Revit Roadmaps

The First-Ever Public Revit Roadmap

By: Employee | Posted ‎10-19-2016 04:38 PM , edited ‎10-20-2016 01:00 PM |

At Autodesk, we know that feedback from you is what makes our products better. Not only do we want to hear your thoughts about what we've released and shipped so far, we also want your feedback on our plans.

 

While we've always tried to share our product roadmaps, it's not necessarily been easy information to come by.  But times are changing, and we’re excited to have the chance to try something new: we’re sharing our product roadmaps with all of our customers, publicly.

 

Before we dive into the roadmaps, let’s establish some ground rules: 

 

  1. We're sharing some of the highlights of our product development roadmap to give you a sense of the general direction Revit is headed. There's a lot more work going on behind the scenes and this roadmap doesn't reflect everything our development teams are working on.
  2. We plan to periodically update the roadmap because it is subject to change. When we can, we'll also share videos that show off some of the work-in-progress software.
  3. Roadmaps are plans, not promises. We're as excited as you to see new functionality make it into the products, but the development, release, and timing of any features or functionality remains at our sole discretion.
  4. These roadmaps should not be used to make purchasing decisions.

 

To better explain the roadmap, for each discipline, we've grouped our plans by theme:

 

  • Create: Efficiently create information that captures design intent.
  • Optimize: Optimize designs for best results.
  • Connect: Empower teams by connecting workflows for team-based project delivery.
  • Automate: Boost productivity by automating tasks.
  • Extend: Support the full project lifecycle.
  • Modernize: Create a modern and effortless experience.
  • Strengthen: Build a solid foundation for product reliability and efficiency.

 

We use disciplines, themes, and colors to keep track of the roadmap details. 

 

rr1.png

Delivered in Revit 2017.1

rr2.png

Planned (Some features are currently available for testing in Revit Preview)

 

Next, let’s dive into some of the exciting work happening in the Factory!

   

 

REVIT CORE

 

“What is Revit Core?” you may ask. Revit Core (often referred to as Platform) is the glue that holds Revit together. It includes technologies and features that are common across disciplines. It is the part of your everyday Revit experience that helps you get your job done.

 

When we imagine the future of Revit Core, we see a robust toolkit that doesn’t get in your way. The tools you need are there. They do what you want. This leaves you time to focus on creating better designs - time to be an Architect or Engineer, not a software wrangler. We believe that this future is powered through a cloud-connected experience that enables efficient collaboration and massive computational power, and by software that understands you and what you need to get done.

 

With that in mind, let’s explore some of the functionality that will help us get there.

 

Automate

 

rr3.png 

One of our key goals is to help you be more effective. To boost your productivity, we strive to create increased efficiency of design that is proactive, captures design intent, and eliminates tedious workflows.

 

To begin, we want to capture design intent in the model. By embedding the logic that you previously had to reapply every time you made a change, we can help you spend more time designing and less time managing changes. Next, we want to help eliminate tedious, repetitive tasks. We do this by providing tools that automate your workflows and simplify painful multi-step processes. Further, we provide our partners with access to Revit data, so they can develop tools to help you get your work done.

 

Connect

 

rr4.png

The future of making things is a team sport, and we know a large part of your job involves working with other team members.  That often requires sharing data between multiple products, across disciplines, with teams located around the world. We believe BIM’s future lies in connecting project teams together by supporting integrated, accessible BIM data regardless of product. 

 

At Autodesk, we spend a lot of time figuring out how to optimally connect teams and the products they use. It’s a really challenging problem that’s aggravated by file formats and geometric incompatibilities. We believe the solution to this problem lies in making Revit data more accessible to other products both through improved APIs and direct access to data.

 

Additionally, we understand the need to reference non-Revit data in your designs. We seek to provide connected workflows that incorporate data from other products in lightweight and project-centric ways.

 

Modernize

 

rr5.png

A big part of our future for Revit is to create an experience that puts you, the customer, first instead of putting you in a position where you need to fight with the software.  We are investing in creating a modern experience that understands who you are, makes the tools you need available when you need them, and allows you to focus on your model instead of dialog boxes.

 

We are focused on supporting the hardware that you already own, with multi-monitor support and support for high resolution monitors.  We are also investing in how properties of elements are displayed and enabling better contextual access to tools for elements. Further, we are investigating ways to allow you to work better in 3D. 

 

Strengthen

 

rr6.png

As we invest in new functionality to extend Revit Core, we cannot lose sight that we must build an infrastructure based on a continuous focus on our customers.  It is therefore essential that we strengthen the core by maintaining an emphasis on creating high-quality solutions that address customer needs.

 

We are thrilled to add a few top Revit Ideas requests that address gaps in Revit Core to our roadmap. Thank you for sharing your feedback on the Idea Station. Please keep up your submissions, we are listening!

  

 

ARCHITECTURE

 

For this part of the roadmap, let’s take a look at the features and functionality we are investigating for architects.  The major focus here is to enable designers to fully model and document their buildings and leverage of the power of true Building Information Management.  Our goal is to give architects the power and flexibility to design the way they want to design and remove software barriers to creativity. 

