ArchiCAD and Residential?

[Anonymous]

Hi guys, Newbie here. I'm currently looking to move on from 2D AutoCAD to producing 3D models that I'll use to create construction documents and renderings. The only 3D experience I have is with ADT, but that was awhile ago and I really didn't care for it (especially for residential). Anyway, here's my questions are this... I'm looking for an unbiased opinion because we all know one program is better than another at certain things but lack where the other excels. I guess what I'm saying is there is no "perfect" product that suits everyone. Ok, so we are an architecture firm and the work we do is residential (custom homes). First of all, which is better at residential, Revit or ArchiCAD? Again, I’m looking for an unbiased opinion (hopefully from someone that’s used both). I'm fine with someone saying "ArchiCAD is so much better at everything else, but if you're into residential only, Revit might be better for you". My second question is, would you say ArchiCAD and Revit are "overkill" for residential only firms and you'd be better off with a residential product such as Softplan or Chief Architect? I greatly appreciate anyone’s feedback on this.

BTW, I’ve searched and have seen a few responses, but I’m more curious to hear your opinions now that version 9 is out.

[Scott Davis]

You know, basically it comes down to trying out the software for yourself. You can get a fully functional 60-day copy of Revit from the website. This is not a lite version, but the whole, full blown package with no limitations for free for 60 days. Download it and try it.

You have to ask the ArchiCAD guys about demoing their software.....does ArchiCAD have a fully functional 'trial' version so that TexasTechGrad can truely compare the two on his own side by side?

[Djordje]

Richard wrote:

Djordje wrote:
Also, you can not compare ArchiCAD and Revit with Chief Architect; if you compare, it shoudl be the same class of software.

Djordje - Other than the multi-user environment, what do you believe defines "class" in this case?

I have not heard that CA can handle something like Eureka Tower.

Apologies if I am wrong.

[Djordje]

Scott wrote:
The 'deadlines' are imposed by the age of the software. Autodesk cannot continue to support old software. If they had to, they would need to provide support back to 1.0.

Sorry, Scott, but this is simply not true. The Autodesk deadlines ran one version back. Support? Back home, I drive a 1965 Beetle. Still can find parts for it.

Scott wrote:
The deadlines basically mean that Revit has moved on and dropped support for old software. You can continue to use it if you'd like, but when it comes time for you to move on, you will need to purchase the software outright again.

Quite callous. Especially if you are on the subscription scheme, which should be on a yearly basis the same as a full license plus upgrade.

[Scott Davis]

Can you still get support for ArchiCAD 2?

If you are on subscription, you continue to get updates....much like an extended warranty for the Beetle. Wouldn't it have been nice to pay a small amount a year on your car, for the life of your car, and continually get all service and maintenance for free? As it is now, you can still get parts....but they are fuill price.

Software is slightly different in that technology has changed too rapidly to continue to provide support for old versions. I don't think I could find anyone that would be able to help me with Bank Street Writer for my Apple IIc. Even now, if I wanted to run AutoCAD 9 off of my fourteen 5.25 floppies that I still have, I don't think I could find a 5.25 drive in a computer to put them in.

[Dwight]

Djordje wrote:
you can not compare ArchiCAD and Revit with Chief Architect; if you compare, it shoudl be the same class of software.

Since there's been discussion, let me add:

There's three areas where not buying the best [usually, but not always, the most expensive] can cause disappointment:

-- photo manipulation
-- rendering
-- building modeling

software of different "classes" might seem pretty much the same out of the box, but once you invest countless hours of learning and adapting, you run into the impenetrable wall of "Can't-Do-That" and end up regretting an inexpensive choice that became a really expensive decision.

Strata falls into this category, less so Photoshop Elements - version 3 really coming along - and applications like chief architect that have abrupt limitations you don't find out about before it is "too late." Excuse the Sunday school/teen s*x theme.

