!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]

>What's a "junk" building, anyways?

For example, one where the roof is flying above the building, or one without doors, etc. One may get fancy and set additional constraints. Most of these constraints are part structural, part legal, part common sense, part style. For example...

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=12865&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=desc&highligh...


>They are researchers, we are architects.

I spotted that.

>Like the grammar checker in Word?

Present limitations do not impose constraints on the future. That's what research is for. There are people who use tools, and others that make them.

>I say that BIM software should allow ANY kind of junk.

Different schools need not to clash. The same BIM may serve both.

>It should be pointed out that Lachmi Khemlani is also founder of Arcwiz, a consulting company that provides training on Revit and AutoCad, but NOT on ArchiCAD. http://www.arcwiz.com/training.htm

This suggests that, in her judgement, AutoCAD Revit (this is the new name of Revit) has an edge over ArchiCAD on research. She spent nice words on ArchiCAD, but also criticisms. One of the reasons Revit has been and is still making stunning progress is the research behind it. If ArchiCAD keeps standing still, by comparison, then Revit may conquer the heart of those... how did you call them?... " monkeys"? Those monkeys will be able to spend time on advanced design with photorealistic rendering, focusing on client satisfaction rather than drawing walls and conducting technical analysis of unsound BIM models. If research is really successful, and there are no reasons why it should not, the profession of architects will never be the same, at least in some areas.

This thread now sounds like an extension of my former "BIM!... WHAT MORE?", populated by the same people who, on one hand wave at BIM, and on the other are afraid of what it may become.

[Dwight]

I know that we all like to compare features, but the strength of marketing is with AutoDesk investment.

Two years ago they took the entire back page of Cadalyst magazine with a photo of socceer/football players booting a cabbage. More money in one go to make an obscure point than an entire year's promotion of Archicad in that same magazine.

I've been to software promotions where the audience was amazed to see a door cut a wall automatically. In 2006.

It is in the promotion, not the features....

[__archiben]

Dwight wrote:
I say that BIM software should allow ANY kind of junk.

That's creativity.

absolutely. but i would put the emphasis in a different place:

"BIM software should ALLOW any kind of junk". but BIM software also needs, at the appropriate stage of the construction process, some kind of element clash detection. there's junk . . . and then there's idiotically placed junk.

~/archiben

[Thomas Holm]

OK. As long as we don't have to endure the Microsoft-style "It seems you are creating a list" junk!

[__archiben]

Thomas wrote:
OK. As long as we don't have to endure the Microsoft-style "It seems you are creating a list" junk!

"Would you like the interactive ArchiJUNK Assistant to really make a mess for you?"

[Anonymous]

jdk wrote:
This suggests that, in her judgement, AutoCAD Revit (this is the new name of Revit) has an edge over ArchiCAD on research.

No, this sugests that her opinion is biased on account of making money with Revit sales and not with ArchiCAD.
Therefore, it would not be taken at face value.

[Mats_Knutsson]

Krippahl wrote:

jdk wrote:
This suggests that, in her judgement, AutoCAD Revit (this is the new name of Revit) has an edge over ArchiCAD on research.

Have they changed the name so Autocad users will be less intimidated with the name Autodesk Revit, which gives the impression it's more Autocad like...? Guess so. Cheeky stuff decieving users like that!

[Thomas Holm]

~/archiben wrote:


"Would you like the interactive ArchiJUNK Assistant to really make a mess for you?"

I could elaborate for a long time on that. Let's hope we won't ever have to!

[Anonymous]

In reference to a "junk" model:

I DO want a model that is tight. I don’t want to deal with light leaks because there is a ¼” around all my ceilings, or get some wacko number from Green Building Studio or DOE because the model isn’t put together right.

If the message pops up “do you want your walls to attach to this new ceiling” I can chose to say yes or no. If I choose yes, every time I change the height of the ceiling, I can rest easy in knowing everything else is moving with it.

If Revit didn’t give me an option, then I would see it has highly restrictive to the design process.

I appreciate the fact that Lachmi points out where both products need to improve. Autodesk and Graphisoft need a kick in the pants on a regular basis to keep them moving in the right direction!

[Scott Davis]

Mats_Knutsson wrote:

Krippahl wrote:

jdk wrote:
This suggests that, in her judgement, AutoCAD Revit (this is the new name of Revit) has an edge over ArchiCAD on research.

Have they changed the name so Autocad users will be less intimidated with the name Autodesk Revit, which gives the impression it's more Autocad like...? Guess so. Cheeky stuff decieving users like that!

Everything in the Autodesk product line is called "Autodesk <insert product name>" There really is no "deception"

Autodesk Inventor
Autodesk Architectural Desktop
Autodesk Design Review

Much like "Graphisoft Archicad"