 

Connect

 

rr7.png

We want allow architects to focus on the things they care about and at the same time, ensure that they are working in a collaborative way with all project stakeholders.  For architects, connecting with others is about capturing design information and collaborating without having to redo work.  

To start, we are looking at how to connect conceptual designers better into the Design development phase of projects.  This is about allowing modelers to use their tool of choice and not lose information when it is brought into the BIM environment. 

 

We also are looking at how architects can better collaborate and share design information with civil engineers and surveyors.  We are striving to allow terrain to be accurately shared to ensure that both engineers and architects are working with the “same dirt”.     

    

Create

 

rr8.png

In the Create theme for architects, we are working to better allow architects to capture and document their design intent by supporting high detail, complex modeling, and letting architects get started with their models fast.

 

Starting with stairs and railings to support multi-story stair towers, we are investing in making it easier to model larger buildings. We want to ensure that when changes are made to the height of the building stories in the project, the stairs and railings update in a truly BIM way.  At the same time, designing stairs and railings can be difficult, so we are investing in small usability improvements to make it easier to get your modeling done.

 

Another aspect of creating that we are investigating is how to make modeling in Revit more immersive and allow you to design within the context of your project.  We are focused on modeling in perspective views so you can better understand the impact of design decisions.

 

Optimize

 

rr9.png

Optimizing a design is a key part of the iterative workflow that architects use throughout the course of a project.  We believe that we can help you by providing better access to simulation and visualization tools so that you can better understand your design and work in a truly iterative way.

To start, in Revit 2017.1 we delivered an integrated experience with Autodesk Insight 360, making it much easier to utilize energy modeling to optimize your designs. Further, we are working on integrating the newest tool for immersive visualization from Autodesk, Autodesk Live.

  

 

MEP

 

Let's look at some of the things we are investigating for MEP customers of Revit, Plant 3D, P&ID, and our Fabrication products.

First, a brief introduction:  The Systems Engineering group is made up of several teams that work together to streamline workflows across multiple technologies (the MEP functionality within Revit, AutoCAD P&ID, AutoCAD Plant 3D, CADmep, ESTmep, and CAMduct).  By harnessing the power of the cloud, these interactions can become very transparent.  So while you may be a Revit MEP, Plant 3D, or CAMduct user, behind the scenes you may be using technology from a mix of these products, along with other capabilities that many other teams are developing within Autodesk, like Collaboration for Revit and BIM 360 Docs.

 

Create

 

rr010.png

These are modeling activities related to capturing the intent of your design or detailed model.  They can be related to physical elements, like duct and pipe elements, or analytical data, such as energy settings and circuiting.  The information created is used downstream and consumed by activities in the remaining themes.

 

We’re continuing to refine the fabrication capabilities in Revit to improve its ability to produce construction ready models. Some of the work we have planned in the Connect and Extend themes will improve the processes by which that model is utilized for downstream activities.

We’re also starting to re-focus on analytical data modeling.  So far, our work has focused on improvements for circuit analysis and improvements related to the building energy model.

 

Optimize

 

rr011.png

Optimization is the process of refining your model to create a more efficient system.  This optimization can be related to the energy efficiency of the delivered solution, or efficiency in terms of construction processes. 

 

Over the years, feedback has indicated that the larger the connected model, the slower the modeling interactions become. To address this, we’re moving to a paradigm where process-intensive computations, such as flow and pressure drop, are computed in the background on additional processors, giving priority to modeling interactions. 

 

We're also replacing the computation engine with a fluids solver, previously known as Dalton on Autodesk Labs.  This solver provides simulation in addition to analytical capabilities.  While we aren't making direct use of the simulation capabilities yet, we are leveraging the engine to provide more robust analysis.  For example, we’re refining the workflow to incorporate mechanical equipment to be more tailored to their purpose, such as pumps reporting their flow and head requirements, and pressure drop being computed through the entire pipe loop (instead of being divided between supply and return). 

 

Connect

 

rr012.png

Project data is created using a variety of products, whether it is energy analysis using Insight 360, process diagrams like P&ID, physical model representations like Revit, or isometrics in Plant 3D.  Connecting this data enables project participants to contribute their expertise and allows information to flow more easily, without having to import, export, or re-enter data created by other project stakeholders.

 

We’re creating the foundation on which engineering data will be shared across project stakeholders.  This will start to enable Revit, P&ID, Insight 360, and related workflows to share information and communicate more transparently.  This isn’t about providing new ways to import and export data. It is about eliminating manual tasks related to data translation.  By connecting the project through cloud-connected experiences, schematics and models can be intelligently connected, information can be easily shared across stakeholders, and data can easily flow through the project lifecycle across a variety of products.

 

Extend

 

rr013.png

Various project stakeholders use the data authored and optimized during modeling for a variety of downstream tasks, like creating spools for pipe fabrication, outputting CAM data for sheet metal fabrication, creating reports for procurement of material, and tracking project elements.  The Extend theme is all about leveraging the connections to the data created and optimized during the authoring phases of the project, and providing workflows to keep stakeholders apprised of information relevant to them.

