GS clearly does not take the residential architect seriously

[rm]

This is going to be a RANT. So if you are a full time GS apologist, you might want to move on.

This week I upgraded one of my dongles to AC 12, only one! For the majority of my last 15 years of using AC, I have used it on upper bracket residential projects. During that time I have purchased numerous 3rd party libraries for windows, doors, and furniture....because the AC library has had the same pieces of _ _ _ _ for the last 2000 years!!!

This while applications for significantly less money, mostly on the PC side - darn-it, have had features like cabinets that heal themselves when arranged in the plan, windows that actually don't have trim problems and are based on real US manufacturers, doors that don't have trim problems and are based on real US manufacturers, furniture that doesn't look like a kid with a crayon drew them, extrusions, lathes, and sweeps that can be rotated and adjust in 3D, like Objective can do. Obviously the objects should be location friendly, I don't mean to suggest every country should adopt the US objects as standard.....OK, done being politically correct.

I have personally been told by the GS CEO when v9 was out, that by issuance of v11 there would be a "new" and well sorted out library that would be "thoroughly" tested. BS.....I have v12, and I found problems with the windows after working with them less than 5 minutes.....see the attached image, so you know I'm not blowing smoke.

What the heck does it take for GS to build a decent library? Let me tell you, I will have to go kicking and screaming to Revit, but if thats what it takes to access a decent library, I will consider it. Currently you can't access anything on the Google 3D warehouse directly into AC12, and there is NO indication from GS when we will see the plug-in again, if at all. And if your on the Mac side, forget it, you don't have a prayer as the plug-in only worked on the Windows side of AC.

Obviously, if I have stuck with this program since v4.1 I think it is reasonably good. What I find inexcusable is GS willingness to keep putting out lousy standard library sets. In the world of BIM and Photorealistic renderings, GS should be providing a solid realistic library set.....they are not even close!!!!!

I have forwarded the bug to GS through tech support. I am shocked I found the bugs with the windows in less than 5 minutes of using the AC12. God knows what I will find when I dig in further with the doors.

For what I just spent on an upgrade, I am absolutely torqued at how lacking this library still is. The truth is, even 3rd party libraries are very limited - they hardly exist. Clearly GS has not been successful in getting buy-in from US manufacturers to create libraries the way AutoDesk has with Revit. While there are some very generous users out there that give away some very good objects ( THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU ) the majority of GDL objects available just are not realistic looking or don't stay current with AC.

I have suggested this before, and I will say it again. GS there are some really smart, good GDL gurus out there. Get off your wallet and hire these people to ONLY design objects or work with manufacturers of real Plumbing Fixtures, Light Fixtures, Doors, Windows, Furniture, etc....and pay them to test the objects thoroughly. I'm guessing a 1 million dollar investment in the libraries would yield something far superior to what you provide now....I guess 50 dollars might do that as well

.....hey Mr. Gallello - you getting any of this?

[Karl Ottenstein]

I welcome Wes' comments and have never found him to explicitly or subtly suggest anyone move to Revit. His participation here has been a helpful view of the Revit world ... and in this case a confirmation that the same library issues we struggle with daily are not unheard of on the Revit side either.

Karl

[Rakela Raul]

I welcome Wes' comments and have never found him to explicitly or subtly suggest anyone move to Revit. His participation here has been a helpful view of the Revit world ... and in this case a confirmation that the same library issues we struggle with daily are not unheard of on the Revit side either.

Karl

exactly !!

[Anonymous]

I'm not even trying to move people to Revit -- I'm saying we have the same complaints from our users. So unless you can master object building in Revit, don't even bother with switching to Revit if you're frustrated with AC's lack of library objects. I am referring directly to the original poster's comment that he would switch to Revit if it means getting a better library. Sorry -- no such luck.

[Anonymous]

I think that GS should focus on the development of AC tools and addons and leave the objects library to the community... But of course giving minimal support... like an "object developer kit" with manuals, templates and tools (maybe that graphical gdl object creator that djordge talked in another thread)...

Why don't GS creates a web platform for all AC native languages?...
Or as many countries that want to join the initiative?...
The "local" libraries could be managed by the country most active reseller or even skilled users...
People could transform it into a business.
Local manufacturers would pay to "object creators" to make and maintain their products available in the local library...

My 2 cent...

[Karl Ottenstein]

Braza wrote:
I think that GS should focus on the development of AC tools and addons and leave the objects library to the community... But of course giving minimal support... like an "object developer kit" with manuals, templates and tools (maybe that graphical gdl object creator that djordge talked in another thread)...

I have to disagree on that one. The doors/window objects in the library are extraordinarily complex, using shared complex macros. Unfortunately, they are buggy and do not offer what users need. Trying to start from scratch by the community - or to fix GS's code - is a huge effort.

