ArchiCAD 11

[Anonymous]

ArchiCAD 11 will come soon (as much as I suspect..)
What can AC 11 do better than AC10?

[March_ Bruce]

This whole upgrade merry-go-round makes me dizzy...

This 15 year experiment in documentation technology is I fear doomed to fail in the context of the history of architecture - Jane Jacobs writes in her last book Dark Age Ahead about how we are imprisoning our cultural history in highly vulnerable technology that requires intense maintenenance to simply access let alone integrate, build on & reuse - the whole house of cards may come tumbling down & we will lose hopefully less than a generation of architectural heritage...

Excuses I have had are that 'our policy is the same as other CAD suppliers' - well it wasn't that way until the windoze version arrived...

I suspect some contemplation of sustainable design should apply to CAD as we seem to have finally awakened to in our physical world...

[Karl Ottenstein]

gbley wrote:

I am also a cynic. I just sat through the reseller's dog and pony and I come away more convinced more than ever that this is ArchiCAD 10.1. There is very little that is surprising and absolutely nothing that takes my breath away.

Most of you know that I'm an independent consultant with no business association with any resellers or Graphisoft. But, thought I should say that for those who don't know.

Gary, it sounds to me like your reseller - generally one of the most knowledgeable guys - just didn't really show you all of the power of 11, or maybe you didn't listen well. There is much more than indicated by your comments.

Worksheets....Detail windows with detail-in-detail capabilities. All this does is eliminate one or two layers of view sets. A bit more convenient but not a new feature by any stretch.

Well, they also permit capturing everything - including text and dimensions - something not possible before with the Detail Tool. (This is the default behavior of the Worksheet Tool, but can be turned off. The default for the Detail Tool is to turn anno capture off, as it is in 10.) I'll agree that this is pretty much a 10.1 thing, but it resolves a complaint often heard here on ac-talk.

Visual compare......Open an elevation view and use a marquee to choose it. Copy it to the clipboard. Go back to a section or plan view and paste.......duh! Works just fine for most needs.

Virtual Trace......Ghost story on steroids. Convenience factor...3 on a scale of 10.

I've got to combine these two, since Visual Compare is basically just a visual trick on Virtual Trace.

But...you've missed the point of this really powerful addition. No, you cannot marquee/copy as you describe...unless you are willing to have all of the layers in the copied elements (now linework) visible in your working view...when you place the copy to the side or wherever (and do tedious sideways referencing).

Virtual Trace is indeed ghosting on steroids...but with a convenience factor of 11 out of 10. Consider:

- ANY view can be the reference (ghost) - not just a story as now

- Because it is a VIEW that can be the reference, the ghosted elements can have totally different layer combo and model view options from the working view. Consider: ghosting a structural section behind a model section or elevation. Ghosting a layout behind the drawing to guide placement of dimensions and annotation. Ghosting an elevation behind a floor plan to visually check / align windows, etc. And so much more.

- But, viewpoint (navigator items) can be the reference also - in which case the current layer combo/etc will apply to the reference (ghost). So, you can ghost stories as you have until 11. But, you can also work with ghosted sections and have the working section and the reference respond to layer changes. (Personally, the view concept is where I'll be most of the time, but this viewpoint method adds great flexibility.)

- You simply right click any Navigator or View Set item to make it the reference (ghost)...and that ghost 'sticks' to the working view. So, if you ghost something to the north elevation - it will be the reference the next time you go there. Etc.

- There is a 'switch reference with active' button, something long wished for, so if you notice something on the reference that you want to change, you can instantly get there as the working view with the previous working view as the reference. Powerful. Think about doing structural plans where you are referencing stories above and below, but with different views (model vs structure) and switching back and forth seamlessly as you carry your bearing points.

- Until 11, we typically had to bring in 2D AutoCAD drawings onto fake stories in order to ghost them for tracing/conversion into models. With 11, those xrefs can be placed on a Worksheet which becomes the ghost for any working view...and can be dragged, rotated, repositioned in any way needed underneath the working view. (Further, those xref layers are segregated in the layers dialog.)

The Visual Compare is just a little lame in that it is indeed purely visual. It is a slick graphic interface that lets you peal away the working view to reveal only the reference while comparing. But, you'll never notice if something is 5mm off.