 

One of the first areas we are focusing on is to extend the connected technologies to streamline workflows for generating piping isometrics from detailed fabrication piping models.  Currently, it is possible to export a MAJ file from Revit, open that file in CADmep, write the result out to PCF, open that PCF in Plant 3D, and then generate DWGs that can be printed for the shop for pipe fabrication.  Possible, but not practical.  We plan to streamline this process and provide a workflow to generate isometrics utilizing Autodesk cloud services for document management.  We’re very early in this process, but the feedback has been positive.

 

 

STRUCTURE

 

This part of the roadmap is focused on structural workflows from Design to Fabrication, supporting the key construction methods for Steel, Reinforced Concrete, and Precast Concrete.

 

In this space, Revit is considered as a multi-material modeling and documentation authoring environment to capture both Design-intent and Fabrication execution as appropriate.

 

Create

 

rr014.png

These are modeling and documentation investments related to capturing the intent of design and providing detailed instruction for further production and construction execution.  The information created is used downstream and consumed by functionalities in the remaining themes. The purpose is to enhance Revit so that it can help in transitioning from traditional 2D CAD documentation tools to BIM-based modeling and documentation authoring. Our goal is to let designers and engineers provide accurate design intent models and give engineers and detailers the ability to develop models to a higher level of fidelity for fabrication and installation purposes. In a nutshell, our investments are focused on making modeling easy.

 

Optimize

 

rr015.png

Optimization is the process of refining a model and making it aligned with several criteria related to quality and completeness, structural analysis, code design and constructability. Our investments in this area are centered around BIM-centric structural analysis and code checks, as well as structural contribution to the generative design and parameter-driven optimization of forms and model configurations. This includes a fabrication level of detail.

 

Connect

 

rr016.png

We are looking at ways to facilitate project-centric collaboration among structural stakeholders, from the conceptual phase through to detailed design and fabrication. When this focus is combined with the instant connectivity that cloud, social, and mobile technologies provide, successful hand-offs between stakeholders involve integrated model data. As part of the focus on collaboration, we seek to understand and support each stakeholder, recognizing their unique perspectives and concerns, their needs for differing levels of model fidelity, and their review approval processes. By improving structural workflows across products and by consolidating functionality around key platforms to provide a higher level of automation, we are working to streamline the overall process and support more effective collaboration among structural stakeholders.    

 

Extend

 

rr017.png

Our main goal is to support the full project lifecycle, extending from the office to the shop and the field. That’s why we’re making investments that enable model information consumption for manufacturing and installation. This includes support for paperless design to construction processes, as well as working to make fabrication and installation instruction delivery tasks modern and automated. This will enable broader accessibility to information across the full project lifecycle.

 

 

IN CLOSING

 

There are a variety of other discussions and work related to connecting workflows from design through to fabrication and beyond.  So, if you don’t see something listed here, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t on our radar.

 

We’ll post updates periodically, and your feedback helps!  Let us know what you think. If there are specific areas of interest, you can submit requests through Revit Ideas - http://www.autodesk.com/RevitIdeas  

 

If you would like to provide feedback on these capabilities, we would be happy to involve you in our beta program (Revit Preview).  Reach out to revit.preview.access@autodesk.com to join Revit Preview.

 

Thanks!

The Factory

Comments
By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎11-06-2016 07:10 PM

This is exactly what Autodesk is doing on a global scale - forcing users to switch for competitive software (like ArchiCAD) by ignoring the feedback, being unresponsive and "fixing" hundreds of problems with their software forever. Although I have a very positive experience dealing with local Autodesk offices in Hong Kong and Shanghai, the overall customer service and software development policy of the company seems totally inappropriate. The local offices cannot do anything no matter how much they try if the whole company is one big mess buying off whoever competition they can without much of a plan or strategy.

By: Advocate YarUnderoaker
| Posted ‎11-10-2016 10:51 PM

Now Idea Station have 1675 ideas.

Realization of 10-15 ideas per year - we will have the perfect program after more than 100 years of development Smiley Very Happy

By: Observer rfarah
| Posted ‎11-16-2016 07:51 AM

Autodesk should look into ridiculous file sizes which prevent proper links to other software, collaboration, and smooth workflows. In additions, links or interoperability between same Autodesk products is missing especially between 3D Max and Civil 3D to Revit. We can't link or export them as parametric/smart objects.

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 07:26 AM

@sasha.crotty It's great that the Revit team has published this roadmap.

 

As for the feedback from my company: we feel that the ideastation is a great tool. 90% of the time when a user asks me about a missing future I can answer them with: "this is on the first page of the wishlish so Autodesk is fully aware of the problem and it will hopefully be addressed soon."

 

The only problem: only 4 ideas on that first page are included in the current roadmap. That's way too little.

