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.

[thesleepofreason]

Reaching any sort of consensus around 15-20 items just won't happen - especially not if they vary in scope and are to be subjectively qualified (quite sure GS have a similar list with short term profitability added when justifying their decisions). For these issues it would be enough to, through user submission and voting, come up with an ordered list but there is not even a proper framework for that and GS sure seem reluctant to partake in building it.

If some sort of consensus is to be reached I think it has to be sought for fundamental issues which could be framed as questions if users paying for a modern CAD/BIM application should have to:

• rely on manual methods of associating geometries with information entities, 
• manually update placed objects when their definition changes,
• manually reposition/create elements when references/definitions changes,
• keep extensive track of how geometries behave/represent based on their creation method,
• or create an ad-hoc information structure to control visibility.

Ideally GS should provide a clear position statement on these issues so that users can decide if it is worth the investment but unfortunately GS has lost themselves among the smoke and mirrors.

[DGSketcher]

That's far too deep for the current development strategists, they probably consider the prospect of maintaining a much needed focussed & professional architectural design software to deliver documentation to the construction industry as outdated. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them see AC as an Application host, and start pushing more in the direction of the AI Visuals experiment. Why reinvent the wheel when others are doing it for you; even if the required integration becomes a chaotic mess of software failures. It shouldn't be a problem, I mean we're all adequately resourced with IT managers to fix these things aren't we?

[jl_lt]

Yes. Along with our design departaments and integrated engineering inhouse departaments.

That is why we all have time to write here. Which we actually dont, because our PR department handles it for us. 

[jl_lt]

Of your list, i consider the first 3 as critical, specially manually updating things.  then the fifth and 4th last as the last 2 can be currently sort of circumvented with some effort, at least in my experience.

The answer of course is NO to all of the questions you arise.

Also, based on some comments i have read here, im beggining to doubt they actually have a workable list. And even if they do, they have completely lost direction on what to do with it, which is worse.

[4hotshoes]

---

@DGSketcher wrote:

---

If we stop asking for these improvements it will never happen.

---

If GS isn't listening, it doesn't matter.

[jl_lt]

Come on guys. Lets not stop digging just an inch before the gold. Its not like we are flying to Budapest (as much as i would like to, they say its great) to annoyingly tap them in the shoulder until they listen;  or organizing some worldwide movement against sofware inneficiencies and unrealized potential.

No. We are just asking for very reasonable things, using a platform they actually created with that purpose (mostly) in mind, and i dont know you guys, but i do it from a very confortable chair.  

But one of these days i might actually get up from it, then theyll see

Lets keep asking. 

[mthd]

Hi Kamil, it’s certainly is good to see it from your perspective and thank you for your time. Could it be that many of you on huge projects are way too busy to contribute to the wishes forum ? 

[claudiuiancic]

Thoughts about the planned new Door/Window Tool

The Door/Window Tool element should allow access to the SUB-ELEMENTS of which it is composed, as follows:
- the emptiness of door/window vs. the actual door/window
- within the object it must be possible to have access to the settings especially for CLASSIFICATION but also for other PARAMETERS
- to be able to set different types of glass for the carpentry meshes (eg: safety glass on the part below 90cm and LowE glass on the upper part, etc.)
- to be able to set different CLASSIFICATIONS for sub-elements (as is the case with the balustrade/staircase), i.e. after classifying the HOLE as HOLE, the CARPENTRY as CARPENTRY (or Door/Window/Skylight/etc) we can classify window sills, handles, door leaf or sash, frames, etc.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

---

@claudiuiancic wrote:

Thoughts about the planned new Door/Window Tool

The Door/Window Tool element should allow access to the SUB-ELEMENTS of which it is composed, as follows:
- the emptiness of door/window vs. the actual door/window
- within the object it must be possible to have access to the settings especially for CLASSIFICATION but also for other PARAMETERS
- to be able to set different types of glass for the carpentry meshes (eg: safety glass on the part below 90cm and LowE glass on the upper part, etc.)
- to be able to set different CLASSIFICATIONS for sub-elements (as is the case with the balustrade/staircase), i.e. after classifying the HOLE as HOLE, the CARPENTRY as CARPENTRY (or Door/Window/Skylight/etc) we can classify window sills, handles, door leaf or sash, frames, etc.

