Graphisoft public roadmap - Follow-up conversation

[Gordana Radonic]

Dear Community, 

We're excited to have published our roadmap!

We'd love to hear your thoughts and questions. Please feel free to use this thread for discussion.

Graphisoft Insights announcement: https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Graphisoft-Insights/Graphisoft-public-roadmap/ba-p/375281

Public roadmap on the Graphisoft website.

Thank you.

[Florian99]

Grasshopper is mentioned in Research and Idea Pool.

We are also looking forward getting more stability, performance and features in with GH & AC

[TMA_80]

I do agree on that, it was promised to be continiousely developped.

[poco2013]

So much for Graphisoft's promises. it brings into question the sincerity of the whole "Roadmap". Sounds like  just advertising "hype", the end of which is more "hype".

But we'll see if version 27 delivers on any promises, if not, this could be the end of any trust in Graphisoft. Not sure that Graphisoft understands or cares as to what is at stake regarding their credibility?

[TMA_80]

In the latest ArchiCAD versions, the focus was certainly not put on the architectural part. It was\is that, maybe false impression, of few architectural features\enhancements on a whole more features for other parallel discplines .

As a long ArchiCAD user, I have, as others, a mixed Feeling about this roadmap (while welcomed).  As an architect, I have also looked for the architectural features, and skipped all the rest, without ignoring them...I find the in place module editing feature situation just insane and maybe reveiling...

[Steve]

By "I find the in place module editing feature situation just insane and maybe reveling..:

insane in that it has not been done already

or

insane that it is being requested as it is not needed.

[TMA_80]

Insane because it has not been implemented yet ! and will,  certainly, not be in the near/mid term. 

[mthd]

“Yes Please Focus On ArchiCAD’s Core Functionality From Now On”

[Rex Maximilian]

It seems that over 90% of the commenters here are in agreement that the resources and development of future features should go "back" into core architectural tools; both new features AND repairing/fixing/tweaking the bloated ones (the stair tool for instance), and drastically "slow their roll" on the MEP/S tools.

I'm just concerned our voices may be getting lost in this discussion here in the community board. I know Laszlo sends reports, but who reads them when he sends them and what weight do they have? To date, the roadmap hasn't been updated since its introduction. When will we be able to to directly comment on the items themselves, and vote on whether or not we want them, etc.

[mthd]

I have been away from the community since 2014. It appears that not very much has been applied from those previous requests ? I think you are all being heard but most of it hasn’t been applied into subsequent versions of ArchiCAD just yet. For whatever reasons and it’s not good to get behind in those urgent requests from the users here. 

Many are describing that some things inside ArchiCAD are left underdeveloped and are “Dinosaurs” or like I said “Archaic” in comparison to what is out there with other CAD software. To be fair all CAD software will have its “Dinasour” components in them. We need to look at what we do have in comparison to others and appreciate it and kindly ask for what we urgently need. Hopefully those urgent things will get applied if the majority of us want or really need them.

[jl_lt]

Archaic.  We are getting near to that

[4hotshoes]

The Issue creation on BIMx Mobile would be huge for non-Archicad managers to get into the model and make comments and request changes. That is if it is as easy to BIMx and does not require BIMCloud paid version. It could greatly enhance the project workflow

[Rex Maximilian]

I'm sure it will require subscriptions to both BIMx Pro and BIMcloud SaaS. This has been an issue in the last few years that many of their feature upgrades to the next version require additional subscriptions... which is why there was pushback on the increasing fees for SSA due to lack of features for SSA subscribers only.

[4hotshoes]

Archicad users have to pay many fees to get Archicad to function fully as it has been designed:

• Archicad seats (high price)
• SSA to keep those seats up-to-date (price is growing significantly annually)
• Basic AC Training to start using AC
• BIMx Pro to publish the model so other can see it
• BIMCloud for key features that AC was designed to do
• What is the total for all of these? Is it more than Revit?

This is the reason why there are so many former Archicad users out there. I have talked with many architects that say that had bought a license of Archicad but never got off the ground with it. They were sold a promise that they could not afford to realize. Archicad should not be parted out into these small functional packages, where users have to pay more and more for one app that is incomplete unless you pay for all of the parts annually. It should all be one. I have been told by GS that the reason that all of these services are separated out is that not all users want to pay for all of those other services. Well I don't use half of the services in the SSA that I am forced to pay for. However, the MEP and Structural should be parted out as packages, because I have absolutely no use for those services. And yet we are all being forced to pay for them if we want to keep working with Archicad. It is simply hypocrisy! The world we all live and work in is bigger than one app (Archicad) we have many other expenses, subscriptions and service to pay for. Graphisoft just makes it frustrating to use the full intended design of Archicad by creating all of these additional expenses. We use to call this "nickel and diming". Clients hate it. I hate it. One fee for one service. 

