EN
I think this thread has thoroughly covered the standard features debate, and Scott is back on solid ground. 
What I would really like to compare is the customization capabilities of each program. I have no experience with Revit, but I have programmed in both AutoCAD and ArchiCAD (GDL only). GDLs are very flexible, but they are only about objects. If you want to automate a repetitive or complex
In AutoCAD you can do just about anything with AutoLISP -- no compiler required. VBA has all the advantages of a compiled language with direct access to many (but not all) AutoCAD functions. These two systems can accommodate 99% of all the advanced user's programming needs. If you want more, there are ARX applications -- which require a compiler. Then there is DIESEL, which IMO bites.
So, what are Revit's customization options and how do they compare to GDL, Add-Ons, AutoLISP, VBA, and compiled ARX apps?
What I would really like to compare is the customization capabilities of each program. I have no experience with Revit, but I have programmed in both AutoCAD and ArchiCAD (GDL only). GDLs are very flexible, but they are only about objects. If you want to automate a repetitive or complex
In AutoCAD you can do just about anything with AutoLISP -- no compiler required. VBA has all the advantages of a compiled language with direct access to many (but not all) AutoCAD functions. These two systems can accommodate 99% of all the advanced user's programming needs. If you want more, there are ARX applications -- which require a compiler. Then there is DIESEL, which IMO bites.
So, what are Revit's customization options and how do they compare to GDL, Add-Ons, AutoLISP, VBA, and compiled ARX apps?
Wes… being located in Vancouver and identified as a “Revit Wishlist Manager” you may be far more familiar with the following projects than I am (please correct any mis-statements I may make…). 
I have used ArchiCAD since release 4.1 (circa 1991) and have only taken a cursory look at the Revit demo software so my comparative knowledge of both is slim at best.
However, two of our former employees are working at offices where Revit is used and I had an interesting discussion with one of them a few days ago.
His firm is working on the new Convention Centre for Vancouver (an expansion of the existing facility on an adjacent waterfront site, which is being built in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics), and the entire project has been modeled in Revit Building 8.1
He notes that the scale and complexity of the model is such that they have encountered significant problems. Efforts to migrate this model to Revit Building 9.0 have failed, and Autodesk themselves have been working on the file(s) in an effort to resolve some of the operational difficulties including programme lock-up/freezing and database corruption (I am not sure of all the details).
Similarly, another firm in Vancouver has been modelling an Arthur Erickson-designed tower with a complex curtain wall system where each successive floor rotates 0.75 degrees from the one below and this same individual working on the Convention Centre has heard that the Revit model for that project is beginning to encounter similar difficulties as their Convention Centre model.
Our firm has never worked on projects of this scale/complexity so I am unable to say how ArchiCAD would fare under similar conditions. Still, it is a bit alarming to hear of these kinds of Revit problems on large projects.
It was sometimes said of Revit back when it was first released that it was not well suited to large projects… is this still the case?
Maybe the underlying Revit “engine” is not so miraculous after all?
I have used ArchiCAD since release 4.1 (circa 1991) and have only taken a cursory look at the Revit demo software so my comparative knowledge of both is slim at best.
However, two of our former employees are working at offices where Revit is used and I had an interesting discussion with one of them a few days ago.
His firm is working on the new Convention Centre for Vancouver (an expansion of the existing facility on an adjacent waterfront site, which is being built in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics), and the entire project has been modeled in Revit Building 8.1
He notes that the scale and complexity of the model is such that they have encountered significant problems. Efforts to migrate this model to Revit Building 9.0 have failed, and Autodesk themselves have been working on the file(s) in an effort to resolve some of the operational difficulties including programme lock-up/freezing and database corruption (I am not sure of all the details).
Similarly, another firm in Vancouver has been modelling an Arthur Erickson-designed tower with a complex curtain wall system where each successive floor rotates 0.75 degrees from the one below and this same individual working on the Convention Centre has heard that the Revit model for that project is beginning to encounter similar difficulties as their Convention Centre model.
Our firm has never worked on projects of this scale/complexity so I am unable to say how ArchiCAD would fare under similar conditions. Still, it is a bit alarming to hear of these kinds of Revit problems on large projects.
It was sometimes said of Revit back when it was first released that it was not well suited to large projects… is this still the case?
Maybe the underlying Revit “engine” is not so miraculous after all?
glenn_peters wrote:Is Revit cheaper for this reason?
It was sometimes said of Revit back when it was first released that it was not well suited to large projects… is this still the case?
Maybe the underlying Revit “engine” is not so miraculous after all?
Krippahl wrote:I'll see what I can do.Matthew wrote:
I'll keep you all posted as this develops.
Great.
Try to talk him into sharing his experience with us here at ArchiTalk.
Still looking?
