U.S. end-users/resellers + GS developers/rep's exchange

[JCovarrubias]

It has been suggested to me (by an end-user) that since there is little contact between the US end-users (with possibly the US Resellers as being the point of contact) and the GSHU developers (inc. their GSHU representatives), there should be a yearly meeting of some type.

Would any of these be a good idea for an exchange of ideas, goals, intentions, comments?

a.) "brown-bag type" informal lunch seminar (1-2 days) in the US
b.) live online chat+WebEx discussions (several hours)
c.) new, limited-time (over the course of 30 days), explicit forum category on AC-Talk
d.) some other medium(s) or combination

Let me know what you think.

[rm]

Jeffry,

What a great idea.......hope GS can pull this off. Thanks for taking the lead on this effort.

Regards,
Architects Design Forum, Ltd.


Robert Mariani

[Anonymous]

Sounds like a good idea but what is the difference between that and the current wishlist? I think all the same issue will be raised again.. There are standouts in the wishlists that are perennial repeats that once addressed will GREATLY help...

So "C." should be enough..

[Anonymous]

Honestly, between this forum and ArchiCAD University events (two last year and three this year) it seems like we have this pretty well covered. There may well be room for more events of various types but I'm not sure it would be cost effective for Graphisoft to host an annual US event. Considering that they are an international firm this would presumably mean similar events in Germany, England, Australia, etc... This would obviously spread the company a bit thin. I imagine the developers spending more time discussing our wishes than coding them into the software.

[Anonymous]

Yes Matthew.. the wishist should be a to-die-for list for GS. Even Autodesk would find it handy.. Perhaps those at GS feel it is a minority vote.. if so they should expend extra effort to grow AC-talk participation. As a new user I couldn't have made it through the first few weeks in AC without it..

[Anonymous]

I'd say a better use of resources would be to have some realistic walk-thrus of completing some projects (residential, commercial, etc?). These would be similar to the Framework book. Sort of a "standard practices" booklet, probably giving us some insight into how GS inteded the software to be used. The Step-by-Step tutorial is a "step" in the right direction only WAY too weak.

...AND, it would be nice if it could be available online for easy accessability to everyone - one for the whole world (and beyond?)...

[Dave Jochum]

Sergio wrote:
I'd say a better use of resources would be to have some realistic walk-thrus of completing some projects (residential, commercial, etc?). These would be similar to the Framework book. Sort of a "standard practices" booklet, probably giving us some insight into how GS inteded the software to be used. The Step-by-Step tutorial is a "step" in the right direction only WAY too weak.

When I started using VectorWorks and then AC, I was very disappointed that something like this did not exist with either program or in the after-market--actually, I'd say I was incredulous. Project Framework and Step by Step are both just baby steps toward a comprehensive guide that would be invaluable for probably 90% of the user base. If GS produced such a book (I'll call it a book, but it could be online) and included it with AC, I think they would win over a lot of switchers as well as those migrating from hand-drawing. In my case, I'd gladly pay for a first rate manual of this nature.

I think we (users and GS) forget just how unique a product AC is. BIM requires a completely different methodology and workflow than other CAD packages. Even those of us who do "get it" fail to capitalize on much of the power of the program.

A good friend of mine--a very good architect--did all his drawings by hand with ink on mylar until 4 or 5 years ago. The day Staedler quit producing the erasers for this combination, he realized he was going to have to switch to CAD. He bought VW and simply produced his drawings in 2D just like he had been for the previous 30 years by hand. I convinced him to hook up with an AC reseller and look at a demo. He liked what he saw and bought it, but he has never figured out how to use it properly. He still does a majority of his work in 2D with VW. He has built several AC models, so he understands the basics, but he hasn't realized the power of BIM. I just wonder how many other AC users out there are similarly handicapping themselves. My bet is quite a few.

Rather than the suggestions Jeffry posed in originating this thread, I would prefer to see GS's resources directed toward an effort of this nature--in addition to a continued diligent monitoring of this forum (and possibly more direct involvement) and especially the wish list.

[__archiben]

Dave wrote:
BIM requires a completely different methodology and workflow than other CAD packages. Even those of us who do "get it" fail to capitalize on much of the power of the program.