[Romans]

...and don't forget the 3rd party add-ons and external software needed to fill the gaps or provide missing features, like LAND4, Modelport, Din3D, Twinmotion/Enscape, Rhino (Grasshopper), Archiradar and so on....

[Bricklyne Clarence]

This is the point I've been making over and over again for several versions now.

That it's simply not fair to keep making Architects and Designers essentially pay for Graphisoft to continue developing tools for other disciplines within the program and ecosystem (MEP/Structural/SAM/DDSCAD etc), that most of us basically don't use nor have any need for - and with no signs of any return on our own investment in license and subscription fees year after year, in the form of tools that we do actually need and use or would like to see improved and fixed.

I don't care what their overall market and planning strategy is at this point.

They've failed to make it make sense for us and I'm not really sure I'd care even if they did try, because at this point it seems like they simply don't care what we think either.

(Consider the fact that they're effectively outsourcing even the simple task of taking in these criticism and comments and having intermediaries and middle-persons do it for them instead. SMDH!)

And yes, "nickel and diming" is the exact correct expression used to describe what's happening here, or at least what most of us feel is happening.

The "Coming Soon" section of the Roadmap tells me that ArchiCAD 27 (And possibly 28 as well) will continue this trend of disappointing version releases that are heavy on tools we don't need (improvements to SAM and his buddy MEP, while Arch(ie) remains the redheaded stepchild.) and piddling tokenistic bread crumbs for the rest of us.

[torben_wadlinger]

This is exactly the issue I've been harping on for years. The German-speaking region is responsible for at least a third of sales (Germany alone 25%, see Nemetschek AG annual report). In our countries, our planning does not end at a scale of 1:100, but we are also responsible for the implementation planning and detailing. And BIM is really taking off right now. However, Graphisoft has been neglecting our market for a good 10 years and is using the profit generated here to grow globally and develop the other disciplines. Long-needed changes, e.g. in the UI, are sold to us as innovations. The roadmap clearly shows that Archicad is falling further and further behind its competitor. The moment is coming when the top management must realize that marketing and double-digit growth in Asia and North America is not enough to anchor the product permanently in the market. Until now, Archicad has been supported by the loyalty of its customers. Through the subscription model, however, it has been clearly expressed that Graphisoft does not care about the customers and only the fast money counts (and to lead the customer into dependency).

Graphisoft wants to make Archicad a Swiss Army knife without understanding what such a knife is. It reminds of the cheap copies that always fail where the original has its strengths: precision, stability, usability, flexibility.

I would have liked Graphisoft to orient itself more strongly on the former role model Apple. Apple had shown the way with Final Cut: New development instead of continuing to maintain outdated software. I would really like to see an Archicad Next Gen. The previous one is frozen and only bug fixes are made. The new one will be developed from scratch with the latest technology. But unfortunately also here: money: 1 / brain: 0

[4hotshoes]

It would seem wise for GS to provide all training for free. All of it! I say this because this is how you get non-users to become solid users that willingly pay the annual subscription. Otherwise, if you don't help them learn, you lose them to their old way or to new ways that do provide help. Then they stop paying. People will pay if they see value in what they pay for. There is no value for me and my firm to have and pay for MEP/S features in an architectural software. I don't even want free training for MEP/S features. While a small firm of 3 or less users may not care about BIMCloud and just use DropBox as most do, they certainly have absolutely zero need for MEP/S. A large 100 plus multi-discipline firm might, but many of them use multiple CAD apps to satisfy their client requests. I will bet the larger market is the small firm of 10 or less, because there are more of them and so many of them have not yet stepped away from  2D CAD and Sketchup. I know that many of them do think about making the switch. They are the real market. But they need help with feeling safe making the switch by having an abundance of good free training available. They need a reliable safety net. If you can get the little guys secure in AC, you have them for life. Big firms do whatever the trend is, because they can afford to switch. And they will switch away from AC if another begins to show more promise.

I know that GS encouraged this discussion for the new road map. And they must have known that many would be critical. But as we all give deep thoughts and words to what really should happen in the future plans for Archicad and have done so for 20 years. I feel that we are all yelling in a sound-proof box. GS is on the outside and not even looking in. They can't hear us. Or so it would seem, since nothing seems to change much. Why do we keep doing this? Why do we keep hoping that GS will someday peek in the box and notice that there are users with great ideas. Ideas that are even better than what they are working on. Ideas that would make AC a superior product.

