and yes, the topic is discussed over and over in this forum.i don't understand what's the buzz here: "which from the top workstations would be better?"
NONE
i'm not with archicad from the very beginning, it think it was 6 or 6.5.
sure, every next version up to that point has been an improvement. like 7 to 8.1 or 8.1 to 10. anyway- every version was developed in name of TOOLS we use in managing the project- and here we see a small change in actual way how the architects think and create architecture (except for using software for creatting bubble-architecture, and even here the solution within ac is external- maxonform:). things have become better, but..
but i just don't see (am i blind?) that the ac has been developed in the means of hardware specs, thus giving room for these software tools to work smoothly and delivering top experience. macs & pcs has grown, emmm... SIGNIFICANTLY over last 8 years.
the marginal upgrade in tools isn't reflected in upgrade how ac works with your hardware. archaic code.
i just can't stand the attitude from GS here. i mean the lines "we have to revrite code. it's huge task". no doubt it is.
archicadwiki techsupport
• no multithreading
ok, they say it's "partly". why?
(..) ArchiCAD will not be a fully multi-threaded application at any time soon. This is partly because re-writing the ArchiCAD code to support multi-threading is a huge task, and there are areas where it would not cause a dramatic performance increase. Graphisoft will focus on the areas where multi-threading brings the most benefit.thus you don't need octocore (or even quadro) mac pro "at any time soon", because it's a big job for them. (if i think that ac on 8 cores would use 1/8 of the resources available-
).• max 4bg ram
well, and if more is in your system, it craches. you have to use the terminal to switch off the "unneeded" ram. ^£%^$£%$
• 32 bit
nuts
Transferring a 32-bit application to 64-bit requires reprogramming even the most basic functions in the software, therefore the change to 64-bit in business softwares will happen at a much slower pace than the rapid change from 32-bit processors to 64-bit processors in the Personal Computer (PC) industry.so mainly they are basing the answer once again on excuse, that it requres recoding ac + on a bad market practise "aww, the other business software developers are also slow on this". sorry, but that doesn't apply to other apps i use, ie, c4d, maxwell. yes, they are a different profile, but- whatever harware resources i give them- it's been effectivelly used. and that's the reason they REALLY are top software solutions. and the argument that archicad has 100x more lines of code can't be an argument.
and with the upcoming ac11... they've spent another year on writing code which sooner or later must been rewritten. with the intoduction of windoze vista more and more consumers will upgrade to 64bit systems. mac users are there already (+leopard will also be a push to abandon old g4 boxes (multicore g5 pros are still more than great)).
graphisofts advertising and managment has been pretty good, but they now have to consider answers to "i got top vista pc/i got the new mac pro octocore, but my ac isn't getting faster".
they can choose to lie about ac beeing top level software.
they can choose to get more unsatisfied customers by telling true "yes, we have worked only on tools, forgetting about cpus, bits and rams".
they can choose to sit down and rewrite ac12 as multithreaded, 64 bit application, which would give them further enormous room for implementing top cpu&ram intensive tools. those who would still use 32bit computers will have their maximum ac11 version. if he GS says "we don't have that much programmers", then it's simple as it gets- AC DOESN'T HAVE FUTURE. it's a fact. like the latvian saying "ko nevar celt, to nevar nest"- you can't carry what you can't lift.
i hope someday new ac version wouldn't be a hotfix for the previous one.
i'm sorry if i touched some of GS staff personally. i understand that you work hard, but, in my opinion, only such critism would maybe produce not only thoughts about brighter future for all of us, but you will finaly sit down, say "ok, this is the point we stop. and open new page for starting to code the real future AC version. yes, we trash the 20 year old and so beloved code, but that's the only way we can do it". ACT, please, ACT NOW! and take your time, i can live with 32bit AC11 if you state that there will be ac12 after 1.5years costing more, because you had to pay more programmers. i will buy it and bring flowers.
TomWaltz wrote:well, name ANY software that couldn't be better
Just wanted to chime in, I agree GS has a LOT of work to do in a lot of areas..
but the problem with AC is that the BASE is missing. we always can moan about the decoration, but what's the point if it's on dummy base (nowadays 32bit is a dummy for a 3d modelling soft
). the AC is implenting those new tools and i'm just waiting scared when the fundaments of this soft will crash from the load. other way is that GS will apply smart patches/hotfixes to the core (they are doing this allready). for how long? sooner or later (i think SOONER) the max workload the patched 32bit core can take will be reached which also means death for AC, because the soft who doesn't have any more room for development is a dead one. AC has this strong knowledge base of 3d cad, a glorious history, a strong experience, which is that bonus for them to stay alive. yet. but other 64bit 3d cad solutions will be out soon, where AC couldn't compete anymore.and my speculation about the lack of programmers in GS is that the actual core is so "unexplainable", it sits only in the existing deveopers heads. they just can't swallow the fact that 1) their baby is dying 2) for getting 64bit they cannot use reainimation 3) for getting new group of coders to work with ac, they have to explain the core code. as they can't do it, the only way is to create a new one.
and who is feeling happy about that (another 32bit version, another year in not stepping forward)
the users? no.
