Archicad 14 New Features

[Dennis Lee]

See what's on youtube!

http://www.youtube.com/user/Archicad#g/c/5C1926DD91A70C7B

Personally, not much in it for me at all!

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:
Dennis,
Your example is interesting but how consider many of such and similar projects do most architects do.
I remember a thread 2-3 years ago on the Talk where the consensus was that these fancy free-form modelling tools and complex forms are really not needed by 80-90 % of architects - they just don't do those kinds of thing in real projects.

Plus, do you have any information about how much time it took to do that gothic stuff in whichever project? I am sure it took a lot of time, no matter the program used. It was not half an hour, that's for sure.
Creating complex geometry is time-consuming.

I did a whole lot of reading on these forums before I bought my first copy of AC a few months ago. I knew that I would have to hit the ground running and I was scared s***less that AC would let me down with things like stairs, custom windows, freeform modeling etc. Since my financial health depends on a smooth running operation I felt that I could not take a chance on this - so I stumped up for cadimage tools and C4D.
So far it has proved a good choice but I am new to this, and the more I get into it the more core AC works for me.
If I was a student I would miss freeform modeling - but don't get me started on architectural education. The bottom line is that in crunch time the most valuable tools are the most practical ones.
Having said that there is no doubt that GS needs a rocket up its a**. I am amazed at what someone like Ralph Wessel has done with objective - and then you see a big GS team photo on facebook ... and frustrated customers.
I actually had a look at Nemetschek's annual report online and debt item that kept coming was the loan taken out to acquire GS - which is obviously costing them. Perhaps GS is in the doghouse and have to earn their way out (in a recession!), with these yearly half-versions before they can accelerate their progress with a couple of strategic aquisitions. Perhaps the failure of big picture vision is not with GS but with its parent .... why did they buy GS again????

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Krippahl wrote:
..........

And by the way, what is this <b>[censored]</b> with stairs? All I hear is people complaining about stairs. By the sound of it, architecture is all about stairs...

And even if that was true, I never had unsolvable problems doing stairs with ArchiCAD.

.........

Translation : "Since I've never had problems using the limited tools in ArchiCAD, then there's no reason to believe that anyone else, any other living person anywhere else in the world, has problems either or should have problems. It's a completely perfect program......

............for me.
Therefore it should be the same for everyone else as well."

I can't help but wonder where I heard that weak argument before.

The reason the issue with the Stair Tool comes up all the time might have something to do with the fact that Stairs exist in virtually every single building that's designed today, except for single level buildings. And modern stairs look nothing like the limited number in the Template used in the Stair Tool that Graphisoft has been using since the early 1990's. Architecture may not be all bout stairs but to act as if they don't matter all that much either, the way you're trying to make it seem is patently ridiculous and silly.

I mean, there's not even a logical way to model guardrails and handrails which are a Code requirement in North American public buildings and stairs, and yet you somehow think that this tool is perfect?

You would think that someone who was a reseller,......I'm sorry... I mean, someone who's "worked with resellers" would know this, instead of going around calling people who are voicing legitimate concerns "trolls" - but I guess not.

Talk about having an agenda.


And as regards to waiting until we get ArchiCAD 14, to make a judgement or an opinion as to how good it is, two things:

1) Most people, in this economy can't afford to either keep up their subscription to a product that keeps failing to deliver version after version, and year after year, or to splurge and buy a copy just to see how good it is, so they have to make a judgement call based on what they see from GS's own marketing/promotional videos and whether they are actually delivering on what users are asking for. There'a nothing unreasonable about any of these positions unless you're used to getting copies for free and can afford to have a bad version or two. Most of us don't know resellers that well.

2) We ARE making informed opinions and judgments based on what we currently have running on our computers (i.e ArchiCAD 13, 12 11, 10 and so on and so forth), as well as a the track record that Graphisoft have already established with those previous versions.
Based on what has come before, if their promotional videos and materials say they don't have new significant (read modeling and documentation) tools, then you can take it to the bank that the upcoming version will NOT have any new significant tools and can make your judgment and opinion based on what you already know rather than wait for the release and spend (waste) money to find out the hard way and get disappointed.

If ArchiCAD 14 was actually delivering on any of the tools that majority of users are actually asking for vis-a-vis modeling improvements you can bet that those improvements would be front-and-center of those promotional videos. They're not, therefore they don't exist.

It's not rocket science.

It's a weak release.
You can spin it however many ways you wish, and belittle or denigrate the people who point out this fact however much you want, but it will not change the fact that this is a weak release. And even GS themselves probably know this.

[Anonymous]

Bricklyne:

Did you read the Architosh interview with GS about AC 14? The article maybe gives some clues as to how GS is planning for its future.

http://architosh.com/2010/05/in-depth-with-archicad-14-graphisoft-talks-to-architosh/


Bricklyne, I have been reading your posts for awhile and I agree with what you say, but perhaps maybe not always the sentiment. With all due respect, have you considered changing to another software?

