Technology in Architectural Practice

Over the years I have heard many stories from AutoCAD and Revit users that resemble a pizzeria owner in NY being shaken down by the mafia. Now I haven't looked at Revit recently, but from what I understand, you pretty much have to learn the software from the ground up and hardly get much efficiency from already knowing AutoCAD. Graphisoft treats you like a customer and I've never heard people describing their experience with the company in the same negative way I hear people describe AutoDesk's business practices. Why keep going back for the abuse? Why continue feeling threatened?

ArchiCAD is the original BIM program. Revit was created to be an ArchiCAD like program that later became an AutoDesk product. ArchiCAD will always be ahead of the technology curve as they have built their product on the same base using the same technology since the late 1980s. Sure you Revit users can cherry pick a feature or two that you really like better and I'll cherry pick 10. Don't be fooled, it's the MAC to the PC. Revit is the copy, Revit is less user friendly, Revit is less elegant.

When I was a consultant teaching others how to use ArchiCAD, I could get interns and old timers alike working efficiently very quickly. I have NEVER had a problem opening or exporting dwg files for consultants. You can still save out a Microstation file among others. When I first started using it in 1997 you could have a PC and a MAC operating in the same file at the same time. In 1997 we could hardly get our PCs and MACs talking to the same printer more or less each other. Did Revit even exist in '97 (that's a rhetorical question)? The program is huge internationally, especially in Europe. I know we like to think USA is #1 at everything, but just like many technologies (and Architecture in general) coming out of Europe, they are usually superior and have been ahead of us for at least a decade and then our stubborn country finally gets on board with much resistance from the corporations pulling the puppet strings. Mini-splits (HVAC) are just now getting popular here for residences, yet they've been in common use in Europe and Japan for well over a decade. Come on, you know exactly what I mean.

Quit believing the hype, quit taking the shake down, and open your mind to the real deal. It's easy to use, it's the original, and the company values your business, not expecting it. Oh yeah, the full blown program is about $1000 cheaper too!

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------

Wow Eric. I would take your comments with a grain of salt considering your first comment is "I haven't looked at Revit recently". Before spouting off about how your program is better than someone else's program, read up on the comparisons. Each program has it's pluses and minuses. Please read up on a side by side comparison of Revit 2013 and ArchiCAD 16 and you'll see there isn't too much that's different. It's all personal preference. Like iOS and Android. There isn't a one size fits all solution. There are definitely draw backs to ArchiCAD when it comes to client and consultant drawing references. 

If you haven't looked at Revit 2013 or coming soon 2014, all disciplines can work within the same model with all tools available to them. It's one program to rule them all so to speak. There is no more Revit Architecture, Revit Structure, and Revit MEP anymore. It's just Revit. ArchiCAD still relies on importing Structural IFC models or CAD to get the information from another program. It's gotten better, but isn't there yet. Same with MEP. The MEP modeler is a nice afterthought that hasn't been fully integrated. Relying on importing data from other programs as opposed to have those model in the same native format is a very large drawback. That is one thing that Autodesk got right. I link my consultants Revit models into my own without having a format change, or relying on plug ins that might or might not import the data correctly. 

I suspect that in coming releases ArchiCAD will solve some of their linking issues. They might even develop their own MEP or Structural BIM product. Our money is well spent on Autodesk subscription which has it's comparison to the prices of ArchiCAD plus subscription. So after the initial higher price point, the two programs really equal out.

Most of the moaning recently was over the forced upgrade to the Building Design Suite, which for the price increase does give everyone access to a lot more tools and programs than Graphisoft even offers. At the end of the day, both BIM programs are meant for producing drawings. Right now to me, Revit does the job better. 

And please do not count as a positive that the core of a program is still based in the 1980's. Your not helping yourself there. There have been countless improvements including Release 16 that have pushed it well beyond what it used to be. ArchiCAD 14 almost seems to be an infant child to a more mature and robust 16. 

There are many people out there such as myself that have used both for a long time and even more that have written about it. I prefer Revit. I have about 20 things I like better in Revit than I like in ArchiCAD. It's not for everybody. Clearly not for you Eric.

Revit has it's place in the market just as ArchiCAD does and that will do for now until something better comes along. 

