archicad vs revit (in my opinion)

[Anonymous]

hey there, In my office I use archicad for everything...
6 months earlier I decided to try revit so i had revit 2011 and did some interesting stuff with it, and came upon these points about revit vs archicad

• Editing of shapes/splines (e.g. Slabs, fills, lines….etc):
Archicad: very easy! You just click on an edge or node and a spline editing toolbar appears, in archicad this is done very quickly.

Revit: you go into a 2d editing mode where you use 2d drafting tools (offset, trim, line, circle….etc) to draw the spline or the shape you want.
• Library parts Objects creation:
Archicad: I have to admit first that I had no training in this topic. Though it's very complex and knowledge-based and process to create an object or a lib. Part in archicad. Of course there are objects that you can create fairly easy like simple doors or so, but if you want to add parameters or functionality to you objects. There has to be programming and scripting done (e.g. creating something like the "Partition Panel "that has a number of panels and accessories on/off switches…).
Revit: I'm surprised to find that objects (families) creation in revit is something that is as easy as drafting... You just create a model, add dimensions, link/constrain them to specific parameters and make your object work like magic; actually, this is the most attractive feature in revit along side with it's 3d massing tools that is yet to be discussed.
I can say that archicad is a user friendly building modeler and non user friendly objects editor/creator. Whereas revit is a non user friendly building modeler (as to be discussed bellow) and a user friendly object creator/editor! Very strange fact...Eh
• 3d Modeling
Archicad: archicad's strong point is its flexibility. You can very quickly create a building model with high level of detail and finishing. However, there is organic architecture which is a zone that I cannot cross using archicad's modeling tools. Is NOT capable of creaing organic shapes whatsoever unless with a help of a 3rd party add on like cigraph's archiform.

Revit: wonderful!!!! I only have to say that I can play with these revit's massing tools in forever!



• 3d window 3d navigation
Archicad: 3d window use 'exploration' rather than 'zooming'. Archicad makes you feel like you are holding a camera and going through the model. There is the feature of 3d explore which I like to play with when I have clients in it impresses them and makes them understand the design better.
The 3d window uses openGL engine to enable the user to see raster materials applied to objects this helps a lot with the modeling and decision making.
The 3d modes are shading, wire frame, hidden line (internal engine only)
Shadows are enabled in openGL in version 14 which is great although I didn’t try it yet.
Vector patterns are enabled via the use of enternal 3d window engine.

Revit: Its default 3d projection is an axonometric view!!!! . I HATE axonometric VERY MUCH and I think that parallel projections are best suited for mech. Engineers or some industrial designers, its use in my opinion in architecture should be limited to descriptive views (sectional 3ds…etc). You can add perspective view via cameras which suks. To make it worse; the 3d navigation is via 2d zoom, meaning that you navigate in your model like you are zooming in a picture.
In the previous versions, the display of real textures preview in 3d window didn't exist up until version 2011 of revit, which had a big entrance via enabling not only the display of textures, but also the display of ambient occultation. There is also several display modes like hidden line, shaded with edges, shaded without edges
Vector patterns are present through all the versions of revit
To be continued………

[Eduardo Rolon]

BIMTIM wrote:
As it far too often the case, people who attempt to compare 2 opposing, yet incredibly similar software packages, tend to show distinct lack of understanding.

Which is what you are basically doing by giving "cheap-shots" as to the lack of "understanding the English Language", "Archicad= Programmer Revit= Modeler", "Build what you Conceptualize".

Both programs are good enough, both have their strengths and their weaknesses.

IMHO this thread was a comparison thread from a person who has used or is using both, you are converting it into a "you are doing it wrong…" one.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

BIMTIM wrote:
As it far too often the case, people who attempt to compare 2 opposing, yet incredibly similar software packages, tend to show distinct lack of understanding.

I can rebut most claims of lack of functionality against Revit as I understand Revit inside and out.
How about we set up a 'Real' debate with a few 'Real' experts and avoid any pointless yelling and screaming about how Chocolate is 'better' than Hokey Pokey....

I will volunteer for the Revit side, and learn lots for my ArchiCAD side...

