The article was pretty generalised.
Architects, for reasons I can't quite grasp, are finally beginning to clue in on the idea that maybe it's possible and maybe it's a good idea to start considering the jump to a 3D building model paradigm.
Up til now you didn't have too many choices, and really, Revit is only the newest choice. ArchiCAD and Bentley's Triforma products were both relatively effective tools for doing BIM.
Triforma is best compared to ADT: you model up each floor of the building in plans and assemble it into a master model from which your sections and elevations are largely generated.
ArchiCAD and Revit have the whole building in one file, so it's a lot easier to see where you're at and continue onwards. ArchiCAD has real problems in the multi-user environment -- lots of annoyance and frustration -- and learning Revit's worksets feature does take a few days. Thankfully Revit's multiuser stability is good with only occasional hiccups which you can nearly always sort out.
The ADT team is no doubt working hard to make ADT as usable as Revit, but it still isn't. If you don't have ADT, there's no point in pursuing it: you'll get up to speed much faster with Revit, and you'll have way more fun!
My $0.02 worth...
"claybaker" wrote in message news:9864405.1076957611574.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum1.autodesk.com...
> I'm considering making the jump to BIM, and have heard all sorts of viewpoints about various products - Revit, Bentley, ESSI, CATIA, etc. In fact, I was just given a copy of Information Week's January 26th edition with the cover and lead article on Building Intelligence. Does anyone have any thoughts, or could you point me to objective, fact-based sources for determining the various features and trade-offs from one product to another? Any and all information would be helpful. P.S. If you saw the Information Week article, what did you think?