Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Is Revit in a deadlock?

  1. #1
    Member Andrew P's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 19, 2011
    Posts
    369
    Current Local Time
    12:49 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Is Revit in a deadlock?

    For many of us, Revit 2019 has been a refreshing release after years of poor and boring releases. According to Autodesk, they have implemented many long-standing requests which might explain the euphoria compared to the previous releases. An they are committed to use users feedback to steer the development of Revit to ensure user satisfaction. However, there’s a caveat to this apparent new policy at Autodesk. Because Autodesk never really catered towards the full spectrum of the AEC industry, in particular the conceptual design discipline, firms who engage in complex geometrical projects or complex historical restoration projects or even fabricators, the current users based isn’t as diverse as it should be to really make the software as versatile as the other Autodesk products. Consequently, the current Revit users base has become very homogeneous and the type of requests submitted by this group might lead to a one-sided push of development.

    This was already notable in the previous releases where and enhanced text tools or cancel print features where the key highlights, while Revit’s extremely poor and limiting modeling kernel, hasn’t gotten the necessary attention. I’m afraid that the users who need these tools aren’t using Revit to begin with or aren't in large quantities to gather enough support. Some of these limitations have been listed on the Ideas forum, but have been archived due to very little to no votes cast. To name a few:


    Allow solids to cut other solids in family editor. A very basic feature that is present in pretty much every 3d modelling application have been submitted on the Revit Ideas forum back in 2016. Unfortunately, due to lack of votes, the request has been officially archived. This come to surprise since it’s seems to me to be a very useful feature regardless of the type of work you do.

    Splines that can be trimmed or extended. AutoCAD has this ability.

    Site tools. This was a top request back in the AUGI days. Luckily, it’s been reviewed at this moment.

    Meshes/Nurbs/Subdivision modeling

    Chamfer/3d Fillet

    At the end I’m afraid that BIM as it intended to be, a workflow that gets you from design all the way to fabrication and maintenance will continue be disruptive segmented unfortunately. Architects will continue working with Rhino or other non-architectural modelling tools. Designs get dumped into Revit if it’s not to complex. Fabricators will start from scratch as Revit isn’t suitable either for fabrication. Let’s hope that Project Quantum will solve these issues.
    Last edited by Andrew P; April 26th, 2018 at 11:55 PM.

  2. #2
    Member kowen1208's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18, 2013
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    354
    Current Local Time
    05:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I use Revit primarily for architecture, so I'm in the majority group. However, there are many things that I wish Revit did differently that would essentially require rebuilding the software from the ground up. If Autodesk has the same assessment, that's a tough spot to be in. Many users will hate the changes. Many may switch to other software programs. Everyone will have to learn how to use the software. Is it worth going down that road, or do we stay the course and build the best program on this faulty foundation as possible?

  3. #3
    Moderator
    "I am NOT a Revit tutor!"
    Dave Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California USA
    Posts
    4,539
    Current Local Time
    03:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by kowen1208 View Post
    I use Revit primarily for architecture, so I'm in the majority group. However, there are many things that I wish Revit did differently that would essentially require rebuilding the software from the ground up. If Autodesk has the same assessment, that's a tough spot to be in. Many users will hate the changes. Many may switch to other software programs. Everyone will have to learn how to use the software. Is it worth going down that road, or do we stay the course and build the best program on this faulty foundation as possible?
    nobody can make everyone happy all of the time...simple as that

  4. #4
    Member kowen1208's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18, 2013
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    354
    Current Local Time
    05:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Jones View Post
    nobody can make everyone happy all of the time...simple as that
    Exactly. But Autodesk has to constantly evaluate "how many people are we going to make happy vs. unhappy" whenever they work on their roadmap, taking into consideration not only revenue lost or gained due to customer satisfaction, but also the resources it takes to reach those milestones. It's easy for us users to sit back and complain about "Revit doesn't do such and such", and forget that Revit is the product of a company whose main concern is profitability.
    Last edited by kowen1208; April 27th, 2018 at 05:47 PM.

  5. #5
    Moderator
    "I am NOT a Revit tutor!"
    Dave Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California USA
    Posts
    4,539
    Current Local Time
    03:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by kowen1208 View Post
    Exactly. But Autodesk has to constantly evaluate "how many people are we going to make happy vs. unhappy" whenever they work on their roadmap, taking into consideration not only revenue lost or gained due to customer satisfaction, but also the resources it takes to reach those milestones. It's easy for us users to sit back and complain about "Revit doesn't do such and such", and forget that Revit is the product of a company who's main concern is profitability.
    well, I do agree with your last sentence. I own my own company and have the same concern (along with others). In the end one could wish for perfection, being faster than the speed of light and never missing a schedule, or whatever, but if I am not profitable I cease to exist. Autodesk has the same issue so I personally don't blame them for their direction for the most part. Revit is not perfect but it makes me profitable and that makes me happy

  6. #6
    Moderator snowyweston's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    C.LONDON
    Posts
    4,426
    Current Local Time
    11:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Possibly.

    And some might suggest you are also.

