I have been very vocal in my previous posts about how I feel obvious operations inside Revit are a complete hassle - allow me to continue....
Today when I was watching a video about how to fix yet another annoying issue - Room Leader Lines not behaving properly, I heard a common line from the youtube presenter. "Don't worry it's ok, we can fix it". I think that this sucks. A lot. This software is extremely expensive. Many of us have been Autodesk Customers and Advocates for years, and while Revit may be somehwhat new to to the mass market, it's old enough for Autodesk to have been able to iron out most of the kinks.
Drafting and Modelling should not be "hard" (no pun intended). CAD was created to make things easier, not more difficult. There are parts of Revit that I love - It is very organized for instance - I LOVE that. But when it comes to basic production methods it can be a real drag.
I want the Out Of The Box Experience to be better. I think that the software is Poorly Programmed compared to other packages (even in other industries) and it seems to me that Autodesk knows that it has the majority of the market share and abuses it in every release. Autodesk needs to teach their programmers how to think like designers and architects and have them crank out a set of plans to really see what's going on.
Have they asked for or recieved any real feedback at all about this software? Are you people telling me that you start the thing and everything works great!!!?? Huh???
I feel like I am getting hosed and while I am new to Revit, I am not stupid. The program should be more in tune with day to day design operations that reflect real world designs. I should not have to "live" with the fact that some programmer did not take the time to fully finish the job.
For future releases Revit needs to be more user friendly and be able to easily produce a set of plans that look **** good, not just ok without hours of customization and work arounds.
Gelöst! Gehe zur Lösung
Just for some context of your editorial, has the author ever programmed a complex piece of software from scratch? Or have they ever managed a software development product cycle? Also, has the author ever researched the makeup of Autodesk's software development teams? This information appears widely online in articles and seems to contradict some of the assumptions made in the post. Would the author's opinion change if presented new information about how software is developed?
Hi jcortel, is there something we can help you on? (I had a quick read of your previous posts) obviously new to Revit, you seem very frustrated BUT your comments are a little naïve. Have you engaged a professional experienced trainer to help you in your transition? As a professional trainer myself I have assisted others in implementation and I would certainly recommend this if you are finding the experience frustrating. Having someone who knows the ins and outs certainly reduces the initial stress levels.
Revit is not a perfect software. Autodesk only released Version 6.1 (2003) after acquiring it themselves in 2002, so that means Autodesk have only released Revit roughly 13 times… which if you were to roll back the equivalent in AutoCAD today, would be like going back to AutoCAD 2004…um…no thank you. AutoCAD 2000i (the internet release, was release 16!, AutoCAD 2008, (what I consider the last of the best releases before performance took a hit due to ribbon design) was release 22!! 33 years later, release 30 AutoCAD 2016!! Maybe puts things in perspective.
So no I would disagree, I don’t think it’s “old enough for all the kinks to be ironed out”.
Autodesk have made many gains since 2004, perhaps not in the areas you would like. Your complaints of the OTB setup are a little ironic I think. I am betting like most people, your AutoCAD is customized to the hill with your office standards. Revit is no different, for it to work well, you have to invest a lot of time in setting it up just the way you uniquely like it, just the way your unique office wants it & just for the unique projects you work on.
Ever drawn up a set of plans using AutoCAD OTB?!? What crap they give you! No layers setup, which means it would be a drawing with no depth! (Don’t even get me started on those useless blocks on the tool palettes).
You acknowledge Revit is young, but expect the finer things to be polished. There are bigger problems than a corner mullion not being default (which by the way is solved by a good curtain wall setup).
So why not give Revit a bit more time than just a few months and a handful or projects to setup well? My implementation plans in new offices is never less than 12 months.
You should be more thankful that you have a forum like this with actual answers, with people who are now experienced enough to be able to help you. You think back when version 6 was rolling out people had this support forum?
I would recommend being more productive about solving your problems, ask questions see how we do it, because whilst you are complaining about the small things, companies are achieving the bigger things with the software that will contribute to a new way of designing & building in the future. When you get there, we will have worked through all of those problems too, refined the software by providing feedback to Autodesk (yes some of us actually talk to Autodesk directly), so individuals like yourself have it easier than us, even if you don’t think so.
I wish you all the best in the new year, it can be a frustrating experience to start with, but it is ridiculous how much information is out there, so make the most of it. If not, you could always head over to Graphisoft, ArchiCAD is up to release 19, going strong since windows version in 1995. You may find it more polished OTB…or if that’s not what you’re looking for, try SketchUp.
Merry Christmas.
p.s. I’ll head over to your mullion problem later and explain the method I use, it may help.
Is Revit, or it's siblings (RAC, MEP, RST) perfect? ABSOLUTELY NOT....But then in the "Old Days", of Pencils and Vellum wasn't perfect then Either. You had smears on the Sheets on hot days with no A/C...PA's leaning over your shoulder saying that they didn't like the way you "Lettered" something, the Ammonia Blueprint machine's Exhaust fan crapped out at Deadline time and filled the entire office...Try working with open windows in Upstate NY in mid Feb. because of it......just a couple of things that ARE NOT PERFECT in our industry. Even Construction in and of itself is not an Exact Science...not matter how hard we try or how much we wish.
BUT........would I go back to Pencil and Vellum..........would I go Back to ADT/ACA...even though before I became Revitized, I was the biggest advocate of Properly Used ADT there ever was........Absolutlely not. As stated before, a good suggestion would be to get some Training and help from those of us who have experienced the ins and out of Revit from DAY ONE, and still would fight vigorously in its defense.
