MieleBIM barely acknowledges Archicad

[KeesW]

I got an exciting promo from Miele this morning. Told me that Miele BIM files were available for download. They included Autodesk Revit Architecture (.RFA), AutoCad Architecture (.DXF and .DWG), Autodesk 3ds Max (.3DS and .MAX), Other 3D software (.OBJ). It continued to say that BIM files can be imported into other software: Graphisoft ArchiCad, Nemetschek Vectorworks, Google SketchUp, DataCad and Bentley MicroStation.

Anyone would think that Autodesk invented BIM!

What is ".OBJ"?

Some obvious questions:
Where are ArchiCad's "PLN" or GDL objects?
What does Graphisoft have to do, or who do they need to pay, to be included in initiatives such as Miele's?
Is Graphisoft even interested in being involved?

[Bricklyne Clarence]

Geoff wrote:
Autodesk certainly is not going to do it. Nor is Google. But Graphisoft had better do it themselves, and quickly. You’ve seen how much stuff is at Google Warehouse. And look how Autodesk Seek is filing up with manufacturer content.

The way Revit Families are created should not be the determinant. Underneath that UI is code, with parameters driving geometry and attributes, just like (but much more basic than) GDL.

I think a large part of Graphisoft's problem in this issue is somewhat two-fold. i.e it's primarily a question of Accessibility and Consolidation.
And on both counts it's self-inflicted, thanks to what seems to be their apparent overall marketing strategy and long term goals for the program.


On Accessibility:
It's been harped on ad infinitum, on these boards and particularly in the Wishlist sections regarding just how the whole GDL-coding methodology of creating Custom parametric objects in ArchiCAD is a major massive road-block allowing users to create customized libraries of intelligent objects which can even be shared or sold, so I won't beat a dead horse, especially if GS themselves don't seem overly concerned to correct this anytime soon or at all.

Other than to point out that, if I'm a parts manufacturer or a supplier for example seeking to provide digital content or a high quality (read : fully parametric) 3D model library or catalog of my products and have to hire specialists to model the parts (windows, doors, moldings, railings etc), on the one hand highly skilled Google Sketchup modelers are a dime a dozen thanks to just how accessible (easy to learn) and ubiquitous the program is thanks to Google. And while Revit may not be as easy to learn or master, it's certainly easier to create custom parametric objects in it than in ArchiCAD, and it basically boils down to the availability of modelers - something that Autodesk's aggressive marketing strategy is taking care of. Even custom quasi-parametric (read dynamic blocks) AutoCAD and ADT objects are more accessible thanks in part to AutoCAD's relatively more straightforward dynamic block creation interface, and we all know finding skilled AutoCAD users (even AutoCAD 3D modelers) is not a problem.

On the other hand, if I'm a manufacturer looking for skilled ArchiCAD object modelers - and I don't mean objects in the sense of 'dead' non-parametric 'slabified' objects, but fully parametric in much the same way a lot of the native library content is - which basically means GDL coders or at least fully proficient GDL-knowledgeable modelers, then things aren't as easy. At this point it becomes a question of cost - as in whether it's even worth it to provide such designer-specific 'smart' content to an apparent or seeming "niche" customer base.

On Consolidation:
This actually ties back to Accessibility, in the sense of how do you get your digital content (or provide access to it) to your potential future customer, once you have a library or catalog set-up of your products. While the 3D object repository they have here is decent and serviceable enough, for casual or infrequent users, it certainly lacks the organization, integration and interface necessary to allow both professional object creators and parts manufacturers as well as skilled freelancers to use it as a conduit to provide content to AC users. To compare it to what's out there in terms of consolidated and accessible online digital content, on the one hand you have Sketchup's Google Warehouse directly accessible from the program itself and an ever growing library with a wide range of objects and models. And then you have Autodesk's i-drop system which is a no-frills, no-fuss interface that parts manufacturer can integrate into their websites to allow AutoCAD, Revit and ADT users to directly drop 3D objects directly into their project files without having to worry about units, scale, whether it will work or not, or polycount.


Like I said before these problems are largely of GS's own creation or are self inflicted by their apparent apathy to address user bread and butter concerns. Custom object creation aside, assuming they were even able to provide that much requested 'holy-grail' Visual, No-GDL necessary custom parametric object creation tool that users have been craving since version who-knows-when, and even assuming manufacturers were able to benefit from this in providing their content in digital and parametric native ArchiCAD object format, how would they be able to get these objects to users in a either consolidated manner or at least accessible. With the object repository here on the forum being the closest thing to a Google Warehouse type system, and with GS's detached, arm's-length, 'we-don't-really-want-to-be-involved' involvement with this forum and it's users, how would any of this ever come together, if at all?

