BIMx functionality

[Rex Maximilian]

(note by moderator: this discussion diverged from another thread, which you can find here:
https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=74047#p330111)

I would also point out in your letter that they took a perfectly great mobile viewer like BIMx and ruined it... all in the name of opening bigger models for big firms... forgetting the little guy.

[Podolsky]

Rex wrote:
I would also point out in your letter that they took a perfectly great mobile viewer like BIMx and ruined it... all in the name of opening bigger models for big firms... forgetting the little guy.

What exactly they ruined in BIMx? BIMx (and BIM Cloud) for my by the way one of the best parts of modern ArchiCAD technology.
Could you describe in more details what do you think is missing in BIMx or how BIMx features are mismatching user expectations?

[Rex Maximilian]

Have you compared items viewed in BIMX Legacy vs. the current BIMx? See my post in the "New vs Old BIMx" with examples.

https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=70502#p322846

The left example is how it used to look in BIMx. The right example is how it looks now.
The old BIMx had beautifully rendered g,i. The models were beautifully lit all around. The new BIM uses a new renderer that doesn't use pre-baked textures. The result is a flatter looking model. Some areas are in light and some are in shade. You can't alter that either.

The reason for this was to have a lower intensive rendering method to load larger models. But what good is it to open larger models when it looks terrible?

Also, they took away the ability to have parallel (axonometric views) and 3D stereogram (with 3D glasses). I bought 50 pair of the glasses and used to have presentation meetings while walking around the model on a large TV. Google cardboard pales in comparison. Everyone has to have their own cardboard, their own phone and has to control the walk-through themselves... and then of course there is the dizziness that occurs with Cardboard.

I'd have to go back to the iPad app Penultimate to think of an app that had a more crippling update.

[Steve Jepson]

Just for the fun of stirring the pot a little more ...I will offer my opinion about why *some* ArchiCAD users have been more and more dissatisfied with every new version of ArchiCAD that comes out.

Imagine, if you can, a program like ArchiCAD that was designed by people in Shanghai vs one designed by people in Cheyenne. I suppose that is all the needs to be said.

[political content removed by moderator]

[Podolsky]

Rex wrote:
Have you compared items viewed in BIMX Legacy vs. the current BIMx? See my post in the "New vs Old BIMx" with examples.

https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=70502#p322846

The left example is how it used to look in BIMx. The right example is how it looks now.
The old BIMx had beautifully rendered g,i. The models were beautifully lit all around. The new BIM uses a new renderer that doesn't use pre-baked textures. The result is a flatter looking model. Some areas are in light and some are in shade. You can't alter that either.

The reason for this was to have a lower intensive rendering method to load larger models. But what good is it to open larger models when it looks terrible?

Also, they took away the ability to have parallel (axonometric views) and 3D stereogram (with 3D glasses). I bought 50 pair of the glasses and used to have presentation meetings while walking around the model on a large TV. Google cardboard pales in comparison. Everyone has to have their own cardboard, their own phone and has to control the walk-through themselves... and then of course there is the dizziness that occurs with Cardboard.

I'd have to go back to the iPad app Penultimate to think of an app that had a more crippling update.

I mentioned BIMx render in number 5. I know this problem with new BIMx - the switched on using Metal by Apple. Don't know how it works on Android and Windows. Probably it's poor Metal use. Now ArchiCAD 25 is getting Metal instead of OpenGL, some users wrote on forum that it's sucks too. But old method also was sucks - especially the time for GI calculation and the fact that never was real GI - just ambient occlusion.

[David Collins]

Steve wrote:
Just for the fun of stirring the pot a little more

Just find yourself an empty workstation somewhere back there in the design department and someone will be along to get you started.

[Israel de Quevedo]

With a palette of tasks for construction simulation, we would have an infinite advantage over any other type of bim solution, since certificates could be created based on the phases of the current construction project.

Planned start and finish dates of the construction task, critical paths with previous tasks, and a percentage of completion system, and a reference to each item associated with a task, references to "Microsoft project" files that can be exported to work residents and reimport them for coordination, all this would serve to offer the best solution. in the 4DBIM and 5DBIM construction planning market

with that we could say goodbye to revit and his younger brother navis.

[Podolsky]

Israel wrote:
With a palette of tasks for construction simulation, we would have an infinite advantage over any other type of bim solution, since certificates could be created based on the phases of the current construction project.

Planned start and finish dates of the construction task, critical paths with previous tasks, and a percentage of completion system, and a reference to each item associated with a task, references to "Microsoft project" files that can be exported to work residents and reimport them for coordination, all this would serve to offer the best solution. in the 4DBIM and 5DBIM construction planning market

with that we could say goodbye to revit and his younger brother navis.

Navisworks is not really brother of Revit. I might say - brother from another father. Navisworks before was independent platform - you could use it with ArchiCAD too. Just one day Revit and Navisworks were adopted by new parents.

[jl_lt]

You gotta love Autodesk consistency on this. Even autocad was not originally created by them, they bought the idea and original code from another guy.

[Rex Maximilian]

Podolsky wrote:
But old method also was sucks - especially the time for GI calculation and the fact that never was real GI - just ambient occlusion.

Yes, it was ambient occlusion pre-baked textures... but, it was leagues better than what they have now. I was pleasing enough for walk-throughs.

I'm just waiting for Twinmotion's cloud presenter to have iOS controls, and then I'm done with BIMx.