!Restored: Success = getting new customers

[Anonymous]

I saw some documents to compare between Revit and AC.
I study Revit from own website.
It is just copy from AC!!

I used to work with AC (and very satisfied, and like many friends from AC-forum).
As AC-user I hope, AC must be better than Revit for Architects.

I have not used Revit, but just seen from Website.
The web-site from Revit is so nice, that I must believe, Revit should be better than AC.

I like to know your opinions and also opinions from GS.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

outofchaosaworld wrote:
This has been an interesting thread and one which has been relatively free of the usual software advocacy that you get on such things. There are a few questions i have which i am not sure it has answered though...

What i would like is something that integrates the workflow better. I would rather not have a model run in parallel with the drawings. Obviously all of the BIM solutions will do that but i am intersted in which one replaces the Sketchup stage most successfully (if at all). I am also intersted to know which takes layering and drawing standards most completely out of the hands of the user...

I don't know that you can replace SketchUp with Revit -- even though I call SketchUp 'time well wasted' people love to use it, and thus Revit now reads and imports SU files in their native form. SU's feel can't really be duplicated in Revit.

There is no layering in Revit, only categories (Walls, Doors, Text, etc). 3D objects are (on multiuser projects) placed into worksets which are generally organized by Exterior/Interior/Site/Structure and whose names are up to you. When those objects get ported to Acad the layer mapping can be set to an office standard (even if some wanker puts stuff on the wrong workset). Worksets are used for demand-loading the database and speeding up views (in elevations you turn off the interior worksets).

I'd like to see Graphisoft lift a page from Revit and rethink the layering system in AC to make it more automatic.

[Ignacio Azpiazu]

SketchUp is the computer equivalent of the napkin sketch, or at least something very close to it. Back in the drafting table days nobody ever thought of wanting to start their CD or DD or even SD drawings as overlays on their napkin sketches. In order to produce geometrically accurate drawings (and these days, geometry and other content databases) by definition you need a lot more input for each element than you need for the napkin sketch. The power of the napkin sketch resides precisely in that you don't need that input in order to convey the concept.

I am curious as to whether anybody uses the much discussed Sketchup-import ability (I am comfortable with the napkin and ArchiCAD and maybe that's why I never went into Sketchup, so err I don't know what I am talking about here). Perhaps for creating some funky hard-to-model-in-ArchiCAD imprecise object you need for a site massing or something like that. Even in the flatcad world, importing a jpeg scan of your napkin sketch can make the first 5 minutes of your SD work a bit more fun, and perhaps again help with some site background sketch that you don't need to draft accurately, but that's about it, isn't it?

[Rakela Raul]

(

I am comfortable with the napkin and ArchiCAD and maybe that's why I never went into Sketchup, so err I don't know what I am talking about here).

same with me.....but looks nice....maybe practicality has something to do w it.

[Anonymous]

I have to say i reckon that Graphisoft and Autodesk are missing a trick a little bit here. I kind of suspect that for a lot of people Sketchup has allowed them to stick with 2d drafting for longer than they might otherwise. Its cheap, its easy, it doesnt do half of what a full BIM solution does but it lets your designers work in 3D without expensive software or training. I would just love something that integrated the whole process. Something like Revit or AC but with tools that have the same directness of Sketchup for creating sketches and testing options that can then be worked up. Of course i guess you could do that by importing from SU but the design process is rarely linear and testing changes or additions in one environment would be fantastic.

I guess i am after the Nirvana of one bit of software that does everything. Even ignoring Sketchup i have spent the last week or so moving from LT to photoshop back to LT back into photoshop then to InDesign. All this just to sort out some coloured elevations that dont look guff. Working with 100meg plus files in PS is no fun. Its really a no brainer to switch but then when you have 300+ seats and an ongoing Autocad upgrade it becomes a major bureaucratic issue...

[Djordje]

Autodesk did trz with Architectural Studio, but it flopped.

