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]

Hi all
I had worked on revit and every year compare archicad with revit and I know archicad 14 have no great features but I think AC 11 best than revit 2011 lock and lock at its features like ( grid on layout and sky background on render????)
and I hope GS make update to stair maker and modeling organic building
but I am sure I am do any stair with it and about organic its real rare .
and about revit map feature I hope GS do this this feature to all autodesk programme like 3d MAX MAYA (AS CINEMA 4D)cos we used that .
Finally I hope from GS answer us bake about wishlist
like I cant do this cos it make .... or we will do it in ac 20
so we will not fill our wishlist unuesful............

thank you all .....

[Anonymous]

Matthew wrote:
I have held off on chiming in on this discussion since I'll probably seem like a big GS apologist and all but...

I think the IFC and collaboration improvements are a big deal and very important. Of course I am not unbiased in this opinion since collaboration, interoperability and file conversions are a big part of what I do.

I do agree with the wish for more improvements in the modeling department. And it seems to me that there are dozens of little improvements that would make big differences to a lot of people. If I were in charge of specifying the ArchiCAD upgrades I would make sure that at least a handful of these little fixes and improvements got into each release.

True Matthew ... but again all that doesn't make it an "upgrade" IMHO , imagine that AC15 came as the same features but supports 128 bits ? I agree its a huge work and big features and huge job for programmers and all ..but does that justify asking people to pay a full upgrade / subscription ? ... does that really catch up with what is happening in the other BIM tools ?

that's one thing ... the other thing .. - and that can't be addressed at the moment ..not till it is released and tested - but I really have my doubts about this working as it is supposed to work ... and that we are done with all the headache ?.. I don't think so .. unfortunately not .. not to mention what was mentioned earlier that IFC depends on both ends of the process and AC is just one side ... but who can control the other side ? lets just remember how GS blamed Google when they stopped the link on Mac ! saying simply .. we can't do nothing ! .. so what if the same scenario happened here ? so really IFC can't be perfect IMHO .. and for that I really can bear the pain that comes from that ... not to mention the upgrade cycle of all the other products .. can AC really catchup with all that ? not sure .. specially if we consider that add-on providers of ArchiCAD can barely catchup with the new versions !

What was the point of a 1 year cycle .. if its just about splitting the features we used to have in every cycle into those years ? that decision didn't make any sense back then .. and I only thought that it might be because of the competition and they want to boost more features in each release but .. since then GS proves that it was a horrible / greedy decision and that is all.


And the most important / sad side of the story .. that none of the GS guys showed up here and said nothing ! well if they are not even interested on defending there point of view .. I really doubt that this can in any means considered to be healthy . it looks like either they don't give a darn ... or they can't really defend what they are promoting .

and I won't really call what users are asking for as small enhancements ... specially on the modelling and the object creation sides ... these are huge developments..and GS during the last couple of years are just killing every possible workaround ( connection with Sketchup - Maxonform - not to mention the old GDL tool box and other options ) .. and I really can't get the point of that !


yes... features in AC14 are welcome .
No ... it doesn't justify throwing a release in the market .

[Anonymous]

hese are huge developments..and GS during the last couple of years are just killing every possible workaround ( connection with Sketchup - Maxonform - not to mention the old GDL tool box and other options ) .. and I really can't get the point of that !

I think the point is AC will be so large programme if it have all modeling tools in cinema 4d
thank

[Laszlo Nagy]

whatever wrote:
not to mention what was mentioned earlier that IFC depends on both ends of the process and AC is just one side ... but who can control the other side ? lets just remember how GS blamed Google when they stopped the link on Mac ! saying simply .. we can't do nothing ! .. so what if the same scenario happened here ? so really IFC can't be perfect IMHO ..

Just to reflect briefly on this.
With AC14 there will come Revit Add-Ins: an Add-In for Revit Structure and another for Revit MEP.
The Revit Structure Add-In will make the IFC smarter right after it is exported from/imported to Revit Structure so the AC-Revit IFC conversion is better than can be achieved by Revit's IFC implementation alone.
The Revit MEP Add-In is used to export the MEP data into IFC so Revit to AC conversion is correct.

So there are ways to improve the exchange even on the other side.

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:

whatever wrote:
not to mention what was mentioned earlier that IFC depends on both ends of the process and AC is just one side ... but who can control the other side ? lets just remember how GS blamed Google when they stopped the link on Mac ! saying simply .. we can't do nothing ! .. so what if the same scenario happened here ? so really IFC can't be perfect IMHO ..

Just to reflect briefly on this.
With AC14 there will come Revit Add-Ins: an Add-In for Revit Structure and another for Revit MEP.
The Revit Structure Add-In will make the IFC smarter right after it is exported from/imported to Revit Structure so the AC-Revit IFC conversion is better than can be achieved by Revit's IFC implementation alone.
The Revit MEP Add-In is used to export the MEP data into IFC so Revit to AC conversion is correct.

So there are ways to improve the exchange even on the other side.

Thanx Laszlo , I have noticed that in the videos , but still .. having all the previous experiments with Sketchup ..google earth ( or even autocad) ..when we just can't catchup with their upgrading cycle ( which is normal .. no one will ask GS to do all that) ..but that puts us again into the issue of having two ends in the IFC story .. not to mention the shortage of connection with Structural analysis programs ( almost none of the commonly used programs export a proper IFC file.. and we have to manually check the results before brining it into AC) .. all that puts IFC quite far from being a stable / every day platform . so yes any improvement in that direction is really good... but again having that nature of not depending on one software I still think that all those features could be implemented and improved on a long term strategy ... while the basics of the program ( where it is in a controlled environment ) should be addressed instead.

