Poorly written GDL Part Libraries

[rm]

WARNING: THIS IS A RANT ABOUT GS AND OTHER VENDORS OF POORLY WRITTEN AND INCONSISTENT LIBRARY PARTS. So you may not want to waste your time reading this if you don't experience problems with library parts, in particular doors and windows.

Doors and windows are without question the most commonly used library parts in most ArchiCAD architectural projects. Being continually frustrated by the limitations of so many of the libraries available to us ( not that there are many ). So, recently I decided to try the new GS AC limited edition library for the US on a model with quite a few doors and windows. Initially I was excited to see what on the surface looked like a good set of doors and windows, with good adjustablility, especially for those who need fairly realistic looking windows and doors for their models.

That said, I have asked GS before, but they seem not understand the importance of being able to assign a different material selection for all exterior surfaces ( read, sash, frames, jambs, sills, aprons, trim, and the like) versus interior surfaces on doors and windows. This may not be important if you don't use your models for renderings, but for those of us who do, it is a problem. It takes countless hours and attention to detail when sellecting parameters for materials so that your renderings will appear correctly both from the inside and out.

However, because of GS inflexible decision to continue to make window and door parts the way that they do, models can not be made to look correctly, concurrently, both on the inside and outside where windows and doors have different material selections. For buildings using, say aluminum storefront, not a problem, but for too many other building, it is. This is absolutely maddening.

Oh, and while your at it GS it makes much more sense, even for those who don't assign materials to their objects, to gang all material selections under one heading called, oh I don't know, say MATERIALS!!!!!!!!!!!!

To help make matters worse, I just noticed that there is still an inconsistantcy in the GS windows in setting materials for different surfaces depending what wood windows you select. On awing windows for instance the exterior trim color controls the interior trim color. Yet on "W Single Hung2" window the interior and exterior trim colors are set independtly as they should be. To make matters worse yet, the exterior sash color can not be set independent of the interior sash material, again rarely on a wood or aluminum clad window would this happen in the real world.

It is really getting quite old to find window and door part developers not checking their parts thoroughly. I don't want to single out GS on this either, as there is another major vendor here in the US of a large library that has doors and windows included in it that alledgely works well with AC 9. This well known unamed library developer has SO MANY errors and inconsistantcies in its door and window library, its a joke. I wrote that developer several times starting in February this year, and most of the errors I pointed out to him have not been fixed yet. Yet that library is still available for sale at Objects Online as well as numerous locations on the web. That particular developer has in the past always fixed found problems, but for what ever reason now just keeps selling "broken" library parts.....unbelievable!!!!!!

Unfortunately, people keep buying these libraries, and until a lot of time is invested in them, they might not find what inconsistantcies exist until it is crucial to them, usually the day before a presentation is due, and there is no time to fix the problem.

But Graphisoft really has no excuse for inconsistencies in their windows and doors. Each of there parts should be fully tested, in straight and curved walls, and masonry veneer walls ( READ, EACH WINDOW AND DOOR FULLY TESTED ). If GS doesnot feel qualified to test their own parts, then they should hire some of their customer to independently to do so. Im tired of haveing my office be a perpetual beta test site for library part developers!!!!!!! I could NEVER get away with this sloppiness in my Architecture practice. I'd be in court constantly. I spend way too much time taking screen shots, sending them to GS and other developers, only to find the problems ignored.

If we go through the trouble of documenting the problems for you GS, you should take the responsibility to fix these problems, even its for just one user, if infact it is a real problem with the library part.

I am currently submitting over a dozen screen shots of inconsistencies to GS tech support us, for bad library parts. Hopefully they will quickly resolve these issues and reissue the parts before v10 comes out. But I'm guessing that GS is putting almost all of its efforts into v10 and problems found in AC 9.0 at this point, are being tabled indefinitely.

Come on GS, we are on version 9.0!!!!!!! Considering the current catch phrase is BIM, you would think you guys would get rid of all your dated, and unrealistic library parts, and finally commision top dog GDL developers to build really solid libraries, and contract them to keep them up to date. Split 1 million dollars amongst ten GDL Gurus.....trust me they will come out of the wood work to jump on this opportunity.

Your modeling capabilities are constantly limiting design, especially without the use of dozens of add-ons, and your library parts are dismal at best. Look how few available parts there are available compared to the AutoCAD world. Manufacturers throw themsleves at Autodesk customers with free parts. And as BIM moves more from a marketing term to a real necessity, you guys keep churning out the same old tired parts....more and more Architects currently using AC will have no choice but to switch to Revit.