I say this not to be confrontational, but if I had so many negative feelings about something, I think I would seriously look for something different.

Don Lee

[Anonymous]

Bricklyne wrote:
... We ARE making informed opinions and judgments based on what we currently have running on our computers (i.e ArchiCAD 13, 12 11, 10 and so on and so forth), as well as a the track record that Graphisoft have already established with those previous versions...

So, if I understand correctly, what you are saying is, in you opinion, GS has a poor track record for the last 4 releases, and still you subscribe for upgrades?
That would be like betting on a horse you believe has failed many times in the past and are convinced will fail again. Can´t see the logic in that.

Besides, why do you subscribe, anyway? Is that mandatory in other countries, or is it a way to pay less on an informed bet? Is it not possible just to upgrade whenever you feel it is worth it, since you find Graphisoft's track record so poor?

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Don wrote:
Bricklyne:

Did you read the Architosh interview with GS about AC 14? The article maybe gives some clues as to how GS is planning for its future.

http://architosh.com/2010/05/in-depth-with-archicad-14-graphisoft-talks-to-architosh/


Bricklyne, I have been reading your posts for awhile and I agree with what you say, but perhaps maybe not always the sentiment. With all due respect, have you considered changing to another software?

I say this not to be confrontational, but if I had so many negative feelings about something, I think I would seriously look for something different.

Don Lee

I do use other software. I have had to learn and use Revit before (version 2009) on a previous job, and I am currently having to brush up since it seems like I will likely be using it again in the near future.

I also do on occasion or when the task requires, use Rhino3D and Architectural Desktop or AutoCAD Architecture, along with the various other non-architecture-specific modeling software out there.

But I have used ArchiCAD the longest of all of them since the 90's, and like many here, I have invested a lot in not just learning it, but developing a decent and somewhat efficient workflow with it. And despite the fact that I still believe that it is the superior software, the gap isn't as large as it once was and the frustration for me comes from a place of seeing the advancements and developments in a lot of other software that I occasionally have to use for work versus the almost complete lack of advancement in the one that I would much rather be using and love using - along with what seem to be a lack of a clear road-map for the future by the developers. Not to mention the apparent if not complete apathy and disinterest that they seem to have towards the users.

It's become apparent and inevitable to me that I will have to be more proficient in Revit whether or not I like using the software. In fact, I believe that anyone graduating from Architecture school today, certainly in North America, has to consider Revit proficiency a must, if they hope to get anything of a foothold int he job market with the economy in dire straits as it is right now. Just as AutoCAD proficiency was almost a pre-requisite for getting into this profession 10-20 years ago.

It's not something that I prefer, but it's something that ironically, GS themselves have seemingly and inadvertently helped foster through their actions over the last couple of versions.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Don wrote:
Bricklyne:

Did you read the Architosh interview with GS about AC 14? The article maybe gives some clues as to how GS is planning for its future.

http://architosh.com/2010/05/in-depth-with-archicad-14-graphisoft-talks-to-architosh/
........

Don Lee

(cont.)

And I have read the Architosh piece, and much like the one they did last year for ArchiCAD 13, it's nothing more than a PR fluff piece, in that, they're just marketing the latest version, or at least spend most of the interview (if we can even call it that) justifying the new features without actually addressing any real questions that may be had regarding the gaps in development from the previous versions.

None of the questions that are asked in these forums where the actual users ask questions, are ever addressed in these types of interviews, and all they do is provide free advertising for the new version and it's new features, while conveying a "narrative" that GS would like to convey - a narrative that may not always vibe with reality. The current narrative is that ArchiCAD would be better suited to deal with its collaboration issues (read IFC) with other professionals in the Industry whereas the reality is that majority of users still depend on 2D DWG/DXF to exchange information with their consultants. The same is even true of Autodesk/Revit users despite Autodesk's efforts to push Revit MEP and Structure.

And as to what GS is planning for the future, which is never explicitly addressed in that interview, by the way, ArchiCAD 12 brought along with it the Curtain Wall Tool, which a lot of people defended as being a harbinger of great things to come from GS from the perspective of a "systems" and "class" based modeling toolset, which could be extended to other Construction tools in the ArchiCAD toolset. But since then we've seen few to no improvements or enhancements to the CW Tool itself, which can politely be described as clunky, non-straightforward, and incomplete, much less having any of that "intelligence filtered down to some of the other tools with much needed attention. Point being that there was no reason to believe that the Curtain Wall tool was a sign of anything to come in modeling improvements, nor does there seem to be any reason to think so with what we've seen (or rather what GS have chosen to show) of AC14 thus far.

But perhaps AC15 will prove otherwise.

