Basics, orphans, productivity loss & 'low hanging fruit'?

[March_ Bruce]

Recently searching for what I consider a 'staple' object eg. a stacked washer dryer as typically found in many residential applications including condos I had to forage back to my v7 library.

Of course this won't help anyone who isn't a long time user...

I continue to experience what I consider a surprising & critical lack of library consistency & focus in this software - isn't this the heart of BIM ?

Critics suggest library management is 'easy' ? Debatable perhaps, but certainly not efficient.

From my perspective hunting down orphaned objects, migrating them one by one, checking/aligning attributes, favourites & frequently needing to re-enter the entire BIM parametric supplier data is a tedious, exhaustive, error prone & fundamentally undermining exercise. Graphisoft CREATES this needless burden & problem...

What good are 4 cores if I am spending a large % of time fiddling with GDL objects?

Items in this category for me include: dining room table, quarter sphere wall sconce, exterior chaise lounge, stacked washer dryer, ceiling fans (ironic w/ecodesigner offered), changed/lost kitchen cabinetry, numerous chairs (some duplicates), many simple stairs that worked better than the stairmaker options ever have - I could go on...

From my perspective an entire bugfix could consist of / focus on library migration/enhancement eg. no more feature upgrades added to already debatably complex software - until what is there works more efficaciously ?

I suggest this is essential & far better done globally at source (GS) with each 'upgrade' rather than simply abandoning so many basic objects leaving the millions of users to fend for themselves...?

[Dwight]

The irony of this horrible and ongoing problem is that the fix is so simple.

It doesn't require the complex coding knowledge the Archicad programming team possesses, but merely diligent clerking with some GDL knowledge. And the will to make it happen.

[March_ Bruce]

I gather from dialogue at the support level that you are indeed correct - presumably largely an issue of 'culture' at the senior management level - eg the will to make it happen...

Library localization may also be a logistical burden at the development level, as I gather many great objects from other areas never make it to North America?

I keep asking if a more graphical interface might assist with a more 'universal' library object development ?

[Dwight]

So they don't care since buyers discover the bad library AFTER the purchase completes.

[Anonymous]

I've posted on this in other threads, and I agree that the state of libraries is a disaster. Here in Australia the localized library still has not been upgraded to 14.
GUI might help but the different versions for each release that's a huge disaster.
Ironic also that for years GS was talking about manufacturers and GDL parts. Revit parts are a dime a dozen but GDL based ones nowhere to be seen.
Finally they should employ true database power and have multiple tags so that there are numerous was to slice and dice to find parts.

Oh and while I am at it, the way a BIM server library requires a whole folder to be refreshed when updating a part is a pain. Embed the part, I hear you say- but that is not helpful for a large project where the part needs to be used across numerous files. And why must libraries on the BIM server be maintained from ArchiCAD? on the BIM server a spare copy of AC must be available to do such actions...and there is another topic - the strange demarkation of server management between the server client and AC itself...