When I was a user 23 years ago, we never had discussions like this. We instead helped each other and we were in awe of AC and looked forward to the next release of AC. Now we have all become cynical, even when GS shows us a roadmap of the future. I still hope a little, but I also worry that any new feature will be another half baked feature added to the list of "doesn't really work very well" used to lure future users. It is hard not to think that way considering the last 5 years of development. AC does not need to be like Revit, it needs to be better.

[mthd]

It certainly can be incredibly frustrating when you need to pay for all the extras that you don’t need and then have to pay extra again for those things that you simply cannot do without.

It would be nice if the PBR rendering solution inside Archicad was complete enough so that you didn’t need to purchase an Enscape or Twinmotion etc. If anything was urgent inside Archicad this would be a good starting point to consider. Redshift has many limitations, maybe they could remove all those limitations and have it fully functional right inside Archicad ?

When you have many user business models to cater for things can and do get complicated. The commercial world is controlling the direction and development of Archicad at present including all the add ons that come with it.

Ok they can do that but just have a bigger team working directly on Archicad and it’s functionality and that may fix things for everyone ?

If we want things to be more simple then we may have to consider other options like Archicad Solo.

[DGSketcher]

Graphisoft's strategy for ARCHIcad needs to change, the current direction of half-baked and irrelevant tools is undermining confidence in the product. They need to change to a simplification of workflow / tools without loosing functionality and deliver tangible user productivity improvements. Whilst versatility is useful, complexity is never a good in a work environment; the job can be stressful enough without constantly trying to remember where those settings were that you changed 2 days ago in your software. 

[mthd]

Hopefully if at all possible, most of the users here on the GSC do have enough time to continue to outline what urgent changes, they would like to see implemented in future versions of Archicad. 

I know that we have made many wishes here and spent allot of time even detailing what we would like GS and Archicad administration to develop further for us in the software. However if the wish list system is not organized more closely and carefully it’s not really clear enough what they should be working on as a priority to keep us all happy.

It looks like the current system is not working sufficiently for us at present from all the feedback that I have read here. Are we just a minority of users that are being ignored ? If so what category of users are we in when we make these wishes ? Some are too busy to read or even post on the forum.

I like to keep the tone positive and professional and not be sounding like a complainer. Please, all you experienced users please keep making your excellent positive suggestions and don’t get upset if they are not implemented just yet. keep on posting your wishes. I personally appreciate the hard work you all put into help making Archicad an up to date competitive CAD system for all of us users.

[jl_lt]

I have proposed several times that we need to establish priorities and make a list of the 20-25 more urgent wishes. In fact, i wouldnt call them wishes anymore; i would call them "FUNctionalities Long OVerdue as demanded by the client". Currently its like if the client (we, the people) paid for gray tiles in the bathroom and the contractor (graphisoft) installed a blue carpet... In the porch, and with aditional costs!. These FUNlovs might:

-Aim to bring Archicad to 2020´s functionality standards. 

-be divided in categories. Something like: visualization, file handling (modules here), 3d modeling (all tools go here), documentation and publishing, attributes, gdl, integration with other software, and yes, maybe engineering and potentially decades long developments like future integration with AIs

-create the framework for smaller, more adhoc wishes to be also implemented

-aim to allow archicad to handle any kind of project scale without having to use arcane procedures

-aim to reduce workflow complexity while allowing the user to increase complexity if they choose to do so. Integration instead of complication.

-be feasible within current archicad technology and structure.  For example, we can wish a nurbs modelling interphase in archicad all we want, but it probably is not going to happen. A more feasible wish might be: better file import from nurbs modelling software. Something like that.

-benefit the largest amount of users given the necesary effort to implement. So things like rebar, while useful, its safe to assume are needed by a very small fraction of archicad users (but its in the roadmap, so...)

-cover all the range from entry level  to power user functionalities 

-establish an incremental time frame. That is, attack first things that can be implemented as soon as possible and go from there. 1 year, 3, 5 and 10 years timeframe should be suitable for implementations of different complexity.  Example: keynotes and other niceties could be added tomorrow if they just bought cadimage. Etc. 

This way, archicad growth in time would make some sense, as current roadmap seems completely random and lacks any apparent kind of vision, except for the emphasis on structure and revit wannabe stuff. 

 Otherwise, the vast array and variety of user wishes gets dilluted, assigned a number and implemented at the pace we currently know.

Anyway, as the roadmap is already here, it might be too late for these kind of efforts, but I hope, and i mean really hope the roadmap still has some flexibility to it and that Graphisoft didnt show everything and actually kept some cards under their sleeve