Revit Or Ca


dshall
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is one is on my wishlist for terrain with ability to show contours in vector or rendered views.

 

One thing I do like about Revit terrains is the phasing so you can duplicate the existing topography, assign one to existing and lock it then manipulate the second for proposed levels. Handy for elevation views also to demonstrate the amount of cut/fill

further to that point again, its essentially a label for the Z-Value of the terrain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heading out the door but will post later. Hope I do not get my head chopped off.

Transitioning to Revit.

Used Chief since '97.

Biggest upfront differences: Revit costs $6,000 and is a harder to learn.

 

Jeff

Curious you think Revit is harder to learn.  I have a copy of Revit in my office and i've only lightly played with it.  I've found Chief the hardest app i've come across to learn.  Again, not in simple things, but in more complex modeling instances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The million dollar question for Chief is will it get better at these things before other apps start to improve in residential design and impede on Chief's claim to fame..? 

 

A big problem for Chief is one of perception. There is a history of consumer products, and some people see it as a builder’s tool for tract homes. I think it is more likely to see a residential architect using Vectorworks or Sketchup than Chief, primarily due to this. I also however believe this could change by word of mouth. The interface took a nice leap in X7 with cleaner icons, ALDO and broken section lines, etc. If we could see a similar modeless properties workflow, anti-aliased plan viewports, a bit more advanced sheet management and slightly improved 2D tools, I think Chief could quickly been seen as a very strong contender. Like Todd said in another thread, the automation sometimes gets in the way of more free form design, and you have to work around it, but it still solves a lot of things one can only dream of in VW and Sketchup.

 

Revit is of course another matter, but it is so for everybody competing with it. They have the might of Autodesk behind them, a clear and monetary sound upgrade path from Autocad, and a strong brand. But, it is also a $6,000 product and quite frankly, at this point in time, I actually think there is less I would like to fix in Chief than I would need to add in Revit to make it useful for residential. Most of the strong features in Revit, like massing, families, etc. are most powerful in commercial applications and doesn’t really help my daily routine. Besides, it too suffers from relatively weak 2D and becomes very slow when the model grows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the issue of complexity. You make a good point I am moving on to Revit because Chief is too hard and it just does not work in many instances without hours of figuring out the secret handshake and then relearning it again or something different down the road. With Chief it is easy to learn the basics. With Revit the basic modeling is not too difficult at all either. Whether or not it is made more difficult or easy because I have worked with Chief all these years I'm not sure. A wall is wall a roof is a roof etc. But once you have a basic model and move forward, all of the tools available in Revit are amazing. The sheer number of things you can do guide its complexity and learning curve. Does the saying "the smarter I get the less I seem to know" strike a bell. If you  are happy with Chief and I think it is a great program fine but I love all tools and available options available in Revit to make more accurate and build able models along with the attendant complexity and learning curve. I guess I just need something a little more challenging which will give be better models and everything that goes with it. In this way it is much harder to learn than Chief. BTW I think the issue of residential versus commercial is a non issue. You are either building an accurate beautiful model or you are not, size is relative.

 

Jeff 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott,

 

Think of it as taking out the "jaggies".  Chief already does this for camera views but not for plan views.

I think Chief uses their own built in  antialiasing, and doesn't use it from your video card at all, maybe they could if they had the video card do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicinus,  I do not understand antialiases,  would you mind explaining this and giving me an example?  Thanks.

 

Scott, have a look at these pictures (click on them so you see them in size). To some people the difference is barely noticable and to others it makes a big difference, especially when there are a lot going on.

 

With AA

No AA

 
As you can see it is already used in Chief with rich text:

Rich text

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on how fast other Architects pick the program up. The bulk of the consumer base that put Chief on the map, builders, are fast fading away due to code issues, etc. Someone has to keep the lights on.

 

Nicinus pinpoints a whole different problem Chief has and that is perception.  In all honesty, even when clients ask what software I use I dont say Chief Architect since I dont want them to think I'm using an app designed for DIY.  One time at a AIA meeting the discussion of software came up and I mentioned CA and those architects looked at me like I was talking about MS paint.  I knew about CA for years but myself dismissed it until I ran into Scotts video's on youtube when i was looking for information dealing with Sketchup.  We've had other thread discussions on this, and if I was Chief I would look at rebranding their professional app....since I dont see how they can shake that perception now.

 

I tend to agree about your other point, permitting is getting to a complexity where builders are wisely handing more and more off to professionals.  This being Chiefs primary customer, that can't be good news - but I see in Doug's comments that Chief is starting to at least look outside their own box now.  Doug wasn't making comments like he is now a couple years ago ... so that is very nice to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this is a dilemma, but certainly one that can be overcome and Sketchup is proof of that.

 

Once a tool starts to be attractive on its own users tend to take notice regardless of circumstances, there is seldom prejudice against great products. If MS Paint actually did something useful I'm sure it would find a user base as well. Strength in construction docs and a smart user interface would be a good way to start being taken seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A perfect example of just how quickly the user base is falling away is this forum itself.

 

 

I would be very interested to find out the source of your information - can you provide details?

I suspect that you are talking through your ars*!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has taken a bizarre turn (hey don't they all) with someone worried about telling someone else that they use Chief Architect and another poster claiming the user base is 'falling away'.

