!Restored: AC12+ Question

[Anonymous]

Hello,
Does anyone think GS might include/be working towards incorporating add-ons such as MaxonForm or Objective into future releases?
I have been using AC for about 4 years now and am relatively happy with the software, I do however wish it was easier to model new objects/elements without requiring any add-ons.
Thanks.

[Anonymous]

(I do not use either Maxonform or Cinema 4D).

So Maxonform is eol.

While I understand one can import models from Cinema into Archicad (with the plug-in), the ability to do freeform modelling in the context of the model is surely a loss(?). Does this mean that in AC12 GS have given us some modelling tools....? Please? Even something like GDL toolbox would help! Or are we going backwards again....?

[Dwight]

These add-ons permit selected Archicad model components to be placed in the Cinema 4D modeling environment and the edited parts to be returned to Archicad for inclusion in the BIM. This allows precise placement of whatever you might be making in Cinema.

Yes, it is a second rate solution, but it is what there is right now.

There are some advantages to having Cinema 4D. The program is extremely sophisticated as a modeler, renderer and animator.

[gpowless]

I'm surprised that anyone would accept "second rate" solutions from Graphisoft. We're supposed to be using cutting edge BIM-CAD software. However, it seems that second rate solutions are becoming a trend in Archicad development. All these add-ons conflicting and trying to manage. Very little backward compatibility between version upgrades. Poor third-party integration. The cost of upgrading is getting out of hand while having to alos upgrade add-on after add-on that Graphisoft can't seem implement and instead rely on third parties to supply what they lack.

I won't be upgrading to 12. Instead I may end up up down grading to 10 since it seemed to be the most stable and easier implemented version. I am disappointed with 11 and it sounds like that disappointment is perpetual. I am tired of having programmers tell me what I need while no one listens to some very basic needs that have been requested from version 6. I'm fed up with not having solutions that were available in one version but not now.

BTW I'm still waiting for that total quantity take-off solution I was promised in 6 and Graphisoft promotes that Archicad is capable with. I didn't expect to have to become a database operator in order to find out how many square of siding is on the side of my building.

Since we can't mutiny, perhaps I will abandon ship.

[Karl Ottenstein]

brendon wrote:
Extract from the local distr. of Cinema 4D.

... allowing a streamlined "roundtrip" Archicad - CINEMA 4D R10.5 - Archicad workflow...

The 'joke' in this statement is that you are allowed only one round trip. You can go from AC to C4D and back - but what you get back is a GDL object, not what you started with. (And what you started with is replaced by the GDL object.) So, making the trip again is a different kind of ride. (Users are advised to save their c4d file before exporting back to AC so that you still have all of the element hierarchy/etc that you created in c4d. In fact, it would be wise to save-selection-as-module before sending a selection to MF or C4D as well.)

Normally, we think of round-tripping as something that can be done indefinitely without data loss.

Karl

[TomWaltz]

Karl wrote:
[Normally, we think of round-tripping as something that can be done indefinitely without data loss.

You mean, like the "round trip" to DWG feature? 😉

[Karl Ottenstein]

TomWaltz wrote:
You mean, like the "round trip" to DWG feature? 😉

[Anonymous]

Maybe I am wrong here, but surely with all of the work being focused on BIM, Nemetschek should be ensuring that ArchiCAD's freeform modelling is compatible with this. As fantastic as the new plug-in may be, it seems to have one major floor (to my knowledge) and that is that the GDL used to translate an object between C4D and AC is "dirty". The objects that can be created are of very limited use to a BIM project.
A quick look at Nemetschek's website makes for a bizarre read, they seem to have several softwares that all do the same thing. It seems fruitless to continue with parallel projects such as Vectorworks and ArchiCAD, or Vico and Rivera. Surely someone in the company has a "big idea", something that can trump Autodesk. Because if they don't then they stand to be outdone in every way. My guess is that this will be their future: http://2008.allplan.com/architekten/index.htm although it looks a little rough around the edges. It also seems to be yet another parallel project, encompassing AC and Vico. Maybe one day someone will tell them that it is better to do one job well that to do several adequately.
This is by no means a slight a GS or their owners, it is simply a request for focus on the job at hand.

[Thomas Holm]

Chris wrote:
... Surely someone in the company has a "big idea", something that can trump Autodesk. Because if they don't then they stand to be outdone in every way....

Cant' agree more. I've been trying to get some response from insiders for a while, but my failure is total. (not the first time

I tried to raise the subject here but I think this topic is better suited for the discussion.

Somebody has to have a clue of what Nemetschek are thinking about the future. And I think they'd gain from sharing their plans. Any delay will only benefit Autodesk.

[stefan]

The history of Nemetschek acquisitions has shown that they keep the different products alive, next to eachother.

No need to remove VectorWorks or ArchiCAD or Allplan.

They might improve communication between these applications though.

And considering AC12... those that know the answer aren't allowed to tell.

I guess ArchiCAD 13 will be called ArchiCAD 2010 (or ArchiCAD 2011 if they use the Autodesk year+1 numbering).

[Anonymous]

I can only agree with Thomas:
"Somebody has to have a clue of what Nemetschek are thinking about the future. And I think they'd gain from sharing their plans. Any delay will only benefit Autodesk."


It appears BIM has reached the tipping point where more companies are convinced and moving that way. As they evaluate the various offerings in the marketplace, any re-assurance regarding future development has to be of value.


Here in Australia the ads emphasize the longevity of the product. However this forum is littered with references to:
- a rather tired and buggy add-on (aka bolt on) approach
- poorly implemented tools (Lightworks vs its real, available, version! - not imagined)
- tools that don't quite work as advertised (e.g something as fundamental as the grid-tool)
- an underlying code that doesn't use multiple processors etc.
and so on.
Then there is the absence of native MEP packages. Sure, we might all philosophically embrace open source/ open standards; initiatives such as IFCs, but if they don't "just work"..... Personally I think native MEP software would be too hard for GS to achieve convincingly. It is just the alternative has to be viable, workable and accessible to the everyday user.


Given experience of GS to date, even if they put out a press release today outlining new directions etc. it would be hard to believe the rhetoric. I guess this is a round about way of saying that GS need to be very careful about what is delivered later this year. It could be a definitive point in the future of the ArchiCAD in the marketplace.

BTW - why improve communication between VectorWorks / ArchiCAD / Allplan? Surely more relevance is the (bi-directional) bridge to consultant engineer's software? I have never had to write anything to these other packages.
Somehow merging ArchiCAD and Cinema - now there is something more relevant. Robust modeling and rendering inside ArchiCAD