 

If you compare this with other Autodesk software (Inventor: 132 ideas implemented, 177 ideas accepted) the Revit roadmap seems - at least at first glance - a lot less responsive to direct customer feedback. I realize that a lot of the ideas on the first page are big ones that will require a lot of development time but it would be a great gesture to the community to start accepting more (perhaps smaller) ideas on the ideastation:

 

- snap between two points

- get rid of too small on screen

- combo box for parameters / parameter limits / parameter validation

- view references in text/tables

- filter schedule by family & type

- cut wall end at angle

- revit legend component sizing

- revit legend tagging

- change revisions on multiple sheets

- spot slope on ramps

- allow text in formulas

- duplicate view: include linework override

...

 

Obviously some of these may be more complicated to implement than it may seem for the end users but at least some of them should be doable? (Snap between two points??)

 

 

Also: it's hard to give feedback on the current roadmap because most topics are rather vaguely defined. "Modern properties palette" could be awesome or completely worthless... depending on what Autodesk means with "modern" :-) 

 

 

By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 08:24 AM

 Pieter I am afraid that your assumption that "Autodesk is fully aware of the problem and it will hopefully be addressed soon" is far too optimistic. I have personally a list of more than 130 problems in Revit, which is growing at a rate of several per month. Some of those issues I have reported to Autodesk for years in various ways, mostly with little effect. One bug with which I was especially persistent with was indeed fixed, but after 4 YEARS of fight! Hard to believe ? Yes, but true.

 

There is currently 1860 requests/bugs on Revit Ideas website. Assuming that only 50% of them make sense and the rest is rubbish (I actually think that many more make sense) we have 930. So if Autodesk keeps fixing bugs and addressing user's request at the current pace (23 per year - a rough calculation based on what's new in Revit 2017.1) then we will have a more less proper tool in 40 years. And this is assuming that no new bugs and requests appear, which is obviously unrealistic. Some of us may retire or die by this time...

 

So Autodesk should really get up to speed (employ more people doing stuff NOT selling stuff). One of the ways to help would be dividing bugs/requests into the following categories:

  1. Obvious - issues which have obviously been overlooked or obvious bugs with an obvious way to implement/fix (functionally not programatically). Such list should be put to immediate implementation (no need to vote, etc.) and would include multitude of small issues untouched for years, which are easy to fix and very annoying. All such obvious issues (50-100) should be fixed within max.12 months.
  2. Must have issues which have obviously been overlooked, but which can be implemented in various ways. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK to gather ideas FOR IMPLEMENTATION ONLY of those issues from the users for a limited time - say 3 months. All the powers users known to Autodesk should be specifically contacted to gve their expert opinion. After 3 months the implementation methods for all of them (40-50) should be selected and within further 12 months "must have" issues should be implemented - total 15 months.
  3. Good to have - issues which make sense, but are still disputable, may be combined with others or may be dropped. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK for open discussion about the PRACTICALITY AND IMPLEMENTATION of the issues concerned for a limited time - say 12 months. Those issues, which would be decided valid would be moved to category 2 - "Must have". So total implementation time for "Good to have" issues - 27 months.

The above is only a rough plan, but at least it is some plan. Right now Autodesk seems not to work to any reasonable plan with IMPLEMENTING (not gathering) our request.

Comments are very welcomed and encouraged.

By: Employee
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 09:28 AM

@pieter, Thanks for your feedback. You make a very good point and we are certainly always considering what else we can add to our roadmap to help our customers. As we mentioned above, this roadmap post doesn't cover 100% of what we are doing (especially the little things). A number of the ideas you reference in your comment are currently under review by our dev teams, so I hope some of them will make it into the Accepted status. Even if a great idea ends up in the Future Consideration status, I recommend that everyone continue to vote on it. This status typically means that an item is too large of us to add to our current roadmap, but ideas in this bucket are something we will regularly reconsider.

 

Regarding more detailed feedback - I suggest joining Revit Preview if you're not already a participant. There are a number of projects there gathering active feedback. Providing us feedback in Revit Preview also a great way to get invited to an Inside the Factory Online or Live event.

 

Thanks,
Sasha

By: Contributor ttourangeau_svn
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 09:46 AM

@sasha.crotty is Revit Preview going to be better than the "I can make it better" mailing list? I joined that sincerely hoping to make positive contributions to the software's development and in the end it was survey after survey about Autodesk's Marketing materials. Such a letdown.

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 10:27 AM

@sasha.crotty I would love to join but haven't seen any opportunities for it. I have an account on the Autodesk Feedback platform but the only feedback opportunity is the "dwg sync for revit". Am I looking in the wrong place?

By: Employee
| Posted ‎11-22-2016 10:46 AM

@ttourangeau_svn, Sorry to hear that that was your experience with the mailing list. Revit Preview provides under-NDA access to monthly Revit builds for testing. A number of Revit teams also use the forums to gather input on upcoming projects before any code is written. It's definitely an opportunity to work directly with the development teams to improve the product.

 

@pieter, you can request access to Revit Preview by e-mailing revit.preview.access@autodesk.com

By: Contributor trombe
| Posted ‎11-23-2016 11:14 AM

Revit on my Desktop.

 

I think it is important to voice my concern about any possibility that Revit could be only available in a cloud based environment in the future.

 

For me,  the use of cloud based services is something to be reserved for small, discrete operations.

