What are new tools for ARCHICAD 13?

[Anonymous]

Hello 🙂
I was wondering if we maybe know what new tools we can expect with the new version of Archicad?
I finaly hope for 3D composite structure layers to be visible, also their 2D representation to be automaticly adjusted to the layer thickness (eg. thermal insulation).
Slab layers and their intersection with wall layers...
Also maybe while defining wall composite layers we can also define each layer height.
Better and more detailed quantity take-off is a must.

[Anonymous]

mthd wrote:
Hello,
Lots of hype about Revit here?

Maybe GS wants to outdo Revit thats why they are taking their time, I hope ???

So can any informed people create a simple list as to what GS needs to do to match Revits advancements?

And you informed people would know how ArchiCAD 12 has advancements beyond Revit, please show us a simple list?

Competition at the top level between AC and Revit can only be for our
good if these 2 products want to be the leading Architectural Product.

And you long winded IT geeks please keep it short for us who have limited time to read over technical jargon, not all of us are on your level.

Have a Happy time using your programs!

no man, u r not right, what lists ??? this forum is full of list what we need . . . every year is the same -. - we write lists they dont read it... AC will be good when GS blind team start to read what WE want and not what they want . . .
AC is long time here but like any great civilization if not developing it will be crashed and new one will replace it. Mybe its Revit time now . . . U see, when u open Whish list section and read problems in working in AC u can easly see what WE need, USERS of this program . . . Mybe Revit is not better now but as i can see in next versions it will be... Mybe Revit devel.team have simple goal... TO be the Best and they will be if they work with their users....

[Anonymous]

Hi
I meant clear lists from those who have sucessfully used both programs would help us.

I am looking forward to test driving AC13

Cheers

[Anonymous]

I am amazed at how many on this site seem to give Revit and AutoDesk the benefit of the doubt when it comes to development. In my view, AutoDesk spends the majority of their resources towards marketing their products, similar to Microsoft. Considering how much money and resources AutoDesk throws at Revit these days, Revit is not significantly better than Archicad.

From my experience, most Revit users sit behind there desk criticizing Revit just like we do here on this site. Ask yourself, is the grass really greener on the other side? if you believe it is than by all means you currently have a choice, switch platforms and see for yourself...Personally, I'm a Capitalist by nature and I believe that competition is key, without it you have chaos. Hopefully, we will continue to have a choice in the future, much of that is up to Nemetschek / Graphisoft and how they choose to move forward. I personally don't feel the grass is greener on the other side and while Graphisoft has it's shortcomings I still feel it is superior to the competition.

[Dennis Lee]

jorgec wrote:
I am amazed at how many on this site seem to give Revit and AutoDesk the benefit of the doubt when it comes to development. In my view, AutoDesk spends the majority of their resources towards marketing their products, similar to Microsoft. Considering how much money and resources AutoDesk throws at Revit these days, Revit is not significantly better than Archicad.

From my experience, most Revit users sit behind there desk criticizing Revit just like we do here on this site. Ask yourself, is the grass really greener on the other side? if you believe it is than by all means you currently have a choice, switch platforms and see for yourself...Personally, I'm a Capitalist by nature and I believe that competition is key, without it you have chaos. Hopefully, we will continue to have a choice in the future, much of that is up to Nemetschek / Graphisoft and how they choose to move forward. I personally don't feel the grass is greener on the other side and while Graphisoft has it's shortcomings I still feel it is superior to the competition.

True. The development team seemingly ignoring the users' wishlist items are just as true if not more prevalent on the Revit side of the fence. I also feel that ArchiCAD is still the better product for me at the moment, but GS also needs to take AC into the right path going into the future. I think it is very critical in the next couple of years.

[Da3dalus]

The real battle for me is, unfortunately, the marketing issue. I have found Graphisoft to be very user-responsive in past years, far more so than Autodesk. No doubt the product is good, and getting better with each release.

However, I now have principals telling me to learn Revit and prepare a migration plan. I have presented and advocated and evangelized for ArchiCAD for years. But I have no doubt that the first time we don't win a proposal because the client wanted a Revit model, they will flush our keys down the toilet.

This has degenerated to a PR war, and I don't know about the international community (responses are solicited), but in the US, perception is everything! Autodesk has the seminars, the junk mail, the huge displays, the web presence, and the foresight to initially give away their software to legacy AutoCAD users.

More importantly, it's not Architects that GS needs to impress. It's the big Owners who are being wooed by Autodesk. The corporations, the governments (city, county, state, and federal), and the mega-construction firms are going to be the decision makers. They write the contracts, they organize the design process, and they want control. They pay the bills, so they get it. For commercial architects like me, we have to play along, or be the bankrupt rebel.

So what's the solution? GS needs a marketing campaign that does the following:
1. Inspires confidence in an open-platform AEC industry.
2. Makes BIM implementation a necessity in the wider market.
3. Devalues the proprietary nature of Autodesk software.
4. Represents ArchiCAD as a superior product with longer history.
5. Provides case studies and real-world scenarios to back this up.
6. Get this in front of the REAL decision makers!

I would also add that a good import/export of Revit may be a necessary evil. At least be able to import the Revit families (objects) that are becoming so common online.

Before I go into a synopsis of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I will concede. Graphisoft, we could use a little help here.

[Anonymous]

I would also add that a good import/export of Revit may be a necessary evil. At least be able to import the Revit families (objects) that are becoming so common online.

