How to Fix Archicad 26 Generated-Frustrations

[Martin Jules]

As I posted it to another thread, here are my proposals to restore the Graphisoft's brand image:

"Based on the frustrations caused by the release of Archicad 26, if I were Graphisoft, I would complete this version 26, which marks its 40th anniversary. We can't celebrate a 40th anniversary that way.

To do that, I would add the EcoDesigner Star in the package for free for all subscribers before the end of the year. I would also add the missing elements of the structural features in version 26 including the steel ones presented during the previous events or webinars as well. The development of the software is very late and I don't know the root cause of this big delay.

As a result, such a strategy would allow Graphisoft to alleviate the pain caused by the release of Archicad 26 this month.

For Archicad 27, Graphisoft could release other featuring proposals including the development of the Morph tool. We have to be able to convert different part of the morph in our design or drawings into appropriate BIM elements since Archicad is a BIM software program. For example, if I used the morph tool to design or draw the roof of my architectural project during the schematic design phase, I should be able to convert this morph part of the design into a real BIM roof in Archicad. This could help to use the morph tool to sketch during the schematic design phase and then develop it during the design process. "

[Israel de Quevedo]

Topography, ramps, metal reinforcement, that's all.

[DGSketcher]

NO, NO, NO! You are compounding the problem on all fronts...

EcoDesigner is broken / still in development. It will only add to the mess we already have if you add it in its current state.

In case you hadn't noticed there is a big push back against the intrusion of the irrelevant Structural features, why throw more resources at frustrating the customer base?

Dangling more new features down the road when the latest updates have further messed up the core functionality / user interface is just what GS have been doing for the last three years or more with half implemented solutions. 

GS need to get back to delivering a best in class software for architects that people want to use. Ok their IT strategies may have a long term pay back, but no one is interested in running software where basic functionalities like dimensioning are unstable, attribute management has taken a major step backwards and the general workflow / interface is a pain to use.

And I will reiterate my point in the other thread. GS have no interest in what is said in these forums otherwise they would be here trying to resolve our concerns.

[Martin Jules]

Architecture can't exist without structure, and architects have to keep working together with engineers from the early stage of any projects. I also suggested the Eco-Designer Star because sustainability is the future of architecture. Archicad will be kicked out of the AEC industry if it doesn't integrate this sustainable feature as soon as possible. 

[DGSketcher]

You don't listen do you? We've been here before. And I stand 100% behind my opinion that EcoDesigner would bring nothing to AC in its current state. It would serve only as you seem to want to provide more PR fluff!

[Martin Jules]

I respect your opinion, but the future of architecture is sustainability, believe it or not!

[Nader Belal]

@Martin Jules May be you don't have a clear image of what is happening ...

1. Eco-Designer for me, and my location is useless, for the simple reason that locally use a different type of units, and since conversion from one unit system to another is actually cumbersome, it's better to leave it unused.
2. Continuing with Eco-Designer, locally speaking, there are already programs that can do the calculations from an IFC import, connected to a data base with all related regulations and norms, with connection for a data base for specifications and other stuff.
3. Here I´m talking out of ignorance with the usual workflow with structural programs, but I do not want Archicad to dedicate its programming resources for apparently good idea half well made, like the one you are proposing for structural design and reinforcement modelling ... because again locally, the most used program (aside from it is connected to an online database for local norms and regulations), can model and modify structure after receiving the model as an IFC. And if I had the option to choose, I would rather send the first idea to Archicad, then receive the final structural model after being correctly calculated and adjusted

[Martin Jules]

@Nader Belal Your points make sense, but what do you suggest in terms of sustainable strategies in/with Archicad?

[DGSketcher]

@Martin Jules You really aren't picking up on the mood here are you?

Yes Graphisoft / Nemetshek needs a strategy to address sustainable solutions, BUT EcoDesigner to the best of my knowledge has been abandoned / neglected to the point it doesn't function to the needs of different locales. This is why it shouldn't be integrated. It is a case of one solution doesn't fit all. I looked at taking on an EcoDesigner licence until it became clear that development had stopped, the workflow requires a specialist/regular user with expertise to get the correct output and the actual output wasn't compatible with my energy consultants software for PassivHaus compliance.

This is another example of why GS / Nemetschek need to go the federated design route of IFC and stop trying to bundle everything into a single software package. It doesn't work and the redundancy merely frustrates those of us who have to manage & navigate round the irrelevant distractions.

[Martin Jules]

@DGSketcher I am aware of the situation, but I know lots of specialists who have worked on its improvement and made some proposals to Graphisoft on it so that it can comply with some local standards. While waiting to solve this compliance problem, it could have been launched for free in Archicad for those who still want to experience it and keep making some suggestions on its improvement. That was my point!