 

I insist on retaining all practical control of my own data. This is not a luddite mentality, rather a cautious approach in a sophisticated technologically oriented marketplace where pretty much anyone and everyone is susceptible to being hacked or otherwise having their data compromised by hacking or the sale of one company to another, which occurs regularly and where agreements and terms of service become redundant or irrelevant to a new owner, as an example of potential loss of control.

I agree cloud services can be helpful and in some cases are the only practical way forward now for some research projects,  or heavy commercial rendering which is based in a marketing strategy.

I am not a large firm and I do not need cloud servers to run things for me or "facilitate"  the growth of one part or more of whatever it is that I do and might want to change to.

For me, retaining Revit as a stand alone software program / application on my workstation,  independent of the internet,  is an expected and vital part of how I want to operate, and I feel strongly that this  type of access should never be compromised.

 

I cannot see how this situation should ever become necessary to abandon in favour of having Revit only available in a cloud based environment.

it cannot be said to be due to updating  a new patched version  or a later change is able to be made more easily by the vendor, That kind of a claim is clearly nonsense as proven world wide for the past decade.

It is as easy to change and post a new version in a download situation relatively speaking, as it is to  change a host environment, in a broad sense.

 

I would be deeply concerned if Revit was not able to reside on my workstation, as is currently the case.

For me as a customer, that reduces my amenity and access potential, and flexibility .

It would not maintain or increase it.

 

t.

 

 

 

By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎11-24-2016 03:44 AM

None of the fellow Revit users I ever spoke to was enthusiastic about Autodesk's ideas to force everything to the cloud. And most of them were seriously afraid of it. Most of the Revit serious power users I met during the Inside the Factory event in Shanghai this year were also very cautious to put it lightly. 

There are several main reasons why:

 

  1. Legal (what @trombe just mentioned above). For most (especially big) companies their projects' data is sensitive. For some companies doing special jobs (military, government, diplomatic) the data is super-sensitive. This alone should be enough reason for Autodesk to NEVER consider forcing us to use cloud. As an option - OK, but not as an "offer we cannot refuse".
  2. Internet connection. Believe it or not, dear friends from Autodesk, there are still situations when internet connection is not available (in trains, on planes, on building sites, on a beach in Thailand, etc.). Or if it is available, it is very slow, breaks down often etc. In some countries, like Australia, internet connections are generally notorious for being slow and inefficient. What is the solution proposed by Autodesk in such situations? 
  3. Technology. Autodesk cloud technology (maybe cloud technology in general) is still not mature enough to rely on it in real work and with real jobs. If its continuous work rather then sending something for processing (like the excellent cloud rendering) then it still slow, inefficient and the service can be sometimes "closed for maintenence". At least until the technology, speed and availability of internet is up to the standard, we must have desktop solutions available.

Dear @sasha.crotty, could Autodesk please assure us that the cloud solutions will not be pushed any more at the expense of us - your faithful (so far) users?

 

Marcin Klocek

By: Contributor ttourangeau_svn
| Posted ‎11-24-2016 05:45 AM

@marcin @sasha.crotty if "powered through a cloud-connected experience" means that Revit will be cloud-based, then there's no other way to say it... Autodesk is user-hostile.

 

You can call that hyperbole, but there are far, far, far more important endeavours that Autodesk should be undertaking in order to make the software more user-friendly and have it do the things users have been clamoring for. It's bad enough that Autodesk keeps on making/buying new software packages (Formit, anyone?) rather than edifying and enhancing Revit's tools... or they take the top-rated Ideas and say "sorry, too complicated - maybe some day tho". It would be exponentially worse if they were to take the already-frustrating software and make it cloud-based before fixing what's currently broken. The pricing structure changes were bad enough - now the software will be even less usable. It's the typical tech-industry echo chamber - they're all saying "Cloud! Everyone wants the cloud because we like it!" - while the rest of us are saying "We paid good money for this software and it's been in development for 20 years, why is so much still missing and broken?"

 

That being said, I really hope that everyone is just misinterpreting what Autodesk is saying. I really hope they will step in to clarify. 

By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎11-24-2016 08:30 AM

@ttourangeau_svn - you are spot on - "We paid good money for this software and it's been in development for 20 years, why is so much still missing and broken?". This is the users' message which the boss (or Product Owner as they call it) of Revit in Autodesk should read to himself every morning. Sometimes it almost seems like Autodesk is on a suicidal mission to do everything possible to scare existing and potential users off. Ignoring what we are literally begging them to do, not responding to inconvenient questions, making secrets out of everything and most importantly - failing or under performing in most what they put their hands on. Maybe there is some inside sabotage going on? 

By: Mentor
| Posted ‎11-24-2016 11:02 AM

Steady on everyone.  The point of this is not to harangue Autodesk into getting pet updates implemented, rumor mongering, and so on.  Its simply to let us know the general outlook, just as reading a movie review in a newspaper doesn't give us the ability to change the script.  The AREA boards (media and entertainment products) had a similar result in the past - any developers/managers who dropped in to keep users in the loop were basically shouted out of the room, resulting in years of non-participation that's only recently been reversed.  If things are not kept constructive then they can very easily go back to where things were - no roadmap, no feedback, no nothing.  

