!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]

Scott wrote:

Spinner wrote:
If i move a wall all the joists move with it, although it doesn't warn me that the joists have been stretched 2 metres so i need to resize them.

If done properly, moving a wall ADJUSTS everything that the user has defined to be connected. The joists you mention will not need to be resized by you, because they will have automatically stretched the additional 2 meters.

I'm sure I would have similar frustrations using AC for the first time with little or no training.

I think Spinner is saying if the joists are spanning 2 metres further, they will have to be deeper, not just longer.

[owen]

s2art wrote:

Scott wrote:

Spinner wrote:
If i move a wall all the joists move with it, although it doesn't warn me that the joists have been stretched 2 metres so i need to resize them.

If done properly, moving a wall ADJUSTS everything that the user has defined to be connected. The joists you mention will not need to be resized by you, because they will have automatically stretched the additional 2 meters.

I'm sure I would have similar frustrations using AC for the first time with little or no training.

I think Spinner is saying if the joists are spanning 2 metres further, they will have to be deeper, not just longer.

well it shouldnt be long before the joists know they are longer and increase their depth or sectional properties to cope .... oh wait thats pretty much what engineering CAD packages can do now isnt it?

[Anonymous]

owen wrote:

s2art wrote:

Scott wrote:
If done properly, moving a wall ADJUSTS everything that the user has defined to be connected. The joists you mention will not need to be resized by you, because they will have automatically stretched the additional 2 meters.

I'm sure I would have similar frustrations using AC for the first time with little or no training.

I think Spinner is saying if the joists are spanning 2 metres further, they will have to be deeper, not just longer.

well it shouldnt be long before the joists know they are longer and increase their depth or sectional properties to cope .... oh wait thats pretty much what engineering CAD packages can do now isnt it?

There will always be a balance to strike between how much to allow the software to do automatically and how much to leave to the professional operator. Generally the more automation the better as long as the results are clear and transparent and easily reviewed by the Architect.

In Revit there is clearly an issue of relationship management. A skilled Revit operator must understand how the relationships are set up, what are the possible consequences of alterations to the design, and have a process for reviewing the project before issuing the drawings.

In ArchiCAD there are also processes such as stretching the entire building with the marque tool and updating the drawings that must be understood and managed properly to avoid embarrassing printouts.

In both products the establishment of proper standards and procedures can go a long way to minimize this problem. In any case the advantages of parametric building models and automatic document coordination make the effort worthwhile.

Finally, regardless of the software, anyone who doesn't print a final review set before issuing CD's is asking for trouble.

[Rakela Raul]

I don't want a system to try and change everything for me as it might have massive design implications that i need to think about

maybe you should use Sketchup in combination with AC

[Anonymous]

My 2 cents. I'm not proficient Revit user, but I was training it for some time (I want to be in touch) and there is one thing that I hate probably the most. Clunkiness. I don't know if this is only me, that I cant set it up properly, but I was trying everything (and believe me, I'm gooood at this stuff) and still working in Revit makes me feel like I was playing Quake 3 on some old graphic card. (Revit's OpenGL driver is probably messed up) It feels like screen refresh is too low. Working in 3D window makes me feel even worst. Comparing to AC it's like here we got new BMW (AC) with all the gadgets and nice V10 engine in it, on the other side we have AUDI (Revit) with even more gadgets but ... somebody put in it some cheap VW engine. Anyone have the same feeling ?

[Chadwick]

I have to admit for a while I just thought my computer wasn't strong enough to handle Revit but I realized that panning in 2D views and spinning in 3D views is a bit choppy. Not as smooth as ArchiCAD for me, but I can easily get over it. Revit has all the tools ( I can change individual panels and mullions in the curtain wall) and more to create efficiency and proficiency in the building model. To continue the car analogy I would rather have a clunker get me where I need to go then have a nice car sputter out halfway there.

Don't get me wrong, I love Archicad but the key to making it a better program is to acknowledge and address its faults and shortcomings - and thats why Revit is the best thing to ever happen to Archicad. Kind of reminds me of a 12 step rehab program - what step is it where Archicad has to apologize to everyone its hurt in the past? lol.

[Scott Davis]

I too wish the "graphics" were a bit faster. Open GL has never seemed to do much, and Revit also has Overlay Plane settings. I leave both of these items OFF, and seem to get the best response from the display. I've seen some users say "Revit is soooo slow to generate the display"....I simply turn off those settings and everything is much better.

There are specific graphic cards that perform better with Revit and Open GL, but I don't have one of those in my laptop.

[Anonymous]

Chadwick wrote:
Revit has all the tools ( I can change individual panels and mullions in the curtain wall) and more to create efficiency and proficiency in the building model. To continue the car analogy I would rather have a clunker get me where I need to go then have a nice car sputter out halfway there.

This seems a bit backwards. I always thought of Revit as the flashy sports car with all the cool modeling tools which would come up short in the heavy lifting of getting the drawings out, while ArchiCAD is more of the reliable old pickup truck that always gets the job done even if you have to jigger the accelerator with a bit of baling wire.

[Chadwick]

Matthew wrote:
This seems a bit backwards. I always thought of Revit as the flashy sports car with all the cool modeling tools which would come up short in the heavy lifting of getting the drawings out

I dont really see either program as flashy honestly. I mean, look at their GUI - they both look like dinosaurs from the Windows 3.1 era. The thing about Revit is, from my experience, is that when I choose a tool or command - it does what I expect from that tool or command. Which is great because I save less time trying to find an object that works online, or a workaround to create something I cant do. Lets be honest, if we're working in a model, then the modeling tools need to be top notch. If you're ok with drafting over errors or workarounds, might as well go back to 2d drafting. Because really what the BIM is about is efficiency. It doesnt do anything new - it just takes everything we've always did and coordinates them, and makes it faster.

I suppose that Revit would seem flashy in a sense that its more of a Building Information Model than Archicad because the building itself has parametric qualities (and not just made up of parametric objects). To me though, thats just expected.

On the other hand, the things we've done at our firm as far as quantity take offs, calculations coordinated in real time with pricing lists, etc. with Archicad is great. Its pushing the boundary of what we can offer as a firm.

Both are excellent programs - just combine them into a mutant hybrid BIM monster (which I'm sure they'll evolve into after 5 years of heavy competition - look at Archicad 10 - a lot of it was things that Revit already had).

[Djordje]

Chadwick wrote:
I suppose that Revit would seem flashy in a sense that its more of a Building Information Model than Archicad because the building itself has parametric qualities (and not just made up of parametric objects). To me though, thats just expected.

Maybe just the semantics, but I think it goes deeper:

PARAMETRICS is about objects - not only GDL library parts/Revit families but any wall, slab, etc - and describes a way that you can handle them numerically or graphically to adjust to situation. Not forgetting the calculations - meaning properites to be used in QS. While ArchiCAD excels in this on the GDL object level, they are equal on the base element level, with the Families having a graphical editing edge.

RELATIONSHIPS are Revit's strong point - and the weakness - seems to be. They do exist in Archicad too - storey recognition, for example - but are not so strong, arguably allowing for more design flexibility and less software meddling in the design process.

I would agree with Matthew - it is down to us to PREDEFINE the templates for the type of the work that we do and to know how to tell the dumb machine what we want to do. Because, as we know, computers never do what we want - only what we tell them to do.