Misc stuff. Lots.

[Anonymous]

-I wish you could do nearly everything without
having to go into some dialog box. I prefer dragging points. (i.e. to change the
size of a window drag a point.)

-I wish you could make things work like Adobe
does.  Hire one of their UI guys.  Photoshop and Illustrator is
actually fun to use.

-I wish I could assign a MassGroup to a layer so I
didn't always have to select objects to attach them.  These can be used for
elevations and sections.

-I wish walls would always try Merging before
giving you an error marker.

-I wish Roofs could be kept as Roofs without having
to explode them into RoofSlabs.

-I wish Windows could have mullions that were
divided by distance, not number of lites.  (i.e. every 10" since I might
have 20 different XO windows of varying sizes with mullions.  Right now I
must make a different style for every size! I stopped trying to use
mullions.)

-I wish you could make a simplified Display
Representation for exporting to Viz.  No polygons that aren't
necessary.  I make MassGroups of all my walls to do this but that's only a
portion of the problem.  There's still 12 triangles to make a
window when all you need is 2, for instance.

-I wish ADT wouldn't crash.

-I wish buttons would change with the mode I was
working in, like Tabs.  One button for walls, one for windows, one for
doors, etc.  Flyouts are a waste of time.  I'm thinking more like
Viz's UI.

-I wish wall styles could include profiles for
crown molding, base molding, door and window trim, fascias, chair rails, etc.
They'd also have to clean properly like railings, not like wall
sweeps.

-I wish ADT used a hardlock rather than some
long, stupid Activation Code.  I see no problem with
hardlocks.

-I wish there was a version of ADT for residential
architecture.  I've seen other software that is better than Viz but I need
to import to Viz.  That is the ONLY reason I stay with it right now. 
Revit might be a consideration.

-I wish AutoDesk would take ADT out in the backyard
and bury it next to VersaCad and give Revit some room to grow.  (I'm sure
that's already going through the motions)

-I wish materials were accessible from Display
Properties.  It is, after all, really a display property.

-I wish Design content was closer to DataCad's
grid templates.  (You won't hear me saying DataCad is better at
anything else, I promise).  I can place content very quickly in
DataCad.  Click the Icon once, click location and click rotation.  And
I can see all my icons without scrolling.

-I wish ADT was faster to draw with.  Most of
this could be resolved with the first wish.

-I wish I could use my stylus with ADT.  I'd
work a lot faster.  All I'd need is a hot key to zoom (which I can
do) and a way to pan by holding down another key (which I can't) like I do
with spacebar in PS.

-I wish ADT allowed you to run on 2 or 3 computers,
without having to pay extra.  This country is based on small business and
there are twice as many designer in this area as there are architects. 
There are no big firms here and one other guy and myself are the only
ones that were willing to try ADT.  (My office won't buy ADT because it
would cost WAY to much for a small business to have 3 seats.  I know of
another 3 or 4 architects that see things the same way.)

-I wish ADT and all other AutoDesk software was a
reasonable price.  I for one would buy several copies if it was under
$1000.  As far as I know, AutoDesk has the worse problem with piracy and I
know this is why.  (AutoDesk is the ONLY one I'm aware of that spends
advertising money on it)  I don't mind buying Photoshop for $600 but for
$3000 for something that will need to be replaced in a year?!  I know
for a fact that if ADT was around $800 I would buy one more and my office
would buy four.  That's an extra four or $3,200.  Other designers and
architects in the area would at least consider it which they won't even do
right now.  AutoDesk is missing BIG in this market.  I can't imagine
who had the bright idea that to solve piracy the best thing to do was to
increase the price...

-Ryan

(There's more but this is all I could think of
in 15 minutes.)

[Anonymous]

that's alot of good stuff.


> -I wish ADT allowed you to run on 2 or 3
computers, without having to pay extra.
This country is based on small business and
there are twice as many designer in this
area as there are architects. There are no
big firms here and one other guy and myself
are the only ones that were willing to try
ADT. (My office won't buy ADT because it
would cost WAY to much for a small business
to have 3 seats. I know of another 3 or 4
architects that see things the same way.)

We use individual seats where I work, so
this is going to be somewhat vague - but
there is a way to run multiple computers as
long as they're not used at the same time by
way of a "icense manager". Ask your
reseller about it - they'll (hopefully) know
more about the specifics.

I absolutely agree about the cost. I wonder
how many thousands they spend on marketing
against piracy - when they could increase
the marketshare exponentially if the cost
were a thousand bucks or less per seat....

[JMoore]

Ryan, would you still buy more copies of ADT if it were priced around $1,500 to $1,750? It might have a some fewer features but would be more functional, kinda like an OEM. Less than $1,000 for ADT would be very hard for just about anybody to swallow except the buyer. I can think of only 1 or 2 other CAD packages out there that are below or are even close to $1000 and they are marginal in quality and ability at best. Believe me I understand your pain I am just bouncing some questions at you for feedback. - J.

