ArchiCAD is dying

[Bruce]

I know that's a controversial subject line, but I believe it's true. Not because I want it to be, but because Autodesk is an advancing monster; ArchiCAD firms are switching to Revit, and Revit-based firms are buying ArchiCAD firms...and switching them to Revit.

ArchiCAD is a great program, but if it keeps going the way it is, I fear it will gradually dwindle until it's finally gone. On a level playing field, it comes out more or less even with Revit (I have done a detailed analysis that has been vetted by Revit experts) - but it's not a level playing field.

In my opinion, Graphisoft needs to do a handful of things to even the odds (yes, I will compare to Revit, as that's the main competition):

1. Rebrand & revamp the UI: CAD is an obsolete term. Even though ArchiCAD was BIM way before the term was even coined, I think the "CAD" in the name does it a disservice. Also, the user interface is old and tired. Should it go to the ribbon? No way. Should it be brought into the 21st century? Absolutely - there are plenty of excellent examples out there. Blender, a free 3D program, is undergoing its second UI redesign in about 5 years. If Blender can do it, Graphisoft can.

2. Introduce type-based elements. At the moment, pretty much everything is instance based. If you place 100 doors 900mm wide throughout the project, you have to select and change every single instance (this is an example, so please don't tell me the workarounds - that misses the point). Essentially, this is extending the attributes database to other objects. This makes project-wide changes so much more consistent, with no fear of missing an element.

3. Easier creation of parametric custom content: A beginner user in Revit can create a basic parametric object by using geometry and dimensions. It is intuitive and accessible. This does have its limits, but GDL is completely inaccessible to any but the advanced user with a programming mind...something architects and drafties generally don't have - otherwise they'd be programmers. A mix of the two would be extremely powerful - maybe an interface similar to Visual Basic, or Grasshopper? Not only for 3D elements, but also for 2D labels.

4. Better labelling & keynote tools: At the moment it's one label per element per view. What if I want to tag more than the ID? What about material, thickness, height etc. Revit is excellent in this regard, and also in the ability to create your label format as specific as you please. Key notes are also critical.

These are only four key improvements that I think are critical. There are many others that I could list, but this post is already too long. I say the above not to criticise ArchiCAD, but to try and help (misguided however it may be).

I could be wrong - I would be happy to be wrong...but the Autodesk monster is advancing...

These changes should be done the Graphisoft way: not to match what Revit does, but to equal and better it.

[Laszlo Nagy]

How so?

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:
Did you guys know that Nemetschek is now a billion euro company? (almost 10 million shares at over 120 euros apiece):

http://www.tenlinks.com/news/nemetschek-dividend-up-23-to-euro-1-60-per-share/

Its share price nearly TRIPLED in the last two years.

http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/NEM:GR/chart

When a product is part of a billion euro company that is growing nicely and when a product is one of the things driving that growth, that product (and the company developing it) is not dying, at least in my book.

I think you'll find the growth has been in engineering, construction, Acquisitions, and forced subscriptions, can you honestly say Architecture sales has tripled?

[Eduardo Rolon]

Racking in the Money until the iPhone came and took it all away.
The metric is not money but new users. Are we growing, stagnant or loosing? Two of those are a problem.

[Laszlo Nagy]

Miki,

I think Blackberry is not a good comparison.
Blackberry is a mobile phone, ArchiCAD is a software, different industries.
Blackberry was making something that cost a few hundred dollars, ArchiCAD is several thousand dollars, different price range.
People use their mobile phone for 2-3 years maybe, but individuals and companies are usually invested in their CAD/BIM software for many more years, even decades.
Developing a new mobile phone takes a few years, developing a great BIM application takes a lot more.
So I just don't feel this is a good comparison.


DesignEngineerBIM,

Could you please point me to the documents that support your claim that Nemetschek's growth is in Engineering and Construction? To my knowledge, the biggest brands within Nemetschek are ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, Allplan, all architectural/design focused (both VW and Allplan have other modules as well), so this is a curious claim to me.
Also, what do you mean by this forced subscription? It is Autodesk who is not allowing you to buy a standalone Revit, only as part of a Suite, and it is Autodesk, who is planning to eliminating perpetual licences in the upcoming years.
Yes, acqusitions may have a part in it, such as the DDS and Bluebeam acquisitions last year.


By the way guys, I am not blind or something, I am just optimistic about the future of ArchiCAD and Graphisoft. I just find that better than being always negative or seeing the possible bad.
I mean, if we want ArchiCAD to succeed, why bother concentrating on the negative?

Jared also mentioned that he has not seen this many ArchiCAD job ads on the Graphisoft site in years (and me neither):
https://twitter.com/Shoegnome/status/581300955427172352
http://www.graphisoft.com/users/job_board/positions_available/
That is another good sign in English-speaking markets. To me it means companies are buying ArchiCAD and looking for qualified BIM staff.

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:

DesignEngineerBIM,

Could you please point me to the documents that support your claim that Nemetschek's growth is in Engineering and Construction?

Give it a week or so and the financials are out for the group. The key users (I believe) are now designers and contractors, you are better off to change its name to reflect that?

laszlonagy wrote:

To my knowledge, the biggest brands within Nemetschek are ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, Allplan, all architectural/design focused (both VW and Allplan have other modules as well), so this is a curious claim to me.
Also, what do you mean by this forced subscription? ......
Yes, acqusitions may have a part in it, such as the DDS and Bluebeam acquisitions last year.

Check out what other members in the group are doing..we will see where the growths been soon.

laszlonagy wrote:
By the way guys, I am not blind or something, I am just optimistic about the future of ArchiCAD and Graphisoft. I just find that better than being always negative or seeing the possible bad.
I mean, if we want ArchiCAD to succeed, why bother concentrating on the negative?
.

