MEP 27 - The New Feature that never happened

[DGSketcher]

Can someone from Graphisoft please step up and own the current abject failure to deliver the renewed MEP Modeller?

Today I joined the many others who have had to return to using AC26 in order to deliver on our MEP commitments.

We all pay out for GS to deliver improvements to AC, yet here we are 7 months later with a key feature broken & software we can't use. Can someone at least tell us what we can expect in terms of delivery of fixing this MEP debacle and when?

It's bad enough struggling with the 3D screen "grey outs", and the disappointment of new features that suddenly became experimental, but finding a fundamental tool is no longer useable... 🙄

[tomswons]

When can we expect adding oval ducts? If ever? @Lina-Zouaghi

[jl_lt]

Hi!   So, how is this going? did it get better in 28?

[tomswons]

It"s getting better but SLOWLY. I mean the Main factor i kinda try to make it work somehow is becouse company in which i work have architects drawing all projects in archicad  so its better to stay in one software. Revit is much better for mep but we work very closly with architects soo... But its kinda a crossroad right now we are very close to just say f this and just go to Revit. We are already resting Revit so... Also costs was Main factor company decided to go for archicad even if it was worse solution overall but not anymore i suppose when they go for subscribtion system and just beta testing live

[Guillermo1]

MEP 27 still not working full yet?

[jl_lt]

Thanks!  a better question would be: since Graphisoft adquired DDS cad, are the current problems caused because they are trying to integrate DDS cad into Archicad, OR Archicad MEP modules and DDS cad are two independent and separate entities?

oh man! they keep buying good software with lots of integration potential with Archicad, yet the integration never happens nor it becomes a fully functional add-on you can buy or rent. 

Example:   Full version of archicad (perpetual) + conceptual AI assistance + high end rendering  + MEP + Structural + AI assistance with documentation + cost calculation suite + on-site reporting and project management  .  You can get through a project WITHOUT any of this just using Archicad of course, but im sure many people would gladly pay for even more specialized solutions that run on the ARchicad environment AS LONG AS THEY WORK PROPERLY AND ENHANCE PRODUCTIVITY IN A REASONABLE PROPORTION TO THE ADITIONAL COSTS INVOLVED.  One could even rent all of these modules as needed during the full life cycle of a project while owning a perpetual license with its corresponding upgrade costs. 

This way you can atend BOTH:  offices that handle smaller projects (thus keeping the perpetual licenses) and offices that handle bigger more complex projects. 

In contrast, what they are doing now will only weed out the smaller offices (which i can safely assume is the majority) and eventually the bigger ones if GS doesnt fix all the problems the software has WHILE asking to receive suscription payment.   But this is just my two cents, some AI in GS headquarters might have already figured everything out.

[tomswons]

As far i know even old mep was based on dds cad. Main problemy right now new tool for mep is beta tool at best. Cost factor make it even worse. They should separator modules for architecture, mep, construction etc as u mention with diffrent prices. We still dont have even Basic tool for creating gdl mep obiects alike Revit family creating tool. Not a single manufacture create addons for ArchiCAD either( i mean like uponor, Wavin, pipelife etc in Revit) api is RAW as well for mep. I would rather like a model where they create less functions constantly but it Works proper not a lot of bad Working functionality

[Guillermo1]

i have ssa for AC28 but can not use it because mep doesnt work, 

[tomswons]

Yep it has a lot of problems sadly. Also it requaier some training becouse it has very diffrent style of work. We also have ssa and i am pretty dissapointed with current state.

Also dont get me wrong i dont just spit hate. I would love ArchiCAD end Revit monopoly but its really hard to belive with current decision they make and quality of their software. I talk with architects in dalit basis and i hear a lot of good opinion on work schedule from their perspective ArchiCAD is gettin slighlty better than Revit on many aspects. Sadly i cant say the same about mep situation. Also from my perspective many general aspects are uncooked. In example there are a lot of problems with Publisher becouse a lot of time views dont update or are missing obiects. Projects exported to dwg have always the same ids for blocks which cause problems if u copy them between diffrent files( causes to paste obiects rotated or compleltly diffrent object). It should genearete unique ids but it doesnt. Updating from 25-26 etc causes multiple database problems where program is missing data during IFC export or random crashes and weird behavior when connectings objects SO migrattion doesnt work as intendent. For the performance i can say ArchiCAD can work fine on even bad PC but its strugle with complex projects and multiple polygons. Also ArchiCAD doesnt scale much with hardware spec as Revit. Revit for exampleis pretty demanding and on low -mid end PC it Works like **beep**. But with better hardware sky is the limit. 
From my perspective every job description is demanding Revit skills for enviromental enginnering and with current path this aint gonna change any soon. For gs mep users are very margin so do they do whatvere they want.. and dont listen to their users. The only time as we can see they started to listen when there was a little riot and topic became popular.