  7. #7
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    10,628
    Current Local Time
    05:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I dont always agree that the prioritization of development resources is properly allocated, to be sure.

    Having said that: Dont kid yourself. This is just another *typical Andrew post* where he ignores the fact that for the MAJORITY (yes, i said majority) of architects, those features he would like to see arent even in the priority list at all, let alone far down the list. The MAJORITY of firms arent drawing douchey squiggly **** just to try to be cool, while drinking french press with their thick rimmed glasses sitting on their Mac Book Pros. The MAJORITY of architects do *normal buildings.*

    BTW, i would do some googling for statistics of how many people work in Architecture, versus how many people have subscriptions to Rhino. Youre a joke, if you honestly think the *majority* use Rhino. Rhino is completely badass, and i LOVE it. But it is NOT a mainstream tool for the majority of architects. You can *yeah But* about the elite firms you know of that use it, and you can copy and paste your starchitect images all you want. The MAJORITY of architects dont do that sort of work.

    Niche specialty software requires niche specialty pricing. See: Digital Project.

  8. #8
    Forum Addict elton williams's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    2,680
    Current Local Time
    09:49 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    JFC, here we go again. Is there some way I can block specific thread topics on the the forum so I don't have to even see them?

  9. #9
    R.I.P. MPwuzhere's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 14, 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    4,864
    Current Local Time
    03:49 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by elton williams View Post
    JFC, here we go again. Is there some way I can block specific thread topics on the the forum so I don't have to even see them?
    You can go to a person's profile and ignore them if that helps.

  10. #10
    Member Andrew P's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 19, 2011
    Posts
    369
    Current Local Time
    12:49 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    I dont always agree that the prioritization of development resources is properly allocated, to be sure.

    Having said that: Dont kid yourself. This is just another *typical Andrew post* where he ignores the fact that for the MAJORITY (yes, i said majority) of architects, those features he would like to see arent even in the priority list at all, let alone far down the list. The MAJORITY of firms arent drawing douchey squiggly **** just to try to be cool, while drinking french press with their thick rimmed glasses sitting on their Mac Book Pros.
    Are you referring to the "majority" of architects in the USA or are you including the rest of the world as well?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    The MAJORITY of architects do *normal buildings.*
    What do you consider "normal buildings"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    BTW, i would do some googling for statistics of how many people work in Architecture, versus how many people have subscriptions to Rhino. Youre a joke, if you honestly think the *majority* use Rhino. Rhino is completely badass, and i LOVE it. But it is NOT a mainstream tool for the majority of architects. You can *yeah But* about the elite firms you know of that use it, and you can copy and paste your starchitect images all you want. The MAJORITY of architects dont do that sort of work.

    Niche specialty software requires niche specialty pricing. See: Digital Project.
    If your answer to all of these questions, that the “majority” you are referring to, are architects living and working in the good old USA, then yes, I fully agree with you. The majority doesn’t use Rhino. While I’m not so sure what mean with” normal” buildings, my assumption is that you’re referring to typical orthogonal classical style buildings, which indeed is the bread and butter of most American architects. However, while I can imagine that it’s not always easy to phantom the fact that world is larger than our 51 states(and I'm not patronizing you personally), we only make up for 4% of the world’s population. So, in that sense, it‘s almost impossible to know exactly what the majority of the world is building or what type of software the majority is using unless you or anyone else have done an extensive research on this.

    Personally, I can only speak about the firms I’ve worked at as well as the countries I worked in, where coincidently the majority use Rhino. But unlike conventional beliefs, Rhino isn’t used exclusively to create blob shaped buildings. On the contrary, most Rhino users used it for conceptual design for ‘normal’ buildings (although the term ‘normal buildings’ differs from country to country), but more so, for conceptual urban master planning. Especially in highly dense cities, having a software that can run hundreds of analyses in terms of FSI, zoning limits, sun studies, etc. is essential. As we speak, I’m working now on an urban project in Russia, where it’s mandatory that each livingroom gets at least two hours a day of direct sunlight. This is almost impossible to make these calculation without the assistance of Grasshopper. But for the sake of this conversation, let’s assume for a moment that I personally (or the small coffee press drinking group of architects who draw douchey squiggly **** just to be cool while wearing thick rimmed glasses sitting on their Mac Book Pros as you described so nicely) need a few modeling enhancements in Revit. What is wrong with that? Is that going to hinder you from designing and documenting you’re so called “normal” buildings? If anything, enhanced modelling tools are as essential for twisting towers as the heavily ornamented venetian style replicas.

    I’m certainly not here to discuss architecture styles as it’s not the proper place to do so. My only point was to shed light on the fact that certain requests will never get reviewed, since those who are in need of those tools, aren’t using Revit at this moment, let alone vote on these issues. And that is a bit unfortunate.

    On a personal note, I always find it ironic how we find it very much justifiable why it’s absolutely necessary that a three man startup who designs and fabricates $5 costing Iphone cases in their garage, are entitled to the overload of modeling tools in Fusion 360, while we find it extremely hard to justify a few extra modeling tools to assist a 200+ man architecture firm on a $50 million building design.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •