AC12 should Improve AC11 or Include New Features?

[Anonymous]

Hi,
I did not know how to make a poll so made it in form of a wish (may be one can make it a poll).

1. Should AC12 ONLY fix/improve/make tools how an architect works, WITH paying the yearly subscription?

OR

2. Should AC12 concentrate on NEW features WITH paying the yearly subscription?

I vote #1
Thanks,
Joseph

[TomWaltz]

I'm not sure I see the difference between the two.

[Anonymous]

TomWaltz wrote:
I'm not sure I see the difference between the two.

#1 AC12=AC11 in tools & features but NO (or way less) bugs, library parts working the way they should, no work arounds, Tools work the way an architect works and GS will listen to feed back of beta testers on the above issues.

#2 AC12 would have NEW Tools.

Joseph

[TomWaltz]

I might be letting a cat out of a bag here, but I would bet AC12's development is too far along for any votes on this to matter.... we might be better off to focus further in the future or maybe on a more "in general, we would rather see...."

As I've pointed out before, Beta Testing is not about improving/revising features. It's just about finding as many bugs as possible before release. Beta Testers can offer as many suggestions as they want, but it's like a plan checker in the office suggesting design changes: it's way too late in the process for major changes to happen.

It sounds to me like your wish is really between:
1) Forget about new features. Make the ones we have work the way they should (get more architects involved in the design/feature process and actually listen to them)
2) Go ahead and make more new features, leaving the existing features as goofy as they are (keep letting the marketing guys lead the design/feature process, ignoring what most of us Archicad-users think).

[Laura Yanoviak]

TomWaltz wrote:
1) Forget about new features. Make the ones we have work the way they should (get more architects involved in the design/feature process and actually listen to them)

I would vote for this option, although I'm sure (as Tom mentioned) that AC12 development is well underway (and AC13 has started).

[Anonymous]

TomWaltz wrote:
I might be letting a cat out of a bag here, but I would bet AC12's development is too far along for any votes on this to matter.... we might be better off to focus further in the future or maybe on a more "in general, we would rather see...."

As I've pointed out before, Beta Testing is not about improving/revising features. It's just about finding as many bugs as possible before release. Beta Testers can offer as many suggestions as they want, but it's like a plan checker in the office suggesting design changes: it's way too late in the process for major changes to happen.

It sounds to me like your wish is really between:
1) Forget about new features. Make the ones we have work the way they should (get more architects involved in the design/feature process and actually listen to them)
2) Go ahead and make more new features, leaving the existing features as goofy as they are (keep letting the marketing guys lead the design/feature process, ignoring what most of us Archicad-users think).

Okay please make a poll of that, I see it may be too late but if they do not see the users true desires how can they expect us to marry them at every subscription time
GS please listen.
Joseph

[Geoff Briggs]

Y'all might be interested in this.

[Anonymous]

Geoff wrote:
Y'all might be interested in this.

GS did not listen

[Anonymous]

There is so much in AC that needs improvement, where should they start? Roofs? Walls? Labels? The ability to easily copy a 2D detail from one project to another?

I bet I could think of at least 5 improvements for each tool in the ToolBox that should be standard. I really don't want to start some flame war, so I'll mention just one item which AC is behind the curve on: Interior Elevations. (Since this is what I'm struggling with this week!)

Graphisoft just added an elevation tool in AC11 to separate it from the section tool. Did they not realize that interior and exterior elevations have completely different graphic displays and functions than a section? In AC10, draw and interior elevation of a room with anything but a flat ceiling and you'll start to see the tool's drawbacks. Additionally, every other major CAD program out there keeps track of where North is. Why can't AC keep track of north and automatically title the interior elevations to correspond with their direction?

AC9 (or was it 8?) added live linked elevations, but everyone I've talked to still explodes their elevations in order to get them to be correct. It took 3 versions for Autodesk to get this to work well in ADT. I hope it doesn't take GS that long.

Maybe I'm way off. Maybe I just haven't yet learned the tools to do this within AC since I've only used AC10 for a year after using ADT for 9 years. AC can do some great, quick 3D modeling. But when it comes to automatic documentation it falls far short of expectations in my book.

[Eduardo Rolon]

Jaycen, you should look into some training if you need help. Even though we keep asking for wishes your comment is too general and might generate a flame (I almost started to).

Welcome to the forums we try to help most if asked nicely. This is not Autocad, nor Revit or ADT, keep an open mind and you might like AC.