i Also asked many electricians and they say neither Revit or ArchiCAD meet their expectation. So there is so much for E in mep xd

[Bricklyne Clarence]

---

@tomswons wrote:

....... We still dont have even Basic tool for creating gdl mep obiects alike Revit family creating tool. Not a single manufacture create addons for ArchiCAD either( i mean like uponor, Wavin, pipelife etc in Revit) api is RAW as well for mep. I would rather like a model where they create less functions constantly but it Works proper not a lot of bad Working functionality

---

I hate to break it to you but they don't even have a custom gdl library object creator (sans the gdl line-coding) even for architects or architectural objects, neither.

Despite literal decades of architectural users begging them to create one

They have a bunch of clunky, non-consolidated, and non-mature addon solutions they've tried to introduce over the years mimicking solutions in other programs (the Library part maker and Param-O to be more specific - with the latter a (.....very, very VERY) poor man's version of Rhino's Grasshopper). 

But really, none of the address the needs of architects to be able to create custom library parts and objects in a consolidated environment that doesn't involve having to learn and master the skills of a profession you ran away from in college because you wanted to DESIGN and draw and not to write lines of code.

The irony of all this, of course is if they had had a custom-object creator that had been developed to work in concert with how architects work, think and are trained to work - or even just how the rest of Archicad works -  they'd have an easy and ready-made solution to the lack of Manufacture-specc'ed custom objects as you could have many manufacturers just contracting regular archicad users to create for them their line of products. 

As it stands, if you're a parts manufacturerer for say sinks, or doors and door-hardware, who wanted to find users that could create their line of products for ArchiCAD gdl library parts they could make available to users, you're going to have a hard time finding any super-fluent Archicad GDL coder or user who can create the parts you need to the degree necessary to meet your parts requirements.

They did this to themselves with ignoring their users demand, and then tried to weasel out of it with their failed Bimcomponents initiative several years ago (a poor man's version of Google-then/Trimble-now's Sketchup 3D warehouse repository that they hoped would be populated with user created objects that would serve as  a seed to encourage user and manufacturers to availe their products as library parts downloadable for any user to find online).

It's trying to take the short cut to get to where others have invested years of cultivating the necessary support and infrastructure to create what they currently have.

And they contintinue to do it to this very day.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

They're never going to separate and sell these modules or products as separate modules, for the very simple obvious reason that if they ever do that, it will then become apparently clear how very little interest there is in the market they claim they're catering to, for these other modules they seem determined to force down the rest of our throats whether we like it or not, and which they then justify using our license fee development resources on (while contiuing to ignore improving what we need and beg them to improve).

Much easier just to hide the real cost of their development (and the failure of their uptake and usage) in the general license scheme and fee and then act like they're all successful tools and features that we were really demanding and that the "market" was hungry for them to produce.

They then make ridiculous claims like,..... "it doesn't take away from improving doors and window tools in Archicad or having a custom object creator, just because we choose to put God-knows-how-much development resources into making a AI Visualizer (that no one asked for)' .....- which,.....if it were true,....then why the heII are those other tools not improved still?

Why are we still forced to use clunky workarounds to deal with shortcomings of tools that were introduced 10,15 even 20 years ago, and then were never revisited or improved? All while we watch them sink more resources to even more unnecessary and even more half-baked tools no one asked for?

(or, very few people asked for, if I'm to be generous to them).

That's the other advantage that going full subscription-only license mode affords them, because then they can REALLY hide all the cost of all the wasted resources and license fees money into a subscription you're obligated to pay regardless of whether you like what you get out of the other end of it.

(...which won't be much, an probably less than you're getting now. And worse.)