Are you trolling,or are you just trying to bait people here?

BIMTIM wrote:
I can also embarrass myself with claims of lack of functionality inside ArchiCAD due to my own ignorance.

So far it seems like that's all you've done with your comments on ArchiCAD on this and other threads.

[Anonymous]

ejrolon wrote:

BIMTIM wrote:
As it far too often the case, people who attempt to compare 2 opposing, yet incredibly similar software packages, tend to show distinct lack of understanding.

Which is what you are basically doing by giving "cheap-shots" as to the lack of "understanding the English Language", "Archicad= Programmer Revit= Modeler", "Build what you Conceptualize".

Both programs are good enough, both have their strengths and their weaknesses.

IMHO this thread was a comparison thread from a person who has used or is using both, you are converting it into a "you are doing it wrong…" one.

Are you disputing that you need to program code to create intelligent GDL objects?

My english shot was an addition to the 'intuitive' shot as an attempt to highlight different ways of cognition.

I use both on a weekly basis, depending on the 'conceptualiser' who sends us a model.

I am not intending to insult the author of this thread. I applaud the attempt at being non-biased.

My wit is often misunderstood, so I tend to give up trying to be subtle (maybe read 'gentle') especially when it comes to a debate that I am passionate about.

Instead of hearing 'You are doing it wrong', you could see it as a 'consider a slightly different approach'. You see, even those who speak fluent english fail to communicate effectively!!

[Anonymous]

Bricklyne wrote:

BIMTIM wrote:
As it far too often the case, people who attempt to compare 2 opposing, yet incredibly similar software packages, tend to show distinct lack of understanding.

I can rebut most claims of lack of functionality against Revit as I understand Revit inside and out.
How about we set up a 'Real' debate with a few 'Real' experts and avoid any pointless yelling and screaming about how Chocolate is 'better' than Hokey Pokey....

I will volunteer for the Revit side, and learn lots for my ArchiCAD side...

Are you trolling,or are you just trying to bait people here?

BIMTIM wrote:
I can also embarrass myself with claims of lack of functionality inside ArchiCAD due to my own ignorance.

So far it seems like that's all you've done with your comments on ArchiCAD on this and other threads.

Thanks for the excellent attempt at a cutting insult!

I was actually trying to bring some integrity to the topic. Oh well, it appears that my methods are lacking for some of the audience....

[Eduardo Rolon]

BIMTIM wrote:
Are you disputing that you need to program code to create intelligent GDL objects?

Nope. But I have never needed to code in GDL to design my buildings.

BIMTIM wrote:
My wit is often misunderstood, so I tend to give up trying to be subtle (maybe read 'gentle') especially when it comes to a debate that I am passionate about. Instead of hearing 'You are doing it wrong', you could see it as a 'consider a slightly different approach'. You see, even those who speak fluent english fail to communicate effectively!!

Yes you might be misunderstood that was why I suggested that In My Opinion you are debating things that are not necessary.

Nobody is/was denigrating Revit just listing what is different from an Archicad users view.

Most posters in this forums are passionate about the tools that they use and their profession it is Sunday as I write this up.

I was clear in that it was my opinion that you were derailing the thread. I still think that you are. Looking at it from another point of view is very hard when dat_architect gives his opinion on the help system (which I do think is a mess also) and your comment is that his english is not good enough.

-----
Creating Architecture is independent of the tools that you use. Architects were building prior to Revit and Archicad and they will continue to do so after they disappear.

Debating which pencil is better is an amusing but pointless sideshow since the pencil keeps changing with every upgrade, Revit 2012 just came out AC 15 will come out later. Will they be better than Revit 2020 or AC 23? Who knows?

[Karl Ottenstein]

Hey guys,

This has the potential to be a seriously useful discussion if we step back from acting like we're shouting over the music in a bar and get a little more respectful and serious.

Some cheap shots on all sides that I see.

All of you have a great deal of experience, but clearly some more introductions are in order as BIMTIM isn't "known" to the community, which is no reason to discount his point of view. (And, as a relative newcomer, BIMTIM probably isn't aware of what each of you interacting with him does.)

