Duncan wrote:This is probably the best answer on this thread to all frustrations user showed. Yes, open source projects are one of the best alternatives we currently know in computer world. Of course a lot been done by commercial software development companies, but the open source software always appeared as lifebuoy during crises. Apple adopted UNIX FreeBSD as their MacOS core, Microsoft now moving into support of Linux and of course excellent example how Blender grew up into serious 3D platform in past several years, becoming strong competitor to packages like 3DS Max, Maya, Cinema 4D and similar.
Hi everyone. I was pointed to this discussion by a friend on the osarch.org forum ( https://community.osarch.org ) where we were discussing the problems with current software and how to fund alternatives. He thought this thread here might be interested in what we're doing.
Basically, very basically, we're working to strengthen opensource / libre software projects in AEC. I did an interview recently with Ralph Grabowski where you can read a bit about us (
oh dear ... now I was going to start referencing people in this discussion by their user name so they'd get a notification ... I guess graphisoft hasn't updated their forum software for a while ...
Podolsky, you mentioned writing a letter expressing users frustrations and DGSketcher wonders if this would make a difference. I agree with Bricklyne Clarence that it has made a difference (I'm a Revit user at my day job). One difference it seems to have made is with some more openness. If you do want to write something I've created a page on our wiki for people on this forum, you are welcome to use to do some collaborative writing on a letter expressing your concerns:
https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=Talk:ArchiCAD&action=edit§ion=1( you may want to help on other pages on the wiki as well )
What interests me in your discussion most is ideas about supporting projects bringing new ideas in developing designs for AEC. Over at OSArch we're doing lots of work, and supporting lots of work, doing exactly this. We'd love to hear from anyone who thinks this sounds interesting. Two examples of projects looking at solving similar challenges to ArchiCAD are BlenderBIM (
https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=BlenderBIM_Add-on) Add-on and FreeCAD ( https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=FreeCAD ). Don't get me wrong - these are not replacements. They can do parts of what ArchiCAD does very well and much they cannot so at all. But maybe single big software packages are on the way out anyway ...
Here's my elevator pitch for why you should be interested in what we're doing:
The old software firms have dropped the ball and just make small changes to old platforms. They only support interoperability when it suits them and try and keep us locked to their product. Smaller, faster, more focused projects and developers can achieve more with less. Binding tools together with OpenBIM standards and opensource software ensures that progress and interoperability is guaranteed. Any components in your toolchain can be replaced by something better if it comes along because all the software sourcecode is open - no one can trap you with their file format or guarded proprietary tools.
So, what do people think? Is this interesting or should we keep trusting and relying on the current projects to keep us productive and relevant in our field?
TMA_80 wrote:Well, I don't think so. AC depends on MongoDB as it's database core and MongoDB is still not native M1 (and won't be before August 8th):
Considering how things are going on, my expectaion is that for the next version, the M1 compatiblity will be the 'lonely' feature
It's sometimes even comic how terms like OpenBIM or Common Data Environment are not really open and not really common. If company A is using CDE called B and company C is using CDE called D - they are working in totally different working environment, that is is not common for both A and C. If OpenBIM means we can use file format, open for all AEC platforms - IFC in this case, then why this IFC can be interpreted by various platforms differently and even loose some data? It's like having a movie, that preferable to watch on Mac, because on Windows it has glitches and actors all have green faces - this is what quite often happens with IFC.Hey there, I'm the developer of the BlenderBIM Add-on, and have been working with Native IFC for a few years now. I thought I'd help shed some insight on your statement.
Braza wrote:It´s easier with smaller applications, of course, but there are examples of complex applications working fine, like Blender. Somewhat less successful are others like Gimp or Inkscape.
The bigger the project, the bigger the mess. Does this makes sense?
Braza wrote:With my limited understanding I think there lies the weak link in Open Source & small apps. Once finance plays any part in the design process there is an immediate shift to duty of care and accountability. Openly declared performance standards and blocks of code that will under stress testing deliver consistent results are to be applauded, but when things go wrong as designers you can be assured our lawyers and insurers will be looking to point fingers at the origin of the problem. If it came from a big brand there is a chance of recovery, if the problem is nested in a group of small apps where do you start. Sorry, this is an adversarial position, but it is the nature of trading and human nature to limit risk. This is fundamentally why we gravitate to the likes of Archicad, because it delivers some basic surety of performance and when it fails we know where to turn. Now if Graphisoft choose to build their product off the back of open source code that is their option and their risk, but I believe they are better resourced to carry out the required stress testing before delivery while we concentrate on our designs.
I really think Open Source SW development is one of the great accomplishments of man kind. But unfortunately I tend to see it in a more reliable form within small scale projects. Making an analogy, is like comparing the building of a barn and a skyscraper. You can build a barn on a weekend with some friends and a barbecue, but try to build a skyscraper like this (?)
Duncan wrote:GDL scripts have built-in licences: Public Domain Dedication 1.0, Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0, Attribution 3.0, Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0, Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 or commercial. Every user can choose type of license when he starts his script. Script also can be password protected - this way hidden to another users.
Podolsky wrote:"open" in what way? Could someone make a FreeCAD Workbench that exported GDL scripts to define ArchiCAD objects?
No. There is no open source extensions. Standard GDL library is open. Some users can open their GDL scripts. ...
bouhmidage wrote:The only problem that Rhino and Grasshopper are commercial product. There is Grasshopper copy called Sverchok on Blender currently under development.
Open BIM would be easier with grashopper, whatch this video of data and geometry exchange between archicad and revit, using grashopper,
this plugin is still in beta stage, but looks promessing