Normally I wouldn't respond to this post but just consider it the views of someone who is unfamiliar with the software. However, considering so much time was taken to point out all the ' with Revit I felt it worth my time. Also, I found some of the issues with Revit to be just plain wrong.
The most interesting thing I found was that the original post was almost 2 years old! I also found the statement 'not bashing Revit' very interesting. That's good because I'd hate to see what issues he'd have if he was. Finally, I see he used ADT for 5 years and he's been using Revit for a whole 3 weeks. Glad to see he gave it a fair chance. Personally, I've been using AutoCAD since 1983 (man am I getting old), ADT since 2.0 and I've now been using Revit for over 4 years. ADT has never been what it was intended to be and is probably the primary reason Autodesk bought Revit. I also worked for a reseller for 2+ years and found that most of the customers use ADT as a glorified AutoCAD package because they find it too difficult to get ADT to work the way they expect it to. They end up resorting to drawing everything with lines.
BTW, it seems like some of the changes they've made in ADT are strangely familiar. Ever wonder where the ability to start drawing a wall and typing in a dimension came from?
As Scott said, Revit is not AutoCAD. It's a completely different software and requires a completely different thought process. It would be like trying to go from a MAC to a PC and saying 'Why doesn't the PC do it this way, the MAC did'.
1. There's a reason Revit doesn't use AEC walls, tags, etc. They are simply not the same types of objects as Revit walls, tags, etc. Again, you're asking for 2 completely different pieces of software to understand the same object. As far as things getting screwed up in Revit, it's a matter of people paying attention to what they're doing. I've seen people completely screw up drawings.
2. Revit doesn't need layers. Layers are useless being as you can name a layer whatever your heart desires and you can never be sure what's on it. When you turn something on or off in Visibility Graphics you know exactly what your changing. IMO the categories pretty much function just like layers in AutoCAD.
3. Need more specifics on what issues you're having.
4. Yes, it would be handy to have an 'automatic offset' similar to ADT. However, placing an object and moving it really doesn't seem to be a major issue for anyone here.
5. Groups aren't meant to be an XREF substitute. They are more meant to manage different types of components. If it's the phasing that is causing problems than create a view with correct phase and work in that view.
6. Simple create the 2D lines as an in-place family.
7. Not sure what you mean by 'snapping to dimensions'. If you're mirroring components you have the choice of drawing a reference line and picking it or using the 'draw' option instead of pick in the mirror tool.
8. You CAN change the wall type while in the wall command.
9. Again, need more specifics on what command is giving you a problem.
10. Revit only has as many door styles as you need. If you don't want to create a door style for each size than you can make the size parameters instance parameters instead of type parameters. The reason they're created as types is it makes it easier to place the door you want and get it scheduled correctly. No more having to watch what the width or height of the door when placing it. As far as the swing angle goes, I recommend looking at RevitCity.com. There are several adjustable doors available.
11. If you want an offset simple place the object, pick it, and change the temporary dimension. There are very few times that I've had to draw a temporary line to place an object.
12. Profiles were, and still are, a major pain. We use both revit and ADT and every time I get one of the users here calling me saying they're menus aren't loaded, or their paths aren't correct I cringe. It's a nice change knowing i can sit down at any computer and i know exactly what I'm looking at. Everything you need to design is there and it's exactly where you expect it.
13. First off, why are you using shift + keys? Just type the dimension you want 1 means 1 foot. 1" means 1". Secondly, you can Revit to use inches if you want. Go to Project Units under Settings and change it to Fractional Inches instead of FEET and Inches. Of course, I just chose to adjust to the way the software was set up. It took me all of about 3 days.
14. Would need more specifics. Make sure you're using the correct trim tool.
15. Sure it does. Uncheck the 'Constrain' box in the options bar when you copy.
16. See number 10 above
17. I'll agree with you on the grips. There needs to be some improvement.
18. Try using the create similar tool instead of offset. Before you begin drawing the wall you can type in the dimension that you want the wall offset.
19. Not true. You can either preset the value or select Graphical and type the value.
20. Windows are as editable, if not more editable than ADT. The level of editability is simply a matter of how the family was created.
21. I will agree with you on that one. I'd like to see a chamfer and radius option built into the trim command.
22. Again, not sure why you're having a problem. Set up a view showing the existing phase, place the existing door and set it be demolished in the new phase. Place the new cased opening in the new phase. This is done many times without having to split up walls.
23. I refer to the previous response - "This is to allow you to select new wall types, for instance, without leaving the 'Wall' command. You've asked for this feature several times already, now you don't like it?"
