Phil recently posted a link for Zoom To Awesome at:

If you haven’t heard of it before, Zoom To Awesome instantly zooms the active window in Revit to the selected objects. Combined with Select by ID and COINS Auto-Section Box, you can find and correct almost any error or warning in your model…

Tested and working on Revit 2013, 2014 and 2015. The Screencast below also shows how to add a keyboard shortcut to the Zoom To Awesome command.

via this tweet:

An old (2006) but insightful post by Phil Read:

if Max/SketchUp/etc.understood the intent of what you were modeling, I suspect the translation to Revit would be far more rational. But this isn’t the case. Those tools produce generic geometry. But geometry alone isn’t enough; you have to be able to embed intent. Creating morphic forms is an interesting exercise in design iteration. But making blobs isn’t the same thing as making decisions about construction (or constructibility). Blobs don’t have the same rules as buildings.

AUGI – View Single Post – Adventures in 3ds Max and Revit Massing

At RTC Australia this year, Revit Legend Phil Read spoke to some of us (in quite a mysterious and tantalizing way) about a new project he was working on…and it looks like this may be it:

M-SIX is building VEO™, a cloud-based platform for use in the design, construction, and operation of buildings and other structures. 

We have partnered with some of the largest AEC firms in the United States to help us understand their needs and to stress test VEO with large, complex projects. In addition to refining our technology, we are paying a great deal of attention to the “anthropology” – the collaborative workflow. 

When connected inefficiently, the tools used in Building Information Modeling add as much friction and complexity as they do valuable insights. Connect these capabilities with a smooth, realtime workflow in which all decision makers have the information they need when they need it – then you will have a solution. 

Then you will have VEO.

M-SIX: Overview | LinkedIn

Does this sound a bit like Revit’s history?

“A team of scrappy entrepreneurs, eking a living out of a bit of venture capital, working 80 hours a week will introduce something that is incredibly and overwhelmingly elegant in concept and use (even if a bit rough around the edges).”

position yourself to acquire this new technology. Pull out the checkbook. Done. This solves the hiring process and getting new teams to gel together issue (they’ve likely been together for years)…an acquisition is fast and quick; what’s done is done.”

Arch | Tech: Please Give Me Another Chance! I Can Change!:

And to me, this is why Autodesk will succeed where Graphisoft and Bentley and those other BIM companies will fail. They just aren’t big enough to acquire all the nice new technology. Any thoughts?

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?