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 ?

[Jp1138]

Kristian wrote:
...
I don’t believe Revit has a very long life left and signs point to fact that Autodesk are looking for something else. Without Dynamo Revit probably would have died a few years ago.
...

As far as I would like to agree, at least here in Spain it´s very far from truth. Nearly everyone here who uses BIM software uses Revit, many times using pirated or educational versions, and even in public contracts RVT format is demanded. Autodesk has a very firm grip in the business here, and it will be a very long road to gaining market share for other softwares, I´m afraid

[Anonymous]

I think Revit is the next AutoCad.

[jl_lt]

Jp1138 wrote:

Kristian wrote:
...
I don’t believe Revit has a very long life left and signs point to fact that Autodesk are looking for something else. Without Dynamo Revit probably would have died a few years ago.
...

As far as I would like to agree, at least here in Spain it´s very far from truth. Nearly everyone here who uses BIM software uses Revit, many times using pirated or educational versions, and even in public contracts RVT format is demanded. Autodesk has a very firm grip in the business here, and it will be a very long road to gaining market share for other softwares, I´m afraid

This comes as a surprise, i would have thought that in Spain and Portugal Archicad would have more ground.

Also, i think that as a group (Architects), we need to grow a pair and stop letting clients and government and most certainly consultants dictate which software we use. I see a lot of responses on the internet of folks that only use Revit "because their consultants and engineers use Revit" and want to make it easy for them. Come on you people!

In any case it should be the other way around. It´s like if in the old times they came and said "hey, you must use Staedler pens instead of Rottring pens for your drawings". I dont think any self respecting architect would have complied to a request like that in those times, and i dont see a reason why we have to do it now.

[Anonymous]

Here in Portugal, local authorities can only ask for open proprietary file formats (dxf/dwg) and pdf for drawings/documents.
About Archicad popularity among AEC: I don't have the statistics, but I have the impression that the great majority of Architects use Archicad or 2d Autocad, Engineers use CYPE with 2d dxf/dwg output for drawings; and bread and butter Contractors: a single crumpled paper set of 1:100 scale permit drawings for the entire construction.

[Jp1138]

Braza wrote:
Here in Portugal, local authorities can only ask for open proprietary file formats (dxf/dwg) and pdf for drawings/documents.
About Archicad popularity among AEC: I don't have the statistics, but I have the impression that the great majority of Architects use Archicad or 2d Autocad, Engineers use CYPE with 2d dxf/dwg output for drawings; and bread and butter Contractors: a single crumpled paper set of 1:100 scale permit drawings for the entire construction.

In Spain there´s a lot of controversy in the matter of open standards, as the law is interpreted in different ways, but the truth is that proprietary formats, basically RVT, are commonly asked in public contracts

[Anonymous]

Jp1138 wrote:
but the truth is that proprietary formats, basically RVT, are commonly asked in public contracts

Wow! This is dangerous... Spanish government and Architect's Regulator/Authority should do something.

[Varch]

I am a new Archicad user- just purchased it this week. I've been a user of AutoCAD for 20 years and Revit for the last 5 years. Looking forward to using Archicad until I retire... I'd say that Graphisoft has done some good things to gain market share.

For instance, I saw my first demonstrations of BIMx last year and I was blown away. I've not seen anything like that in the Autodesk world (yet). They should continue to leverage that kind of technology and give it away for free. The more that this technology is seen by other architects, like me, the more that they will pull users away from the Autodesk ecosystem.

Same thing with Twinmotion. The fact that Graphisoft created a partnership with Unreal to provide a free license of Twinmotion to AC users is significant. They are effectively encouraging all users to showcase the product using some of the most state of the art visualization software... software that is simple and easy to use. Again, they are leveraging their user-base to showcase Archicad with stunning Twinmotion graphics. Autodesk will never do that.

[jl_lt]

Welcome aboard Mr. Varch, and wish you much success with your decision, which I'm sure it will.

[Nader Belal]

This is a comment for @Braza &especially for @Jp1138

I guess that both of you are European citizens as I'm, therefore I would like to acknowledge you that in 2018 or 2019 (I don't remember exactly), the European Union have issued an order to all its members stating that for public works tenders, the accepted file type for presentation is IFC, and therefore all countries in the European Union must specify and accept presented IFC files.

@Jp1138
Few weeks ago, there was a huge public tender for the creation of BIM objects for Barcelona's sea port, and it was huge in what ever the way you wanted to see it, and I was searching for people to form a team to present for that tender, which with the last intent I had to pull back.

Anyway, and if you read the technical specifications to the public tender, you will find that the Barcelona's Port Authority (the body that practically have the last word in everything):

• They asked for IFC deliverable files, but also the original digital files (ie: what ever program file you used to generate their IFC format).
• They asked that the BIM objects must have parametric properties were applied (ie: BIM objects presented as IFC format loose all its parametric properties, therefore the original file must be given either way)
• In other places of the technical specification of the public tender document, the authority gave a hint about part of the work that their technical teams do, and you can guess that they do infact use Revit for MEP, and Structure design.
• At many place in the technical requirement document, the authority have stated that they used a specific software for Barcelona's Sea Port Technical Administration, called FME from Safe Software, and if you checked the software's supported file formats, you will find IFC for sure, but also multiple Autodesk propietary file formats, but non for ArchiCAD, or even for Bentley's AECOsim (they also don't even accept Blender files even when they do accept 3Ds)

What I wanted to show with my comment is the following: [list=]

Although the European Union can in fact enact an order to force national governments to ask for and accept IFC deliverable files, some countries will also ask for originals proprietary files, simply because the European Order did not state that IFC is the standard of reference (in spanish: La vara de medir)

Let's say that IFC have been implemented as the ipso facto standard for everything, many public authorities have already invested in digital platforms that are dependent on specific proprietary file formats, and the decision of adding additional proprietary file formats to them may be a decision pushed by market research of the platform creator.

Then comes the issue with the personnel that would have to deal with these files, what use is it to them or to the work they do in different public companies and authorities if they do not know how to handle them, or have the minimum knowledge to navigate other BIM programs and platforms ???

[Jp1138]

It´s a difficult situation, because in this particular case they are asking for objects to be used in whatever system they are using, so it would be logical to ask directly for Revit files if that suits them. I think it´s a different situation than when RVT files are asked in project tenders, where IFC files are completely functional.

If the administration orders some computer programs they need and they use Windows, you cannot present a macOS or linux program...

The question is, why is the port authority using the rvt format? Is that the better solution or they just got the most usual one? Is the most cost-effective for the citizens paying for it? Were other alternatives considered?