The end of upgrades

[steven-g]

That's not the point. You use Revit, you know what it can do and how well it does it. But it is only popular amongst people who use it. Nobody else has heard of it. And anyone looking at software purchase, will look at the price tag, and then maybe look at the features, maybe. So maybe Revit is the future and if it's that good then it probably will be. But only once the word has spread. The fact that nine out of ten cats prefer "whiskas" is because it's the only one they have heard of, not because it's the best. And unfortunately being the best doesn't count for a lot when it comes down to advertising and the collective mind. And it don't matter what Revit is and Autocad isn't, at the end of the day the building will be built.

[tzframpton]

That's not the point.

Yes, that's exactly the point actually. AutoCAD became popular because of the market demand. Revit is doing the same. So is Inventor. Solidworks. Catia. List goes on.

 

When AutoCAD came around, it replaced hand drafting in many industries (eventually). Now, the parametric modeling CAD application is replacing AutoCAD. I can assure you that nine out of ten cats do not prefer to use AutoCAD who've used a better platform on a production level for a few years. You, and Mark, and many others here are making your points based off your emotional attachment to a software that you are comfortable with, and from what I can tell, there is little experience with a parametric CAD application.

 

Do you think that guys like me, JD Mather, and SuperCAD have all teamed up to boast about these applications and degrade AutoCAD? Absolutely not. We haven't drank any "kool-aid" it's just logical and common sense. The need for AutoCAD is going away. The use for AutoCAD will still be around. Big difference.

[ReMark]

I've read that BIM is not well suited for fast tracked projects nor does it solve all of a company's design problems.

 

Does your company have a BIM project leader?

[f700es]

I've read that BIM is not well suited for fast tracked projects nor does it solve all of a company's design problems.

 

I would have to say not true. It is made for fast tracked projects. All changes are updated on the sheets automatically.

[steven-g]

Yes, that's exactly the point actually. AutoCAD became popular because of the market demand. Revit is doing the same. So is Inventor. Solidworks. Catia. List goes on.

 

When AutoCAD came around, it replaced hand drafting in many industries (eventually). Now, the parametric modeling CAD application is replacing AutoCAD. I can assure you that nine out of ten cats do not prefer to use AutoCAD who've used a better platform on a production level for a few years. You, and Mark, and many others here are making your points based off your emotional attachment to a software that you are comfortable with, and from what I can tell, there is little experience with a parametric CAD application.

 

Your wrong there, I would love to work with Inventor or Revit if it is as capable, I don't use LT out of choice, I push LT up to and way beyond it's limits because I know that there are better methods to working than doing drafting in one program and material lists in another and planning in yet another etc. I hope you are correct that parametric modelling is taking over (it may well be introduced into Autocad). My main argument is about the alternatives, Autodesk is seen as being Autocad and I think stepping away from any Autodesk product due to financial reasons is not a decision many people will take. If Autocad was to be reduced in price in comparison with Revit or Inventor, then that would certainly prolong the life of Autocad. In my experience it is the managers who make those decisions and not the people who actually use the end program, the problem Revit has is convincing the managers that it works better, simpler and more cost effectively than it's cheaper cousin Autocad

[Organic]

Many people won't "want" to switch but they'll be forced to in the AEC and Manufacturing industry. I can't speak for Civil. I have no clue what lies ahead for that market.

 

The civil industry won't change signifignatly. AutoCad & Microstation have both been the stalwart drafting packages for 30 years and will continue to be. Design has generally been done in other packages. Civil 3D (AutoCad with civil tools added on top) was very late to the game and is certainly not the future of the civil industry.

[Organic]

You see, inside Revit MEP, you can take the volumetric space conditions, get the thermal R-value off the walls, floor and ceilings, and calculate load information which will size your ductwork and add up the CFM discharge for the unit you've placed for the space. Read up on how Revit performs calculations, something AutoCAD simply cannot provide.

 

The output from these programs is only as good as the inputs entered into them. Garbage in = garbage out as the saying goes. If you have non engineering operating the software and performing calculations that engineers would have once performed then there runs the risk of problems developing later.

 

I for one don't see why everyone is advocating for CAD software to become smarter. If you think about it you will realise it is not actually in your best interest. Take Civil 3D for example; it tries to be an engineering design package while also reducing the amount of drafting required. A lot of engineers are now directly operating Civil 3D, whereas once both a designer and drafter (as well as the engineer) would have been employed. In essence smarter software is putting people out of jobs.

 

Engineers don't want to draw things, then do manual calculations on a scratch pad or calculator.

 

Err why not? I use CAD a lot more than most engineers and still perform many calculations and design aspects on a sheet or paper (or in Excel). No software is perfect; if an engineer can't recognise when the software is not working (and work out a appropriate solution) or what reasonable results are then that is a major issue in it self.