Radically improve your modeling and documentation tools. Those who write to this forum are a minority of users, and while too many here seem willing to evangilize AC to their death at any cost to the rest of us., most just want to get their job done faster and with more effeciency and industry standardization.

AutoCAD is going to hand you your lunch with a serving of REVIT if you guys don't stop repeating the same errors. Listen and fix problems that users keep bringing to your attention, without being called out on the table, like......... ( disclaimer to readers, this is one of my wishlist items, this is really for GS benefit, just in case someones actually listening )

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=6583

....hope this was more than entertaining to those who made it this far
!

[TomWaltz]

Rashid wrote:
So manufacturers interested in GDL cannot look at Graphisoft objects to see GDL at it's finest??

Pretty much, yeah.

Though I do have to say, the TrusJoist guys did really well!

[LiHigh]

I agree with all you guys. GS libraries are just not good enough. I use my own GDL object most of the time.

[Rob]

Back to the original topic. Could we finally get a library part of a window, door, niche/empty opening as standards. Properly analysed to details, like principals of opening, mullion, sill/threshold etc shaping, door/widow furniture and door panels/window panes libraries in easily extendable macros with proper description of parameters so any customised solution could be added by a local office GDL guru. So, for example, we would have a macro for ALL door panels in one with predefined parameters, a macro for handles and same with all other bits and pieces. I have to say we have some sort of organisation in it at the moment but yet again it’s not good enough. An example: we have 50 different door panels for internal doors why don’t we have them for bifolds???!!! Such silly (I would call them) mistakes really drive me schizo.

It shouldn’t be so hard to analyse that just by looking at the door/window builder and considering that it was quite recently pretty much one-man-operation company.

[rm]

Rob wrote:
Back to the original topic. Could we finally get a library part of a window, door, niche/empty opening as standards. Properly analysed to details, like principals of opening, mullion, sill/threshold etc shaping, door/widow furniture and door panels/window panes libraries in easily extendable macros with proper description of parameters so any customised solution could be added by a local office GDL guru.

Hi Rob,

Actually, the original topic WAS, that there are too many inconsistencies in door / window objects being put out on the market for sale both by GS and here in the US by GDL developers. This IS the problem. While I fully admire any office that can afford the resources to build there own GDL libraries, that strategy does nothing for the majority of offices, ( nor does it do ANYTHING for GS in sales ) that don't know how or have the time / budget to learn how to make GDL objects. THIS strategy does NOTHING to further GS ability to convience large number of AutoCAD / Revit users to switch to ArchiCAD, and we ALL need them to do so.

Imagine you have an office of say, ten architects........maybe you do, I don't mean to offend. Now you use Revit, the AC salesperson gives you a good deal on AC. Now he/she explains to you that you can not use paramentrically the 100,000 + objects available in the market allready to you in the AutoCAD world.

Where do you think that sale is going...........NO-WHERE!

GS talks about BIM this and BIM that. They NEVER say in order to make AC fully capable, you REALLY need to learn GDL because we just don't have a very large database of libraries available to you, at least not ones that consistantly work well.

In a market like Chicago, which is a HUGE architecture market, do you know how hard it is to find Architects with AC experience, MUCH LESS GDL experience. Lets be realistic here, MOST not all, but MOST people who worked to get an Architecture degree and work in the business want to be practicing architecture. Writting GDL objects may be a creative process, but it is NOT practicing architecture......nor should any confuse it as doing so! I personally dont care if I every "build" a GDL object again ( although I have done some simple ones ) I am way to busy running my office, designing buildings that work, that are functional and appealing to my clients and hopefullly my future clients. I have never had a prospective client ask, by the way, does your firm write its own scripts for GDL objects. GDL has no room in my radar, and if we switch to Revit sometime in the future, GDL will be bid a good-day!

So, the original point is GS needs to get its act together ASAP on library parts ( but not JUST this ) and HIRE, YES HIRE, GDL "Experts" to create new and reliable "FULLY TESTED" library parts, and start with the doors and windows! Then they need to convince manufacturers to jump on board too, and make it as EASY as possible to get them involved. Because without the manufacturing market jumping on board, you and I will all eventually be Revit users. Maybe not today, or in a year, but within 5 years.

That IS the point!

