mthd97

Whoa ! I didn’t know that but I will definitely be looking forward to what’s new in X15 this year.

The official CA website is offering anyone who has an older copy of Chief Architect, 50% off the first year. Has anybody taken up this offer so far and is there a link to the terms and conditions for this offer ?

Lol !

Zombie thread ? I certainly don’t think so. In the end you cannot expect all the good things in one type of CAD software to work well in the other. The only time that can happen is when a big CAD software company buys out another. Autodesk purchasing Revit for example. Revit Lt Suite with AutoCad Lt together. You shouldn’t be forced into a cult following of one type of CAD software either as is the case with many CAD users who are just one eyed. If you need to use Softplan with Chief Architect, then go ahead, no one has the right to disagree with what software you will use ? Mac or Windows, our choice. MS office or other software ? If it helps your office get your work done efficiently and easily, then just use it. If you just need to use Chief by itself then that’s cool to. I have used Chief Architect & Archicad in my office for my scope of work. If I was starting out new today I might just use Autodesk Lt products if they are cost effective where I live so I can just get started. Then if I have more cash flow I might look at using full BIM software. Chief Architect was cost effective and easy to use when I started and that’s why I think the 2K per year might be a bit too steep for new users but who knows ? Time will tell.

CA is definitely more superior to SP. SP is good for Home Builders as well but not as good as CA is for Home Builders, Architects, Interior Designers & Drafters. CA is a very good all round product but still should have a perpetual licensing policy for new users who want one and want SSA as well. You will catch more Bees with honey ! You want to sell more software and get more users on board with CA ? Bring back a perpetual licensing policy if you want to.

Yes it would definitely be good for CA to support IFC 3D not just 2D dwg.

All cool Brad, I relate to not having to go fine tune a picture perfect rendering but some get paid well to do just that. I became a qualified Architectural Technician after being a qualified Quantity Surveyor/Estimator. I like drawing better than crunching numbers. It’s good to know that SP is doing a good job with material take offs and I can see why a QS would prefer that system over CA for that purpose. Is SP a bit clunky with drawing compared to Chief ? Can you collaborate between CA & SP ? I think CA is well developed enough to use the ML functionality and create a template to work from for take off ? Can SP build framing better than CA ?

You got to remember that Joe is an Architect and his perspective is different from from a Drafter/Designer or Quantity Surveyor. Professional 3D Rendering of correct looking interiors and exteriors are very important to Architects and Interior Designers as you know. I’m not sure how well SP performs in that area at present ? To me as a former QS SPSL was quite attractive but CA has improved its ML since then so I wouldn’t need to change to it.

Funny but I don’t really know that much about Softplan. Softplan Softlist was quite developed in the past and a bit better than CA ML IMO over a decade ago. Once again another Builders/Carpenters program. I am not sure what the rendering capabilities are like inside SP at present ? However Cadsoft (Envisioneer) is used quite a bit in Australia. It seems to be a bit like Autocad to me with basic 3D rendering. I don’t know what it’s like these days. Chief Architect is a good all rounder !

I think I would also be quite skeptical about going to Autodesk for Revit LT or Autocad LT as I see it ? But it’s up to each persons scope of work to decide what they will use and not use. I am mostly retired and only do the occasional job here and there and I am happy with X10 but if I still had my builder clients to work for, I would simply have kept SSA active. I don’t need to be on SSA with other cad either because I don’t use my software very much at all now but if I did, I would prefer to own my license to use the software and not be forced to pay a yearly subscription fee. The CAD companies that stay away from yearly subscriptions only agreements will probably do much better because they still offer perpetual licensing. As much as I like Chief Architect, I 100% disagree with its new policy because it may hurt them quite a bit down the track. I think Autodesk may have shot themselves in the foot ? I see some Revit users moving over to other cad so that they can actually own a perpetual CAD license. I think Chief Architect inc will have its subscription clients demanding allot more from the CAD software because of this new arrangement ? It could force them to have to deliver a much higher level product than they would have if they just stayed perpetual ? With Autodesk being the other main competitor offering yearly subscriptions, it becomes the measuring point of what you can expect for a yearly subscription fee for CAD software agreements.

If I took up the offer now and got X14 and started a job in that version, there is no way an older version would be able to open those files. That offer is only for now but when X15 arrives it may not be a 50% offer either ? My observations about Interior Designers comes from the Facebook user groups. There appear to be many users who are in that profession who are using CA. Those users would definitely be interested in a robust PBR engine right inside CA so they don’t have to export into other PBR applications. As well as the huge post that was made in this forum about a PBR rendering engine. I think it’s very much in the future interests of CA to have a very fine PBR Render engine right inside CA in the future. That’s cool because that will continue to drive the designing side of development of CA with that user group accessing CA. The only problem is that those very fine PBR render engines require a heavy duty GPU capacity or video card. And many might complain about having to upgrade their hardware as well maybe ? I just like to see how CA develops in the future ?