[Organic]

With how much gridlock I've seen, it doesn't matter how 'inexperienced' you say I am. It takes no effort to notice that being "information rich" is the last thing we need. 10-15 years ago there wasn't hardly any gridlock in the industry and now, with all the communication and information rich business going on, almost nothing can get done. People spend more time reading e-mails and staying connected to everything that's going on that they can't even get their own job done.

 

I agree.

 

I'm working on a few large projects now that have multiple stakeholders (including government agencies) and multiple design firms involved. There is no BIM model, no navisworks adoption, nada; trying to get everyone to use something like that would be like pushing water uphill. It is hard enough just trying to get .dwg files off of everyone else!

 

The methods used worked in the past and present and will continue to work in the future.

 

The learning curve is just as easy if someone starts out in one or the other. If you come from one platform, then of course the learning curve will be steeper.

 

I don't agree that the learning curve would be the same. Revit would require more time to learn. Similarly though Civil 3D would take more time to learn than vanilla AutoCad so it is not really a comparison that can be made.

 

But it's not fair to calculate the direct cost between Revit and AutoCAD, because the platforms aren't directly comparable. Many people confuse this topic.

 

The cost is negligible anyhow for most firms

 

I still see AutoCAD sticking around. I do feel that current pricing and editions could use a change.

AutoCAD LT, as it is, should be $500. No more, that's it. Too many competitors give their "LT" version away. Compete or get out of the game!

AutoCAD Standard: Full AutoCAD with 3D features, database connectivity, LISP and customization but no rendering engine, $,1,500. Most users don't use it so why pay for it.

AutoCAD Pro: Everything it is today. $2,500

 

You value a rendering engine at $1000?

 

AutoCad is expensive, no question about it. However, companies build the cost of the software into their employee charge out (bill out) rates just like any other overhead.

Edited March 2, 2014 by Organic

[Organic]

If you do not know Revit, you're either not going to get hired or you're coming in at entry level and you will learn Revit.

 

Rubbish.

 

Most firms hire professionals based on experience and transferable skills, not specific knowledge in a software package. You hire someone for their architectural design or mechanical design skills, not their experience in X software package.

 

Companies who hire on software package alone tend to be the companies no one wants to work for.

[Organic]

REVIT has not fully fulfilled its BIM promise. Anyways, what does the contractor constructing the building need in the field? Does he or his subcontractors need BIM? No. They need a set of working drawings. Those happen to be ...drumroll please... 2D drawings.

 

You've hit the nail on the head with 2D drawings.

 

What has taken off in the civil construction industry (by some contractors) is the use of handheld GPS (with design model uploaded) for the contractor to use (including for machine control). Printed paper plans are still the go though.

[Organic]

At my last company, the CEO made an announcement that everyone's going 3D - period. Civil 3D for certain departments, Revit for other departments, and so forth. There were a few "AutoCAD's never going away" guys who instantly, in one day, went from knowing it all to totally back to ground zero.

 

Civil 3D is just AutoCad with civil tools chucked on the top. I'm a big of AutoCad although not so of Civil 3D; it simply doesn't have the power that a lot of other programs has while it also has a lot of bugs and quirks (that have resided in it for many years). We have now moved away from Civil 3D for design (although are still using AutoCad as the main drafting package).

 

The civil department of your firm would surely have had to have been using design software packages other than doing it all manually in AutoCad?

[tzframpton]

You've hit the nail on the head with 2D drawings.

*rolls eyes* Man, you two guys are hopeless, haha. Organic, you're civil... which has nothing to do with Revit, so why do you even have an opinion about it?

 

You and Mark still believe that Revit is simply a drafting program. Why are you two so unbelievably stubborn with this assumption that 2D drawings is what it's all about?

 

Revit is a project management tool. You can execute Revit Server so that many people can access the same project file anywhere as long as you have an internet connection. At my last company, you had the Dallas office, Houston office and our California office working on the same project file, at the same time, with live model updates as you design. Admin rights and permissions can be set so access to certain modeling components were available or denied. AutoCAD simply cannot do this. Once a single user is in one file, it's locked out. And that's fine, I'm not faulting AutoCAD for this, I'm saying it doesn't advertise to do this. Just like a Word document can't have two people in there at the same time.

 

Building envelope information can be acquired throughout the life of the project for our mechanical engineers to gain access to for their load and calculations. Our structural designer in California and myself utilized live interference checking to coordinate ductwork penetrating the roof framing, and CMU walls on our last project. Structural engineers have to submit a cost analysis estimate along with the 95% submittal so the owner can have a benchmark on pricing from the contractor - all done with a click of a button in Revit because that information is already available. No more manually listing each steel member, and adding up these calculations. Same goes for precast concrete.

 

AutoCAD, being used in the AEC industry, cannot give you access to as much information as Revit does. I'd love to see AutoCAD try and print a heating and cooling load analysis report for an entire building. This kind of thing takes a lot of time to use a Polyline to get the area of a room and manually calculate the room volume, r-values, etc. so a mechanical engineer can start on his work.