I would recommend anyone to do comparisons themselves before delving in or read up on the countless blogs and news groups. Just search "ArchiCAD vs Revit" in your favorite search engine and get hundreds of hits. Since Graphisoft does more direct selling, it's a little more difficult to get support right now in the US. But on the flip side beware there are countless Autodesk licensed resellers all trying to get your business. Each reseller offers different incentives and support. Kind of reminds of car dealerships. Different showrooms with the same product. Shop around. Find what works for you.  

-------------------------------------------
Gordon McKenzie Assoc. AIA
BIM Manager, Merriman Associates.
Dallas TX
-------------------------------------------

I have a conference today, so not much time to respond. Sure it's been a few years since I've test driven Revit, but have you got MAC yet? I see AutoCAD and a few other products are available on MAC, but where's Revit?ArchiCAD began with MAC and has supported both platforms forever. Since I started in 1997 MACs and PCs could play together in the same file. I find it strange that so many creative, graphics related professions have always been on MAC, yet Architects in America rarely are since AutoDesk hasn't been very MAC friendly in the past. My personal experience with both programs leaves me comparing Revit's interface to a more complicated Windows OS, while the ArchiCAD interface is more elegant like MAC OS. Just my opinion. How does the Teamwork equivalent (file sharing between users) work compared to ArchiCAD's Teamwork Server? Can you instant message a teammate and ask them for a single element or a portion of their already defined space without signing out and back in again? On large, complex models, this can be time consuming $$$. The built in morph tool is pretty cool too. I can take any parametric element like a column, wall, or even a parametric object like a toilet or handrail and morph it into any shape like the dedicated 3d modeling programs can do. Sure we can tit for tat all day long, but my main point being, Revit isn't the only game in town. Don't be afraid to research options. ArchiCAD is hardly an inferior program, but quite the opposite. Revit likes to stay within it's family and ArchiCAD likes to share with friends. How many file formats can Revit open or save to directly?

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-11-2013 19:29
From: Gordon McKenzie
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Wow Eric. I would take your comments with a grain of salt considering your first comment is "I haven't looked at Revit recently". Before spouting off about how your program is better than someone else's program, read up on the comparisons. Each program has it's pluses and minuses. Please read up on a side by side comparison of Revit 2013 and ArchiCAD 16 and you'll see there isn't too much that's different. It's all personal preference. Like iOS and Android. There isn't a one size fits all solution. There are definitely draw backs to ArchiCAD when it comes to client and consultant drawing references. 

If you haven't looked at Revit 2013 or coming soon 2014, all disciplines can work within the same model with all tools available to them. It's one program to rule them all so to speak. There is no more Revit Architecture, Revit Structure, and Revit MEP anymore. It's just Revit. ArchiCAD still relies on importing Structural IFC models or CAD to get the information from another program. It's gotten better, but isn't there yet. Same with MEP. The MEP modeler is a nice afterthought that hasn't been fully integrated. Relying on importing data from other programs as opposed to have those model in the same native format is a very large drawback. That is one thing that Autodesk got right. I link my consultants Revit models into my own without having a format change, or relying on plug ins that might or might not import the data correctly. 

I suspect that in coming releases ArchiCAD will solve some of their linking issues. They might even develop their own MEP or Structural BIM product. Our money is well spent on Autodesk subscription which has it's comparison to the prices of ArchiCAD plus subscription. So after the initial higher price point, the two programs really equal out.

Most of the moaning recently was over the forced upgrade to the Building Design Suite, which for the price increase does give everyone access to a lot more tools and programs than Graphisoft even offers. At the end of the day, both BIM programs are meant for producing drawings. Right now to me, Revit does the job better. 

And please do not count as a positive that the core of a program is still based in the 1980's. Your not helping yourself there. There have been countless improvements including Release 16 that have pushed it well beyond what it used to be. ArchiCAD 14 almost seems to be an infant child to a more mature and robust 16. 

There are many people out there such as myself that have used both for a long time and even more that have written about it. I prefer Revit. I have about 20 things I like better in Revit than I like in ArchiCAD. It's not for everybody. Clearly not for you Eric.

Revit has it's place in the market just as ArchiCAD does and that will do for now until something better comes along. 

I would recommend anyone to do comparisons themselves before delving in or read up on the countless blogs and news groups. Just search "ArchiCAD vs Revit" in your favorite search engine and get hundreds of hits. Since Graphisoft does more direct selling, it's a little more difficult to get support right now in the US. But on the flip side beware there are countless Autodesk licensed resellers all trying to get your business. Each reseller offers different incentives and support. Kind of reminds of car dealerships. Different showrooms with the same product. Shop around. Find what works for you.  