Rather than the suggestions Jeffry posed in originating this thread, I would prefer to see GS's resources directed toward an effort of this nature--in addition to a continued diligent monitoring of this forum (and possibly more direct involvement) and especially the wish list.

whilst not a US archiCAD user, it is probably not my place to answer the call of jeffry's original proposal, however i would like to capitalise on dave's comments above. i wholehearted agree that directing resources toward BIM education and methodology is essential for the development and use of all BIM related products in the industry.

i have just had an incredibly frustrating week of dealing with flatland mentality: masonry specials drawn line-by-line in isometric and counted by eye; somebody working in 2D on a copy of the file "because i don't what to mess up what he's doing with the model", etc, etc. i am blue in the face from continually explaining the concept and suggesting methodologies that are then simply forgotten, ignored or perhaps never fully understood in the first place. i may not be as articulate as matthew, djordje, karl et al in explaining these issues (to colleagues, etc.), but i do feel that the understanding requires something more fundamental than i am able to give.

djordje posted a link to a very interesting article concerning BIM in another topic; contractors are beginning to appreciate the use of the 'virtual building model' - possibly because they are closer to the 'physical building model'. architects, engineers, etc are going to find themselves left behind without education on the direction the industry is surely going to take.

a concerted, single effort from all companies producing BIM software positing the future of the virtual building is what i believe is needed. however this kind of approach would be hard enough to achieve without one of the biggest players also responsible the biggest flatland software!

rant over. sorry for going off topic.

~/archiben

[Karl Ottenstein]

JCovarrubias wrote:
Would any of these be a good idea for an exchange of ideas, goals, intentions, comments?

a.) "brown-bag type" informal lunch seminar (1-2 days) in the US
b.) live online chat+WebEx discussions (several hours)
c.) new, limited-time (over the course of 30 days), explicit forum category on AC-Talk
d.) some other medium(s) or combination

I agree with others that the wishlist should be a key source for this exchange, but I'm not averse to seeing (a), (c) or (d) as well although (a) will only attract those in the neighborhood or with plenty of $$ to travel to the meeting.

I'm definitely opposed to (b), from personal experience on Microsoft developer 'sessions'...which were a total waste of time as comments streamed completely out of synch...a question, coments and questions unrelated by the dozen, then someone responding to the original question, etc. As if someone took this forum and scrambled all of the messages throughout the threads and then you tried to make sense of them.

I also strongly agree about the need for a book - which I've talked about writing in the past (and many kindly offered their support - thank you!) - but I don't think that addresses the topic of this thread which is to get input to the developers.

Personally, I think the areas that the developers keep ignoring have nothing to do with the US market ... but everything to do with usability and with long-term wishes that our global community keeps asking for and never gets. I picture a brown bag lunch with a lot of angry people saying "How many more years to we have to keeep asking for x, y and z!!!" ... so what's the point of that?

Cheers,
Karl

[Karl Ottenstein]

~/archiben wrote:
I am blue in the face from continually explaining the concept and suggesting methodologies that are then simply forgotten, ignored or perhaps never fully understood in the first place. i may not be as articulate as matthew, djordje, karl et al in explaining these issues (to colleagues, etc.), but i do feel that the understanding requires something more fundamental than i am able to give.

Thank you, Ben but, we all know you to be quite articulate and I tend to ramble along most of the time!

Staying off topic (sorry Jeffry)... if I can throw out some experience/opinion from my years of teaching at the university level: some people may never get it. Office hours were the time when I could one-on-one with someone for whom the approach used in the classroom or lecture hall wan't "clicking". Trying to find the "hook" that linked the topic and their unique psychology and experience was easy and interesting in 90% of the cases. With some, though, you'd go "well, think about it this way".... through every scenario you could think of and still get a blank look. And, you'd find later that other faculty in the discipline were having the same difficulty with the student and a year later they were in a different major. Whether it is a preconceived notion that the person refuses to let go of (and may refuse to share with you!), or a completely right-brained person having too much of a challenge getting their hands around a left-brained concept...sometimes the problem isn't the teacher. Or, at least that's the psychology of the teacher trying to feel better about not getting through. So, I wouldn't necessarily beat yourself up if your message isn't getting across!

Cheers,
Karl