Archicad Future, 27 Poll

[bouhmidage]

Archicad 26 was released yesterday, personnally i'm disappointed of how Archicad is slowly developped in the last 4 years, the pandemic has it' effects on business for sure, but we expected more since earlier versions used to bring nice and cool features, 

I created this tread for users who have ideas, suggestions, propositions for the next release, we may express our thoughts, and give guidelines for development team, Graphisoft is listening, i'm sure, 

For me, the most important thing to in an urgent way is to stop this multilingual installers strategy, 

Archicad 26 is released, all the world can download it with a multilangual installer,  : 

1 - download and install in a preferred langue, 

2 - open Archicad using your template, or download a template from the website, almost of us migrate tempaltes from older versions, resellers template  are useful for new users, 

3 - libraries also can be dowloaded from website, this will help in 2 things : lignter installers, and libraries are accessible for everyone especially when user works for foreign companies, .

this way, development and bug fixes will be focused on 1 installer, not 10, 

----------------------------

Archicad strategy is to implement several disciplines, let's admit this, 

For users , Architects, engeneers, drafters, commands and disciplines should be seperated and organized in different way, so we don't feel abused with unecessary command, 

yes Archicad offer possibility to organise commands in the work environnment, but the saved commands layout will be a mess when upgrading to newt version wich contain new commands, 

why not,  from a buttons menu you can activate ad desactivate disciplines commands.

----------------------------

You said in the webinar, Focus on design, Archicad tools are really good and that's why we stick to Archicad , BUT aren't fully baked, workarounds and illogic solutions are always there to disturb the workflow, think about new users, workarounds make them feel uncomftable, saying, " this simple situation needs a workaround, whatabout complex ones ?? " 

each tool have major / minor things to update, tweak , to get a good design toolbox for daily work, 

to attract users, Archicad should easily be able to help designing a residentiel or midscale projects without workarounds, this kind of project is where users start exploring the software, if it fails, users will start searching around for alternatives, 

make the product a complete solution for architects, 

----------------------------

i think , Archicad 27 should be the " NO workarounds version "   ,make architects life easier, to focus on design , then you can go ahead for structural and MEP workflows, 

[Jim Allen]

I agree with everything you said!

Actually if we think of things in terms of instances, I think we might be making things more complicated for people who haven't used the principle.

Describing an extended functionality for favourites I think is more in keeping with the Archicad workflow and achieves (I think) the same thing.

[DGSketcher]

I'm not sure I understand? Instances would always be a collection of 2D/3D Elements. Favourites are a means of adjusting parameters and attributes for an element type e.g. walls, slabs, doors etc.

[Rex Maximilian]

I get your point. I would love to see your list or one like it actually taken into consideration by Graphisoft. It's just hard to see another outcome based on what they've shown as an unwillingness to implement features recommended by members of this forum. Only one opinion seems to matter... the one from the hundred+ seat firm requesting features that are of interest by maybe 10% or less of the users. But I applaud your proactive approach of creating the list.

[Jim Allen]

No - instances refers to something where you have a definition of something, which if updated automatically propagates all changes to instanced copies.

It's simply a mechanism for automatically updating properties.

Favourites define element properties and characteristics. If we can get a way of automatically updating every copy of a favourited element (except for certain unique properties) we effectively have the same functionality.

It's fantastic for evolution of a design.

Say for example I have a column element supporting a beam, I could start off with an element, modify its properties and define it as a favourite. As the design becomes more developed, I could modify  one copy, redefine the favourite, and have every copy update automatically.

It's how I used to work in SketchUp and Vectorworks.

I have used lots of different 3D applications, and there are some things that you need to unlearn when you start working with new software in order to adapt to a new methodology and workflow. Equally there are other things that other software has that could bring large benefits if brought into the new software.

It's a case of getting a balance I think. It's unrealistic to want to make new software behave like your old software, but copying features that are successful and improve productivity is not at all new. No software exists in a vacuum.

One of the things I love in Archicad, that I would have loved in SketchUp is the 'Show selected in 3D' command. Absolute genius, and so useful!

[DGSketcher]

I'm with you on the Favourites, it has been discussed before that they COULD / SHOULD operate as element type definitions. Probably another slow burner for GS development...

Instances - I think this is more of a language problem, no one knows what to call them in the context of AC, we did have a lengthy debate on their naming a few years ago, but for now I think the use of "Instancing" in AC is best considered as Hotlinks with local / in-place editing. A bit like WBlocks & Blocks in Autobad.

[jl_lt]

Hi! another idea:   It would be interesting to be able to get a list we all can agree to here in the  forum (that is, to an 80% level of agreement which should be enough, more than that might be impossible 😂). If and when he have something to show, instead of sending it to Graphisoft, somehow sharing it with all and any Archicad users we might know. They would NOT be able to further edit the list otherwise it would be never ending endeavour, but they can vote or say HOW much they would like said features.  

Then we send it to Graphisoft.  From personal experiences when i was doing my research on wether to use Revit or Archicad i can say that even big offices are more than willing to discuss BIM matters. 

Would this be doing work Graphisoft should be doing? absolutely. But in the long term we all might benefit from it

[thesleepofreason]

The notion of users compiling and managing a "shadow roadmap" is bizarre but as said, I think it has more potential to change the development than any of the industry open letters we have seen recently. The crux is that the effort would have to be of a magnitude that is hard for individual users to justify and it is questionable if it can be organised.

Because I don't think it is enough to compile a list and get it polled, signed and delivered to GS. In what way would that be better than the current wish list which GS allegedly have at their hands? It isn't a question of information deficit at GS, they simply choose to ignore it and will seemingly continue to do so as long as it doesn't have a real impact on any prioritised business metric. 

Short of GS coming to their senses, I think the only shot is to leverage the detrimental effect this information can have on potential new users evaluating Archicad, hoping it forces GS to act on it. What is needed for this is a platform that is easily accessible to potential users, where the information is validated by current users and structured in a compelling way. Basically a uservoice page driven by users - truly bizarre.

As you said, it would be doing GS's work for them and it is work that seem natural for most interesting contemporary app developers. That it is not for GS is a shame, especially given the heritage.

[jl_lt]

The keyword is "shame"

I mean, come on, i love Archicad; it has trully changed the way we work and comunicate, at least for us.  We love it as it is, with all its quirks and even its faults,  and this coming from a user that is very far from using it to its full potential. 

But the stagnation on its development feels heavier each passing year. Not only stagnation but a deviation from its essence. The very essence that made a young Steve jobs pour money to help an also young gabor bojar (yes, i know that story). And i think its safe to say we all here wish for the long term survival of this wonderful software, a survival that feels more and more compromised with each ignored wish on this forum.

I cannot even fathom the idea of Archicad one day going out of business and having to use revit, which i rather work by hand than using that thing.

as has been said many times, we should not be delusional and think we will change things with these kind of efforts, but its better than doing nothing, and sure better than those open letters.

[Jim Allen]

I think we would need to create a website with a poll to garner sufficient support. That way we can analyse the responses and derive what people think is important.

Let's develop the list first, because lots of other peoplewill have valuable things to contribute.

It's not 'my' list, it should be the community's list. 😉

[Jim Allen]

David Shorter has made some really useful changes to this. If anyone else wants to contribute and make suggestions, open the sheet and request access.

When we think we have captured a consensus view, we can create a poll and get people to vote for suggestions.

If you feel strongly about features and a wishlist, please speak up and get involved.

I do think that past failures to get GS to take any notice of similar initiatives in the past are no guarantee that everything we try in this regard is doomed to failure.