-------------------------------------------
Gordon McKenzie Assoc. AIA
BIM Manager, Merriman Associates.
Dallas TX
-------------------------------------------

In response to Eric Rawlings' post, I would whole-heartily agree.

I was a part of what the pre-AutoDesk Revit called the "Pioneer Program." I still have the t-shirt they gave us.  We were a group of twenty architects from around the country who participated in teleconferences once or twice a month to discuss the program and what could be done to make it better. It wasn't until v3 that you could actually output a drawing to a printer.  In any case we must have done a good job in pushing the software forward since AutoDesk heard the footsteps and recognized the fact that in order to remain the market leader (in the US), they would have to buy out Revit.

When that happened, I said adios!  As one with limited AutoCad background and experience, I did not consider using Revit when the Desk bought them out.  I had used more than five other programs, that were better than AutoCad, but went the way of of the Edsel due to lack of market share.  I had always considered AutoCad an engineer's software package (not that there is anything wrong with that).  I had found a software package that was created by architects for architects and was much more intuitive that AutoCad,  It was also less than 20% of the cost of AutoCad.  The drawings I could produce looked like they were produced with AutoCad.  AutoDesk even tried to prosecute me for pirating their software.  The legal action was dropped quite quickly when I threatened to own a part of AutoDesk after the suit was lost by them.

I immediately took up ArchiCad whe Revit sold out and have been using it ever since.  While mostly for design, we are now moving into using it for construction documents too. 

Eric is correct that in the world market, ArchiCad has a larger market share.  There are many reasons as to why this is.  I recently purchased some training videos for Revit.  There has been much improvement since the original purchase from the folks in Boston.  I plan to get competenent at both.  I see many similarities betwen the programs that learnimg the second is made easier by knowing the first.  Both have advantages, but if I were to have to make a decision, ArchiCad for right now is my choice.

-------------------------------------------
Greg Burke, AIA
President
Gregory John Burke ' ARCHITECT, PA
Vero Beach, Florida
-------------------------------------------

FYI... for those interested in this topic of ArchiCAD vs Revit:

Scott Mackenzie is doing a side by side comparison on his blog:

• The first post. Revit takes a slight lead out of the gate.
• The second post. Warning, Revit gets slammed in this one.

Also here's a collection of thoughts and links on this subject:

http://www.shoegnome.com/tag/archicad-vs-revit/

-------------------------------------------
Jared Banks AIA
Saint Paul MN
-------------------------------------------

Good posts here, but there's one problem that no one has yet to address - you shouldn't be making a major design/production tool decision based on what other people say. If you're a cabinet maker using hand saws and you query your friends about which power tool you should buy and they say a chainsaw would work best - would you go out and buy one?

Each software application for BIM has its pros and cons - it's up to you to install a trial, spend some time learning the application properly, and doing a sample project. In an ideal scenario, try the same process on the other application under consideration and compare your results. Archicad might have some neat feature that makes your work much more productive than Revit would. Revit might be a bit easier to learn...what's important to your needs?

I started with Revit back in 2001 and my former firm evaluated it against Archicad and Bentley. We went with Revit - not because it was the best all-around application, but because it met MOST of our needs and was easy enough to learn that we could have just about everyone on a project team learning it and producing models. That same firm thought that Digital Project (Gehry's version of CATIA) was the best all-around modeling tool; however, when they tried to implement it across the board, only a few people out of the entire NY office figured out how to use it.

Recently, I have been frustrated by an apparent lack of innovation from the Revit development team at Autodesk, but it is still the core tool we can use to design and document about 90% of our project systems. What happens to the other 10%? Sometimes we'll need to use an application like Rhino with Grasshopper to develop a custom facade solution and then import it into Revit.

-------------------------------------------
James Vandezande AIA
HOK, Inc.
New York NY
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-12-2013 21:21
From: Jared Banks
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit


FYI... for those interested in this topic of ArchiCAD vs Revit:

Scott Mackenzie is doing a side by side comparison on his blog:

• The first post. Revit takes a slight lead out of the gate.
• The second post. Warning, Revit gets slammed in this one.

