📝 Future AEC Software Specification - What's your thoughts?

[handjonathan]

This week we have seen the publication of the Future AEC Software Specification; an ongoing initiative to define the future tools that the AEC industry needs to shape the world around us.

The specification poses some interesting foundational thoughts on the principle and capabilities for the future. What are your thoughts?

*Don't have time to read the Specification? Read the Key takeaways attached.

[handjonathan]

@Simon_Weel 

I guess the first thing would be a rename to Revit X 🤣

[RobDraw]

---

@Simon_Weel wrote:

The article reads as science fiction.

---

Thanks! I got a bit of a chuckle from your comment and then read the article for the first time. I was actually thinking your comment was far from accurate. I actually agree with you.

The article reminds me of that open letter to Autodesk penned a number of years ago. I wonder how many of the same companies are involved.

We can all dream and hope for a better tomorrow. The article is just another way of saying, "Autodesk isn't giving us what we want" without actually considering the consequences of this ideal. All this is under the guise of "what the industry needs". Many may not like it, but there is a logic to how things are progressing. It may not be apparent or even agreed to by the nay-sayers but it is there.

With that said, like that open letter, some of the things they strive for are very subjective and opinion based. I get the feeling that they aren't seeing the big picture and the possible ramifications of their ideal.

[Simon_Weel]

---

The article reminds me of that open letter to Autodesk penned a number of years ago. I wonder how many of the same companies are involved.

---

All of them - it's at the bottom of the article.

Biggest 'problem' IMO is the AEC industry being way too fragmented. It's not like the automotive industry where a handful of companies decides which cars we drive. It's more like every village having at least 5 different churches and any of them claiming to be the 'true' one. So the first step needed is to unite all different parties, which is a mammoth-task on it's own...

If I look at my own country, the Netherlands, there's no guidance in the AEC industry. Every company does it's own thing, invents it's own standards etc. While there are branche organisations, most of them are the type of offering a helping hand, which is good, but none of them takes the lead. Imagine the same thing a global scale.

Anyway, I don't mean we better leave the things as they are, but you have to work with what you've got and build on that. So trying to push firms like Autodesk or Graphisoft to improve their software is a good thing. And outlining your thoughts on how you envision the future of CAD is also a good thing. 

[RobDraw]

All of them? That explains it. I thought that open letter was poorly written by a group of frustrated users demanding changes. The article seems like the same message in a kinder gentler format. Kind of like a kid who didn't get what they wanted from Daddy and tried buttering up Mommy with a kinder gentler approach hoping for at least some sort of acknowledgement. Ideals are great but people make them reality and not everyone lives in the same reality.

Your observations about the way things are in your country is common over here. The way things get done vary widely even within trades. Finding anyone that follows the NCS is rare. I couldn't tell you how many ways revisions are handled, as an example.