These are incredible productivity boosters for all offices doing all kinds of work.

Come on GS. This is pathetic.

Sorry that I disagree. I think that GS has released a great upgrade at a reasonable price. There really are lots more things in 11, of course. Pen Sets assigned by view; transparency in OpenGL; link any marker to any view/drawing (all of those 'typ' structural callouts are now easy and dynamic); long file names (at last!); calculated volumes for the components of profiled walls, beams, and columns; and lots more.

Hopefully the marketing machine will catch up with the product announcement.

Cheers,
Karl

[Jefferson]

So the way I see it: I can upgrade now for $895 ($695 with a subscription), or just wait for AC12 and do a 2-step upgrade in the $1100-1200 range. I still come out ahead and I don't have to deal with the hassles of converting old projects, updating libraries, and learning all the kinks of the new program.

I have been on this cycle since starting with AC, but never had the fiscal side "rationalized" so well for me

I tend to just be starting to "cruz" with the current version when another comes out. Slower than most perhaps. The new and improved version is always tempting, and certainly as Karl clearly explained above, there are time saving and valuable new editing features, as well as some other interface that would make life better in front of the screen. [Although the decision not to allow PRINTING of the virtual trace was huge mistake! Think printed ghost stories, C'MON!!!] The other side is learning curve, updating, and time and expense of these combined with upgrade costs.

Ultimately, so far, the beauty is to each his own.........

[Chazz]

Great post Karl. Thanks for being such a fantastic forum resource.

In designing and executing an evolution of the tool such as version 11, GS has 2 bars to clear:

• 1) They have to provide enough perceived productivity enhancements such that users will be willing to take the bait and upgrade.
  
  2)They have to push the software along so that its is positioned to compete effectively against whatever their competitors just released. Hopefully this will attract new users and grow the platform.

The first one is easy. If the developer can't make improvments that are compelling enough to attract their own user base, something is wrong.

The second one is a lot harder, at least in the current climate. Revit is experiencing tremendous asendency. GS is in a race for it's life. The next few upgrades are not just technical exercises, they are make-or-break existential undertakings.

Before this release has even been delivered to users it has been branded a timid offering. Whether that perception persists, only time will tell (GS has always been pretty weak when it comes communicating it's strengths).

But a larger picture is emerging: It is becoming clear that to compete against Revit, GS needs to be changing the game and out-inovatings it's much stronger rival. This release, for all the debate about the merits of this-feature-Vs-that-feature does not appear to rise to the level of game-changing. Indeed, the fact that there is even a debate about whether the upgrade is worth the trouble is (depressingly) instructive in itself.

This is the thing that annoys me most about using ArchiCAD. Regardless of the debates about how good this or that upgrade is, the truth is that ArchiCad, after all these revisions, has morphed into a very ugly, complicated, many-knived machine. The interface is so uneven and so inconsistent, it becomes inescapable to conclude that there is no larger strategic vision. Features are appended ad nauseum but no one appears to be driving the train we are all riding.

The fact to remember is that innovation and great software design does not require the resources of a a behemoth like Autodesk. Indeed, innovation often goes to those places when it wants to die. If all it took was money to create great software, Microsoft would have killed off Apple long ago.

GS needs to get back to making software that is beautiful to look at, easy to use and powerful to deploy.

[Anonymous]

Karl,
I've enjoyed reading a number of your post in the past and I generally find you to be knowledgeable and informative. I think this time you've missed the boat. The reality is I did listen well. I went there looking for a reason to upgrade, not to support preconceptions about not upgrading.

I agree that Tom is a very knowledgeable guy. No question. I can't think of one good reason why he wouldn't show everything he could to support his upgrade message.

I think you need to face the fact that this is a bunch of refinements with few exceptions. If someone truly needs these refinements and workflow is being impacted without them, then upgrade.

Come on GS. This is pathetic.


Sorry that I disagree. I think that GS has released a great upgrade at a reasonable price.

We are just going to disagree on this Karl. GS has released an average large scale hotfix at an upgrade price. Given that AC10 got rave review in the media, I think this release will be treated badly and appropriately so.

It should be clear to even the most casual observer that this release has generated a great deal more negative comments than positive. You can continue to proclaim its greatness from the mountaintop but that doesn't make it so.