Also here's a collection of thoughts and links on this subject:

http://www.shoegnome.com/tag/archicad-vs-revit/

-------------------------------------------
Jared Banks AIA
Saint Paul MN
-------------------------------------------

Rather than rely on one's limited knowledge of software, especially a package with which all users are unfamiliar, it is much more efficient and cost effective to listen to experienced users of several software packages. If the cabinet maker is producing award winning cabinets with his chainsaw, maybe he is onto something, and his advice should be regarded.

I have research some of the features placing Revit against ArchiCAD. If I understand correctly, a major hurdle to ArchiCAD is that changes in the model do not concurrently occur on all other views. Each view must be updated or refreshed for the changes to be seen. Is this correct? If so, this is a significant time stealer for those in high production mode, especially for models with millions of square feet of space,

-------------------------------------------
Charles Graham AIA
Architect
O'Neal, Inc.
Greenville SC
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-14-2013 10:11
From: James Vandezande
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Good posts here, but there's one problem that no one has yet to address - you shouldn't be making a major design/production tool decision based on what other people say. If you're a cabinet maker using hand saws and you query your friends about which power tool you should buy and they say a chainsaw would work best - would you go out and buy one?

Each software application for BIM has its pros and cons - it's up to you to install a trial, spend some time learning the application properly, and doing a sample project. In an ideal scenario, try the same process on the other application under consideration and compare your results. Archicad might have some neat feature that makes your work much more productive than Revit would. Revit might be a bit easier to learn...what's important to your needs?

I started with Revit back in 2001 and my former firm evaluated it against Archicad and Bentley. We went with Revit - not because it was the best all-around application, but because it met MOST of our needs and was easy enough to learn that we could have just about everyone on a project team learning it and producing models. That same firm thought that Digital Project (Gehry's version of CATIA) was the best all-around modeling tool; however, when they tried to implement it across the board, only a few people out of the entire NY office figured out how to use it.

Recently, I have been frustrated by an apparent lack of innovation from the Revit development team at Autodesk, but it is still the core tool we can use to design and document about 90% of our project systems. What happens to the other 10%? Sometimes we'll need to use an application like Rhino with Grasshopper to develop a custom facade solution and then import it into Revit.

-------------------------------------------
James Vandezande AIA
HOK, Inc.
New York NY
-------------------------------------------

the AC and AutoCAD debate is finally boiling to the surface, hooray.

i started out with microstation in the mid 90's, spent a few years with autocad architectural desktop, have been using archicad for past 8 years and upgrading every year, now using archicad 16.

went with AC after doing a small amount of research. one package having many good capabilities. lots of good upgardes in the past few years. as noted in other replies, it started out as an architectural 3D cad package from its inception, was not pulled together from a few dissimilar graphics packages and forced to integrate.

i also agree with the notion to go from 2D autocad to a 3D BIM application, whether archicad or revit, the learning curve will be the same (same amount of pain). the larger firms are generally forced to stick with autodesk because they may not be able to or want to jump in with both feet, it makes financial and transition sense to switch over in small steps, a few people at a time so that the work flow output doesn't suffer all at once. the phone access tech support for archicad has always been superb.

obviously they both get the job done, each have pros and cons which most could be debated as to how much pro or con. sometimes i see that having more control as being better as discussed re the layer control, i find the layer system in AC as a positive, although it does take time to use it efficiently.

the AC folks i have called on in the US do work hard to earn your business.

-------------------------------------------
Jeffrey Warren AIA
Architect
DESIGNshop, inc.
Simpsonville SC
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-15-2013 18:37
From: Charles Graham
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Rather than rely on one's limited knowledge of software, especially a package with which all users are unfamiliar, it is much more efficient and cost effective to listen to experienced users of several software packages. If the cabinet maker is producing award winning cabinets with his chainsaw, maybe he is onto something, and his advice should be regarded.

I have research some of the features placing Revit against ArchiCAD. If I understand correctly, a major hurdle to ArchiCAD is that changes in the model do not concurrently occur on all other views. Each view must be updated or refreshed for the changes to be seen. Is this correct? If so, this is a significant time stealer for those in high production mode, especially for models with millions of square feet of space,

-------------------------------------------
Charles Graham AIA
Architect
O'Neal, Inc.
Greenville SC
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-14-2013 10:11
From: James Vandezande
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Good posts here, but there's one problem that no one has yet to address - you shouldn't be making a major design/production tool decision based on what other people say. If you're a cabinet maker using hand saws and you query your friends about which power tool you should buy and they say a chainsaw would work best - would you go out and buy one?