But then again, when you're always saying that maybe tomorrow will be different, with no real reason to believe so, then you have a problem.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Krippahl wrote:

Bricklyne wrote:
... We ARE making informed opinions and judgments based on what we currently have running on our computers (i.e ArchiCAD 13, 12 11, 10 and so on and so forth), as well as a the track record that Graphisoft have already established with those previous versions...

So, if I understand correctly, what you are saying is, in you opinion, GS has a poor track record for the last 4 releases, and still you subscribe for upgrades?
That would be like betting on a horse you believe has failed many times in the past and are convinced will fail again. Can´t see the logic in that.

Besides, why do you subscribe, anyway? Is that mandatory in other countries, or is it a way to pay less on an informed bet? Is it not possible just to upgrade whenever you feel it is worth it, since you find Graphisoft's track record so poor?

Well you're not really understanding me correctly anymore than you're just choosing to turn and twist my words around to make your point.

When I said "we" I was speaking in the generic sense of frustrated users and was not specifically referring to only myself. In this regard, there are users who use Macs and can't just easily switch applications or platforms when they feel like it once they realize that ArchiCAD is no longer addressing their requirements - especially as there are no viable alternatives for that platform (yet). Just as there are users who already work in an environment where they have to use the program, but don't necessarily have the final say, or any say as to which software they should use or whether they can switch. And furthermore, one can only go so long without upgrading before risking running into problems with collaboration or hardware issues.
And yes there are subscription users who can choose to opt out, and who probably will.

You seem to be suggesting that if anyone has any problems with the software, then regardless of having paid for it, either through subscription or otherwise, then they should just suck it up, zip it and either keep using it and suffer in silence, or switch to another software if they are not happy (which will happen for a lot of people). As opposed to voicing their concerns with what should be the concerned parties (in this case the developers), as tends to happen with other software and as used to happen even here not too long ago.
Or that anyone that has a less that favorable opinion of the upcoming version, should not voice that opinion, or be branded a troll.

That doesn't make sense to me; unless only certain opinions (read: favorable) are the only ones that matter on this board.

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:
Dennis,
I remember a thread 2-3 years ago on the Talk where the consensus was that these fancy free-form modelling tools and complex forms are really not needed by 80-90 % of architects - they just don't do those kinds of thing in real projects.

Creating complex geometry is time-consuming.

I Don't really agree here Laszlo .. yes it is a minor portion of buildings, but actually that is where people are expecting the real huge benefits of BIM and BIM collaboration . the other thing is ... ok lets say we only need it 10% ( or even 2%) of the time ... so I agree it is not the most focused part of the development .. but dropping tools that we already had ? dropping Maxon form and the link with Sketchup ? fine .. those links where not perfect .. but at least I was able to do those weird shapes ( not fully BIM , but at least get some sctions/ elevations coordination options ) .. but now ?

and I clearly remember when GS was lecturing everyone about that connection and how important it is ... and now suddenly after dropping it ..oops ! only few architects were using it !?

Many features in ArchiCAD are used by less than that percentage ..and still its developed and kept . ( Listing maybe? ).

[Anonymous]

Its really funny. So we will pay again our subscription to see what they will do? No we wont. We did, and we got 13... with no new features for single users, and now 14... with no new features too.. Sorry but no. There is no paying for 15.... No pay and wait and see.... that is over

Its ridiculous to talk about what to change.

Look at the ancient material editor. Try to change a material on the fly. You cannot. Have to go back, open the editor change the material... and then go again to the model and see the changes.. and then back again... and we are in 2010

Hundreds of stupid things. An ancient gdl....no scripting environment..

And then the plugins. That ****** decision ,old plugins not working in newer versions. That is totally unacceptable. This is intentional (because if i believe its not intentional then its a complete programming lack of skills)
Plugins should work for every version. Period.

[Anonymous]

I believe that anyone graduating from Architecture school today, certainly in North America, has to consider Revit proficiency a must, if they hope to get anything of a foothold int he job market with the economy in dire straits as it is right now. Just as AutoCAD proficiency was almost a pre-requisite for getting into this profession 10-20 years ago.

My son is in architecture school right now and while Revit is very popular I don't see it as a must.

Not to mention the apparent if not complete apathy and disinterest that they seem to have towards the users.

I really don't disagree since you qualify a bit what you say, but I maybe don't infer from GS's actions that they don't care about the users or that they have some malevolent intent. My take on the article is that GS is looking to the long term and trying to be relevant in a Revit world.

Or that anyone that has a less that favorable opinion of the upcoming version, should not voice that opinion, or be branded a troll.

Not at all, i am just as critical of GS's not solving MY problems as anyone else, I however, don't feel I can speak as to GS's business plan or their motives as being totally ill informed and done to deliberately cause harm to their users.

I do wish they would be a lot more forthcoming about their game plan, but I can appreciate why they might not be.

Don Lee