No I just saw the offer to use the latest version for a years subscription at 50% off on the CA website for persons with an older version like me. No mention is made if that is restricted to just using X14 only for that year ? I will have to read the fine print. It’s fair to say that once the year is up you will not be able to use the newest software version unless you want to pay full price for the following year. I can still however use my older version when ever I wish. Yes those programs I mentioned above are expensive and intensive but many Architects like to use them. Chief Architect is great for home builders and carpenters as well as Architects. I don’t think many home builders or carpenters would even have a use for VW or AC or Revit as I see it ? Chief Architect is much more construction orientated straight out of the box than other CAD is.

Well it does say that it’s only for the first year so after that we should pay the full fee as required. If we would like to continue using CA in the future. They gave us past users plenty of time to upgrade or continue paying SSA. Future users will have a much better developed product that we had when we first started. I think it’s fair because they gave us a warning for when things would change. We are all free to choose what software we will employ and CA has it’s price like other CAD software does. Time will tell if they are attracting new users out there ? It appears to me that many more interior designers are choosing CA these days for ease of use. Just guessing but I wouldn’t be surprised if X15 has a very robust PBR engine in it this time ? Vectorworks Architect & Archicad both have the Maxon Redshift PBR engine in them. Who knows, let’s wait and see !

Past users who have an older copy of CA can now upgrade to the latest version and save 50% on the first year. So for occasional users like me that’s a great gesture by CA sales. Well done and thank you very much.

Welcome to “SO” day ! SO = Subscriptions Only.

In this instance paying SSA makes good sense and be glad you started with X14 when SSA is still possible. As for CA following the Autodesk model ? CA would have their own business model to follow not their example. Revit Lt subscription in Australia is $665 AUD per year over 3 years. You can only render in the cloud with Revit Lt. So it’s good value down here. SSA is $1000 AUD per year, still good value for what you get with rendering in CA and framing and cabinet tools. CA’s new subscription service will be proven over time if $2000 USD per year is too much ? They can always lower the price if people are scared off to other options. Time will tell.

Hmm ! very interesting observations just above. To be fair, comparing CA with SP is correct but for me CA wins hands down. I agree that an amalgamation between CA & SP or a take over of SP by CA would create a very interesting mix ? If the extra money from a subscription improves CA’s development, then I am all for it. Comparing CA to Revit, Archicad or Vectorworks Architect is not realistic. Those programs are designed specifically for Architects not builders or Architectural Drafters. No framing in them, you will need some add ons. Architects get paid much more than most of us and have more time to fudge around with the design concept and be more intricate with sculptural home design than most of us. Just my observations of having demos of those products and seen much promotional information as well. I was an Archicad user as well but only because they produced add ons that help do roofing, cabinets and other functions that we specifically do in Australia & NZ. Not to mention their Australian essential library of objects. If it wasn’t for those things I would stick solely with CA. I take twice as long to produce a similar model in Archicad but it’s more correct to what we will actually build here in Australia. Others are much quicker with Archicad than I am. If I was in the US I would stick to CA and see them go further forward with their excellent program that is very fast and it will get even more accurate. Hopefully they will eliminate some of those anomaly’s that some Revit users have found ? Going from Chief Architect to othercad could be a big mistake ? My estimate is that it could take you twice as much time to do the same work with othercad. Not to mention the steep learning curves. If you are not an Architect think carefully before choosing othercad. I could just about guarantee you that you will be glad you still have an up to date copy of Chief in the office. SSA is nearly a no brainer with this new subscription arrangement. If I wasn’t retired I will still have CA SSA up to date. I get enjoyment at seeing the new features and updates and the development of CA. I occasionally do tests to see if things are better in the newer versions even though I am retired. Have fun Beta testing X15 !

All other CAD will definitely have steep learning curves compared to Chief Architect. I could always do a quick render in Chief Architect with less hassle. It’s up to your own business model but if you want to punch out a quick concept of a home that is not too complicated, it’s good to have an up to date version of CA in the office. I am retired from full time work but if I was still working I would jump at the upgrade and keep SSA current for that CAD tool. In my circumstances to upgrade from X10 to X15 before the Jan deadline would cost me $3500 AUD. I would definitely do that if I wasn’t retired. I will just have to be content with X10 just Incase I have to model up some cabinets for someone or a simple design concept. Thanks for the use of Chief Architect software, it helped my company since version 6.