Each software application for BIM has its pros and cons - it's up to you to install a trial, spend some time learning the application properly, and doing a sample project. In an ideal scenario, try the same process on the other application under consideration and compare your results. Archicad might have some neat feature that makes your work much more productive than Revit would. Revit might be a bit easier to learn...what's important to your needs?

I started with Revit back in 2001 and my former firm evaluated it against Archicad and Bentley. We went with Revit - not because it was the best all-around application, but because it met MOST of our needs and was easy enough to learn that we could have just about everyone on a project team learning it and producing models. That same firm thought that Digital Project (Gehry's version of CATIA) was the best all-around modeling tool; however, when they tried to implement it across the board, only a few people out of the entire NY office figured out how to use it.

Recently, I have been frustrated by an apparent lack of innovation from the Revit development team at Autodesk, but it is still the core tool we can use to design and document about 90% of our project systems. What happens to the other 10%? Sometimes we'll need to use an application like Rhino with Grasshopper to develop a custom facade solution and then import it into Revit.

-------------------------------------------
James Vandezande AIA
HOK, Inc.
New York NY
-------------------------------------------

Charles this is not necessarily correct.  

The model is always alive, it is parametric, the views on the sheet layouts might either be set to autoupdate or they can be set to manually update the information that is contained within them.  This is only on the layout sheets themselves, in the modeling area the elevations, sections, and other information are alive and directly connected to the changes made in the model in real time, there is one variation but it is so slight it's not worth mentioning in this discussion.  All of this works very well.  I have worked with projects that are vastly complicated with different methods for updating relevant information on the layout sheets and have never found myself not able to see information that is current, if I know what I am doing.  All of these options are geared around your projects' needs which can change throughout the project, and can be affected by size and its complexity.  Which makes it nice to have so many options to adjust which accommodate the model and team as the project evolves.

Archicad is a very well designed platform that has been around since the early 80's, similar to when AutoCad was developed but then again totally different trajectory.  Archicad is very powerful and can do almost all things necessary for any size project, of any complexity.  Archicad can work on large files/projects with large teams over vast areas with more diverse teams using less bandwidth.  They also have a really passionate, highly intelligent CEO with a deep technical background and understanding of the software.  Victor has been with the company as long as Revit has been in existence, or the term BIM was coined by Autodesk.

Every platform has advantages.  Just pick one.  Learn, and improve and don't isolate yourselves by your platform selection.  This is the biggest problem the industry faces is the lack of Interoperability or cross integration among teams who are using different systems.  Archicad is really great at integrating and translating its data into various other formats.  We have to work together in this sandbox of BIM/Virtual Building.  How we get there and what we use when we are there can vary greatly.



Respectfully,




WEW

-------------------------------------------
Willard Williams AIA
Walker Warner Architects
San Francisco CA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-15-2013 18:37
From: Charles Graham
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Rather than rely on one's limited knowledge of software, especially a package with which all users are unfamiliar, it is much more efficient and cost effective to listen to experienced users of several software packages. If the cabinet maker is producing award winning cabinets with his chainsaw, maybe he is onto something, and his advice should be regarded.

I have research some of the features placing Revit against ArchiCAD. If I understand correctly, a major hurdle to ArchiCAD is that changes in the model do not concurrently occur on all other views. Each view must be updated or refreshed for the changes to be seen. Is this correct? If so, this is a significant time stealer for those in high production mode, especially for models with millions of square feet of space,

-------------------------------------------
Charles Graham AIA
Architect
O'Neal, Inc.
Greenville SC
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-14-2013 10:11
From: James Vandezande
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Good posts here, but there's one problem that no one has yet to address - you shouldn't be making a major design/production tool decision based on what other people say. If you're a cabinet maker using hand saws and you query your friends about which power tool you should buy and they say a chainsaw would work best - would you go out and buy one?

Each software application for BIM has its pros and cons - it's up to you to install a trial, spend some time learning the application properly, and doing a sample project. In an ideal scenario, try the same process on the other application under consideration and compare your results. Archicad might have some neat feature that makes your work much more productive than Revit would. Revit might be a bit easier to learn...what's important to your needs?

