ArchiCAD user interface

[Christiaan]

Hi, I've been taking a look at ArchiCAD recently. I really love the overall user experience of ArchiCAD but one area that's a little disappointing is the user interface. It seems messy and a bit clunky.

From what I understand ArchiCAD has got increasingly powerful and complex over past few years, which probably explains the messiness. And Java certainly explains the clunkiness.

So is there any hint of GS looking to give the UI a makeover any time soon? And is it likely to remain written in Java for the foreseeable future?

[henrypootel]

I also find the interface very fast to use and learn.
It maybe doesn't look as cool as something like Lightroom or Picasa, but it looks quite good in Vista, fits well with other applications, and have a sort of professional, we-mean-business feel to it. I would almost say 'Spartan'.
UI Design is not about making things look good, but making things 'work good'.
If your biggest upset is that the OSX version uses some Windows icons or conventions, then I think that UI team are doing a great job(I do think that anyway).

[Christiaan]

henrypootel wrote:
If your biggest upset is that the OSX version uses some Windows icons or conventions, then I think that UI team are doing a great job(I do think that anyway).

Even if that was all I was talking about, which I'm clearly not, you would consider the use of Windows icons in the Mac version a great job? GS may be doing a great job overall but using Windows icons in a Mac version is the definition of not doing a great job (at least with regard to icon design).

henrypootel wrote:
UI Design is not about making things look good, but making things 'work good'.

Of course, which suggests you need to read my posts again.

In any case I've only scratched the surface so far. I'm sure I'll have more feedback as I get into doing a project.

@ Karl, my suggestions weren't meant as isolated features to be tagged on to ArchiCAD. They were meant to be taken together, as an all encompassing overhaul of some of the basic UI elements.

[David Shorter]

Christiaan, the real issue here is not that Graphisoft can't or don't want to do what you suggest but is probably more that the majority of ArchiCAD users run one of the Windows operating systems, sometimes in the same office as Macs are running.
What Graphisoft have done very successfully (IMHO) is to put together an interface which works well on all platforms.

[Christiaan]

David wrote:
Christiaan, the real issue here is not that Graphisoft can't or don't want to do what you suggest but is probably more that the majority of ArchiCAD users run one of the Windows operating systems, sometimes in the same office as Macs are running.
What Graphisoft have done very successfully (IMHO) is to put together an interface which works well on all platforms.

Wow, I would be shocked if that's their position, especially with regard to something as basic as icons. That's a horrible way to develop an application. I really doubt that this is the case.

Vectorworks is developed for Windows and Mac and they don't resort to such silliness, and I've never heard of any complaints in understanding between the Mac and Windows versions.

I'm evaluating ArchiCAD for our office (which is Mac only) and we'd obviously want the least friction to adoption. An app that looks like a Windows app and doesn't follow modern Mac interface conventions is quite a bit of friction, and in the case of basic UI elements like these it also the crucial aspect of "first impressions." So, in introducing ArchiCAD to my Director he's immediately going to be thinking negatively along the lines "these guys don't even know how a Mac app should look and work."

Good to see there are other users of the same opinion:
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=26933

Looking through various threads it's not surprising that many of the comments along the lines of mine come from Mac users, especially those who are new to ArchiCAD. Long time users have got used to the idiosyncrasies, and even have an interest in keeping the status quo. New users have a unique perspective that long-time users would be wise to keep an open mind about in my opinion.

[henrypootel]

henrypootel wrote:
UI Design is not about making things look good, but making things 'work good'.

Of course, which suggests you need to read my posts again.

I realise that this is not what you mean, but you are saying that it needs to have better 'workflow' and 'ui' without much by way of actual illustration of the point, and you keep mentioning little visual niggles which don't really hurt the design(like Windows icons). you also keep mentioning that archicad doesn't fit the mythic 'standard ui conventions'. i assume that what you are referring to here is the almighty OSX UI Design guidebook? If so, a quick re-read of this will show how well archicad fits the recommendations in that document. this is an especially impressive feat given the vast complexity of the program.
I realize that people like to vent, and discussion of this kind of thing is good, but to help archicad and the community(and by extension, yourself), suggestions need to make sense within the context, and to be well thought through:

Firstly, it's just butt ugly and has loads of unintuitive icons (aside from the Toolbox), not a nice place to spend most of your day, so an overhaul of the UI workflow and an overhaul of icons would be high on the list, including banishing Windows icons from the Mac version.

what icons are unintuitive? how would you like the UI 'overhauled'? what about the thousands of existing users who like and are used to the current system? Incremental changes are always best for an established user base. an 'overhaul' would create a lot of ill will in the community and would make a significant in almost all current users productivity.

More compliance with Mac interface guidelines generally, e.g. Mac folder trees instead of Windows folder trees

I can't think of what you mean here. as karl mentioned, the mac version folder trees do look like mac folder trees.

A major tidy up of the Menus, including banishing tools and icons

this was done in v10 and given the uproar at the time, i wouldn't think it would be a good idea to do it again. if you can think of a way of doing the menus better, use the work environment.

A unified window interface, with tear off palettes for those utilising multiple screens

i don't see what this would do that the current interface wouldn't let you do. apart from making it look more like a windows application.

Tabbed main windows

this would, i agree, make archicad look more modern. i don't see any need for it though, as the view map in the navigator is all i really ever need. i guess if you were working between multiple different views at the same time it might save a few clicks, but when i'm doing that, i still use the navigator to change between views each time instead of grabbing them from the Window menu.

[Karl Ottenstein]

henrypootel wrote:

Tabbed main windows

this would, i agree, make archicad look more modern. i don't see any need for it though, as the view map in the navigator is all i really ever need.

On this tabbed vs Navigator thing, Apple's own Xcode shows that even they recognize the use of a navigator list interface over tabs when there could be dozens to hundreds of items to view. The attached screenshot is Xcode 3.1, the latest update. Source files clicked in the tree list at left appear in the editor at right. (There is a drop-down list of files in the editor header bar, too.) Microsoft's Visual Studio uses tabs to show the multiple open files on the right .. and one quickly runs out of space for all of the potential tabs there.

So, here, Graphisoft and Apple seem on the same page.

I did a quick scan of Apple's Human Interface Guidelines, and don't see anything that suggests that Aperture (for example) is more "Mac-like" or "modern" than ArchiCAD. But, I just skimmed:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/userexperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGIntro/XHIGI...

There is also this User Experience document:
http://developer.apple.com/ue/index.html
which points back to the Human Interface document as the guide for developers.

Cheers,
Karl

[Christiaan]

Karl wrote:
Cocoa vs Carbon has almost no effect on the user interface.

Eric wrote:
Outlook will be a Cocoa application. We're building on the most modern OS X framework to make Outlook beautiful, to make it high performance, and to make it well integrated with the operating system.

Maybe Microsoft didn't get the memo about Cocoa not having almost no effect on the user interface?