 

Really don't understand why someone would not say they use Chief. My clients don't know anything about design software - nor do they care. They care about results of course, but don't care what I use. Is there really any risk to telling someone you use Chief? I mean real risk, like losing a client, or losing business because of it? Or is there only perceived risk that the fellas at the local AIA meeting will think lesser of you. Really?

 

And NO ONE on this forum knows the extent of Chief's user base and whether or not it's 'falling off' or not - NO ONE.

 

And builders are Chief's primary customer? And when they go who will be left? A supposition simply made up out of whole cloth. NO ONE on this forum knows the make up of Chief's users.

 

Like I said a bizarre turn, in this case with absolutely no basis in fact.

 

It looks very much like we are taking our beliefs and finding a way to bend the facts to match those beliefs instead of learning the facts and changing our beliefs to match the facts.

 

I'm curious about all the above suppositions but until I learn differently I'll remain curious and not make any baseless claims..

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another waste of time discussion on Revit vs Chief.

If you care to look at the history of how Revit came about, you might just see it as a marketing ploy to bring people back to Autocad

Yes engineers do love Revit and Autocad because that is what they are used to, 2d cad.

The engineers have a huge say in the commercial world and many ArchiCAD users have had to learn Revit for their sakes although they prefer ArchiCAD as Architects and is the better tool for them.

AP design was a forerunner of Autocad Architectural desktop and then Revit came about after that.

Check Wikipedia to find out the facts but in the end they were used to bring people back to Autocad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another waste of time discussion on Revit vs Chief.

If you care to look at the history of how Revit came about, you might just see it as a marketing ploy to bring people back to Autocad

Yes engineers do love Revit and Autocad because that is what they are used to, 2d cad.

The engineers have a huge say in the commercial world and many ArchiCAD users have had to learn Revit for their sakes although they prefer ArchiCAD as Architects and is the better tool for them.

AP design was a forerunner of Autocad Architectural desktop and then Revit came about after that.

Check Wikipedia to find out the facts but in the end they were used to bring people back to Autocad.

Originally Revit was an engineering software, not architectural -  Autodesk has a history of buying out software companies (Revit, Softdesk, 3ds Max, Maya, etc, etc) Hopefully Chief is not on their sight.....

P.D. - Did you know Autodesk got rid of their "suggestions/Wishes" forum for Autocad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has taken a bizarre turn (hey don't they all) with someone worried about telling someone else that they use Chief Architect and another poster claiming the user base is 'falling away'.

 

Really don't understand why someone would not say they use Chief. My clients don't know anything about design software - nor do they care. They care about results of course, but don't care what I use. Is there really any risk to telling someone you use Chief? I mean real risk, like losing a client, or losing business because of it? Or is there only perceived risk that the fellas at the local AIA meeting will think lesser of you. Really?

 

And NO ONE on this forum knows the extent of Chief's user base and whether or not it's 'falling off' or not - NO ONE.

 

And builders are Chief's primary customer? And when they go who will be left? A supposition simply made up out of whole cloth. NO ONE on this forum knows the make up of Chief's users.

 

Like I said a bizarre turn, in this case with absolutely no basis in fact.

 

It looks very much like we are taking our beliefs and finding a way to bend the facts to match those beliefs instead of learning the facts and changing our beliefs to match the facts.

 

I'm curious about all the above suppositions but until I learn differently I'll remain curious and not make any baseless claims..

 

How is relating a personal experience or thoughts something that needs to be backed-up by proof?  That seems like an odd thing to be asked to prove.

 

I think we've established in previous threads that is seems Chief's primary customers are (1) DIY and (2) Builders...as seen in CA marketing programs.  Unless Chief were to release documents or other things we aren't asking for, I am not sure how to "prove" this as a fact but this made up a very small portion of my comments.

 

If you re-read my comment on the AIA meeting, it was that I did mention Chief and the reception of that comment was one of bewilderment.  How you are getting to a point of suggesting they would feel lesser of me is a bit odd.  Of course the value of that statement is in how (in a generalized way) architects don't view CA as a professional tool - and that should be well known by everyone here.  I dont have "proof" of this statement, but Id be surprised if its questioned.

 

Further, are you suggesting that you are never asked what software you use by your clients?  I am constantly asked this question for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Revit was an engineering software, not architectural -  Autodesk has a history of buying out software companies (Revit, Softdesk, 3ds Max, Maya, etc, etc) Hopefully Chief is not on their sight.....

P.D. - Did you know Autodesk got rid of their "suggestions/Wishes" forum for Autocad?

Yes I heard a whisper about that Forum.

Very possible for Autocad to build a one shop CAD stop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I need to apologize. I made some observations and while I stand behind them I should not expect any of you to understand. I think it is easy enough to see but that's me. I guess it's simply a matter of how you choose to see things. Anyway, I am sorry I wasted your time as well as mine. Won't happen again.

By all means have your say Old Timer I want to hear your view as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Architects on the new Panel may help change the view of the AIA?

I suspect the AIA may not like the name Chief Architect as it has the word "Architect" in it?

Chief Architect has the right to that name as they fought a battle over the 3d home Architect name with Broderbund in the past for software naming.

Some Architects here in Australia are OK with us Building Designers to be Architectural Technicians, but that is another issue people waste time arguing over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Member Statistics

    32637
    Total Members
    9156
    Most Online
    TSharp
    Newest Member
    TSharp
    Joined