As a moderator, I can see which firm he works for... While he may not want to name the firm, I think mentioning the size and scope of projects that they do and that he has worked on in Revit/ArchiCAD might earn some respect for his point of view. I for one would like to hear his insights. But, maybe we can have a respectful dialog on all sides so that everyone feels welcome. With minimal snarky remarks and quoting just the relevant sentence(s) for your response rather than full posts. At worst, we'll learn something new.

Attitude adjustments all around please?

Cheers,
Karl

[Anonymous]

Karl,

Thanks for the cool head, I assume that is why you are a moderator! Keep up the great work.

As suggested, here is a little background from me.

I work as the BIM Manager for a large construction company here in Aotearoa.

Prior to learning CAD/BIM tools, I spent several years working as a labourer on various construction sites. I have a working knowledge of Vectorworks, AutoCAD, ArchiCAD and Revit Architecture. I also use on a frequent basis, Deep Exploration, Photoshop, Indesign, and Acrobat to name a few.

I am an active member of the local BIM (ArchiCAD) user group and a committee member of the local RUG (Revit Users Group).

I do not often sugar-coat my words to protect the sensitivities of others. I enjoy being both blunt and honest. I do stumble in and embarrass myself generally with outstanding results.

I am aware on many gaps in my knowledge and actively seek to fill them.

I come from the slant of constructibility, not design, and experience many issues with models regardless of the Platform. Modelling practice is more often the major issue. This is confirmed by Graphisoft NZ as the general answer to why issues arise is "User error" often extrapolated into user being labled expletives I do not think appropriate in this forum. The Autodesk resellers I speak to also agree that it is lack of product knowledge that creates most model issues.

To use any AEC Modeller well, there are many prerequisites, and a lot of time/trial/error... Not to mention an active understanding of 'how to' build.

I do hope to add to the information base of this community whilst learning lots.

From replies to my posts it appears that I will confront many users with my opinions. I do hope that they too can see a broader point of view.

[Anonymous]

perhaps like someone who has been using both programs for more than one week.

I've learned them both very well now. Revit can do more, but it's serial interface holds it back. Forget about the ribbon tool bar, it just cannot shake it's pro-engineer pedigree. You are awlays three or four click to the ribbon window to do anything as simple as change the shape of a slab.
Don't get me started on how dificult it is to do something as simple as extend the end of a building. can you say fence stretch.
Yeah revit can do MORE, it can make cool groovy shapes and you can use adaptive elements to knock off Ghery till the cows come home...but this describes about 5% of all architectural projects....and if you have the budget to do that, buying a third party program on Archicad is still cheaper than Revit. If you need to model furniture in Archicad, Sketchup (which still is much easier than Revit) and bring into Archicad.
Try battering a wall, canting a wall, changing the thickness in Revit. Try manipulating anything in a 3d view. etc. You can spend your time refuting these, but usually all you come up with is some other way of doing the same thing, but not as well.
People who always want to claim that one program is not better than the other, that it's subjective, bla bla are usually the ones that do not have experience using both programs. It's the same argument they made with Microstation vs. Autocad, and it's the same argument they make rre Mac vs. windows....well Mac is better than windows, Microstation was better than Autocad, and Archicad is better than Revit.

[Anonymous]

Tomas wrote:
perhaps like someone who has been using both programs for more than one week.

I use both on a weekly basis. The last ArchiCAD project I had was a 10 storey 15,000m² building with full MEP (don't get me started on ArchiCAD MEP!! Yes I can back this up with actual bugs I discovered logged with GSHU). I currently have a Revit model of a 18,000m² 7 storey building (full MEP and Structure). I have a 'little' experience with both, yet am by no means an ArchiCAD expert.

Tomas wrote:
I've learned them both very well now. Revit can do more, but it's serial interface holds it back. Forget about the ribbon tool bar, it just cannot shake it's pro-engineer pedigree. You are awlays three or four click to the ribbon window to do anything as simple as change the shape of a slab.