Just a general comparison because it really depends on the type of PBR renderer you are using inside the actual software package. We don’t know what’s inside X15 just yet either ?

I don’t think the casual users have enough spare cash to keep SSA alive in this economic climate especially with the price increases in gas etc ? Most who use Chief for daily work will keep paying SSA and any future new users will just have to pay the subscription fee if they choose to employ CA. I have said it before before and I will say it again “The Render Capabilities” are what control the cost of CAD software. Revit LT has no PBR, Archicad Solo no PBR, that’s why they are so much cheaper than the full versions of the software. What if CA released a version with no PBR in it ? Then you could compare that with those products I just mentioned above. If I was still in full time quantity surveying work and drawing timber framing plans I would keep paying the SSA fee. Maybe it’s time for CA to release a version with no PBR in it for drafters and builders who don’t use it ?

Sorry to hear how many users are upset by this decision like me. My understanding is that your version license will not actually end completely when you decide to stop your SSA when you retire or stop for some other reason. You can still use the version you have ended your SSA at from what I understand but we will not be able to sell on our licenses. I don’t think they would send out a virus after we end SSA to stop our CA programs from working. It looks like you can keep SSA going for as long as you wish if you are still on it before the deadline. I think they are rewarding past users by keeping SSA alive for us if we wish to continue with it. The problem comes about if you want to expand and have more seats of CA, then you have to enter the new subscription arrangement if you choose to do so ?

I can remember way back when I personally raised the idea of Chief Architect going on a system similar to what Archicad have used for many years “a yearly fee that includes upgrades.” To help it further develop. lo and behold we were all surprised when it was implemented along with many of the things on our wish lists. It definitely appears that it’s time for them to move further forward with this new yearly subscription fee for reasons that we are not all aware of. If this helps Chief Architect’s further development ? Then I can’t disagree with that. Graphisoft have not ruled out the possibility of adopting a yearly subscription fee for Archicad either. Chief Architect was used by me because I had many builder clients who wanted timber framing plans and take offs including estimating. You couldn’t beat the way Chief Architect has been able to build timber framing so quickly from way back. Anyway it’s definitely very builder friendly software. Architects tend to use Vectorworks Architect, Archicad and Revit more than Chief Architect in other parts of the world. If you are an Architect in North America doing many residential houses it would be crazy if didn’t have an up to date copy of Chief Architect in your CAD tools set. It’s definitely not a toy and never was.

This can prove true but if we were able to remove the automatic modular functions of Chief then it would slow it down. So there is a trade off and sometimes you just need to do the extra work and model a floor truss and copy it through your design. I think it would be great if Chief Architect would do 3D model transfer or sharing with the leading timber framing manufacturing companies in the US that also engineer the framing structure. That way we could import the work back into CA in 3D. I think it could be a bit too much to ask CA to become full 3D BIM with other leading CAD software out there. But what I am asking above wouldn’t be too much to ask I hope ? Anyway, a subscription option is the new reality. And I think we should all be thankful that SSA is not redundant and may never be so ? If you are in the US and you do many residential houses then it could be a no brainer to not keep SSA active or upgrade ? Everyone will have to make their own decision according to their own business model.

Yes I know you did and I agreed with you. They argued that CA is BIM software and yes it is to some extent but it’s not full 3D open BIM model sharing. This is where you can edit each other’s model like Archicad and Revit can already do with each other in order for the engineers to complete the structure in Revit and send the model back into Archicad. Engineers certainly prefer Revit with the engineering capability plug in or whatever it is that they use with it ? Still Chief Architect is a very good program for residential work in the US and it doesn’t really matter if they choose to participate in 3D BIM model sharing or not. I am a quantity surveyor and estimator by trade and I can’t see the subscription price of Chief Architect being about two thirds of Revit Full ? I could be wrong. they may indeed get that for it ? The PBR render engine values are what usually bump the price up inside any CAD software solution. “You don’t want to price yourself out of the market” is a common saying down this way. If Chief Architect was half the price of Revit full then that would appear to be a more realistic figure to ask ? That’s up to them to set the price and only time will tell how many new users will take up Chief Architect Premier. It’s certainly appears that many have taken up Chief Architect Interiors to me ? You know how it is with buying a fiancé a diamond ring ? What are they worth to you and what can you afford ? Just another interesting subject to discuss for us. I think I wasted enough time gas bagging about the new subscription policy of Chief Architect.

There are many good things inside Chief that could be utilized for commercial projects, it’s cabinets and it’s libraries. These other programs also do low rise residential projects as well. The 3D framing is great inside CA and that could be used along with other engineering applications to finish the structure to engineering standards including finishing its trusses etc. Further 3D editable model sharing would be great if another program could import a 3D model not just a 2D dwg drawing.