Not may be needed, this is essential! If we could import and export Revit files right now many of our concerns would be answered.

More importantly, it's not Architects that GS needs to impress. It's the big Owners who are being wooed by Autodesk. The corporations, the governments (city, county, state, and federal), and the mega-construction firms are going to be the decision makers. They write the contracts, they organize the design process, and they want control. They pay the bills, so they get it. For commercial architects like me, we have to play along, or be the bankrupt rebel.

Couldn't agree with you more. This is the key for Graphisoft / Nemetsheck. If they are to remain viable as a company they need to get aggressive with marketing!

“Architect shall describe internal abilities to produce the project in software compatible with AutoCad MEP 2009/Revit2009 software, as this may be the preferred software package for the project.”

We are seeing more of this when looking for work. Frankly, if more and more clients put notes like this in their RFQ's, Principals of firms will ask, why are we not on Revit. Bottom line if our firm loses a job because the owner says we we are not on Revit.... then my friends, the proverbial S&^T will hit the fan..More than likely Graphisoft will lose a huge client at that point. I hear the rumblings in my office every day as well and I am doing my best to defend Archicad but at some point they may not be buying my pitch and that is bad news for those of us who like Archicad and especially those working at Graphisoft.

[Anonymous]

Well said Chuck.....
Its a sad situation, we all love Archicad, but in america Autodesk has the resources and the muscle to convert the key players into using Revit

I said it before, the writing is on the wall. We all should be learning Revit although we like it or not....

I myself will continue using Archicad for my personal work but I ll be learning Revit also in case theres a better paying position on another company.
(or maybe a position at all if Im out of work, remember we are in a recession)
You cant put all your eggs on one basket!

[Anonymous]

You cant put all your eggs on one basket!

your a very wise man!

[Bricklyne Clarence]

jorgec wrote:

I would also add that a good import/export of Revit may be a necessary evil. At least be able to import the Revit families (objects) that are becoming so common online.

Not may be needed, this is essential! If we could import and export Revit files right now many of our concerns would be answered. .......

...as prescient and pragmatic a suggestion as that may be, I strongly doubt whether it would be worth it, or even possible at all for Graphisoft to pursue such an option, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, file format propriety issues aside (as in, only Revit as an application can open, read and write .Rvt files; - not even AutoCAD or Autodesk's Inventor can - due to intellectual property rights), Revit is notorious for spitting out, or rather exporting, the most unusable (read; cluttered) 3D Models for use in other software. Anyone who's ever tried to render a Revit produced 3D .dwg file knows just how unconsolidated and overly cluttered the files are, with a lot of unnecessary information and objects. Typically, using a Revit model in an other application involves exploding the model and a ton of clean-up in an Application such as AutoCAD before it can even be usable in a reasonable manner in any other application. I imagine it would only get worse when trying to translate these models at an algorithmic level to another file format directly from the .rvt format, while maintaining the object intelligence and parametric properties.

Secondly, there's Autodesk's own reluctance or reticence to support and adopt the IFC format in a meaningful way, since that seemed to be the one way of getting and translating intelligent (parametric) BIM models between BIM applications - because they'd much rather be the ones writing all the rules and laying the groundwork. IFC would have been a better and more logical (and certainly less expensive) route to follow, writing a tranlsator for your application to read your rival's file format.

Thirdly, there's that little issue of Revit having even worse interoperability with their (Autodesk's) own .dwg format, which is not only the de facto industry format but is also essentially an open format, than ArchiCAD does. Part of the reason is how Revit organizes information (lack of the use of Layers, and conventional line weight systems, being a big BIG hindrance to translation). It's no wonder that Autodesk are now pushing the .fbx format as the standard format between all their various software.

Consequently I think GS stand a better chance developing a good FBX translator ( as well as improving their current dwg translator) which allow one to define geometric elements as ArchiCAD construction elements upon import; kind of the way the Sketchup (SKP) translator works. Or one that allow the user to define parametric values for the imported objects in the case of dwg blocks, or Revit family objects, to be usable as useful ArchiCAD gdl library objects.

At the end of the day the .rvt format is a closed format as I already mentioned, which means that only Revit can read .rvt files, in the same way that only 3DS Max can read .max files, Maya can read .ma or .mb files, and of course, in the same way that only ArchiCAD can read .PLN and .PLA files (and by extension .gsm library object files).

[gpowless]

I would take it further.

Archicad should directly read and write in Revit format instead of its own proprietary format.

I understand the enormity of this suggestion, but Graphisoft is competing head to head with Revit for the same user base. Standing alone we become like the Apple MacIntosh users - a bunch of dedicated followers, but only a fraction of "Mr. Big's" user base.

Apple learned that if they want to bite into Microsoft, they have to speak the same language so that there is little difference in systems. The Mac is still proprietary but now that it is speaking windows, its user base is growing to a greater percentage of the market share.

On the other hand we are still fighting generations of AutoCad and as much as we all know that it sucks as a BIM it is still a CAD with the market share. The name is connected.

So the only way to capture that is to make everyone thing there is no difference in products in personal choice.

Estwing and Stanley both make hammers. I have had an Estwing for over 30 years. I could take it to any construction job and build with and be competitive with any other trained carpenter. The skill or specialty is not in the hammer. It is in my skill in using a hammer that is comfortable and familiar.

CAD should be no different.