What do you think should be done to get Archicad a bigger market share ?

[Anonymous]

I personally find ARCHICAD way more powerful, easy to use, faster and all in all innovative than other solutions like Revit. However since Revit is backed up by Autodesk and long years of Autocad dominance, ARCHICAD isn’t leading in terms of market share, what do you think GRAPHISOFT should do better? Do you think it’s enough for them to just push for a better product ? Or is there something else you would do ?

[poco2013]

Richard wrote:
5. .... Some parts of the world seem to have pretty good libraries. The U.S. does not, although at one time, it was starting to go well and then fell off. Haven't seen any updates to Weyerhauser (Trus Joist), Simpson Strong-Tie, Andersen/Pella/Marvin windows, etc. in a very long time. Could also have Kohler, major appliance manufacturers, tile, and more.

I agree completely. Having to "cobble up" a library from a multitude of sources and the related conversions involves a huge amount of wasted effort best spent on the design. As a international program, I feel that Graphisoft is not that interested in the North American market, at least with respect to resources. Revit offers a more complete package for our market, but at some additional cost.

If Graphisoft would offer a more convenient, low cost method that Vendors could use to convert their drawings to Archicad format ( & include their applicable properties which showcase their uniqueness), I believe they would get better participation. Generic, one symbol fits all, are not well received by clients. One or two dedicated people to interface with and support the Vendor's libraries might mitigate the current "road block" Perhaps, Graphisoft should make a effort to listen to the Vendors/Manufacture's concerns.

[Erwin Edel]

Regarding manufacturer support for library parts: I make it a point to inquire sales persons vistiting us to promote their product about the availability of ArchiCAD library parts (when needed). A lot of them assume BIM is just the one program, so it helps to make them aware their potential customers require different solutions.

I do find the 'native' ArchiCAD parts a lot more robust than 3rd party libraries though. Especially for windows / doors.

Elevators are a pain in the behind still, but Otis and Kone (the mayor parties in our spot of the world) are hard to tackle in this regard. I'm not even sure if the revit output they offer is much good.

Overhead garage type doors are sort of bad in the library and hard to come by for ArchiCAD.



Regarding promotion, free (online) training etc, I feel our local reseller is doing fairly well in this regard. Also getting students and teachers interested in ArchiCAD (catch 'em young!).

[Karl Griffith]

Having just merged with a Revit firm, I now have a perspective on this I did not formerly have. As a 5 person firm merging into a 90 person firm, there was no discussion or consideration of a change. They didn’t even want my two ArchiCAD seats as part of the acquisition (so now they are mine – there’s one ArchiCAD advantage right off, you own what you buy).

In my experience, everything here (upstate New York for me) is Autodesk for the simple reason that everything is Autodesk. There is no consideration of features or performance, just a matter of using what everyone else is using. When I would tell people I used ArchiCAD, they’d look at me like I had two heads – “why would you do that!?”

The only complaint I have heard with Revit is cost. If ArchiCAD could significantly beat Revit in cost, people might listen. But then comes the matter of converting over and all that involves – there would need to be excellent support for this. Also support for interoperability – I think Graphisoft is doing a great job with this, but it would need to be made even more comprehensive and easier. Again, I have been asked, “Why not just use Revit, and not have to do all that stuff?” (ifc transfers, etc.).

Then the issue of getting trained ArchiCAD users. This would start in educational institutions, but certainly a need for training people to go from Revit to ArchiCAD.

All in all, certainly not an easy task.

[Richard Morrison]

A couple of other ideas:

1) Give anyone who wants one a free one-time one-year subscription.

2) Throw down the gauntlet and challenge Autodesk to a one-day design competition based on the former "CAD Shootout." 5 of their best Revit people against 5 of Graphisoft's best (world-class speed and design champs, linked by Teamwork) and publicize the heck out of it. Even better if Autodesk is unwilling to accept the challenge.

