I'm actually more interested in having AutoCAD as a way to fix (manipulate
more "PC") consultant files before messing with them in Revit or prep a
Revit export for a specific consultant. It further provides a way to
"proof" a file that gets sent elsewhere, otherwise you can only say, "We'll
it should work fine, I've never had any problems." This way you can just
open it up in AutoCad first and KNOW!
So do I really need AutoCAD to do work? Actually, yes...we have clients
that have dwg files and they expect the work to continue on in this
fashion...as everyone knows the customer is always right even if they are
wrong. Sure, I can do my stuff in Revit and export it, but then I'm back to
the above issue of proof. Without an AutoCAD seat at least....
There's plenty of good reasons to have the tool lying around, but as time
goes by it'll be like that hand saw on my wall gathering dust while the
compound miter saw gets a new blade and oil.
"Mel Persin" wrote in message
> It's not about you (don't take this personally), me or any Reviteer who
> master Revit to produce the building model, 2D detailing, importing and
> exporting to complete a set of construction drawings. Instead it is about
> firms ability to transfer their AutoCAD/ADT seats to Revit, train their
> staff and modify their current practices and standards to enhance Revit's
> modeling and parametric benefits.
> You already know from your own experiences as a dealer and practicing
> professional that not every firm can will Revit into their practice ,nor
> convince their staff to change from what they already are secure in using
> get them up and running (training) on Revit. In the larger architectural
> and engineering firms, just the act of getting IS and/or CAD management to
> upgrade programs without thorough testing, deployment plans, training and
> customization is a Herculean task resulting in delays of months To ask
> firm to interrupt their work flow, even for greater benefit, is paramount
> cash flow death and client deliverable delays.
> In any firm, greater than five CAD users, the ability to adopt better
> software or adapt to the coming changes in architectural services, slowly
> being ushered in by building modeling and parametric, is going to take
> several years. Until their is an cadre of knowledgeable and experienced
> Revit user's to meet the demands of the architectural and AEC communities
> workforce as there already exists for AutoCAD, transition will be steady,
> but slow.
> The success stories that some firms have published are only a glimpse of
> building modeling and the future of parametric. Since the majority of AEC
> firms will continue to use AutoCAD along with the myriad of consultants
> providing building design services, management will hold to perceptions
> AutoCAD is still the glue between Revit and the rest of the CAD world.
> I would fully agree with you that doing the detailing in Revit is easy,
> better coordinated and controlled. But then those who started with Revit
> early on are the explorers (like Christopher Columbus or Colon as he was
> known) and you and I who came with Autodesk's adaptation of Revit
> forging new pathways for our peers to follow.
> So let us all carve a new landscape for the practice of architecture and
> pave the way to a greater reward.
> Mel Persin, Architect-AIA
> Network/CAD Consultant,
> Support & Training
> From All of Us to All of You.
> This time of year brings out good cheer,
> For the Holidays and New Year.
> So let the festive spirit abound,
> And enjoy those loved that are around.
> Yet not forget those who cannot be,
> Who's love in past brought us glee.
> We wish you and your family all ,
> The best of the Holidays about to call,
> A New Years throughout of good health,
> where deeds and love are measured wealth.
> That strife and hunger of nations cease,
> and all mankind enjoy a millennium of peace.
> "Aaron Rumple" wrote in message
> > I'm finding this not really true. I'd rather draft in Revit than AutoCAD
> > even for 2D. I thought I'd need AutoCAD to transition my drawings, but
> > I've imported a lot of the office drawings into Revit - I'm shocked at
> > poorly drawn AutoCAD drawings are. Drawings I would look at in AutoCAD
> > consider "good" and "clean" are full of inaccuracies and garbage
> > Cleanup is simpler in Revit than in AutoCAD.
> > "Mel Persin" wrote in message
> > news:3fe2e1bd$1_5@statler...
> > > My opinion valued a buck on today's market and inflation rate is you
> > > still need AutoCAD for the next several years. You may not need every
> > seat
> > > to have AutoCAD as you migrate your staff over to Revit. Yes Revit
> > > it all, but you still have staff in transition, outside consultants,
> > clients
> > > and the construction community who will still cling to AutoCAD as we
> > evolve
> > > building modeling with Revit.