As 'open source' it might be worthwhile in the end ... except that the objects have to evolve with some releases of AC to deal with new features. A firm doing production wants the correct objects delivered and working with the new version of AC, not some arbitrary time afterward when the volunteer community gets things working.

Of course, this thread is partly inspired by the fact that GS does not really do this for us as they should either... we are still waiting (and waiting) for the library patch for the bugs in the 12 library (and 11 migration library) - much less for better objects that more accurately reflect the real world components that we need.

Cheers,
Karl

[Erika Epstein]

Karl wrote:
. we are still waiting (and waiting) for the library patch for the bugs in the 12 library (and 11 migration library) - much less for better objects that more accurately reflect the real world components that we need.

Cheers,
Karl

HERE! HERE!

[Anonymous]

Hi Karl,

Thank you for your feedback... Its always wise and positive...

I think that GS needs to gradually separate the library development from the tools/addons development...
If the complexity of the tools/addons keep growing like it has been, we will see more and more bugs all over the library...
Specially in an AC 12 months release basis...
Of course starting from scratch by the community - or to fix GS's code - is a huge effort... But I doesn't have to be from the day to the night...
I believe that this 'BIM' thing will only grow if all the community participate... architects, engineers, constructors, manufacturers, etc...
I don't see it as an 'open source'... Its a market place!
A manufacturer would gladly pay to an object developer firm to create and update his product objects within new releases of AC...
They do this every year with paper/media catalogs... And it would certainly cost less than a massive marketing campaign...
So... in the end... we could have a free working library updated in our servers (by FTP for example)...
Just a thought...

[rm]

Braza wrote:
Hi Karl,

Thank you for your feedback... Its always wise and positive...

I think that GS needs to gradually separate the library development from the tools/addons development...
If the complexity of the tools/addons keep growing like it has been, we will see more and more bugs all over the library...

Braza,

I couldn't disagree more with you on this issue. There have been several legimate developers of 3rd party libraries.....thank God!. But I don't think most of them make a very good living from the library sales alone, at least not enough to make it a sustainable business. Perhaps, GS can put some key developers on their payroll so that those people can make a decent living from developing their libraries and have the benefit of GS development teams behind them.

GS has missed the mark with their libraries on several fronts:

1. GS has failed to develop ( although they can still try ) relationships with manufacturing partners to create content based on real architectural building components.

2. GS could invest MORE in QC ( quality control ) with their own library parts. While beta testers are very useful, they should NOT be the final point of testing software. There is NO substitute for paying people to check software. If it fails, you hire new people, you cant fire a beta tester...your not paying them.

Mentonia mentioned Chief Architect. While I cannot speak with authority on that application, I have seen its library at work, its automatic framing, its dimensioning, it Bill of Materials ( think BIM ) and AC has nothing on that application for those particular tasks.

GS needs to get serious about library development and publishing them....Currently they are not!

[Anonymous]

Hi Robert,

rm wrote:
1. GS has failed to develop ( although they can still try ) relationships with manufacturing partners to create content based on real architectural building components.

2. GS could invest MORE in QC ( quality control ) with their own library parts. While beta testers are very useful, they should NOT be the final point of testing software. There is NO substitute for paying people to check software. If it fails, you hire new people, you cant fire a beta tester...your not paying them.

I agree that it's a huge step to implement a solid "public" object library for AC... Sounds like utopia... I know...
But when I say I think that GS needs to separate the library development from the tools/addons development... I mean that it needs to be another business...
Maybe a GS special division or even another company that makes money providing objects for the industry manufactures (as you mentioned in point 1) and maintaining the core generic library...
And let the GS code team focus in new and improved tools so much needed...

[Karl Ottenstein]

Hi Braza,

Thanks for thinking I was being positive. 😉 But, to put a negative spin on it: windows/doors are so different from, say, a dining table.

The window/door interface is exceedingly complex - and they share common macros for casing, etc.

If we had every manufacturer producing their own windows/doors (GS and we users tried lobbying for it - and got nowhere)... then users would have a complex mess on their hands if every manufacturer had a different UI and parameter list, and handled common elements (e.g., casing) differently.

If one were to say that the GS was to provide the UI scripts, common macros, etc. to simplify the job for volunteers or 3rd parties - in order to have a unified interface to make usage consistent and easier - then we're back with depending upon GS to get those components updated and released.

I tend to lean towards Robert's suggestion that GS just has to hire more GDL specialists and to make QA of the library a higher priority. They have to see how that would pay for them, though.

Personally (shall we have a poll?), I probably spend more time futzing with door/window/object parameters and patches than I do with the entire rest of the model and document set. So, for me, a solid (non-buggy), useful library would make me more productive than any feature GS could add to the program itself.

Cheers,
Karl