[Nader Belal]

@Richard Morrison

First, I think you have just missed the idea where can Revit shine. Big firms that have dedicated teams of MEP and structure engineers, would see Revit as a good platform, since that their modelling team members can act more like a floating team that can switch from to Architecture, Structure and MEP modelling task per project hassle free.

Second, in the past, AutoCAD users were already outnumbering ArchiCAD users, and for them to switch from AutoCAD to Revit is natural.

@Richard Morrison & @Stress Co.
Third, manufacturers' content is a manufacturer property, meaning that the models that they provide can be subject to copyright laws (check ISO 16739:2018), besides, providing their content in whatever program format is a corporate and marketing decision.

@Richard Morrison

2) Throw down the gauntlet and challenge Autodesk to a one-day design competition based on the former "CAD Shootout." 5 of their best Revit people against 5 of Graphisoft's best (world-class speed and design champs, linked by Teamwork) and publicize the heck out of it. Even better if Autodesk is unwilling to accept the challenge.

Seriously!! Until now, I haven't seen someone make the switch just from seeing a video like the one you're proposing, that in case you haven't already seen the big number of ArchiCAD users making that kind of videos, without counter the shares in social networks.
Besides, it's like fighting a pig that at the end of the fight, the pig will enjoy it, we get muddied, and nobody will be capable of making a distinction.

In my humble opinion Graphisoft should at least exploit these issues to its benefit:
1. Many ArchiCAD users and lovers, make online video tutorials for free, but I have heard the stories that local distributors have even threaten them in courts if those users didn't pull doen their videos in there respective countries for publishing copyright content/or because they're using pirated version of the program.
The funny part is that some of them were already starting to attract new users in die-hard Autodesk countries ... If I would in Graphisoft place, I would leave them do what they love to do as they want to when they want to, and I would even contact them to correct the errors they have committed in their video tutorials.

2. Algorithmic design is the new Dorado, just as was BIM in the era of CAD, and Graphisoft should give a cookie to who ever had the idea to create the idea of creating the bridge between Grasshopper and ArchiCAD.
Unfortunately, I don't see Graphisoft pushing ArchiCAD in Rhino and Grasshopper spheres of influence, as the to go BIM package, specially when Autodesk created Dynamo to challenge Grasshopper plug-in, and the underlining philosophy of usage of ArchiCAD and Grasshopper are almost the same.
In fact, I see more ArchiCAD users doing all the pushback in Rhino and Grasshopper forum's in Discourse.

3. Open the damn API ...
Are you aware there are more Rhino's API users that are using C++, C#, & Python, than all of ArchiCAD API users through all of its history, even when Mc Neel is a younger company with a younger product in the AEC market !!!
I dare to say, that thanks how Mc Neel is cherishing their user base, not only there able to grow quickly, there were also able to tackle Rhino & grasshopper quickly and efficiently.
Even Autodesk have copied and is still copying Mc Neel's methods.
Just see what Joe Putnam in this thread: https://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=295001#p295001
And in the same thread look what I have found: https://discourse.mcneel.com/t/learning-revit-or-archicad-for-rhino-grasshopper/67650/10

4. @Karl Griffith

Then the issue of getting trained ArchiCAD users. This would start in educational institutions, but certainly a need for training people to go from Revit to ArchiCAD.

Graphisoft should go to educational institutions, and support student not just by training them, but also by providing a hotline that would help them do their work quickly and efficiently when they get stuck, and believe me, they get stuck quiet frequently.

5. Local institutions
I don't know about you, but local authorities in Singapore have took the approach to accept all projects in their native BIM platform formats ... and I think it's a good idea that Graphisoft would give free licences to those local authorities where there are ArchiCAD users or firms presenting their work to those same authorities.

6. GDL objects
As a professional GDL scriptor, I see it hard to believe that a language that was invented like 20 years ago, is more relevant than ever, and Graphisoft haven't pushed it forword, that's nuts.