You ignore the small problems (and small users, and small user concerns) to chase bigger things, and it eventually comes to bite you in the butt in a big way down the road. Funny how these things work.

[Anonymous]

I've alluded to this suggestion in previous posts, and in my response to GS survey, but here it is again for what it is worth:

Awhile ago VW have announced they are incorporating <<Siemens parametric technology>>. This gives some very powerful functionality (robust complex 3d modelling tools and relationships) that ArchiCAD also needs. Reading the Siemens blurbs on it, it would appear that this software has some traction in manufacturing etc, and by using this technology there is a clear opportunity for excellent interoperability between software that uses it.
Suddenly Nemeschek have the opportunity for common ground between their software & others....

I really think without such bold steps GS will slip into irrelevancy. Sure they will lose some money in royalties to Siemens, but developing from the ground up and properly* integrating it into ArchiCAD would be a huge job.

As for manufacturer parts - I really cannot see any change to the REVIT dominance - other than trying to develop a translator (the difficulties of this with a 'proprietary' software have been discussed elsewhere). However until ArchiCAD gets 'relationships' any translator would have a very hard time trying to produce a meaningful result.

*-I say properly after such a patch job was done with Lightworks that three versions of ArchiCAd later we still need to use Artlantis to have a reasonable workflow...


PS:
I forgot to add one of the biggest problems is that until GS sort out their whole library part thing - why bother? Every version of AC seems to require a whole re-write. Why so called global parameters have to be redefined between versions is beyond me.
An older part should still work, albiet with less functionality.
Parameters defining an old one should transfer seamlessly into the new one. Life should not be so hard!
The headache transitioning projects on the yearly upgrade cycle (to be proven) is nightmarish....

[Anonymous]

sdb wrote:

mikem wrote:
I'm bemused by Nemetschek. They have three architectural BIM programs (Archicad, AllPlan and Vectorworks) each doing their own thing with their own file format and there is no effective way of exchanging information between them (ironically DWG is the best option). As it is now providing content is not viable for any of the three programs because their individual user numbers are too low.

If the three programs had a common file format providing content would be a lot more attractive because of the total number of users (600K+) that would be accessing that content.

The current situation is just plain dumb. Its not very strategic and gives Revit an easy own goal.

Couldn't agree more. At the moment manufacturers only really want to provide Revit content, because if they provide AC content, they should also be doing vectorworks & allplan..... a more open format between those three products would make a huge difference.

Couldn't agree more with your agreement.
The more I observe international business the more I see the importance of individuals or a small group of top execs with a strong (relentless) personality. Apple is an extreme example but look at how many times they have jumped from one system to another and dragged their developers and customers along with them. Autodesk deserves all of their success because there is more fight in that dog.
Nemetschek needs a VERY bold strategic vision if it is to remain relevant. I don't believe for a second that AC is going away but it shouldn't require so much justification from potential customers or content creators.
Of the 3 Nemetschek 'BIM' applications AC is the clear winner. We know it is not perfect but as a long time (14 years) vectorworks user I can tell you that VW is NOT BIM - but souped up 2D software. Allplan strangely has the best marketing story of the 3 with its suite of products - not to mention the powerful capabilities of Allplan Architecture itself (have a look at these videos). Also on a superficial level Allplan is a much better name and flows easily with 'Architecture', 'Engineering' etc. Unfortunately Allplan is too niche - big in Germany and some other European countries; but if a manufacturer is not going to model content for AC they probably haven't even heard of Allplan.
... which brings me to ArchiCAD. I have only been using it for 6 months or so and I am sure that I made the right choice (having looked at VW 'BIM', Allplan and Revit ... Bentley was off my radar). Graphisoft (or should I say Father Nemetschek) has a great product. Nem of course also has a truckload of other products under their belt. I feel that it is just a matter of vision and drive to put the best parts together to provide a powerful alternative suite to challenge the Revit's in the marketplace.
Graphisoft may have lost the marketing war over the acronym 'BIM' but they have a jewel in their trademarked 'Virtual Building'. 'Virtual construction' is coming up everywhere now - even with Sketchup!. My advice to Nemetschek - ditch the ArchiCAD name, put it together with the best of your other multidisciplinary products, and re-launch under a 'Virtual Building'-based brand ... even a name like 'Virtual Building Studio' - which is more all-embracing than Archi-anything
.... oh, and while you're at it buy Vico
Just my 2c

[Anonymous]

Hi,
From quite a while ago, but we did actually end up getting Miele Appliances on board to support: Revit, ArchiCAD & Sketchup all available here: http://www.bimstop.com/profile/miele/