[Anonymous]

I would add that when one of the most if not the most important decision is the future value of the time you invest in a product. One must ask these questions:

Will the product be a standard of the industry or not
Is it accepted and used by the Engineering community
It has engineering modules or not
Will it help me integrate in the corporate world?
What is the projected user base curve?

The decision is not unlikely as the one presented to the member of a minor foreign culture of what is the #1 Language one must learn.

I for one at the time I decided for Archicad I was sure it will conquer the marker, but I was wrong and it did not. Growing older I have realized that the success of the product has only marginally to do with its quality and a lot with its marketing and the greed of its management. I am sure Archicad had menu buy our offers from larger interest groups but it remained in hands that it may not have deep enough pockets to propel it in to the future.

[Ignacio Azpiazu]

Adalbert wrote:
I for one at the time I decided for Archicad I was sure it will conquer the marker, but I was wrong and it did not.

A major consideration is what type of practice you picture your future in, or you would like to flow to in the future. The larger the practice, the larger the personnel dynamics, the larger the flow of CAD files with the outside world, the higher the costs of speaking a different language. The smaller the practice, the lower those costs and the higher the profits of maximizing productivity even if it is not the market leading program. (In say spreadsheets you don't have that dilemma: Excel is the absolute best, and it is also the standard.)

If you have been using ArchiCAD all this time, Adalbert, you have payed less transition costs than if you had tried to keep up with every new release redesign of AutoCAD, Architectural Desktop, Revit. [I made a very painflul switch to AC in '00 after 8 years of Minicad/VectorWorks and I will never regret it. Today I am seeing the death of AutoCAD at the hands of Autodesk and history, so I am also glad about having had successfully avoided that awful tool even if it was the standard for so many years.]

There are lots of profits we all reap daily from using ArchiCAD, and in your case that must have outweighed the cons up to now --otherwise you would have switched programs.

[Anonymous]

The future leaders in the computer business have never been clear. Lotus, Word Perfect and Ashton Tate used to dominate the PC software market. There is no guarantee that even Microsoft or Autodesk will continue to dominate their markets forever.

The best practice, in my opinion, is to use whatever works best for now and be prepared to change if circumstances dictate.

If ArchiCAD is no longer working for you, or there is another program that will serve you better, them perhaps it is time to switch.

[Anonymous]

Ignacio,

You are right as far as the past is concerned but at this point we have a competing software equal or close to be an equal with AC. Unfortunately this software is in the hands of the most powerful player in the field and it may very well become a standard, so the picture you projected is far from being an accurate one.

Mathew
You are correct “ The best practice, in my opinion, is to use whatever works best for now and be prepared to change if circumstances dictate.” This is what I am talking about the “change if circumstances”.

[Djordje]

Adalbert wrote:
Ignacio,
You are right as far as the past is concerned but at this point we have a competing software equal or close to be an equal with AC. Unfortunately this software is in the hands of the most powerful player in the field and it may very well become a standard, so the picture you projected is far from being an accurate one.

Don't think so. Not because of the software, be it ArchiCAD or Revit, but because of the nature of the industry. As long as the authorities want paper, and as long as not knowing how to send email, make a PDF, or scan something means that you are illiterate, it will not happen. No non-drafting software will be a standard.

Speaking of the competitor - I personally see a huge problem in it, that is its main advantage. Yes, relationships. I suspect that one spends as much time controlling the relationships, breaking or redefining them, as one does the design. A submission or tender documentation set is a legal document. No, I don't trust myself enough, let alone a software, be it what it may! This is off topic a bit, but consider - in the residential practice, what is the implication of a, say, wall pulling half the house with it two feet out?

Adalbert wrote:
You are correct “ The best practice, in my opinion, is to use whatever works best for now and be prepared to change if circumstances dictate.” This is what I am talking about the “change if circumstances”.

Quite, quite true. What works for you best is the best. Some would not require more power than X, some would want Gehry's CATIA based app. The trick is to recognize the value that XYZ software returns to your practice.