[Nader Belal]

@Richard

I think someone have already taken the lead for your idea about the gantlet

See the link: https://twitter.com/DigitalNath/status/1207543937293897728?s=20

[Ahmed_K]

1- A good training content is necessary to help newbies to start, the forum is not enough for learning,
Almost of tutorials are at basic level, drawing walls, slabs, modelling for just modelling, tutorials should focus on BIM modelling techniques, to show the archicad power,

4- making gdl easier and cleaner to understand and use, it's like a secret, 4 books to help you use a scripting language, thats NOT ENOUGH, architects don't have time to script by hand, we need some kind if template for several objects, graphical interface, clear workflow of object creation, case studies, more helpfull tutorials, users can't use a tool without a "how to use" manual...

2- Archicad should alsofix some basic problems like incohérences between 2d and 3d, tools limitations, architecture students will nlt like a software that sometimes presents plans in some wrong ways or a program that make them struggle or workaround to create the shape they imagine ( talking about complex shapes)
Graphisoft should impress students at first, students of nowadays are the users of the future,

3 - training centers, certified users, us an architect i'll prefer to hire some well trained and certified user that spending days to find an archicad user, self-trained...
Revit conquest the market just y training young architects,

If archicad will not focus on young users, students and young architects, it will loose too much on the market.

[Nader Belal]

@Richard Morrison
About throwing the guantlet and go after the firms that uses Revit, that is a very risky business that can have counter effects for the following reasons:
1. The ones that I have already explained.
2. Some offices are obligied to present their work in Revit native format, because the official organization that they have to present to will not accept any other delivery.
3. In the my last reply (the one that I have pointed to @Joe Putnam point of view), I have shared the link about BIG's (Bjarke Ingels Group) office member, saying that they switched from ArchiCAD to Revit, for some of the same reasons we the users have pointed out, so tell me how would you reply to such a pitfall !!!

[GOBA]

I’m just starting to use ArchiCAD. I don’t know what can be done to get ArchiCAD a bigger market share, but I can tell why I'm using ArchiCAD instead of Revit. I was going to use Revit, not for any good reason, but because I was supposed to! Why? Because we tend to misunderstand BIM=Revit. I didn’t really know how to start, and I decided to study a BIM master. I was lucky, and I had the opportunity to learn (a little bit) Revit and ArchiCAD. I liked more ArchiCAD than Revit, it works much better with IFC, it has permanent licence, and it’s cheaper.

So, the first step is to get to know ArchiCAD, and to be able to use it. I had a 1-year student licence. To obtain that licence, I had to register the master information. To obtain the 3-year student license of Revit, it was only necessary an email!!! May be, people need to know that there’s life beyond Revit, and it has to be easy.

I registered yesterday in this forum. I don’t know how it works, but I think it’s very important to have somewhere (like this forum), to get help when you start. Autodesk community is bigger, and that can make people choose it.

There’s a problem that @Moonlight has appointed to, and it’s that some organisations are asking for native Revit models. I work with architects, and I intend to deliver them the structural model, in IFC. I intend to defend an Open BIM workflow, but I don’t know what will happen if, in the future, I’m asked to deliver the Revit native model.

[ricarc]

Resuming my long experience in using AC and teaching it, the key could be a new very simple approach to the use of AC, as well as it was long time ago, because the new users don't feel clarity and synthesis in their first times working:
1) Complete basic palette configuration window
2) Complete basic Contruction Objects Library (for each Country..)
3) Complete basic Furnitures and Sanitaries Objects Library (for each Country...) having render inside is a great thrust for choosing AC
4) Reorganization and unification in more logical windows of tools and actions, forgetting now the old way (two templates Old and New users..)
5) Concentrate in only one group all imports and exports external files.
6) Facilitate the conversion to older versions (like Autocad makes, Revit I don't know..), without heavy work, number by number...
- People need to be quickly operative
- People need clarity, univocity and evidence of the actions necessary in modelling and using the software
- People wants every object could be necessary for working in his country and it must be actual/contemporary or better symbolic (good for having the right view of the model, but the real one it will be chosen finally, not so important)
- After first approach and first working day AC must be friendly and quite right for user.
(I'm very sorry for my English, while hoping to be understood..)