> > >
> > > Do you need Revit series, not necessarily. If the plan is to migrate
> > of
> > > your AutoCAD, LT or ADT seats to Revit then you probably could work
> > > well with retaining your AutoCAD LT seats. Your not likely to be
> > any
> > > 3D modeling or need 3rd party software API or program interfacing or
> > to
> > > program AutoCAD internally once you transition fully to Revit.
> > >
> > > Of course during the critical transition period to Revit and until all
> > staff
> > > is trained and your appended standards to include Revit's building
> > > process and methods is fully developed, you will still have seats of
> > > AutoCAD/ADT staff can use. But down the line, a year or slightly
> > > Revit demonstrates to management and staff the ease of learning,
> > > opportunities during design, efficiency in production documentation
> > > elimination of errors of drawing sheets, graphic and schedule
> > coordination,
> > > your firm will shed the old legacy 2D CAD for Revit's Building
> > and
> > > fully parametric database.
> > >
> > > AutoCAD will be unnecessary in your design and production process and
> > > convenience to manage drawings received from outside resources or
> > > Revit's views exported to other CAD formats.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mel Persin, Architect-AIA
> > > Network/CAD Consultant,
> > > Support & Training
> > >
> > > "John Story" wrote in message
> > > > I got the correct version last night for the upgrade to the seat we
> > > now
> > > > but have a question as to the best way to move forward from here to
> > > > more. I understand that there are essentially two versions now, one
> > > is
> > > > "standalone" called "Autodesk Revit 6.0" and one that is "AutoCAD
> > > > Series".
> > > >
> > > > So, beyond the obvious that AutoCAD is included in one, what
> > > > differences are there between the two packages? A different
> > > > implies that it is installing at least some other portions or
> > > > somehow into AutoCAD or something. Does it link to that specific
> > > > AutoCAD? Please be specific.
> > > >
> > > > I am on the verge of transfering several unused seats of AutoCAD to
> > or
> > > > the other, and the licenses will be networked for all seats
> > > > first impression would be to get the AutoCAD Revit Series, so I can
> > still
> > > > have the AutoCAD seats and the Revit seats, unless they are somehow
> > > to
> > > > each other or cannot be network licensed. If this is the case, I
> > get
> > > > the Autodesk Revit 6.0 and don't really need the excess AutoCAD if I
> > > > going to use Revit.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to all that help,
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
This is all pure speculation, but based on my experience with FlexLM, I'm
probably closer to being right than wrong. ;-) If someone has other info,
please correct me.
With FlexLM, each product is licensed as a "Feature". So, you have X number
of licenses of a particular Feature, say 10. You may install the product on
as many machines as you wish. Each computer that launches a product gets
one license of a Feature. You may launch as many instances of that product
on one machine as you like, and you will only take one license of the
There will be one Feature for the Revit Series product. The Feature will be
different from the Feature for a standalone Revit product, and from the
Feature for a standalone AutoCAD product.
So, launching Revit from the Revit Series installation will use one license
of the Revit Series Feature. All subsequent launches of Revit or AutoCAD on
that machine will not take an additional license, merely use the same
If you buy the Revit Series, the Revit installation and the AutoCAD
installation will probably still remain completely independant. In fact,
you can probably install only Revit on one machine, and AutoCAD on another.
But they will share the one license of Revit Series.
So if you have 10 licenses of the Revit Series, you may have any combination
of users using either Revit or AutoCAD, as long as the total number of users
doesn't exceed 10.
Hope that helps,
"John Story" wrote in message news:3fe2156c$1_2@statler...
> I got the correct version last night for the upgrade to the seat we have
> but have a question as to the best way to move forward from here to get
> more. I understand that there are essentially two versions now, one that
> "standalone" called "Autodesk Revit 6.0" and one that is "AutoCAD Revit
> So, beyond the obvious that AutoCAD is included in one, what specific
> differences are there between the two packages? A different installer
> implies that it is installing at least some other portions or linking
> somehow into AutoCAD or something. Does it link to that specific seat of
> AutoCAD? Please be specific.
> I am on the verge of transfering several unused seats of AutoCAD to one or
> the other, and the licenses will be networked for all seats obtained. My
> first impression would be to get the AutoCAD Revit Series, so I can still
> have the AutoCAD seats and the Revit seats, unless they are somehow tied
> each other or cannot be network licensed. If this is the case, I will get
> the Autodesk Revit 6.0 and don't really need the excess AutoCAD if I am
> going to use Revit.
> Thanks to all that help,