Remember, anything Man touches is not going to be perfect...no matter what it is.
We're here to Help if you need it. You only need ask.
good Luck.
M
Developing software is never over. Applications are constantly in a state of development. Bugs here...glitches there...fixes for that break this...it's easy to blame the developers, but when you are developing complex software such as this....you really should cut them some slack.
There is one issue that does seem to be somewhat interesting. Many of the families have a lot of parameters that are common to each other. In fact, Revit schedules have a default list that include most of these things, like the manufacturer, voltage, comments, size, type, etc. However, when you create a family for a new light fixture or a new piece of equipment, and you begin to add the parameters that need to be defined, none of those standard parameters are presented anywhere. Let us take the example of light fixture. To give one example of a parameter, I want to define the voltage that the light fixture may be connected to. There is a voltage parameter in the database. We know it exists because these are all default parameters when you make a light fixture schedule. Unfortunately rather than accessing the default parameter, you are forced to create a new voltage parameter. Now this light fixture has two voltage parameters in the database. One inaccessible default parameter and one user created parameter. The problem is then compounded when I give this family to another person to use. If they don't have the same shared parameters, then they have to create yet a third voltage parameter to be able to sort and make any necessary calculations in their own projects. This leads to unnecessary bloat in the form of the rapidly expanding database, as well as general portability issues stemming from the end user usage of the parameters for other calculation purposes. If there existed dropdown menus in the parameter gui. For example I could click an electrical category, it could query the database and provide a list of the existing database default parameters, for me to select from. or I could click a button for electrical parameters and it adds all available one by default allowing the user to select ones he does not want to use. This would go a long way toward alleviating the experience.
Just a random rant!... I was a graphics programmer for years in the AAA game industry for starters. I have a 5k computer. It has 64 cores. Revit really only uses 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What in the holly cow... Also I just had a project that was using 34 GIGS of ram while working a short while on it (A whole 2000 SQ Ft ). Please hire me to fix this mess... This is ridiculous at a programming level. We had to make fully life like scenes at 60 frames per second in my gaming programming life and FAR more complex then these drawings and yes we had model behavior that was relational. My drawings are moving at maybe 2 frames a second in realistic with a RTX 3080 / 64 gigs of ram / 64 CORES!... good lord... what does the average joe have to put up with, this is the absolute top of the line computer....THE MOST MONEY CAN BUY....
Just wanted to vent.... this is ridiculous for what I spend a year on this software... and most of all the hours of my life taken by bad software engineers.... FIX THIS Autodesk... the monopoly will not last with this..... sorry just aggravated I am working way into my supposed holiday because you hired terrible programmers and system designers. Your programming team should be replaced or reorganized... the core systems rewritten for multi core... that would be a game changer... yes difficult but have you looked into people that have dealt with PlayStation hardware where you HAVE TO USE MULTI CORE. Or are you using cheap engineers?
I love Revit but this is absolutely un excusable. All CPU and GPU architecture is multi core.. yet Revit is based on single core windows XP.... argh... For my company I spend what I could have a corvette for and I have a Pinto with 4 flat tires.
-I wholeheartedly agree with the original poster. No excuses. This program is too expensive to suck so loud. Data base design has distinct advantages, but my drawings need to look good, too. I can't have the first, (or second) sheet of my 60 page drawing set look like it was drawn by a blind person, especially when it's only text.
-I need more control over schedule styles, for one. Schedule borders rarely work properly. When I edit a schedule it would be great if I was looking at the live schedule, instead of a proxy that doesn't stylistically represent the schedule I am creating. Try it. You need to close the schedule editor top have a look at the actual schedule. Style changes "stick", sometimes. Change the grid visibility setting and some columns change, others don't, and you may never get back to the beginning. Header over rides don't. The graphic interface for schedule editing is not very distinct, it is difficult to see which field I have selected.
-Tasks that should be simple are mired in invisible constraints. Editing a wall profile is just one example. Error messages are not specific enough (although getting better). Wall joins have too many ways to not work. The message that a certain task will cause my walls to become unjoined isn't enough. Give me some idea of what to do differently so they don't become unjoined. Alternately, let the unjoined walls sit where I place them without reaching out to snap to some vague undefined snap.
-Nothing is intuitive. Not for drafting tasks, not for modeling tasks, not for word processing tasks. Why do you "open" a drawing and select a sheet, BUT you open a family? The contextual menus are ridiculous. To get to the create tab I need to do what??? Try it. Now tell me that makes sense. Take a look at the support files. How many tasks are users instructed to do something on the "Create" tab?
-If I only needed data base level information I could send just my spec book to the job site, but I need to create detailed integrated drawings, that look good and are easy to read.
-The posture that Revit is new and still learning is horse ****. I work with a man who has used Revit for 20 years. When I ask him for help with the program, often as not, he starts his explanation with the phrase "I have a work-around for that". Look how far video games have come in the same time frame. There are plenty of 2-d and 3-d drafting/modelling programs out there. Try one.
-I understand that data is the focus of data-base programs, and Revit does those type of tasks very well. How many architects are on the program staff? What do your programmers know about designing/building things? Send them over to the community college to learn how to develop construction drawings.
Now, if you are reading this and nothing I have said rings true, (besides the fact you've heard it all before), then we have identified the problem. You can't help fix it if you don't know how construction drawings are created and/or how your program actually works. I strongly suspect that is the case, as there is little indication otherwise.
Sie finden nicht, was Sie suchen? Fragen Sie die Community oder teilen Sie Ihr Wissen mit anderen.