And sorry... but for me .. IFC doesn't only mean Revit !?.. although this what the videos imply .

Any how .. AC14 is out already .. and easily you can see that users are not happy ( at least on this forum) .. and sadly ..easily again you can see that GS doesn't even care !

[Laszlo Nagy]

whatever wrote:
Thanx Laszlo , I have noticed that in the videos , but still .. having all the previous experiments with Sketchup ..google earth ( or even autocad) ..when we just can't catchup with their upgrading cycle ( which is normal .. no one will ask GS to do all that) ..but that puts us again into the issue of having two ends in the IFC story .. not to mention the shortage of connection with Structural analysis programs ( almost none of the commonly used programs export a proper IFC file.. and we have to manually check the results before brining it into AC) .. all that puts IFC quite far from being a stable / every day platform . so yes any improvement in that direction is really good... but again having that nature of not depending on one software I still think that all those features could be implemented and improved on a long term strategy ... while the basics of the program ( where it is in a controlled environment ) should be addressed instead.

And sorry... but for me .. IFC doesn't only mean Revit !?.. although this what the videos imply .!

Yes, I agree it is probably a long term strategy. As I see it it is a strategy of saying let everyone use their program of choice and collaborate through open standards, instead of everyone forced onto a single platform based on a one-size-fits-all idea.

By the way, AC14 will have IFC connection to many programs, including: Analysis Applications, DDS-CAD MEP, Nemetschek Allplan Engineering, Scia Engineer, Revit Structure, Revit MEP and Tekla.
There will be so-called IFC Translators, similar to the existing DXF/DWG Translators so the translators can be configured to work specifically with various applications.

[Anonymous]

Whatever wrote:
"Any how .. AC14 is out already .. and easily you can see that users are not happy ( at least on this forum) "
How so?
lec

[Anonymous]

laszlonagy wrote:

Yes, I agree it is probably a long term strategy. As I see it it is a strategy of saying let everyone use their program of choice and collaborate through open standards, instead of everyone forced onto a single platform based on a one-size-fits-all idea.

By the way, AC14 will have IFC connection to many programs, including: Analysis Applications, DDS-CAD MEP, Nemetschek Allplan Engineering, Scia Engineer, Revit Structure, Revit MEP and Tekla.
There will be so-called IFC Translators, similar to the existing DXF/DWG Translators so the translators can be configured to work specifically with various applications.

This strategy is supposed to be what GS is preaching for long time ... but looking at the market today ..the part of "every one use their program of choice " becoming one particular program ! .. and to be honest .. now the programs (at least the architecture packages) doesn't have that significant advantages one over the other .. so in that case .. and if I wasn't an old user of AC... why would I go with AC and have to live a nightmare working with IFC ? " to convert a big file from another "very compatible structural package" to AC it might take 4-5 hours in some cases ... do I really love to go through that while there are no huge advantages in AC against the competitors ? the structural guys here are using Etabs for structural analysis ... can I share an IFC from archicad with them ? no .. because etabs crashes at that point ..and even if it doesn't ..it just can't read the files properly ( not even its own IFC files ) .. ok can I get it back from etabs in IFC format ? no .. because again it exports in a very weird way ... so its a thing that GS can't enhance .. ! its an etabs issue .. and here I question that part about you pick the best package and we make it work ! " while most of the competitors with their structural packages developed links "not only IFC - AFAIK- sure not to mention buying that product by the same company ! with the structural analysis programs " .IFC is nice and great .. does it "work" till now?..no ...will it in the future? maybe .. hopefully .

again .. yes long term strategy .. we all agree.. but then why to put it in one release " and only that with no actual features" and call it a new version ? not sure if export-import options can make a new version . any how its GS product and they have to handle the consequences .. hopefully that I am mistaken and this version will be a ground breaking .. and push their sales .

[Dennis Lee]

At 4:19 of this video, it says ArchiCAD 14 can do collision detection. If true, isn't this a major feature? How come it's not mentioned on the new features list? Also, the video shows a bunch of new buttons that I've never seen before. Anyone have any idea what they are?

http://www.youtube.com/user/Archicad#p/c/5C1926DD91A70C7B/2/pMBtiHqOLFQ

[Laszlo Nagy]

Whatever, I get your point about Etabs.
Yes, there is probably a limitation of how well the IFC file exchange can be if the other side is bad.
But what should GS do? Not pursue this direction? They do not have much choice. DWG is Autodesk's format and it cannot be used for BIM file exchange. Revit's format is proprietary, too.
Also, I am reading at various places that BIM will never really be a one platform solution. Maybe Revit has Architecture, Structure, MEP, but there are so many additional phases to BIM and Integrated Project Delivery (including, analysis, cost estimation, time schedules, construction-related application, Facility Management etc.) that there will probably never really be one format or one platform. An in that case the program will need to be exchanging files. IFC is the open standard format that can be the future common file exchange format.
So I believe it is a very good and strategically good decision from GS to pursue its development.

(But this is no argument about what constitutes a good and full release to whom and why).