Hi JB, I watched your review and it was quite informative. I also saw your video on cabinets in AC25 and the improvements that you wished for. Maybe they are listening to you because they did improve them again in AC26 ? I thank you for your video on cabinets as it might have helped us all get better cabinets.
I hope they will listen to your suggestion on the resizing problem of the feet and handles not resizing to the desired or proper position.
I have used the CI tools for cabinets for many years now because they are specific to our region. Cabinets are allot more customizable with CI tools. You could try the tool for 30 days for free to see if it helps you out or if can move the feet and handles to the desired location ?
I would show your video to CI or Central Innovations to see if they can do those things in future or if they can’t do it already now ? Just Incase GS don’t get around to doing it for us in time ?
Thanks. I believe Graphisoft is listening, so hopefully we'll see some more cabinet tweaks in the next version of Archicad. And maybe some day we'll get face frames and inset cabinets!
I've heard great things about the CI cabinets, doors, and windows. And as much as they might make my life easier, I continue to stick with the OOTB objects because I want to be able to help everyone who is working with just what Graphisoft offers.
They can do face frames and insets with glass etc and arc tops in the “cabinets CI tool” from about AC24. Please watch this video below from about 19min 40 secs in, to see what can be done with cabinets right now.
I am a big fan of the “CI coverings tool” for automatic wall cladding, gutters and ridge capping myself. It saves a heap of time in producing a more accurate 3d model.
The bottom line for me is, are the improvements worth not only the price of subscription, but the 10% increase in subscription we recently were billed. The answer to both is no. The only upgrade worth the price lately has been AC 25.
What really incenses me is that to talk with third party programs needing FBX (almost all AR apps and 3D asset markets), I have to save to SketchUp, and then purchase a subscription to SketchUp to export FBX.
The response from GS regarding this "since version 25 when it was first brought up to them" has been reprehensible. They pass the buck off to Epic and then rationalize by asking why we need FBX anyway (check the FBX thread).
I also agree with you... what Architect using ARCHI-CAD asked for structural and MEP features?
The CI cabinets definitely have superior features, no question. I've used the coverings before but found them fussy. I prefer my method of wrapped wall skins and the opening tool.
The subscription cost to new version value is such an important metric. But how do we actually measure that? Saving X hours/year? Speeding up tasks by Y%? Providing us with some new service to charge for? Archicad 24 failed for sure. 25 turned out to have more value than I expected. Polygonal Openings and the cabinet objects were hugely valuable to me. Not earth shattering, but probably just enough to make the SSA cost worth it. 26? TBD. I like the improvements to cabinets. Folders and search are proving to be really worth it too. $880 worth? I don't know. But I kind of think so. Is it time for some huge improvements? Yes. Can GS keep coasting? No way.
Another thought: I've found low feature versions are sometimes when I make the most improvements to my workflow. And while I want new features and bug fixes, what I really want is for my process to improve. So while 24 had basically no valuable new features, it was during the 24 release cycle that I really embraced and explored everything from 22 and 23. I feel the same with 25/26. I think in 26 I'll really take advantage of some stuff from 25. Not an excuse for Graphisoft to churn out uninspired releases. But more of a challenge to us users: we're stuck paying subscription, what are we going to do to level up our usage this year. Adapt new features or make better use of old ones?
Not claiming to have the answers here, just sharing the thoughts I have every year with a new version.
I totally agree with you, in that all these things should be able to be done in the Archicad native work environment.
We need people to keep on encouraging that direction so that software will be developed to be a complete design package without the need of too many add ons.
Archicad can primarily aim for being a more accurate 3d modeling software solution for Architects, Interior Designers and Architectural Technologists or Building designers.
Too much BIM collaboration with Revit & Engineers has definitely slowed down Archicad’s progress in those areas mentioned above.
I hope that they will see that following the Revit business model is detrimental to GS and Archicad’s development.
I am 100% sure that if they can put the focus back onto the basics right inside Archicad that they will get more business and Revit will get less.
Let Revit care for the engineers and let Nemetschek encourage the use of its own engineering software in conjunction with Archicad like they have done before.
Let them see if more will come to them for a full BIM solution, after all that’s what Autodesk is definitely doing.
We don’t want Archicad to eventually become the second choice to Revit. With too much collaboration you can end up helping Autodesk to becoming the first choice.
Regarding EcoStar, that becomes a more valuable tool when it is an accredited software within the country that it actually being used in. Couldn’t resources be spent on making it fully accredited in the international versions that it is produced in ?
Just my thoughts on how Archicad could become an even better tool for Architecture primarily.
Figuring out how to integrate Ecodesigner star into the design process has the potential to be a game changer. Whoever can crack that and teach others wins.
The Search additions made AC26 worth the upgrade in my workflow. I may recover my investment by not having to scroll through hundreds of drawings. It's a shame they only did half a job as usual e.g. the Link drawings dialog is missing search, but this is one of the more essential places where it should have been deployed.
I do think GS could spend more resources on the basics that make a difference. Productivity doesn't come from one off Wizz-Bang features, it comes from having consistent, simple & reliable tools and filling the gaps of missing essentials like Instancing.
I agree. The search is now an essential function and alone makes the upgrade worth it. I actually struggled when going back to AC25 awaiting the release.
But as you point out - it is really frustrating that they always cut their development short even on the functionalities they decide to implement. There are so many small things to pick up that would have a huge effect on workflow efficiency and thus return on invested development.
Example: The shortest way between an element and its attribute is the info box yet it's popup menu cannot be used for anything other than changing attributes - we can't even use it to access the attribute dialog. To me this seems like a rather easy thing to develop and implement as the popup menu is identical to the interface of the attribute palette/dialog. The potential positive effect for workflow efficiency is obvious. So why stop short?
The result of such (and other) seemingly strange development decisions is that even though I am willing to make the upgrade - it's only under the premise of me continuing using AC that it is an easy decision. The investment in time and money done to AC means that the threshold for walking out is quite high but every release the threshold gets lower and GS doesn't seem too interested in closing the door.
Upvoted