[Anonymous]

I'm inclined to think architects and designers are
outside of the realm of "more expensive is better."  I don't wear certain
clothes simply because they are more expensive.  I will buy the best tools
for what I do.  If the best tools are cheaper than all the better. 
But when the best tools are too expensive than I must settle for the marginal
stuff.

The profit margin for Cad packages must be really
high.  The cost of development can't be so bad that it warrants a 3,000
sticker price.  There are no moving parts in the final product yet I'm
buying a CD that costs the same as an entire top-of-the-line computer
system???  The manual must cost much more than the price of the
software.

I like to try out the trial version of different
packages.  If I find one that works better AND costs less I'd buy it on the
spot.

[mikeashton8316]

I have had Architecture 2011 installed for over8 months and have to reinstall it every couple of months due to its inability tostay together! It continually looses functions, plotstyles , icons, and the MIN/MAX/EXIT butttons (see the attachment for a picture) for the sheet or page (not the program) disappear and reappear at will forcing you top close the program and restart in order to minimze a drawing or get to another drawing. Why can't Auto Desk make its program run correctly...the world knows you guys hold Microsofts hands while developing the program but you function about as well as VISTA did until last year. AutoDesk acts like support is un necessary and cannot be bothered faulting everything but their work, you make "impovements " and break thing that were working fine and wonder why I curse you. No responability, no guts to stand by your product.

 Subscription sucks as does  your response time, Iget more responses from "NOBODY" than from a real tech. But what do I expect? because you cannot write a successful program and the cheaper solutuions work more reliably! NOT BETTER BUT YOU CAN DEPEND THAT THEY WON'T DO WHAT AUTODESK DOES AND SABOTAGE YOUR WORK.

[Mike.Lamka]

The price keeps a lot of people from buying ADT, but it has gone down in price.  It used be be about $5000 for adt alone and now you get a "package" of software.  ADT 2012 by itself is around $3000 which is progress.  What about other options such as a corporate and a personal use version.  NO, I don't mean the student version.  I do work on the side designing restaurants, bars and coffee shops and it'd be nice to have the current version at home, but the price stops me.

It's a thought that I know more than a few people share.

[ntellery]

@mlanka, if you are on subscription you can install and have a 2nd licence running say at home for the price of subscription.

The aussie dollar is now trading above the US dollar but ADT is still around $7,000 here and I pay $1000 per yr sub to keep up to date for versions sitting on the shelf (waiting for a usable version to come along).

to Ryan, you should really follow up wtih VIsionrez and check out their cheaper packages based on ADT. Advanced functionalility not really used in residential much is removed and you get specialist tools for residential - if you are in the US or follow their practise it might well be a no brainer.  You will get ADT on steroids for Resi work and the VR team are actually enthustistic about the product!

What's with the bury ADT?  What version are you using anyway?

Oh and you get a great roofing tool with VR. 

But also you might like to know you can do a lot more with the OOTB roof tool - there are tricks they don't tell you.  I've blogged on them for you.

[CivicDesignDevelopment]

It's funny you're responding to a post from 2002, but lucky for you, I'm still around, albeit with a different account.

When I first made this thread I was a student and used ADT for making some renderings and playing around and much of what I said was off the cuff from just a few months of use. I obtained ACA in 2009 and now my outlook has changed about Revit v, ACA and I really hope they expand ACA by incorporating some of Revit's best features. ACA/ADT has improved a lot since then, although there's some things that I wished for that never came about that I still wish for, like the roofs.

[ntellery]

Good to hear you are still around.  They often will incorporate ideas from other programs.  I think ACA is a very strong good option but I do think that some ideas should be marketed differently if you are using it for residential work.  For roofs, if you've not visited my blog then you may not know lots of tricks in that roof object that are available.  But continue to make noise about roof improvements, hopefully one day they'll get to it.

(the roof object in ACA12 was introduced in ADT1 version and not changed a bit since then. so I recon it's due for a workover).

[jmcintyre]

Hey Nathan, the roof object did change around 2006/2005. Before then you couldn't apply materials, now you can, but that's all that has changed. Roof and floor slabs could do with work as well. I really like the ability in revit to raise or lower verticies and this would be a good addition to ACA.

[ntellery]

well that's news indeed but was the change to the RO or was it to ADT? I no longer have those versions to test. aecMaterials were added around then so was it simply that new stuff was added elsewhere that the RO could play with.  About the same time they changed ME's so you could add a RO to an ME.  I'm not sure technically if they did anything to the RO or whether it was just a by product of the change to teh ME.  Anyway yes they both were good changes and added usefullness to the RO and increased it's ability.

Yes the spot heights for slabs are a great idea, great for terraining slabs I think for driveways and access ways etc. for ACA yes I think everyone must find that addition very useful.

[jmcintyre]

Can't remember exactly which version it happened, but the RO without a material assigned was less useful than now.

Apart from the families in revit, spot levels in slabs is about the only feature I find superior in modelling.