I started with Revit back in 2001 and my former firm evaluated it against Archicad and Bentley. We went with Revit - not because it was the best all-around application, but because it met MOST of our needs and was easy enough to learn that we could have just about everyone on a project team learning it and producing models. That same firm thought that Digital Project (Gehry's version of CATIA) was the best all-around modeling tool; however, when they tried to implement it across the board, only a few people out of the entire NY office figured out how to use it.

Recently, I have been frustrated by an apparent lack of innovation from the Revit development team at Autodesk, but it is still the core tool we can use to design and document about 90% of our project systems. What happens to the other 10%? Sometimes we'll need to use an application like Rhino with Grasshopper to develop a custom facade solution and then import it into Revit.

-------------------------------------------
James Vandezande AIA
HOK, Inc.
New York NY
-------------------------------------------

James, I am in complete agreement with you. Everyone should decide for themselves which BIM application works best for their firm.

At the AIA Convention in 2005, I visited the booths of (in my opinion) the top four BIM application developers. After spending hours at their booths watching demos and having discussions, I narrowed the list to two: ArchiCAD and Revit. Following additional research confirming these two seemed best suited for us, our firm set up a team of four architects who then spent four months immersed in Revit, and then another four months immersed in ArchiCAD. We brought in developer-authorized trainers for both programs, developed a test project through all phases of a project, kept comparison spreadsheets of "soft" aspects such as ease-of-use as well as factual aspects like file import/export capabilities.

After 9 months, we chose ArchiCAD. It was a surprise decision to many, as most architects in our region were being told that "BIM=Revit" followed by: "and here is the cost to upgrade from your AutoCAD licenses..." We rocked with ArchiCAD for several years. "BIM-plementation" of ArchiCAD was successful.

But then our firm's practice began to change and we found ourselves partnering and sharing design roles with other architecture firms around the country as our expertise in our market grew beyond just our local region. As the majority of these partner firms were using Revit (often by default as mentioned above) our use of a different successful BIM platform not only surprised them, but presented challenges during some model exchanges, and further, precluded any possibility of both firms working "live" in the model. (ArchiCAD has had single-server-based live participation for several years, and we even offered other Revit firms ArchiCAD licenses but there were no takers.)

We eventually came to the conclusion that we needed to move (back) to Revit. (Like previous posters in this thread, we used, er, more accurately TRIED to use, Revit 1.x for over a year.) It was difficult to explain this move to staff as they struggled learning Revit, having full capability of producing excellent work in ArchiCAD. While we considered running both platforms for a little while, in the end it became the right business decision for us to switch all projects over to Revit, even though most staff still preferred ArchiCAD after learning Revit.

You can squabble over comparisons of "pet pallets" and ribbons, and talk about which company has more market share in different parts of the planet, but in my opinion, in the end it really comes down to which tool best facilitates success for your individual practice. Try them out. Don't trust the chainsaw salesman.

Tom Peterson

-------------------------------------------
Thomas H. Peterson AIA, LEED AP
Principal
Mackey Mitchell Architects
Saint Louis MO
www.mackeymitchell.com
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 03-14-2013 10:11
From: James Vandezande
Subject: ArchiCAD vs Revit

Good posts here, but there's one problem that no one has yet to address - you shouldn't be making a major design/production tool decision based on what other people say. If you're a cabinet maker using hand saws and you query your friends about which power tool you should buy and they say a chainsaw would work best - would you go out and buy one?

Each software application for BIM has its pros and cons - it's up to you to install a trial, spend some time learning the application properly, and doing a sample project. In an ideal scenario, try the same process on the other application under consideration and compare your results. Archicad might have some neat feature that makes your work much more productive than Revit would. Revit might be a bit easier to learn...what's important to your needs?

I started with Revit back in 2001 and my former firm evaluated it against Archicad and Bentley. We went with Revit - not because it was the best all-around application, but because it met MOST of our needs and was easy enough to learn that we could have just about everyone on a project team learning it and producing models. That same firm thought that Digital Project (Gehry's version of CATIA) was the best all-around modeling tool; however, when they tried to implement it across the board, only a few people out of the entire NY office figured out how to use it.

Recently, I have been frustrated by an apparent lack of innovation from the Revit development team at Autodesk, but it is still the core tool we can use to design and document about 90% of our project systems. What happens to the other 10%? Sometimes we'll need to use an application like Rhino with Grasshopper to develop a custom facade solution and then import it into Revit.

-------------------------------------------
James Vandezande AIA
HOK, Inc.
New York NY
-------------------------------------------