 

For starters, lets look at the "cloud connected experience" that was mentioned.  For now this refers to analysis, rendering, and other features which can leverage massive computing power available in server farms.  These can provide capabilities which are far beyond the ability of single-, small-, and even mid-sized companies which simply don't have the budget and manpower to maintain the necessary hardware/software.  Could this mean moving to a SaaS (software as a service) for the actual program itself?  It certainly does, at some point in the future.  But not today.  Or tomorrow.  You won't wake up one day and find the program or your work gone.

 

Next, try to consider what the program *can* do.  Some of you are probably a little young to remember using drafting boards.  Or using AutoCAD with only a keyboard and no mouse (the lucky ones eventually got a tablet... ooohhh fancy!  Smiley Happy ).  Even five years ago we didn't have the capabilities we have today.  Who feels like going back that many releases?  Yeah, kinda figured.  Smiley Happy  So is it too much to ask for a little more patience and a little less useless venting?

By: Contributor trombe
| Posted ‎11-24-2016 12:49 PM
Dear dgorsman,



I started with a drawing board, then AutoCAD LT before Revit.

I have had a seat of Revit since 2002.

I have watched its development and the rate of acquisition that AutoDesk
maintains, and it has done a sterling job of "leveraging" its assets, (such
as stripping code from Revit , to support and make new products).

I have never had any issues with Autodesk making as much money as it can.

I can however understand the continued frustrations of Revit users who see
new products being created and developed apace, while Revit (after
iterations became Building), then Architecture, languished while Structure
and MEP were created and other products gained the benefits that reputedly
and repeatedly came from Revit.

We have waited for a very long time in years, and a much longer time in
software development /marketplace terms, to see a number of basic tools be
improved such as Railings (for instance). This has not really happened.



While you may be trying to strike a note of moderation, you might recognize
that Revit has a huge installed base and it's been 14 years since AutoDesk
purchased Revit. During that time, the work done to create a new
marketplace "vision" and paradigms, seems to have resulted in the
perception that more resources pro rata have followed the edges of the "new
vision", than have been allocated to develop the very thing that is IS
primarily responsible for this possibility at all.

Taken in simple terms, without Revit, there would be NO new market.



IPD for instance is just partnering from the 1980s....it's not some new
wonderful creation.it's just a re-packaging of an older industry practice,
tweaked with a new wrapper to suit the marketing business unit.

Yes Graphisoft and ArchiCAD are running around, and VectorWorks are always
trying to find new ways to convince people they have a viable BIM product
and maybe others in the world market would have arrived at some sort of BIM
construct without Revit, but it is Revit itself, to me, that has wholly
allowed AutoDesk to promulgate some new suit of the Emperors clothes.

Therefore, since Revit has been the benchmark and public face of the new
BIM idiom, we "should all follow"....it seems wholly fair to me that the
Users of Revit have a reasonable expectation the product would be developed
so things like the darn railings system would not only work properly but be
a great tool..but it's not is it..and it really has not changed "much"
since I bought the product in 2002.



This is but one example of how Revit has not been developed soon enough or
deeply enough given the amount of time it has been in the vendors hands and
given they are the largest software seller in the world, and certainly the
largest by a huge margin in the AEC industries.



I am not an Autodesk hater at all - it's a solid and successful company,
but for me, I feel Revit has always been the whipping boy for all other
things - they took the code for new products and to tweak old ones, but they
have not poured enough resources into making Revit what it could be and
instead, they have drip fed the customers per annum only enough to keep the
wolf some way from the door.

The Workarounds for Revit, deserve a series of books on their own, such is
the lack of development pace in the product.



So while you sound a note of let us not shoot the messenger ( and I agree)
, please also recognize the level of frustration that we as Users feel
regularly, at having to make those workarounds for tools that do not work
either as expected or that have never been designed to complete their
functionality or simply have been left to a low priority for 10 years or
more like a proper text editor ! (which even in 2017 version is still miles
off what it needs to be).



Taking away my access for the product on my desktop and forcing me to use
the software I a cloud only service, will be the final indignity to me - we
have drip fed you for years and now, we are just letting you know that we
don't give a crap about how you run your business , this is how we are
running ours.

That I promise, will be the day I cease paying for Revit.



trombe

NZTCC, BBSc, BArch
By: Advocate MuirEng
| Posted ‎12-01-2016 06:52 PM

My issue with the roadmap is this... It has a bunch of blocks with sometimes with fairly general titles, and offers the user a chance to click a block, which presumably should lead to further details. But instead we just get a zoomed in view of roadmap. What the hell is "double patterns", for example?

How can we vote for items just based on titles? Our interpretation of what these blocks mean could be very different than yours.

 

And.. as an electrical engineer I share the general feeling that the designers have no idea what we use the product for and what we care about, and that we are a minority group that isn't on the radar at all. There are exactly zero items listed under MEP that I give a rats **** about, except maybe tool for schematic level design that relate to the model.

 

I just don't the value in renewing my maintenance plan to be honest.

