling behind, or failing to stay ahead, or whatever). So I decided to have a little fun.

Don't get me wrong, Revit is a good program with a lot of nice features. I have enjoyed using it on a few projects now and look forward to getting familiar with more of its subtleties and advanced features. And of course if GS stands still, or if it is perceived that they are falling behind, they will lose in the marketplace.

So I have undertaken a completely biased and unfair comparison of the two programs (since it is based on a Revit wishlist and not a feature list) to make the point that ArchiCAD does have a lot of strengths and features that Revit does not. It would be interesting to do a more comprehensive comparison (like using an ArchiCAD wishlist) but I don't have the time right now.

Apologies to Wes. I hope you don't mind me "borrowing" the list. I grabbed it from the Augi forum (it's publicly posted with no copyright notice so I can't see any harm in it) and have added my own inline comments. My knowledge of Revit is still somewhat limited so I may be a bit off on some of the finer points, but I have tried to be as accurate and objective as I can (while still having a little fun with it). And Wes, if you can add some more knowledgeable feedback about anything I have misunderstood I will be most appreciative.


Modeling

- Allow shared coordinates to be used in defining heights ot point entities that define the toposurface... points only use project coordinates at this time
...We may not have the terrain tools as such but the mesh tool can do this

- Improved sloping slab / roof modeling tools (specify slope by three spot elevations)
...Sloping slabs would be nice, but we do have this for roofs.

- Allows slopes in pad objects
...I guess we would need pad objects first (library parts could do it).

- Sloping walls -- angle of slope as instance parameter (not just skinned on mass objects)
...We've got this and then some.

- Create workplane by clicking 3 points in model (sim to AutoCAD create UCS by 3 points)
...We don't need no stinking workplanes.

- Create named reference plane by selecting face of object (ref plane aligned to object face)
...I'm not sure about this one. I don't recall using these in Revit. EDIT: I just checked and realize that I've been using reference planes all along and either didn't know or didn't remember what they are called. There is much about them I still don't understand so I am still not able to comment on this one.

- Allow system families to be placed in user-defined subcategories
...That would be like layers only less flexible. Also like Classcodes which I truly, deeply wish we had.

- Allow windows/doors (but esp. windows) to be tangential to the wall when "Vertical only" is unchecked in the family. This is a huge problem for non-vertical walls where the user wants the windows to be coplanar with the wall
...We have it now.

- Allow 3D snapping of model lines and/or reference lines to allow us to escape workplane hell
...We've got this one too (and no workplane hell).

- Improved/more site modeling tools (road design, etc.)
...Yes, well, we can wish for this one too. I'll have to compare ArchiTerra 3 to the Revit tools some time. EDIT: Well I just took a quick look at the terrain tools and , unless I'm missing something, I would prefer to model terrain with the mesh tool. ArchiTerra definitelyhas functions that are lacking in Revit.

- Improved stair modeling tools and ability to join geometry with floors (e.g. monolithic concrete stairs)
...Yes, well, that too.


Documentation

- Ability to customise elevation tags like you can with section tags
...All tags in AC are customizable and far more so than in Revit.

- Ability to categorize interior and exterior elevations separately and control their tags' visibility separately as well
...There are all sorts of ways we are ahead on this one.

- Transparent filled regions (allow % transparency as overlay or underlay in views)
...We have this too.

- Ability to add views (sections, elevations) while working on an in-place family
...I'm not sure what this request is about.

- Ability to resequence numbering in schedules when objects are added or removed
...We can do this manually in the IS. I haven't done schedules in Revit so I'm not sure how this compares.

- Area tool (suggested to have it built into the measure tool)
...We have this in fills, zones, and of course the measure tool.

- Ability to vary lineweights by distance from cut plane in section/elevation
...We have this partially in the distant area settings

- Camera location icon for plans
...We've had this forever

- Greater control over wall visibility in views: cores only, cores + everything else
...Well...

- non-rectangular boundaries for viewports (it's like deja vu all over again )
...This was introduced in PM2.0 as I recall

- Viewports to be "snapable" for fast, precise layout
...We've had this forever too.

- Either remove limitations of detail views for floor plans, or allow for more floor plan callout types
...We have a similar wish for live enlarged plan views.

- More control of revision schedule: direction (bottom to top), designations (not just numbers only), and allow revisions to list even if revision bubbles aren't displayed
...Well, if we had a revision schedule, we could wish for improvements.

- Report number of objects selected
...We have this live in the Find & Select and in detail in the modal Edit Selection Set dialog

- Ability to tag legend objects in legend views
...I'm not sure what this is for.

- Ability to print multi-page PDFs rather than having print/name each page manually (granted if you use PDF Factory -- or the free PDF Creator from PDF Forge)
...We have PDF capabilities way beyond Revit. As far as I can tell there is no PDF import at all.

- Allow true colour presentation option for shaded / shadowed orthogonal views (plan / elevation)
...We have this in elevations anyway. Not hard to fake it in plan by referencing a 3D view.

- Allow rescaling of hatch patterns without finding and reimporting the .PAT file
...This has always been possible in the File Types dialog. We can even rescale instances since 11 came out.

