Challenging article at Arch | Tech

Phil Read has posted a confronting analysis of the current state of the BIM software industry.

Here are some quotes I found particularly stimulating:

“When I demonstrated Revit during sales presentations, people were very quick to raise the numerous objections:
  • 3DMax was a better tool for modeling
  • VIZ was a better tool for rendering
  • AutoCAD was a better for detailing and documentation
  • Excel was a better for creating spreadsheets and schedules
And you know what? They were right. And they still right. Compared feature to feature, Revit can’t compete with those kinds of tools.”
” Applications create silos. Exported data means that the everyone is working in separate versions of the truth;”
“…I don’t believe that Revit is capable of evolving beyond it’s designed intent as a tool to resolve coordinated documentation.”
 “Revit isn’t the center of this ecosystem of geometry and data; it seems to orbit other applications (Navis, ProjectWise, etc) that in turn attempt to integrate data across domains.”

Read the entire article:
Arch | Tech: Why Can’t We Be Friends?

Something that isn’t mentioned here is monopolization.  At times we feel that an all-in-one Design/BIM/Documentation/Presentation tool would be awesome.  But where is the competition?  If we all end up using one powerful piece of software (ie. Windows), who makes the developer accountable?

1
Leave a Reply

avatar
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
Peter Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Peter
Guest

Oh, come on – as an investor, surely you know the primary motivations behind the development of anything at Autodesk: capitalism … which is fine, by the way. Autodesk's primary concern is to satisfy the demands of shareholders – from this all else flows. If Autodesk were to actually create a flawless piece of software, (one that could link in, say, Word and Excel files ;-), then customers would not have to buy anything from them for a period of years. This would have a deleterious impact on the flow of cash toward shareholders, resulting in the possible removal of… Read more »