Somehow I don't see any of the "full" software companies spending resources on developing something that already exists and has proven itself - Google would not buy it if it were not covering its bases. Providing the import is quite enough in my book. Of course, REFINING that import is another story and gets under the same set of rules as implementing the wishlist.

The Swiss army knife software IMHO is just not feasible. You have so many diverse requirements that no company will develop all - they will buy a piece of this and a string of that, as Autodesk has done historically and Graphisoft is doing more and more.

I also agree with Dwight; if you mainly do one type of buildings, having a good template and pre-defined elements will enable you to VERY quickly slap together a proposal. My lead time for a proposal is one working day - not slow in anyone's book.

As for the colored elevations ... my condolences, and please rush that switch to Archicad. You get them there with one click.

[Anonymous]

outofchaosaworld wrote:
I guess i am after the Nirvana of one bit of software that does everything.

Perhaps you (and others?) from your firm should come down to Nottingham for ArchiCAD University in September. It's not quite Nirvana, but it is an enlightening experience. It is short (Thursday - Saturday) and a great opportunity meet people who use ArchiCAD at all levels of skill, on all types of projects, and from all kinds and sizes of firms. It can be a very effective way to investigate what it takes to make the transition to the Virtual Building process.

I don't know if there is anything similar for Revit near you. Their website doesn't list any live events at the moment.

[Dwight]

Does everything?

I have it.

Calculations, shaded renderings and construction documents all in one.

This "software" has a softness of 4B.

[Anonymous]

Djordje, my point was kind of that for a lot of people out there Sketchup has become the easy and cheap option that is almost stopping them from stepping up to AC or Revit. I guess it can be complementary but a BIM solution that is completely integrated and does the sketch stage as well as the production and documentation stage would truly be the killer app that encouraged more folk to take the step up. Having said that we have found quite quickly that while SU was initially a real sea change in how we worked we have outgrown it. Thats happening in some, though not all our offices. My take is that we should always be looking at constant improvement. When we took up SU we were the first in our local market to do so and it ruffled feathers initially. Now its everywhere. Improvement for me, as someone engaged more with design than production, would be something that did the same but made prettier pictures and then kept up with the development of a design without the need for a round trip between packages and a doubling up of effort. I appreciate that AC can do some of that and the comments about templates make a degree of sense. That wont quite fulfil our needs though as while elements might be common the big picture needs to be specific. We deal generally with reasonably large schools projects. 12000 sq m and up. The design of those requires broad brush strokes that get progressively refined over a course of a few weeks and we start from first principles in every case. SU has made us better in the broad brush stroke terms. It just doesnt quite follow through in an efficient enough way to help make us better in the refinement and detail of those ideas.

[Anonymous]

outofchaosaworld wrote:
We deal generally with reasonably large schools projects. 12000 sq m and up. The design of those requires broad brush strokes that get progressively refined over a course of a few weeks and we start from first principles in every case.

I am working with two firms that do a lot of schools (one does schools exclusively) and we are seeing great opportunities for efficiency and automation throughout the process.

The firm that only designs schools recently completed their first project on ArchiCAD and were very pleased that it was completed on time and within the budget, despite the transitional cost of starting up with a new system (of course I like to think that my help had something to do with it).

I find that school projects (at least here) are especially suited to the BIM/VB process since the specs, requirements and details tend to be quite similar from one project to the next.

The other firm also does single residence and urban planning/community development work. These tend to be a bit trickier to set up, but still benefit greatly from the process once properly organized.

[Rakela Raul]

I find that school projects (at least here) are especially suited to the BIM/VB process since the specs, requirements and details tend to be quite similar from one project to the next

specially cuz their bidding construction process is awarded to the "low bidder" (at least here and during my school project era) and low bidders are always looking and hunting for CO's..so any software that helps coordinate drawings a bit better, is very welcome....in addition to the low fees from the school boards that pushes you to save as much time as possible to make some money "if u make any."