I would dispute that you know Revit that well. As you can set up multiple commands to the same keyboard shortcut, most users I know have one shortcut set up for every type of edit (slab, ceiling, roof, soffit, dorma, shaft, wall cut, extrusion, sweep, etc.) and one shortcut to finish. Very quick, and straight forward. Granted not as quick as a simple change in ArchiCAD with the pet pallette, though quick in its own right.

Tomas wrote:
Don't get me started on how dificult it is to do something as simple as extend the end of a building. can you say fence stretch.

To extend the end of a building, depending on how you have set up your model. Normally, I would simply drag the Grid at the end of the building if still in design phase. If the building were already being coordinated and the grids were set, I would select the wall/s and move them, or (once selected) select the dimension and change it to the preferred value. This would of course automatically adjust the roof, floor, mezzanine at the same time. If there were a hipped roof, the roofline would also automatically adjust if set up that way. Fences (railings) are edited in the same way as slabs. there are ways to set up railings to 'drag' but that requires a little more nous.

Tomas wrote:
Yeah revit can do MORE, it can make cool groovy shapes and you can use adaptive elements to knock off Ghery till the cows come home...but this describes about 5% of all architectural projects....and if you have the budget to do that, buying a third party program on Archicad is still cheaper than Revit.

Very few projects require this technology, though it can be used to generate/regenerate 'difficult' shapes natively and seamlessly without leaving the package. (A PC is cheaper than a Mac, so a PC is 'better'?)

Tomas wrote:
If you need to model furniture in Archicad, Sketchup (which still is much easier than Revit) and bring into Archicad.
Try battering a wall, canting a wall, changing the thickness in Revit. Try manipulating anything in a 3d view. etc. You can spend your time refuting these, but usually all you come up with is some other way of doing the same thing, but not as well.

You can graphically (no need to learn to code GDL) create furniture easily in Revit. Furniture created in Revit can be manipulated numerically, graphically, and via catalogue to affect its size, shape, materials, etc.. Sketchup can quickly generate geometry though this is 'dumb' geometry. Not being able to manipulate in 3D does not reflect badly on the software package (as there are many things doable in 3D in Revit if you take the time to learn) I think it reflects more on the users lack of knowledge. Battering a wall and changing the thickness are both simple processes (I again dispute that you know this package 'well')

Tomas wrote:
People who always want to claim that one program is not better than the other, that it's subjective, bla bla are usually the ones that do not have experience using both programs. It's the same argument they made with Microstation vs. Autocad, and it's the same argument they make rre Mac vs. windows....well Mac is better than windows, Microstation was better than Autocad, and Archicad is better than Revit.

Looking at the rest of your post, it is clear to me that I would not seriously ponder the relevance and accuracy of any conclusions drawn by you. When I started using ArchiCAD, I had a "I hate this because its not..." syndrome and when asked by GS support if I had stopped 'comparing' yet, I said I would never because there will always be a comparison. My of the things I though not possible in ArchiCAD, are possible, just not initially obvious. If you are able to transcend your Grrrrr toward Revit, you may actually enjoy a portion of your time spend using it.

Please keep your posts relevant to the post. Your could demonstrate your vast knowledge of both packages through a constructive comparison between software packages. This would be helpful to those reading here.

I will add some of my own observations in time to be pulled apart by the AC pros so I can learn more about why peeps in here are so passionate about AC.

[Anonymous]

Tomas wrote:
Yeah revit can do MORE, it can make cool groovy shapes and you can use adaptive elements to knock off Ghery till the cows come home...but this describes about 5% of all architectural projects....and if you have the budget to do that, buying a third party program on Archicad is still cheaper than Revit. If you need to model furniture in Archicad, Sketchup (which still is much easier than Revit) and bring into Archicad.
Try battering a wall, canting a wall, changing the thickness in Revit. Try manipulating anything in a 3d view. etc. You can spend your time refuting these, but usually all you come up with is some other way of doing the same thing, but not as well.

The whole point of developing tools to make funky Frank Gehry buildings is to make it possible to develop on top of those tools, day to day tools, like stairs, site, slanted walls etc. You can't develop site tools if the software doesn't allow you to loft solids and surface.

And therefore I always said Graphisoft needs to develop these tools for funky buildings. Once that in place, the rest follows.