GS coders? no.
the GS shareholders? no (mmmkay, they do have short-run benefit from the next version. smaaaart...)
those who answer to the poll that AC is the top- yes, at this point as for tools- YES. plus- that AC glorification aspect and the past...
but as for that future tech aspect (which is the topic here)- NO.
lives that who changes
@Miki Woodie:
1) i don't know what you actually meant by "bisystem", but i suppose it's that AC is parly 32, partly 64bit. (?) i don't agree that it's not a big issue. like Bricklyne Clarence said
secondary- i have always though of architects, that they tend to have above avarege computer resources (while still having low income:)), which results in faster project times etc. so in my opinion, we are in 64bit target group. if i was on pc, i couldn't imagine not buying (or stealing m$ ) xp64, for gaining all the benefits when using fastest software available.
i understand that every one has it's reasons, so no offence, but i see that you are using AMD 64 3200 with 32bit xp. no offence, really. but ask yourself-isn't that because you don't use any 64bit soft. and then- wouldn't it be great to? and then- others are allready using (flying
) in 64bit maya, 3ds max, cinema 4d r10, maxwell 1.1 a.o.
2)
your argument is like GS in the wiki. "we are not bad, because other are bad too." so what that revit sux more badly (i didn't state that!!!;))? does that make AC better? when the latter wouldn't be, ie, revit, vectorworks but "taking advantages of the newest tech". and 64bit multicore isn't that new anymore.
3)
the modules approuch could be interesting. but as i see ac now, it is so tied together. it probably would be more easy on unix (mac os, linux ver) base, where the core services exists, and then used through modules calls. i don't know much about m$, but i think it's totally different approach.
sure, the rendering engine, 3d fluid modeling brushes/ways could be like modules (like addons/filters/brushes etc in photoshop), but the base (plans, sections, navigator, library, layers, pens etc)... i just don't see a way the current philosophy of how project should be done in AC could seperate that. it's all needed to create the project, even the smallest.
but here- your vision of "maxed out" AC is the current ac+modules (structure calculations (i repeat CALCULATIONS done by cpu). tell me, how much memory & cpu would this assign. 32bit 2GB? ain't it LOL?:)
1) i don't know what you actually meant by "bisystem", but i suppose it's that AC is parly 32, partly 64bit. (?) i don't agree that it's not a big issue. like Bricklyne Clarence said
You can't surely tell me that AC can't benefit from having the use of an extra processor..(..)tell me what i gain from 64bit 3daxis add-on (it's just an example) if i sits on 32bit core. you forget, that all that 64bit stuff GS have implemented are tools/decoration, which isn't THE CORE of what WE DO AS ARCHITECTS. rendering, 3d viewing is in my opinion is secondary. we draw plans, make sections, place and modiffy doors and windows, copy, drag, multiply, place, calculate zones, calculate shedules, place drawings on layouts, browse through library, load new elements, and that undoubtly takes the greatest part we spend acually working in this application- all these AC core processes. the time you wait that render to finish IS'T the time YOU are working. it's digits then. take a coffee break. but its abnormal, that there's a coffee break after each zoom in/out of A1 drawing. you'll say- take a more powerful mac. my imac and mbp are maxed out, and ANY further upgrade wouldnt reflect in AC speed growth...
secondary- i have always though of architects, that they tend to have above avarege computer resources (while still having low income:)), which results in faster project times etc. so in my opinion, we are in 64bit target group. if i was on pc, i couldn't imagine not buying (or stealing m$
) xp64, for gaining all the benefits when using fastest software available.i understand that every one has it's reasons, so no offence, but i see that you are using AMD 64 3200 with 32bit xp. no offence, really. but ask yourself-isn't that because you don't use any 64bit soft. and then- wouldn't it be great to? and then- others are allready using (flying
) in 64bit maya, 3ds max, cinema 4d r10, maxwell 1.1 a.o.2)
your argument is like GS in the wiki. "we are not bad, because other are bad too." so what that revit sux more badly (i didn't state that!!!;))? does that make AC better? when the latter wouldn't be, ie, revit, vectorworks but "taking advantages of the newest tech". and 64bit multicore isn't that new anymore.
3)
the modules approuch could be interesting. but as i see ac now, it is so tied together. it probably would be more easy on unix (mac os, linux ver) base, where the core services exists, and then used through modules calls. i don't know much about m$, but i think it's totally different approach.
sure, the rendering engine, 3d fluid modeling brushes/ways could be like modules (like addons/filters/brushes etc in photoshop), but the base (plans, sections, navigator, library, layers, pens etc)... i just don't see a way the current philosophy of how project should be done in AC could seperate that. it's all needed to create the project, even the smallest.
but here- your vision of "maxed out" AC is the current ac+modules (structure calculations (i repeat CALCULATIONS done by cpu). tell me, how much memory & cpu would this assign. 32bit 2GB? ain't it LOL?:)
Still looking?