 

Point being: you guys are comparing Revit and AutoCAD with snide comments about "2D drawings". I have said this time and time again and I'll say it yet again.... Revit is not just "3D". The only reason you here can try and justify your inexperienced opinions about Revit is because you can't see beyond the construction documents (aka "2D drawings"). You can't possibly understand how Revit was used in a more beneficial way to create those 2D drawings. But yes, you guys both are right... at the end of the day you are creating 2D drawings with tables and schedules filled with data. Revit does the exact same thing only better, faster and more accurate.

[ReMark]

Who are you calling stubborn? LoL

 

I agree that Revit provides benefits to both architect and engineers that AutoCAD does not.

[tzframpton]

Who are you calling stubborn? LoL

You!! haha.... you're still my favorite Mark, no worries brutha.

[Mike_Taylor]

Point being: you guys are comparing Revit and AutoCAD with snide comments about "2D drawings". I have said this time and time again and I'll say it yet again.... Revit is not just "3D". The only reason you here can try and justify your inexperienced opinions about Revit is because you can't see beyond the construction documents (aka "2D drawings"). You can't possibly understand how Revit was used in a more beneficial way to create those 2D drawings. But yes, you guys both are right... at the end of the day you are creating 2D drawings with tables and schedules filled with data. Revit does the exact same thing only better, faster and more accurate.

 

I know contractor who are actually building off the Revit models and not 2D drawings for some smaller jobs. The drawings are essentially created to give to they municipalities for documentation and review purposes. Even drawings being created are starting to fade out.

 

The industry trends regarding software in Canada are rumored to be about 2 years behind that in the US (IE we are currently where the US was 2 years ago regarding the industry trends) and it is starting to become extremity prevalent here. Onme thing I will have to disagree with Tanner is that AutoCAD will eventually be ousted, I do believe it will always be around in some capacity. Not only would it be strategically unwise for them to get rid of it, but so many people use it because of it ability to cope with almost any situation. Yes it it not nearly as quick, accurate (it can be if additional time is taken) or information saturated as Revit/Inventor/Solidworks etc is, but it can do all of it. If the price point is dropped I believe that it will stick around until a new software is released that puts Revit where AutoCAD currently is.

[SuperCAD]

I know contractor who are actually building off the Revit models and not 2D drawings for some smaller jobs. The drawings are essentially created to give to they municipalities for documentation and review purposes. Even drawings being created are starting to fade out.

 

You bring up a great point here. I know that when I was at my last job, I was seriously considering a push to use SolidWorks 3Dvia Composer to create files that the shop would be able to open on a monitor at their workstations. That way, we could eliminate printing and we would be able to add the assembly steps with animations to show them exactly how to put it all together. We would break the most complicated assemblies down to the level of a "ready to assemble" cabinet that you would get from Sauder (or any similar company).

 

In this scenario, 2D drawings would be a thing of the past and the shop would be working directly with the 3D model that was created by the CAD group. Before too long I would imagine that all architectural plans would be handled the same way. The construction crews would all be working off of the model that Revit generated, along with all of the information contained in it, and turn off information that wasn't related to their field, and not some clustered piece paper because the AOR decided to save a few pennies by putting everything on one sheet.

[f700es]

Did you guys ever try this SuperCAD? It sounds like a good idea. I would just be worried about some user in the shop and their ability to view 3D files. Some take to it like a duck to water and some never do.

[steven-g]

I have had to stop issuing 3D drawings because the shop floor guys aren't used to it, well the supervisor isn't, he's had flat drawings all his working life and that is what he wants.

[SuperCAD]

Did you guys ever try this SuperCAD?

 

Unfortunately, no. We were putting things in place to make it happen, but then I had to go a quit on them, so it's my fault (haha!). My second in command of CAD and I were discussing how we could implement it and get total buy-in from the shop. Since we got rid of a bunch of old-timers and brought in a bunch of younger skilled people (you know, the ones who were born AFTER computers were invented), we thought it would be best just to train the team leaders on how to look at the 3D files. This way you wouldn't have to train 100 different people and all of the direction was coming from their lead person. It turned out that some of the guys on the shop floor actually learned how to use SolidWorks when they were in school. That would have made the process so much easier.

 

I did find out the other day that the owner made a decision to equip every build team with an iPad so they can look at the PDF files. I'm waiting to see how that goes when one gets destroyed every other day.

[SuperCAD]

I have had to stop issuing 3D drawings because the shop floor guys aren't used to it, well the supervisor isn't, he's had flat drawings all his working life and that is what he wants.

 

I had the exact opposite experience. Once I introduced 3D to our drawings, the shop always wanted it. We were doing so much in 3D that I was able to convince the owner to invest over $70,000 to upgrade the computers and get SolidWorks.