- Allow calculated values in tags (e.g. show room occupancy or corridor loading)
...Zone stamps can be easily customized to do occupancy. Accumulating corridor loading is still manual.

- Allow calculated values to control color schemes (e.g. show areas over/under building space program)
...I'm not sure what this means.

- Color fill legends should not be cut off by the crop region
...We don't have this problem.

- Allow gradient fills
...Yup, we've got these too.

- Coarse scale fills should permit a view override per category so that all walls, floors, roofs, etc can have the same coarse scale appearance in plans and sections
...We can do this in a variety of ways. View Options, Pen Settings, etc.

- Linework tool should be allowed to work on linework from linked Revit files (to remove lines between linked elements if no line would exist when the design is constructed)
...We don't need this since ArchiCAD does a proper job cleaning up the drawings.


Performance

- Double-click to edit sketch based objects rather than rolling up to the 'Edit' button
...We don't need this since we can easily edit the items (such as floors & roofs) in place without having to go into Sketch mode.

- Revamped UI: varies from requests for basic updates to inclusion of VIZ-like behaviour to commonly-used tools to modeless properties dialog box
...Revit has a long way to go to approach both the capabilities and the complexity (complifications?) of the ArchiCAD interface. If GS could really put a priority on clean-up and consistency, not only would we all be thrilled, but it would be much more obvious how far ahead ArchiCAD is in this respect

- Accurender 3 needs to be updated to a newer rendering engine
...We know how this feels. I haven't done much rendering in Revit but I understand that it is no better and perhaps worse than AC in this regard. EDIT: Mental Ray now in Revit 2009 - I don't know how this stacks up to LightWorks in AC

- Improve display system - make objects display as they do in Inventor (clear and rapid display of objects)
...I don't know Inventor, but the performance and display quality of Revit definitely lags behind ArchiCAD

- Allow double-click or right-click to edit and finish editing objects (e.g. floors)
...Again we don't have the onerous Sketch mode and so don't need this.

- Allow users to select point of rotation rather than moving icon from center of selected objects
...We have this along with the rest of the much quicker and more facile edit functions in AC.

- Auto-hiding/roll-up of portions of the UI (Project Browser, Design Bar) to facilitate more screen space
...Both programs need a face lift. At least it is possible to customize AC.

- Full screen mode
...I thought Revit had this. They must mean something different than I am thinking.

- Support for dual monitors
...AC supports as many monitors as you care to attach

- More keyboard support for commands (e.g. various line tools during detail line command)
...Of course we can customize this to our hearts' content - with a few exceptions.

- Editing request pop-up for users who need to relinquish objects
...Hard to compare, but this sounds like it could be a cool Teamwork function. Not high on the list as far as I'm concerned though.

- Select all instances: per view or per project
...This would make Revit's selection tools only slightly less pathetic by comparison to ArchiCAD.

- Make family list pull-down (Type Selector) wider, or at least appear in a tool tip: long family names are getting cut off
...Most of the field length issues have been sorted out in ArchiCAD

- Customized pallettes for storing and placing commonly used components
...Favorites, Modules, Eyedropper & Syringe tools

- "Create Similar" command should mimic all properties of the object selected (only partially mimics properties at this time)
...I still haven't got the hang of this tool in Revit. It sure is a long way from the Eyedropper & Syringe tools

- Let Tape Measure tool work in 3D
...We've got this too. It would be even more useful in Revit if you could snap to points and edges, and constrain directions as well as we can in AC.

- Option to have crosshairs as the cursor
...I'm not sure about this. If they mean full window crosshairs, well I guess I would just turn them off.

- Let Revit access the power of high-end video cards
...ArchiCAD flies on a Quadro. It's not that bad on a GeForce either. I'll try to compare the two some time if I get a chance.
46 REPLIES 46
Thomas Holm
Booster
Thanks, Matthew. I'm happy someone with practical experience of both systems posts a practical comparison.

While there are a lot of things to improve, from what I've learnt, I'm convinced that Archicad's workflow, very practically oriented to produce construction documents, with the model- save view - place on layout - publish layout book streamlined sequence still has no real match in other CAD or BIM systems.

But the pressure of Autodesk's heavy marketing is felt even in this forum. I'm sure there are users that will be happier with Revit, but I really do hope that the switchers have done a thorough evaluation for themselves before!
AC4.1-AC26SWE; MacOS13.5.1; MP5,1+MBP16,1
Anonymous
Not applicable
Thomas wrote:
Thanks, Matthew. I'm happy someone with practical experience of both systems posts a practical comparison.
Thanks for your appreciation Thomas. I want to reiterate though that this is not a fair and unbiased comparison being based entirely on what Revit lacks (the wishlist). I do hope it serves to remind some folks there there is still a lot to like about ArchiCAD and some very important productivity tools that are presently lacking and may be very difficult to implement in Revit.
JaredBanks
Mentor
Great Posts! Thomas, I agree completely about the workflow of AC. I'm in the process of training about 16 people at my firm on AC11 (some old 8.1 users, the rest autocad users or hand drafters) and I keep telling everyone that the work flow is more important (in my opinion) than fancy 3D renderings or anything else. The ease of putting together layouts, auto-referencing, etc really helps convince a lot of the hesitant users.
Jared Banks, AIA
Shoegnome Architects