Again other members in the goup are very good at talking it up but IMO I wouldnt be following their lead if I were you...
BTW we do want archicad to succeed.

[Laszlo Nagy]

DesignEngineerBIM,

You didn't answer any of my questions with a fact or document, only with opinions ("I believe..."). You only refer to non-existent documents. Could you back up your claims with facts that are known and can be verified?

Also, you didn't explain your "forced subscription" claim.

Also, I don't quite understand what you mean by this:

Again other members in the goup are very good at talking it up but IMO I wouldnt be following their lead if I were you...

Could you explain?

[Laszlo Nagy]

Nemetschek published their Q4 results yesterday:

http://www.nemetschek.com/en/presse/press-releases/detail/nemetschek-group-plant-nach-rekordjahr-201...

So the Build segment, which covers Construction, gives less than 10% of revenue, even though it now even includes Bluebeam. Almost 80% of revenue comes from the Design segment, with Vectorworks and ArchiCAD contributing mainly to this growth. So I am not seeing the growth mainly and increasingly coming from Construction and Engineering.

The report also states that more than half of the revenue is coming from license sales, and revenue from license sales increased more than revenues from subscriptions. So I am not seeing that "forced subscription" thing (elimination of perpetual licenses, subscription as the only available choice) either.

I also think that the acquisition of Bluebeam will have a positive effect for the whole Nemetschek group in terms of growth and brand awareness in North America. But of course, time will tell.

[Anonymous]

My bad, also I forgot to mention (the generic term used) "Design", incidentally, this all encompassing term "Design" (a Nem North America invention), does it include,Artists,Stage and Garden designers and how does that equate to BIM ,5D & 6D and the real world of construction, just curious.
I realize shareholders couldnt care less where revenue comes from, but my business relies on your products & Bim Developments and I am not all that confident in reading your financials and BIM Hype.
Care to elaborate on the user base breakdown/sales... ? Thanks

[Anonymous]

Bruce wrote:
I know that's a controversial subject line, but I believe it's true. Not because I want it to be, but because Autodesk is an advancing monster; ArchiCAD firms are switching to Revit, and Revit-based firms are buying ArchiCAD firms...and switching them to Revit.

ArchiCAD is a great program, but if it keeps going the way it is, I fear it will gradually dwindle until it's finally gone. On a level playing field, it comes out more or less even with Revit (I have done a detailed analysis that has been vetted by Revit experts) - but it's not a level playing field.

In my opinion, Graphisoft needs to do a handful of things to even the odds (yes, I will compare to Revit, as that's the main competition):

1. Rebrand & revamp the UI: CAD is an obsolete term. Even though ArchiCAD was BIM way before the term was even coined, I think the "CAD" in the name does it a disservice. Also, the user interface is old and tired. Should it go to the ribbon? No way. Should it be brought into the 21st century? Absolutely - there are plenty of excellent examples out there. Blender, a free 3D program, is undergoing its second UI redesign in about 5 years. If Blender can do it, Graphisoft can.

2. Introduce type-based elements. At the moment, pretty much everything is instance based. If you place 100 doors 900mm wide throughout the project, you have to select and change every single instance (this is an example, so please don't tell me the workarounds - that misses the point). Essentially, this is extending the attributes database to other objects. This makes project-wide changes so much more consistent, with no fear of missing an element.

3. Easier creation of parametric custom content: A beginner user in Revit can create a basic parametric object by using geometry and dimensions. It is intuitive and accessible. This does have its limits, but GDL is completely inaccessible to any but the advanced user with a programming mind...something architects and drafties generally don't have - otherwise they'd be programmers. A mix of the two would be extremely powerful - maybe an interface similar to Visual Basic, or Grasshopper? Not only for 3D elements, but also for 2D labels.

4. Better labelling & keynote tools: At the moment it's one label per element per view. What if I want to tag more than the ID? What about material, thickness, height etc. Revit is excellent in this regard, and also in the ability to create your label format as specific as you please. Key notes are also critical.

These are only four key improvements that I think are critical. There are many others that I could list, but this post is already too long. I say the above not to criticise ArchiCAD, but to try and help (misguided however it may be).

I could be wrong - I would be happy to be wrong...but the Autodesk monster is advancing...

These changes should be done the Graphisoft way: not to match what Revit does, but to equal and better it.

1. For the UI Improvement we would suggest having less dialogs an object dialog and have the parameters editable as a user special clicks or hovers over that part of the object, more direct editing in direct relation to other model objects. In addition the 3d editing environment needs improvement with a more robust navigating and orbiting feature set.

2. We would expand this to container type objects that is pervasive in many other arch softwares that allow assembly of multiple basic objects types from window doors slabs etc. that can be edit in place relative to other objects. Iterative assemblies could then be changed in mass.

3. With the advent of Grasshopper, microstations generative, and Revits addon ArchiCAD is being left in the dust on this front. How applicable in 90% of the projects is questionable but it creates mindshare as innovator.

4. It's such an obvious hole, needs plugged and fast.

They should also buy the Modelport technology to increase availability of manufacturer object types.

[Anonymous]

If there is one software that is on the verge of death than that is Revit. Revit 2015 was already a horrible release and Revit 2016, what just came out is even worse, with absolutely no improvements, no new feature or enhancements. They just released Revit 2015 and changed the name to Revit 2016. Can you imagine Graphisoft releasing Archicad 19 that is exactly the same as Archicad 18 except for the name change?

People, count your blessings. Revit is finished and almost gone.