24. If you want the counter to align with the walls than use a wall based family. If you don't want to drag the counter to the size you want than create a family with the size built in (not very useful since counter tops are typically built to the size of the room. If that doesn't work, create the countertop as an in-place family. As far as the sinks, use a non-hosted sink. finally, the comment about Revit being a modeling software. This is a typical response from those that want to pick Revit apart. Just because it's a model software DOES NOT MEAN EVERYTHING HAS TO BE 3D. Rule of thumb - only create what you need to in 3D. Keep your families simple. If a 2D representation conveys your intent than use it.
25. Work in a view with the right phase set. Why would you want to preset the phase of an object?
26. this shouldn't be an issue in 2009. Unless you're zoomed in so far you can't see the object that's being referenced.
27. Stairs definitely need improved. No argument there.
28. Roofs could also use some improvements. Not sure why you're having issues with readability. I'm not sure how ADT handles this but if you want the edges of the walls below the roof to appear I either turn on the floor below the roof ar use details lines and lock them to the face of the wall below.
29. Haven't dealt much with arch-topped windows.
30. I really don't understand this one. I can create a window of any shape and size. As far as scheduling, the schedules only display what you tell them to.
31. If you are placing a wall why not type the length of the wall as you're placing it?
32. Again, simply not true. If it's a 2D representation you want, use the detailing tools. If it's something like a sill than either build it in to the window or create a family that is adjustable. Families are leaps and bounds ahead of where blocks could ever be. Families are not something that you can simply just start creating. If you want to use them effectively you definitely need to get training.
33. You are correct, any Joe Schmo can accidently move something on a different floor. However, I found this is usually someone just not paying attention to what they're doing. Typically I found this only happens once when the person has top go back and fix it. they quickly learn to be conscious of what's going on in the model. Of course, if Autodesk made it the other way people would complain that they couldn't move things in one level while they're in another.
34. I'm sorry, if I heard you right, you said ceilings are hard to work with in Revit? Ceilings are one of the worst things to work with in ADT! What is easier than picking inside a room and having Revit create a ceiling. If you need a different size grid create a ceiling type and have it show a different size grid. As far as changing from 1 to the other, all you have to do is pick the ceiling and pick the new type from the options box. What’s so difficult? You need to move the grid or heaven-forbid rotate it, how about selecting on the grid line and moving it. Again, what’s so difficult? True the light fixtures don't snap to the grid. So place one light, align it to the grid and then copy or array the light. As far as the ‘element is too small message’ try using your align tool.
35. Again, if you are talking about creating families, you need to get training.
36. Huh? Very rarely do we EVER have to change the profile of a wall unless we are trying to create a wall with a sloped top. The extend tool in Revit works beautifully. If you are getting error messages than it’s not the software it’s the way you created your model. We occasionally get error messages if the roof does not extend over the wall. The last part of your statement is one I find most amusing ‘Revit is not an accurate software’. Are you kidding? If anything, Revit is TOO accurate. Hence the reason you can not manually over-ride dimensions. If something needs to be drawn to a 1/16” of an inch then draw it to a 1/16” of an inch and don’t fudge it because it’s close enough.
37. It’s been a while since I actively worked in ADT but I wasn’t aware that ADT had an ‘autoscroll’ feature. I find the middle mouse button quite useful when I have to scroll.
38. Why? Again, ADT and Revit are 2 different software packages. That’s like saying I can’t copy and paste from Microsation to ADT. BTW, can ADT cut and paste elements from Revit? Hmmm.
39. Set up your views to show components any way your heart desires. Heck, have everything show as different colors like ADT if you wish.
40. Before making a statement like something is ‘outrageous’ you should probably work with Revit a while longer on some larger projects, possibly across multiple offices. While I’m not a big proponent of having separate Revit files, I’m sure there are times when this may be a viable option. Personally I’ve never been able to come up with a good way of making it work without running into other problems. Now we do have structural and MEP in separate models but I’m sure you weren't referring to that end of things. One thing, you seem to be a big fan of X-Refs as I am. Aren’t X-Refs separate files that linked in another drawing?
Finally, I think the guys working on the Freedom Tower would disagree that Revit isn't a good tool for corporate architecture.
Are there improvements I'd like to see in Revit? definitely. IMO I'd like to see them integrate tool palettes into Revit. I also thing the interface for loading families could be greatly enhanced. I've seen some third-party software that handles this MUCH better. I also wish they'd get rid of the arrow and give us the choice of using cross-hairs would be a huge step forward. As far as the components go, I’d love to see something similar to the dynamic blocks in AutoCAD where I can select a box and I get a drop down box next to the family that I can choose a different type.
Message was edited by: Discussion Admin