[James Murray]

rm wrote:
So, the original point is GS needs to get its act together ASAP on library parts ( but not JUST this ) and HIRE, YES HIRE, GDL "Experts" to create new and reliable "FULLY TESTED" library parts, and start with the doors and windows! Then they need to convince manufacturers to jump on board too, and make it as EASY as possible to get them involved. Because without the manufacturing market jumping on board, you and I will all eventually be Revit users. Maybe not today, or in a year, but within 5 years.

That IS the point!

Now I have nothing to add.

[TomWaltz]

I think I'll take this opportunity to also mention that the GDL/object interface is in serious need of an update. The graphical interfaces starting to appear in some objects are an improvement, but there are still a few other major items missing:

• - Zoom in/out on previews. Nothing like changing a parameter on a 15'-0x12'-6" object and having no idea if anything changed
  - Full rotation of previews, without actually changing the object's rotation angle (like a mini 3D window)
  - More than one level of "expandable" headers
  - Better methods for 3D linetypes (dashed lines in 3D are currently arrays of small solid lines with gaps between them!)
  - Ability to select multiple parameters of the same type (like selecting all pens or fills)
  - Ability to set all objects to a company standard, such as all door swings to pen 19 or all fonts to Architext.

[Anonymous]

rm wrote:
...Writting GDL objects is may be a creative process, but it is NOT practicing architecture...

Exactly rm,

I personally like programming process, especially when I do that for my projects, but I'm architect and working on drawings, doing sketches etc is more creative process for me than working on software omissions.

I would like to use GDL only in very specific cases. Software developers must care only automating processes and write more universal programs.
So back 2 original post that's means, that we need more universal and independent DWs, structural elements, etc.. We architects must care about design and not GS or Autodesk. They are "soft. developer companies" and must work in the way to develop CAD and not theoretical projects to be more original, the last is our job .

So I fully agree all that's above. We need next generation universal libraries and also universal tools to develop these lib-s much more easier, without waiting new lib releases from GS. And finally i just want to spend time on GDL programing process for my creative profession .

[Anonymous]

I fully agree with all this.

May i add another point. To write his own parts is one thing. To maintain them through different versions of AC is another pain.
When some old features suddenly work differently with a new release, this is very anoying.

I think to mask values for wallhole and cutpolya, completly changed from 7 to 8, without any warning or explanation.
Detail, OK, but consequences are significant.

[Karl Ottenstein]

I have nothing to add to the comments below either. (It is difficult even teaching GDL when "none" of the library objects is a good example of how things should be written and documented.)

But, on a constructive note, perhaps the US people who have posted to this thread could comment on the revised doors/windows in the SE 9 library and give specific feedback to GS on what works, and what does not?

I agree with all of the general gripes and emotion (!) ... but I think specific and constructive requests are more likely to receive attention.

My 2 cents,
Karl

[rm]

Karl wrote:
But, on a constructive note, perhaps the US people who have posted to this thread could comment on the revised doors/windows in the SE 9 library and give specific feedback to GS on what works, and what does not?

Karl

Karl,

Since I'm in that group, I will respond. I have sent files to tech support. The objects are plagued with problems, and I had to compile numerous screen shots to indicate what the problems are that I found to this point. Needless to say, it is very time consuming assembling screen shots, writing little narratives, than packaging it so it is clear to the recipient. I just didn't see the need to post those items here. I also have done so with the SmartParts 9.0 Library. But that has not done much good either.

I think that my original posts are clearly in line with almost everyone who has posted here! I know you try to help people as much as you can on this forum, but you jumped the gun a little on your suggestion here.

I have numerous emails into GS for found library part inconsistencies. In this case I decided to be go public with the need for improvement, because I'm tired of wasting time with tools that simply don't work as advertised. Every 18 months +/- we get a new upgrade from GS. It sometimes takes months for problems to crop up in design and production of construction documents while using AC. By that point GS is already moving on to the next "upgrade" and we are left holding the bag......that's unacceptable anymore from GS, Abvent or MS as far as I'm concerned. I invest too much money for half-backed software, and I'm sick of it. If you paid retail for all your software, you might see my point here.

Resellers and related consultants can make all the excuses they want for the shortcomings of the software they represent, or gain income from by espousing its virtues; but architecture and design firms need to keep their office efficient. Just as in construction, sometimes a bigger hammer gets the job done faster. I decided to use a 5lb. hammer, I could have used a sledge hammer instead.

But thanks for your suggestion, none the less. I know it was meant to help