 

Unless you can put up a block "Low Hanging Fruit For Electrical Users" and work with us to define five or ten items for that list.

 

 

 

 

By: Enthusiast robert.glover
| Posted ‎12-13-2016 05:27 AM

Thank you for this. Would it be possible to add a function where users can star, thumb-up, etc. their top 5 or so features? Might help you guys see what we are most interested in. I'll post this in the Idea station as well. Thanks.

By: Collaborator cprettyman
| Posted ‎12-15-2016 10:09 AM

It seems to me that one of the issues with Autodesk's software development (and I have seen this in Revit, AutoCAD and 3DS Max) is that it takes too long to get back to a feature after it is released.  I have often felt that a feature has been released "half-baked" and not really usable.  But, by the time Autodesk revisit's it, I've found work arounds, or abandoned the idea.  And many ideas that had real potential fail, and are never revisited.

 

Part of the problem is that the new features are seen by a limited user group before they are released.  I know that Autodesk tries to address this - new ideas are presented to user groups in a variety of ways, but these are inherently small subsets of the user community.  A dozen people in an NDA presentation at AU may give great feedback, the Gunslingers events (I'm blanking on their new name) give more.  The Preview testing group is larger again, but in each of these, the feature is progressively more and more locked down, and the developers less able to change the way it functions.  I've done a fair amount of Beta testing, for example, by which time the features are pretty much designed, and the feedback is all about usability: bugs and performance issues.  

 

Another part of the problem is timeline - roadmaps like this one are discussing development time frames of years, not months.  Somewhere in these responses, someone mentioned a turnaround time of 15 months.  I don't think that's realistic.  How long it really takes is probably confidential, but I'm sure it's way longer than that.

 

So what we have is a scenario where Autodesk conceives of a new idea, whether its from a user suggestion, or the brainchild of someone in house, and it's sketched out, and shown to a small group of people for feedback, then planned out, and shown to a slightly larger group, then developed and tested, and finally released to the public a few years later, at which point, tons of feedback on all the ways it might have been better starts coming in.  A lot of that feedback is valid, and probably gets put back into the development process, but it's years, and several releases later by the time that feedback makes its way to the public release.  From the outside, it seems like Autodesk releases a feature, and then waits to see if it catches on or not, and then, maybe, updates it.  

 

What I would suggest is that for any new feature, plan for a second pass one release later.  Think of it as planning for service pack 1, but in this case, it's about expanding usability, not correcting bugs.  If the resources - all the designer and developer time required - is slotted in, in advance,  to take 2 passes at each feature, perhaps you can take all that feedback from the millions of users who don't see the preview releases and act on it quickly.  

By: Participant mrenaud8
| Posted ‎12-21-2016 02:10 PM

Love it!

By: Community Visitor per.hartman
| Posted ‎12-23-2016 01:10 AM

Hi


I have a small question....

In the MEP section you wrote:

 

By connecting the project through cloud-connected experiences, schematics and models can be intelligently connected

 

Could you elaborate on this?

 

Per

By: Advocate laurasmagin
| Posted ‎12-26-2016 09:34 PM

Can we expect the information to be updated regularly? I realised this was posted in Oct, it's now Dec. Have some of the 'blues' now 'green'?

 

Thanks

By: Explorer CristianOtter
| Posted ‎01-04-2017 04:41 AM

Great, thank you for sharing and keep up the good work!

By: Advocate YarUnderoaker
| Posted ‎01-18-2017 10:48 PM

Now I have spam from AGACAD TOOLS4BIM. They has good solution for precast concrete automation, so I interested - is Autodesk will use partners solution for cover yours plans or do own? I see precast concrete automation located in third wave in roadmap, but you can do it now if you want.

By: Employee
| Posted ‎01-20-2017 08:17 AM , edited ‎01-20-2017 08:20 AM |

Hi Rostislav,

 

As you can see on the public roadmap, we have the precast space in our focus. AGACAD provide a set of good productivity tools that are complementing Revit workflows in this area.

 

Kind regards,

Dan

 

By: Explorer scott
| Posted ‎01-30-2017 09:50 AM

Well, first, let me say that I am pleasantly surprised to find this list of exciting new functionality in the works for future Revit releases. I hope AutoDesk will do more of this type of outreach.

 

However, while I know this list is not exhaustive, I feel like there are so many things that are missing from this list. Read through the various forums across the internet and you'll find a plethora of work-arounds, minor annoyances, and major functionality gaps in the software that persist from year to year. It would be nice to know that AutoDesk actually listens to its user base. I know that several people in our office have posted suggestions over the years that seem to fall on deaf ears. Meanwhile, the number of useful improvements found in the annual new releases seem to be on a steady downward trajectory.

 

Don't get me wrong, Revit is a very useful and powerful tool. And I understand that new features and fixes take time and resources to develop and implement but, it would be nice to know that these things are being heard and to have some explanation as to how it would be prioritized for development.

 

I think the amount of money we collectively spend on these subscriptions demands more of this.

 

Thanks for reading.

