To ArchiCad or not to ArchiCad, that is the question....

[Anonymous]

OK, here's my problem and I would greatly appreciate your input (as non-biased as possible please). I am an architect setting up an in-house design studio within a remodeler/design-builder. I have used many different 2d CAD programs at a very advanced level over the years for several architecture firms and remodelers and now must recommend a CAD program for the new office. The choice, as I see it, is between ArchiCad and Revit. I have been evaluating both programs on my computer and I see the potential of both programs and really can't decide. While I am a novice (at best) in each program here's what I see good and bad in both programs so far.

Revit:
1. Great intuitive interface with easy to use snaps, ortho, and tentative snaps.
2. Very good library of parts right out of the box and more can be found online.
3. Temporary dimension tool is fantastic.
4. Poor/slow rendering capabilities.
5. Not great tools (not that bad either) for making CD's but seems to be making an effort here.
6. Subscription prices that are absurd. Not only do you have to buy the product once but over and over again.
7. Good: has that behemoth Autodesk backing the product.
8 Bad: has that behemoth Autodesk backing the product.

ArchiCAD:
1. Very sophisticated and powerful selection of tools.
2. Line weight control to the Nth degree, a great plus. I am extremely critical of CAD drawings that read flat, whether they be Presentation dwgs or CD's.
3. Very good rendering and the Sketch rendering function (a Photoshop like rendering tool) can be very useful for quick looks that a remodeling client can relate to.
4. Easy to view and modify library parts.
5. Not enough library parts from Graphisoft and/or vendors..
6. Can't just point and click when drawing. You must enter "shift + R" before every co-ordinate entry. This drives me crazy.
7. No offset command that functions as one would expect (a la AutoCAD). This also drives me crazy.I have no ides how one details without a drop dead simple offset tool. I guess I'd have to learn.
8. No subscription fee (at least not yet).

The list could go on and on for either product. I think if I could combine the ease of Revit and it's snaps and temporary dimensions with ArchiCad's CD detailing tools (and line weight control), library modification tools, and rendering capabilities I'd be set. But alas, I can't.

So my question is what do you think is ArchiCad's's single greatest asset (please don't list CD set co-ordination as they both are very good at this) and what is it's greatest weakness. Be truthful here. I would really appreciate your input. I think I will do well with either product but would be interested to know what it is that the typical user loves/hates.

I'll try listing this in a Revit forum as well....

Thanks,

Dean

[Anonymous]

Rob wrote:
and then reply:

If this Revit / Archicad comparision discussion goes much further we will split that content into a new thread because, yes, it is getting OT.

It just makes me wonder if it is going so much out of the topic. Richard has explained the BACKBONE of AC on a quite good example (my opinion) therefore capabilities of AC engine that gives you relative but so far huge freedom in comparison to let's say REVIT or ADT etc no matter on any fancy-pancy interface or obscure features/featurettes (seeing Revit's marketing images with a spiral curtain wall - what on earth would you use that for?) ...
...so try to explain the capabilities of AC and you are out of the topic... but of course...

I must jump in here and say that this thread is quite interesting and entertaining. The moderators over at AUGI tend to keep their forums very organized, not censored. For example, this type of thread might be broken out into a new thread so it doesn't become 'buried' under an unrelated topic heading. I am continuing to research ArchiCad as we continue our success with Revit. I believe that ArchiCad provides the closest comparison to Revit...forget about ADT and Triforma. Digital Project may be interesting in the future (if it's more affordable!) for more fabrication-based design.

It seems that ArchiCad users don't fully understand Revit and vice-versa. What if we had some sort of mediating forum to openly discuss these two? The idea intrigues me. I've started an experimental Blog I affectionately named "All Things BIM" and would love to get a select group of experts from Revit and ArchiCad backgrounds to contribute insightful articles. Feel free to check it out at THIS LINK.

JV
SOM-NY

[Rob]

JV,

It seems that ArchiCad users don't fully understand Revit and vice-versa.

I think that's a very apparent fact but what I am trying to say is not about comparing features and/or interfaces of AC vs Revit (I believe you could find similar functions and their counterparts in both AC and Revit to may be 95% as they target the building simulation which is always a set of floors, beams, columns and other well identified buildings elements). What is more important (well at least for me) the fundamental idea behind all of it, which is GDL.
I believe all BIM software works (in simple terms) something like an engine operates over a database that contains all data like dims,materials,linetypes etc. and here it is - GDL is the engine, what's more you can access that as an user directly (and it doesn’t take a big effort to understand it – being an architect at hell of a busy office, not a programmer). It makes the whole intention very transparent with a huge potential. That's what makes AC so unique to other AEC applications and arguing over things like we have a button that makes The Eiffel Tower in one step and you don't, doesn't make a sense. Well, Revit doesn't have that (meaning transparency) which I suppose is bloody important in a long run (...and GS knows that after 20 years as oppose to Revit that can't even keep its own format backwards compatible).

However, thanks for the link, it looks like quite interesting stuff.

ta-da

[Anonymous]

Rob,

Yes I agree that these Revit vs. Archicad threads can sometimes get tiresome and downright nasty. I do know quite a bit about Revit, CAD, training/learning abilities, programming and interoperability; but I do not know much about ArchiCad so I won't pretend to be an expert. That's why I'd LOVE to have a cross-platform forum!