Given the large amount of people who are choosing to put themselves on a 2 year upgrade cycle, doesn't it make more economic sense to get a higher percentage of upgrades every 18 months than a much smaller percentage of upgrades on a 12 month cycle?

The people who are really in a hard place are the resellers who must try to convince users of the value of this release when they have a hard time believing it themselves.

Gary Bley
Portland, Oregon USA

[March_ Bruce]

"Chazz" wrote:

The second one is a lot harder, at least in the current climate. Revit is experiencing tremendous asendency. GS is in a race for it's life. The next few upgrades are not just technical exercises, they are make-or-break existential undertakings.

I went to my first REVIT seminar out of exasperation over the troubles I have had with the v10 upgrade on the intel mac... We were promised a version by June 2007 & I had to run in Rosetta emulation due to crippling bugs until the end of September - I am literally being driven away due to non-performance of the software...

My wishlist is so long in terms of BASIC enhancements such as:
- trim slab to roof & vice versa tool options (asking since v4.12)
- discrete slab & roof edge material changes (asking since v4.12)
- return of legacy NATIVE pmk & 2d layout editing support
- consolidate missing, duplicate or subset library objects
- restore seemingly needless & illogical menu & shortcut changes which actually increased rather than reduced keystrokes (for the growing camp of laptop users) while making legacy version/file use even more complicated & inefficient

I find the list of new features troubling in the abscence of such basics...

As a more peripheral example Intel Mac users STILL don't have a sketchup import option as neither in 9 under emulation nor even in parallels with the windows version seem to work.

Please FIX THE BASICS OF THE SOFTWARE WE PAID FOR before asking for another upgrade fee...

I am also told my subscription upgrade must be renewed in order to receive v11 after June 1st even though it has been announced prior & I suffered the Intel beta version & severe bugs for 4 months into my subscription period...

This upgrade has been an expensive, exasperating experience & so I am looking elsewhere...

[Anonymous]

Bruce March.......yet another satisfied user. Are you listening GS? Maybe your most recent ".........great upgrade at a reasonable price." will address his concerns.

[Chazz]

gbley wrote:
....this release has generated a great deal more negative comments than positive. You can continue to proclaim its greatness from the mountaintop but that doesn't make it so.

Clearly, I have my own issues with the software and it's development trajectory but let's not forget that Karl has actually been using the latest release, while the rest of us have just read a few PDFs and seen some Quicktime files.

My interest is in elevating the discussion above the pro/con of AC11 and into the more critical sphere of placing this release into the context of the competitive landscape. Does it move us forward substantially? Does it shift the paradigm? At the very least, does it lay foundational groundwork for something big to come?

This is the first release that places primacy on 2D tools and 2D workflow. That seems sort of strange and potentially a step backward or a "dumbing down" --perhaps a concession to entice flatlanders? I don't know. It's not what I would have thought necessary and I don't recall users asking for it on this forum, exactly but I will reserve final judgement until I have a chance to deploy it and drive it in anger.

[Laura Yanoviak]

Chazz wrote:
My interest is in elevating the discussion above the pro/con of AC11 and into the more critical sphere of placing this release into the context of the competitive landscape. Does it move us forward substantially? Does it shift the paradigm?

No. AC10 did this (sort of). I think expectations are too high -- following a release like AC10, and on the heels of the Nemetschek acquisition, I think AC11 is a decent upgrade.

Chazz wrote:
At the very least, does it lay foundational groundwork for something big to come?

I have heard very good buzz about AC12 -- I guess we'll see... (and we only have 11 months to wait!)...

[TomWaltz]

Chazz wrote:
This is the first release that places primacy on 2D tools and 2D workflow. That seems sort of strange and potentially a step backward or a "dumbing down" --perhaps a concession to entice flatlanders?

I think it's meant to help entice the flatlanders. This gives them a fall-back, so they can easily work entirely in 2D and just pretend they are still in Autocad.

I think that's the reason ADT was widely installed and minimally used. It was SO easy to just work in lines all day.

In my opinion, the 2D functions were largely meant to appeal to the bottom end of Autocad users, ones whose management forced a new program on them but are unable or unwilling to use anything resembling BIM.