Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: Leading architecture firms pen open letter to Autodesk over rising costs...

  1.    #41
    Moderator Robin Deurloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 7, 2011
    Location
    Rotterdam, Holland
    Posts
    1,634
    Current Local Time
    11:33 PM

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    One thing that I think should be on the list is to get all the data from elements available in Revit.
    A good example is the Mirrored property you can get to with the API in Dynamo with Python, but can not be used otherwise.

    Other examples might be x, y and z coordinates from the project basepoint, rotated, flipped, mirrored.

    To be honest I'm not sure what that should look like, but maybe an extra section in the instance properties panel with just reporting parameters?

  2.    #42
    Member anthonyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31, 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Current Local Time
    07:33 AM

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    To add my voice to the concerns about pricing. My thoughts on the matter are:
    • There has been a disrespectful increase in the cost of ownership that is not matched by feature improvements with numerous long-standing substandard existing features that need attention: batch printing without locking up and the ability to define the output filename is just one.
    • The subscription model does ensure continued vendor viability, but the continued income flow means there is little incentive to develop the product.
    • Named licenses means an increase in customer workload to manage them across the business. I did not have to assign a named user with the manufacturer of each car at my house. We can share the cars amongst the family as it suits us, but we understand that two of us cannot drive one car at the same time. That is up to us to manage. Companies as well as families want to share their limited resources to make the most of them. At my workplace we have hot desks and our building does not have a toilet for each employee. We share the small number that are there. Removing network licenses in favour of named users is a punitive action that has no benefit for customers. I hear Amy’s reasons, but they do not hold water for me.
    • If a company discontinues subscription then there would be no ability to access historical project data. This is a real danger for firms. A viewer program that easily allows for Worksets, links and printing should always be available.
    • I wish we did not need the Collections. Most users at the companies I interact with use Revit alone. I use AutoCad occasionally, but only to prepare a DWG survey or similar for linking into Revit. The other software from the collection is never installed. It is not adding benefit to us.
    • Generative Design is a new feature, but it is only available to Collection subscribers I believe, not for Revit alone. Can there be a functional reason for this, or is it only a punitive measure? Just because you can do something, does not mean that you should. Happy customers will continue to spend money with you – and be enthusiastic fans. Unhappy customers will look for alternatives.
    • Using Revit is my career. I enjoy working with the program every day. But there are limits. I am not the decision maker: I am the influencer - and these price rises are making my justification more difficult. Perhaps the forum should have a new thread or grouping for Revit Alternatives where we discuss what the competition is doing and what the pros and cons of those applications might be: ArchiCAD, Catia, BricsCAD, Rhino/Grasshopper, Rhino Inside, BlenderBIM, Vectorworks, AllPlan, Bricsys, Bentley Open Building Designer.
    • I applaud Amy, Kyle and Scott for their participation, but the main issue of high cost remains.

  3.    #43
    Member anthonyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31, 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Current Local Time
    07:33 AM

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    To add my voice to the requests for existing feature development. Can we please have:
    • The View Maximise button functionality returned to the way it has always been up until v2018.
    • Ability to batch print without stalling and with granular control over output filenames.
    • Ability to have multi-sheet schedules.
    • Ability to schedule all elements in one schedule, including materials.
    • Ability to have a dynamic abbreviations list.
    • Ability to see Areas in a normal floor plan.
    • Have better site tools.
    • Make Groups more robust.
    • A built-in pattern maker.
    • Easy batch sheet and view creation and renumbering/reordering.
    • Make Railings easier to use.
    • Ability to move a callout from one view to another. And allow a disparity between the actual callout boundary and that shown in the parent view.
    • Allow user-defined back-referencing in the same way you can manually define a View Reference.
    • Support for SketchUp import that has minimal affect on file size and performance.
    • Ability to cut stair display in a plan view as they go down to the level below.
    • Easier Revit.ini updates to drive changes to office/team computers, a la the way Bentley handled site/project/user configurations a decade ago.
    • Stop SWC pushing my personal settings to the central model.
    • Ability for family formulas to interpret strings.
    • Ability to remove/change items/parameters in a family created from a family template file.
    • Ability to have option buttons and/or radio buttons in families.
    • Parameters to report if a family is flipped or rotated in the project.
    • Ability to write text font/size changes to all system and loadable families in a project.
    • Allow Revit to correctly interpret DWG surveys that have their origin point far away from the drawing elements.
    • Ability to have a Grid North in addition to the True North so shadows can be calculated correctly.
    • Allow view phasing overlays so Existing and New buildings and shadows can be compared in one view.
    • Allow vector output of shadows cast so they can be coloured, measured, scheduled and calculated.
    These are the tools I use all day every day.
    Last edited by anthonyB; Today at 01:10 PM. Reason: Thought of another.

  4.    #44
    Forum Addict tzframpton's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17, 2011
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,107
    Current Local Time
    04:33 PM

    3 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I guess I'll throw in my comments.

    A little background: I'm a small business owner with a handful of employees and we are a specialty MEP firm. We are not engineers, although we do design work with partnering engineers, and our primary bread 'n butter is the MEP sub-contractor's BIM modeling, coordination and shop drawings. We get a lot of work with general contractors too, supplying the same MEP modeling efforts, or spearheading the full coordination process.

    Two things: Price and Functionality.

    First, the price increase of 33% that was announced four days after I purchased my year subscriptions did not set well with me. That was about 9 months ago, so I have 3 more months to go before I have to buy the same packages all over again, with nothing new/different/etc but now it's 33% more. That comes out to about $8k more... which is about $650/mo that literally comes out of my personal pocket.

    Second, is a mixed bag. I still feel the pain of the MEP designer dealing with native Revit content for duct, pipe, conduit, etc. There have been no improvements in quite some time, and I do not want to be too critical here but those tools are in many ways the most inefficient approach to modeling a duct, a pipe or a conduit - and don't get me started on fittings. But the Fabrication Parts in Revit has been an incalculable addition to our workflow and process. Yes, still have to deal with AutoCAD and yes it only makes financial sense if you have the full Industry Collection, but it has absolutely changed our process and we can provide true LOD 400 content from a Revit platform.

    I have been joking for a few years now that I'm "ready for a Revit killer to come along and up the game of design software" but I must confess that's not much of a joke. I like Revit, and it is a productive tool for us indeed, but I do feel a sense of connection to the open letter.

    -TZ

  5.    #45
    Moderator Robin Deurloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 7, 2011
    Location
    Rotterdam, Holland
    Posts
    1,634
    Current Local Time
    11:33 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Got 2 more that are on my list for a while, that I forgot:

    1. have paint react to phases, so I can give a wall of window a different color in the new phase. Mostly for rendering purposes I guess
    1a. while you are at it let objects know they are painted so m2 can be calculated from that
    2. Let Rooms stay when you change phase. I think they should stay unless I tell them to be removed, so maybe let them react to phasing, and be demolished in a new phase?

Similar Threads

  1. Toposurface not rising???
    By flying_tj in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 29th, 2018, 03:53 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 29th, 2017, 02:45 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 23rd, 2015, 06:45 PM
  4. Revit OpEd: Dear Mr. OpEd - A Letter from Autodesk
    By Revit OpEd in forum Blog Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 17th, 2013, 04:15 PM
  5. stairs rising on the other side required ??!
    By ahmed_hassan in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 16th, 2011, 04:39 PM

Posting Permissions

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