creative design, custom houses, and the limits of Chief?

[HumbleChief]

I think you've asked one of the really relevant questions regarding Chief's business model and what their designs and intentions are for their future. I am a small time residential remodel designer. Chief fits my needs very well and I suspect it serves others well with a similar business model. Is Chief content to stay focused within that narrow market? Is that a good (read profitable) niche to remain in? Or should they expand their focus into some very, very competitive markets?

 

Remember they also have home versions as well which some have suggested might diminish their brand among Architects who consider themselves perhaps too professional to use such homeowner type products. But they are running a business and we can't guess at how profitable that segment is, nor how profitable the migration from Home Design Pro to Premier might be.

 

Do they want to expand their current market share? Perhaps an easy yes, but with that comes added expense, added expertise, added marketing and going up against some really big players in the field. Risky, and must be calculated very carefully. And what are those features it should add to enter that new market? You know what you would like, but the risk just grows with each good business question.

 

My business is similar with similar decisions. I did a couple of commercial jobs and the new learning curve was awful and not profitable. With my new limited knowledge should I now expand into the commercial market or stay focused on small residential where my core competency lies? I've decided to stay focused on small residential and will turn down commercial jobs.

 

I think Chief has (apparently) made a similar decision to remain in the small residential market and no one here can know how well that is working for them. If that's true then adding features to enhance that market presence makes a lot of sense. But what features? And how fast? And at what cost? And when will competition suddenly decide small residential is a market they want to exploit? And where will Chief be when/if that happens?

 

Not an easy call but I think adding features for unconventional homes and/or modeling capabilities does nothing to harm their market position, might expand it and will still allow them to remain focused on becoming/staying the best small residential design software out there.

[Joe_Carrick]

FWIW, I saw some things in the Revit Demo that I liked:

 

1.  2 way Schedules

2.  Ability to enter data directly in the Schedule

3.  Ability to Group Schedule Columns

4.  Levels - (Platforms, Ceilings, etc.)

5.  Wall Intersections

6.  Room Numbering

 

I also saw some I didn't like:

 

1.  Library access tied to Project rather than System Wide

2.  Material Textures - very weak.

 

Then of course there's the Price......

 

As far as how fast the building could be put together and the various views being created - I think Chief is just as fast, maybe faster.  The Symbol Libraries available to Revit are probably more extensive but I don't know if they are better or not.

[HumbleChief]

Agreed Joe, there's some nice features no doubt. Loved the level feature (who would have thought I'd like that feature huh?)

 

OOB for a small residential designer? A bit of a no brainer for me, Chief beats it for way less money. More complex commercial or very large scale residential, perhaps not a no brainer but Revit must be better, I'll assume for now.

[Joe_Carrick]

I don't think it should be too difficult for Chief to add the things I liked. 

I think all of them have been requested multiple times so they should be on the list for X8 or X9.

[Kiwideziner]

Have to agree totally Joe.

And value for money CA has to be a better option for residential Home designer builders. As far as the market goes this forum is probably 1% of the user base. I know of around 30 users and i am the only one on here.

[Nicinus]

David,

 

There is nothing wrong with using the CAD Detail method.  It's just not my preferred way of working.  I like to be able to change the "Existing" when/if I find there was something wrong with the "as-built".

 

Not to mention that it would be a more 'intelligent' way to have one model that everything is derived from, instead of having to have some parts of it as cad details from a prior version, that really aren't much more than pictures.

[Nicinus]

This may be one of those "be careful what you wish for" kind of things. From what I've seen in the above Vectorworks video, and the capabilities I know to be in ArchiCAD, these both already HAVE these capabilities. So why aren't we just using these programs, if we really need these features? For me, the answer is that these higher-level programs are now so feature-laden that the complexity of use overwhelms what I need to get done. I look at the Vectorworks dialog boxes within boxes, and my brain turns to mush. From what I've seen, Revit is worse. There are many things that need to be improved in Chief, for sure. But I do not need clay-like modeling,  "Teamwork" features, IFC compatibility, or the ability to show phased work. For the type of projects that I do, the current level of features are pretty much fine. I don't WANT Chief to become ArchiCAD, because the relative simplicity of use that I depend on would be gone. I can now sit in front of a client and design some pretty good floor plans with furniture and trim, especially if using the House Wizard features. (Including in addition/alteration projects.) I can't do that with ArchiCAD, because there are so many damn settings to be juggled. I'm not doing "sculptural" works. If I were, I would use a different program. What I would lose by the addition of all of these modeling features would be too high of a price -- and we are fooling ourselves if we don't think there is a price in piling on features. In the hands of an expert user, any program is going to seem amazing. "Snobby architects" may use these modeling programs to their advantage, but that's not my market, nor the market of 95% of most projects out there.

 

I don't think Johnny is aiming for Archicad, he wants more Sketchup style 3D editing and I've never heard anyone saying Sketchup is complex. The simple fact is that Chief adds more and more poly solid and 3D tools with every version, and there is no reason this can't be done with elegance. I personally don't really need itas I own 3ds Max and am quite proficient with it, but since Chief aims to generate all condocs from a 3D model I assume it has to be an area of focus.

 

At this point I don't need team work functionality either, but I doubt Chief can go on forever without letting people share work.

[johnny]

I agree that only a few % of the users of CA are on the forums, but the reputation CA has among architects isn't good, but I think that has more to do with them confusing the DIY products and the Premiere version.  Unlike Revit, which we don't call "Autodesk", has solid branding of a pro-product.  The name "Chief Architect" is on all the DIY produces, and we don't typically use the term "Premier" to identify CA.

 

It largely depends on the location I suppose you work, but I can tell you where I am "builders" don't design/draw homes like they did even 10 years ago.  Everything is getting so complicated most builders are seeking professionals to handle their work.

 

The architects I talk shop with typically use Revit and Sketchup. 

[Nicinus]

I'm in an area with tons of residential architects doing custom homes, and none of the ones I happen to talk to use Revit. A few use Archicad or Vectorworks, and the majority use Autocad and some Sketchup. I'm sure it is different if they do more commercial work.

 

I don't think any one of them has said that Chief is a consumer product, they just haven't heard about it, and the few that have hesitated because it is residential only.

[Richard_Morrison]

I agree that the issue with architects around here is mostly that they haven't heard of Chief Architect. Also, many are doing commercial or institutional work where they want or need BIM, along with residential work. For them, BIM=Revit. The ones that don't use BIM are using AutoCAD, mostly because that is pretty much what the entire workforce is trained for. But most of the firms advertise for Revit skills now.

 

However, I think there is a whole bunch of residential-only architects who might gladly embrace Chief, if they were shown it persuasively.