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?

[Anonymous]

I think what is being missed here is that the GDL as it presently exists cannot provide the door, window, stair or other assemblies that we need. GDL is great for some things and it can be stretched to some pretty amazing lengths, but it is not sufficiently robust, flexible and maintainable for complex assemblies.

Door and window libraries could theoretically be improved, but as someone who has seen the deep, dark insides of GDL for twenty years I can say with a fair degree of certainty that such efforts are ultimately doomed. The upside is that the solutions don't seem that difficult to me. The downside is that I don't see anyone (including Revit) addressing the issues properly.

Perhaps the curtainwall tool is the herald of a new era in this regard, and it is impressive in many ways. But its lack of integration with the rest of the program leaves me less than encouraged.

Graphisoft has pulled off some very impressive feats by repurposing and integrating basic functions of ArchiCAD. Teamwork and hotlinked modules are essentially extensions of the group and lock functions (yes I know, modules existed before the group function - consider it advanced causation or Darwinian preadaptation). A similar approach to integrating the tools could produce extraordinary results, but instead we are getting a proliferation of unrelated features and functions. Imagine if you could draw complex profiles to be used as mullions/muntins in the curtainwall system, or be called from within a GDL script.

Oh well back to work. I still prefer ArchiCAD to anything else out there.

[Anonymous]

Karl wrote:
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.

I'm sure GS CEO knows that spending more money in QA and programmers would fix the problem... Its all about money...
What we can do now with this thread is propose attractive cost/benefit alternative solutions for a growing problem that address our needs in the future.

Karl wrote:
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.

Personally, I can live without object UI. I'm satisfied with a well structured parameter list. About macros... Why not start scripting/rescripting objects without macros as a standard?... I know the file size would grow (don't know how much)... But it would be much more easy to detect and fix bugs. The only role of GS would be make standards and avoid the mess... and its simple: refuse the object till it become stable.

Matthew wrote:
What is desperately needed is an improved environment/process for creating custom components/parts/assemblies and a clearly delineated set of standards and guidelines for doing this. Ideally the GS parts should set the "gold standard" for properly designed and engineered parts (a "simple title" should not require hundreds of lines of code) and serve as examples to everyone else of how things should be done. This way we would all have a solid base to start from and it would be much easier for everyone to produce consistent libraries of high quality.

I agree with Mathew. GS should create and rule an environment for easy object creating with standards and tools. And it could even make money with it...

[Anonymous]

Braza wrote:
Why not start scripting/rescripting objects without macros as a standard?

Paulo,

I understand your frustration, and I share it. But your proposition about macros is not realistic. Don't ask GS to delete what they have built.

Doors and Windows make me think to Frankeinstein story. Even for GS, it is difficult to control them, due to their overcomplexity. The yearly cycle of new release makes worse the situation.
I would expect GS to focuse on these basic and essential parts, before adding new features. Only GS can do that. Don't count on external developers, it would just add mess to the existing one.

May be they will have to improve the WALLNICHE tool, which is a bit limited. Currently, it is impossible to script some slanted reveals. Faster to model the shape and perform a SEO. Is it BIM?

[Anonymous]

Hi Olivier,

Olivier wrote:
Doors and Windows make me think to Frankeinstein story.

I think its time for a new/improved geometric engine (GDL? Hibrid?)... As described in a thread about "parasolid" in this forum...

Olivier wrote:
But your proposition about macros is not realistic. Just for example, WALLHOLE2 tool can work only if it is called by a macro.

When I talked about scripting without macros, I didn't refer to the core macros like WALLHOLE2...
Its more like those custom ones that you can use with the CALL tool...
Which are all over the door/window scripts... Like the stichs in Frankensteins body...

Olivier wrote:
Don't count on external developers, it would just add mess to the existing one.

I'm not saying that external developers have to do GS's job...
I'm talking about two different things...
One is that GS have to provide a bug-free simple generic object library... Fair enought...
The other is that GS should create and rule an environment/platform for easy object making with standards and tools for the market/community that will become the main stream object library...

Maybe I'm wrong... But I think that the majority of AC users are "addicted" to the GS AC library... and expect that GS provide them increasingly complex objects... I think it shouldn't be GS's job...

An environment/platform with easy object creating tools and standards would lead to a main AC library composed by:
1. A GS created and maintained bug-free simple generic object library maintained by GS (wich would be used only by AC beginners) ...
2. A GS regulated bug-free community library, containing market objects oriented to country/region specific needs and maintained by its manufacturers/developers (wich would be used in production)...

Just some ideas...
The GS regulating process could be made by an automatic bug report system (within AC) wich would automatically exclude the object from the library and contact the manufacturer/developer to fix the bug...
Its obvious that a manufacturer/developer wouldn't want that his objects/products become "unavailable" in the library... and they would quickly fix the bug to get back to the business...
About the AC yearly new releases library update... it could be made by contacting each developer to check their objects as beta testers...

Perhaps I'm being unrealistic... But at least I'm trying to be constructive...

[Anonymous]

Paulo,

Don't misanderstand me, your argumentation is positive. Lot of good remarks in this thread.

On June 2007, at Frank Beister and Matthew Lohden's initiative, some folks of this forum
had an interesting exchange with GS team, about GDL improvements.

Without betraying any secret, my feeling is that users can propose, at the end GS decides.
Native english speakers present in this exchange, would explain this better than I could.

For myself, I don't wait for a revolution. Just an evolution.
A more robust library, exempt of bugs should be the first priority.
I second all users pushing in this direction.

[rm]

Olivier wrote:
Paulo,
A more robust library, exempt of bugs should be the first priority.
I second all users pushing in this direction.

....which is the point of why I started this thread. If BMW ( i pick them because they make a heck of a drivers car ) kept putting out cars with bad brakes - what do you think it would do to their sales?

[Anonymous]

Olivier,

Braza wrote:
Perhaps I'm being unrealistic... But at least I'm trying to be constructive...

Sorry if this statement sounded rude and personal... It was not my intention...
Your feedback is always wise and constructive...

[Anonymous]

Olivier wrote:
On June 2007, at Frank Beister and Matthew Lohden's initiative, some folks of this forum
had an interesting exchange with GS team, about GDL improvements.

Without betraying any secret, my feeling is that users can propose, at the end GS decides.
Native english speakers present in this exchange, would explain this better than I could.

Ok... Now I'm getting curious...

[Anonymous]

As I just spent 1/2 hour making screen shots a diagrams to demonstrate this and posting it with out searching first for the issue I feel like an ass.

In any event as this hase been discussed and pointed out it seems a most serious issue to address almost immediatley.
This goes for the Arched Top Double door not being able able to have equal size panels when made larger than 5' in width.

[rm]

Don't worry.....GS should have this library issued solved, just in time to try to sell you on v13, of course it wont work in AC 13, but there is always AC 14...etc......

.....BTW GS, hows that Google 3D Warehouse plug-in coming? ......I'm sorry, what - we can't hear you!