Archicad Blog: www.shoegnome.com
Archicad Template: www.shoegnome.com/template/
Archicad Work Environment: www.shoegnome.com/work-environment/
Archicad Tutorial Videos: www.youtube.com/shoegnome
Good project.
James Murray

Archicad 27 • Rill Architects • macOS • OnLand.info
Anonymous
Not applicable
JaredBanks wrote:
Great Posts! Thomas, I agree completely about the workflow of AC. I'm in the process of training about 16 people at my firm on AC11 (some old 8.1 users, the rest autocad users or hand drafters) and I keep telling everyone that the work flow is more important (in my opinion) than fancy 3D renderings or anything else. The ease of putting together layouts, auto-referencing, etc really helps convince a lot of the hesitant users.
Sometimes I think the biggest upgrade GS could do would be to just make all the features they already have more accessible and easy to use. There is so much good stuff in the program that a lot of people don't even know about.

I agree entirely about the workflow issues. There are many tools that I use constantly (hundreds if not thousands of times a day) that don't have any real or acceptable equivalents in Revit. The automatic relationships can make up for this up to a point, but then they can bite you on the back side later on.
Anonymous
Not applicable
James wrote:
Good project.
You mean my little amusement? Or the whole discussion?
Anonymous
Not applicable
Well -- that's an old list -- pre Revit 2008, even. The only leftovers from that list that might be of consequence to a Revit user would be customizable elevation tags so that you could have more than square or circular elevation tags ...though that's all we need in my firm anyway 😛

And might I add that we got Mental Ray in Revit 2009, so we are quite happy over in Revitland... use of linked files got a major boost now that we can use linked elevations and sections instead of just plans, and you can use the Linework tool on linked geometry, which was what kept me from getting excited about using this feature more.

Our wish for lofting tools was granted 50% in that we got a single segment loft, with a multi-segment loft tool likely in testing at this moment.

We have to manually model (in Revit, not an outside app fortunately) sloping walls, but it's not hard to do; it's just an added step. That particular wish hasn't been granted yet, but since some big wishes were put to bed in this release, our hopes are up.

I think with the death of Maxonform (is it really gone?) then it would be worthwhile for ArchiCAD users to compare Revit 2009 to AC11 and then picket at Nemetschek's office.

As for what I'd take from ArchiCAD -- the trace feature. That looks really cool. We have to convert PDFs to something else for importing into Revit and it would be convenient to get rid of that one little step. We can underlay plans under each other right now, but not elevations under plans and so on.
Dennis Lee
Booster
I agree with Matthew wholeheartedly. I feel that the AC users are bit quiet when it comes to standing up for AC in the comparisons w/ other software - but really, there are a LOT of things to like about AC. I do feel that it takes some time to get a good feel to get the right balance of how much to model, how much GDL to become familiar with, how to best use each element for different tasks, and such, but once you have some level of comfort in understanding the workflow, doing architecture any other way is unthinkable.
For me, AC's ability to let me work in 3d - walking and looking around just like FPS game, (flying around w/ 3dconnexion ), getting instant section models (marquee-F5), and selecting, modifying, etc. all in 3d and switching back and forth (F2 - F3 - F5) - is really the natural step up from the second best way to do architecture (foam block - chip board - section models - drafting over trace, etc...). I feel in this regard, AC still has no competition.
ArchiCAD 25 & 24 USA
Windows 10 x64
Since ArchiCAD 9
Anonymous
Not applicable
metanoia wrote:
Well -- that's an old list -- pre Revit 2008, even. The only leftovers from that list that might be of consequence to a Revit user would be customizable elevation tags so that you could have more than square or circular elevation tags ...though that's all we need in my firm anyway 😛

And might I add that we got Mental Ray in Revit 2009, so we are quite happy over in Revitland... use of linked files got a major boost now that we can use linked elevations and sections instead of just plans, and you can use the Linework tool on linked geometry, which was what kept me from getting excited about using this feature more.

Our wish for lofting tools was granted 50% in that we got a single segment loft, with a multi-segment loft tool likely in testing at this moment.

We have to manually model (in Revit, not an outside app fortunately) sloping walls, but it's not hard to do; it's just an added step. That particular wish hasn't been granted yet, but since some big wishes were put to bed in this release, our hopes are up.

I think with the death of Maxonform (is it really gone?) then it would be worthwhile for ArchiCAD users to compare Revit 2009 to AC11 and then picket at Nemetschek's office.

As for what I'd take from ArchiCAD -- the trace feature. That looks really cool. We have to convert PDFs to something else for importing into Revit and it would be convenient to get rid of that one little step. We can underlay plans under each other right now, but not elevations under plans and so on.
Thanks for the follow up Wes. Perhaps I'll do a more even handed comparison once I have Revit 2009 and ArchiCAD 12 is released.