---

Is there a planned new Door/Window Tool or it this just a wish on your part?

The Roadmap doesn't seem to indicate there's any planned re-do of those tools anytime soon.

I mean, it's not even in the "Under Research" tab which is like the third tier of their Roadmap scheduling (after "Coming Soon" and "In Progress") which to me implies that they're not even thinking about it, let alone working on it. (I don't take the "Idea Pool" seriously because it feels to me like those were just random disparate wishes they culled from the Wishlist forum that had scored high, which they dumped in there to make everyone happy that had noticed the other sections are a bit to MEP/DDS/Structural heavy (....which they are))

Because I hate to break it to you, but people have been wishing for improvements to the door and window tools since forever, with seemingly no impulse or inclination to do so any time soon on Graphisoft's part.

But hey, I hear we now have AI to play with.

Not like it's going to help you design any better doors or windows for your project, though,....

[Pato99]

Nah it's just a dodgy Stable Diffusion integration that has minimal features. They got it to work on one guys computer and posted to social media about it. 

You're better off learning SD as a standalone product. 

[torben_wadlinger]

OK, there is one door-tool to rule them all! It's free, it's all-embracing - but it's in german.

https://www.dormakaba.com/de-de/verkauf-support/digitale-planungsunterstuetzung/bim-von-dormakaba/bi...

But it is the tool we all need and want. GS knows this tool. It's made by the famous Frank Beister (hail to Frank, be praised!) and the door itself can be separat from the opening!

Surely it needs some improvement and further programming. And translation. But it is soooo close to be perfect. I use it regulary in ever project.

[Rex Maximilian]

The best I've ever seen was CADimage Door and Window Builder several years ago (before they used an API). That single door and single window did EVERYTHING!!! And it was perfect. Of course, as it goes, all advancements go in the wrong direction and we have worse, tab heavy libraries.

[Takis]

Dear Gordana hello,

For better collaboration between Architects-Engineers and better SAF model and presentation I would like to suggest the following:

Add (horizontal and inclined) Beam Ends vertical and horizontal rotation in both directions.

Better to have (edges and central/center of section gravity) end-3D hotspots and drag them back-forward (attachement).

Also this applies to columns ends.

Add 2D plan view result of the above.

AC27 INT

Takis Apostolides.

 

[snow]

'Slanted Ends' are one – late – topic on the road map.

But yet, the option to bevel beams in horizontally plane is missing so badly.

In case of profiled beams... sometimes we can help ourselves by making a 180° turned profile... and we turn it back in the model...

... but that can not be the way... really not.

I've been so bold to add some to the image...
The end-cut has always to be a plane... but could then be turned even to a 'jack rafter cut'

[Takis]

Hello,

thanks for all clarifications, all of them are right and helpful to better understand the situation.

Takis.

[DGSketcher]

Hopefully the Product Manager can see beyond a single cut angle. @Takis was probably suggesting that each hotspot could move independently along the beam axis to form a "compound" cut e.g. one where the cut on the Y axis is at 30 degrees and the Z axis is at 45 degrees.

[snow]

Thank you for translating the drawing... now I understand, I think... 😉

So when the second angle for beam ends is mentioned... I just want to add this annotation, that it could be often helpful, if it's possible to type in the second angle not in relation to the beam plane but in relation to the direction of the first angle... ( difficult to bring this in words... hope it could be understood with this sketch...)

[DGSketcher]

Think of a sloping roof framing rafter hitting a wall at a twisted angle (e.g. rotated about Z) so it isn't square to the wall. I am about to start a project with this requirement. At this point I can only think that I am going to have to use Morphs as I will need compound cuts at both ends. 

If only we had instancing... or a beam tool with compound cuts...

[snow]

When I need such cuts... I try to cut with SEO...

..often there is a ridge or valley rafter that can do it...

[Takis]

Dear Gordana hello,

For inclined beams and curved beams, I would suggest the Level Dimension Tool to get information about the top/bottom level at each point of the beam on plan, just like we have available for the terrain tool.

Also, the General Label does not give all the information about the levels.

It only indicates the bottom-lower and top-upper level of the inclined beams.

It should also indicate the top-lower and bottom-upper levels of the inclined beam.

AC27

Takis Apostolides

[Takis]

Adding photos.

Takis3D viewPlan view