Concerning backwards compatability, I haven't come across a single time when I needed to save a Revit project back down to version 3.1 or 2.0, etc. Can ArchiCad save back to version 1.0? Does the platform carry all that baggage? Some have often said that maintaining backwards compatability prevents the file format from being streamlined and improved. I'll guess what your response will be to that, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

JV
SOM-NY

[Rob]

Can ArchiCad save back to version 1.0

JV,

it's a bit too far fetched, firstly because when v.1 got released most of Revit users didn't even have a computer, secondly you are talking about 20 years span, so it is not just a problem of the number of released versions but hardware limitations at that time.

OK then, can Revit save to file format at least 2 numbers down? eg Revit7 to v.6/v.5. It is a quite normal situation when our modelmaker and viz contractor uses AC8.1 and our office is on v9.0 - no dramas (my personal best is saving to v.6.5 for a client's fiddly attempts on his computer at home). Unless you all have the latest version which doesn't give you the choice how to spend your own money your own way and you're being forced to upgrade. I hope you don't have to sign the subscription agreement with your own blood.

[stefan]

J wrote:
I must jump in here and say that this thread is quite interesting and entertaining.[...] I've started an experimental Blog I affectionately named "All Things BIM" and would love to get a select group of experts from Revit and ArchiCad backgrounds to contribute insightful articles. Feel free to check it out at THIS LINK.
JV
SOM-NY

Nice Blog. I think I'll have to check it into more details...

And to add to the discussion, today I received a mail from a former studying friend who happens to be using ADT and wants to switch to either Revit or ArchiCAD. Now what would I suggest? Honestly, I'm an avid ArchiCAD user and a beginning Revit user, yet I'm not able to make a clear choice. They're both good and they both are progressing. There is no clear winner, since both have advantages lacking in the other. If he would have asked to choose between ADT and Revit or ADT vs. ArchiCAD it would be easy 😉

[Anonymous]

Again, since I'm not the AC expert...did AC have backwards compatability within the first 5 years of its existence? I bring this up based on feedback I received from one of the Revit founders as follows:

Another interesting question would be how many users are willing to pay for the implementation of backward compatibility. Keep in mind that the price may not be in $$ but in decrease of improvements elsewhere since resources are to be shifted.

I do know that backward compatibility is a popular request, especially with people accustomed to dwg files. However allow me to make a general observation. Applications that are still being developed and improving rapidly usually do not provide backward compatibility. It is usually much later in an application life cycle when it matures considerably and accumulates a substantial number of users then market forces cause corporations to invest into development of backward compatibilities.

So, Autodesk is faced with resource allocation question. At what point Revit resources should start shifting from wooing more of dwg users to providing functionality for the sake of outdated Revit releases?

JV
SOM-NY

[Rob]

Applications that are still being developed and improving rapidly usually do not provide backward compatibility. It is usually much later in an application life cycle when it matures considerably and accumulates a substantial number of users then market forces cause corporations to invest into development of backward compatibilities.

allow me mate, bollocks.
All decent applications have at least some sort of export function to previous file formats (again, their own formats!!!). It seems to me like not having a common (sense) functions in a software means automatically a sort of advantage for Revit users or it is being presented so.

Again, since I'm not the AC expert...did AC have backwards compatibility within the first 5 years of its existence?

theoretically yes,
AC.9 can save to v.6 file format (by the way ten!! years old, I am not really sure if Revit was even in an alpha stage at that time) and then if you had ACv.6 you could save that to even earlier versions. Anyway, the current version of AC covers at least 10 years backward (you must admit that keeping options for older versions wouldn't make a sense - who would use them today). But still it is a good example of transparency and clear direction where GS goes to.

Keep in mind that the price may not be in $$ but in decrease of improvements elsewhere since resources are to be shifted.

and what about the users who don't give a s!@# about forced upgrading and want to use their software as it is? They do not obey the marketing department - throw'em to the lions...

[Scott Davis]

and what about the users who don't give a s!@# about forced upgrading and want to use their software as it is? They do not obey the marketing department - throw'em to the lions...

Those that are just fine with the status quo, and want to be stuck with old technology in less than a year at a time, go right ahead. Once again, no one is FORCING you to upgrade! Let your subscription lapse, keep using old software. IMO, those that do not want to be using the absolute best, most up to date software they can, well....I personally think that is perhaps one of the worst business decisions one can ever make. While your doing 'just fine' with old software, your competition is sailing away with your future clients.

[Rob]

Those that are just fine with the status quo, and want to be stuck with old technology in less than a year at a time, go right ahead. Once again, no one is FORCING you to upgrade! Let your subscription lapse, keep using old software. IMO, those that do not want to be using the absolute best, most up to date software they can, well

and how would you communicate with different versions of Revit, darling?
So you are BEING forced to upgrade, aren't you?
That's what I meant.

[Scott Davis]

Within my office, everyone is on the same version. My consultants are under contract with my office. If a project begins in 8.0, it will remain in 8.0. Unless there is a feature in a new release that we cannot live without.

This is the same for AutoCAD...all deliverables must be in 2004 DWG format, which covers up to ACAD 2006.

Every release has been absolutely worth the subscription price. There really is no good reason not to stay on subscription and continue to to get upgrades. Seems that AC has caught on to the subscription model, and are now offering the same thing....hmmm, guess it can't be so bad?

Now, if Revit release a version that performed like AC 8, then I'd argue against upgrading as passionately as you have.