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎02-14-2017 01:09 PM , edited ‎02-14-2017 01:12 PM |

@sasha.crotty @peticid

 

Shouldn't this idea with 242 votes be marked as accepted/included in the roadmap as well? It seems to be a duplicate to this and this idea, both marked as accepted.

 

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎02-23-2017 06:47 AM

I just noticed that a lot of additional ideas have been marked as "accepted" on the Revit Ideas platform. It is surprising however that the majority of the accepted ideas have very few votes (14 of the 27 accepted ideas have less then 25 votes, with a good portion of those only having barely any votes at all).

 

At the same time, only 7 out of 40 ideas with 100+ votes are accepted right now. Four of those are actually duplicates so that leaves us with only 5 out of 38 ideas with 100+ votes accepted. Also, please note that these top 40 ideas, with very few exceptions, apply to all disciplines and would thus be useful for the entire Revit user base.

 

Shouldn't the development resources be invested in ideas that get hundreds of votes rather than ideas with just a few votes? I'm not trying to be a negative nancy here, merely communicating honest feedback based on the current roadmap and the information provided to us through the ideas platform. I wonder whether that the factory ( @sasha.crotty) could comment on its current strategy?

 

 

By: Enthusiast robert.glover
| Posted ‎02-23-2017 07:14 AM

Can this be updated with 2017.2? Will it be updated with the 2018 updates? I'm starting to feel like this road map was a one-and-done project and won't be maintained. Only time will tell.

By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎02-23-2017 09:16 AM
Guys, do not be naïve. This is just Autodesk marketing – to tick the box of
“we launched another initiative for communication with the users” and report
it to the shareholders or senior management.

Nobody cares to really analyze our opinions, requests and data and take them
into account. It has been like that for years and not much seems to be
changing.



Marcin Klocek
By: Contributor JanUsinger
| Posted ‎02-28-2017 11:32 PM

@pieter

I don't think Autodesk cares too much about how many votes each idea has gathered.

It is more likely that they pick ideas that are easy for them to implement.

Ideas that would be too hard to implement (no matter how popular) are ignored for now (at least).

 

By: Mentor
| Posted ‎03-01-2017 09:53 AM

I think @JanUsinger has it right.  While more votes should make it more likely to be looked at by the developers, it isn't necessarily going to (or should) happen before others with fewer votes.  There isn't/shouldn't be a direct correlation.  As noted by Autodesk personnel not everything they are working on is on the Roadmap or in the public domain.  If an Idea would be rendered irrelevant by or conflicts with one of those other tasks then any time spent would have been better spent on something else.

 

For example, if we collected all the "Revit for Mac" votes it would put it higher up than a number of others; that task would take a couple of years, and take away resources from things which I'm pretty sure most would want prioritized instead.  A more extreme example, if I posted an Idea to make Revit free for all I'm sure that would top out on votes - but I'm also certain that it just wouldn't make it into the list (for obvious reasons).

By: Enthusiast robert.glover
| Posted ‎03-01-2017 10:25 AM

I believe the core of many of the recent comments here is that many of us feel that Autodesk does not hear our wishes/concerns/problems. I further believe that the Road-map is A WAY for Autodesk to try and fix this perception. As with so many things, you can't please everyone. I find the Road-map a great step, and expect that things such as the Ideas Forums and knowledge network are other great avenues of communication. There is no single great option to make everyone happy, but at least they are trying.

 

All that being said, I believe more could be done. Perhaps Autodesk could have moderators responding to comments and giving what feedback, thanks, insight they can to comments and idea suggestions. I also believe that other related programs, most specifically Navisworks could use more attention and work from R&D. I file suggestion after suggestion, error after error on the program and I get no response of any sort and no progress to the program year over year. Having a road-map for that, heck even an Idea site for it would be major steps forward.

 

Think about that and then consider that Autodesk has started getting away from the annual push to release a new software with major (often not ready) updates in favor of publishing not one but TWO mid-year major updates thus far. I see these as bigger deals than patches and service packs which I don't believe include the large number of changes seen in 2017.1. Clearly they are working towards making the software better, and I appreciate that, but there is and will always be room for improvement.

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎03-01-2017 10:32 AM

@dgorsman Of course there are other issues to take into account, but the balance seems lost at this point. Again: only 5 of the 40 ideas most popular ideas are accepted while at the same half of the accepted ideas got barely any votes at all. 

 

The idea platform allows us to collectively communicatie our priorities. It should affect the current roadmap more than just tangentially. We hope that it will be a major factor in deciding where to invest resources.

 

Also, if there's good reason why the factory chooses not to act on some of the ideas, we hope they will communicate about it so we can perhaps suggest alternatives etc. Communication is key.

By: Employee
| Posted ‎03-01-2017 12:35 PM , edited ‎03-07-2017 03:52 PM |

Thanks all for the very interesting discussion! I think there is a lot of great insight in these comments. I really appreciate the patience, understanding, and willingness to find collaborative solutions expressed here. Please find follow ups on a few questions that hopefully shed some light onto our thinking.

 

First of all, let me say that figuring out the "right" investments is challenging. My job exists and is exciting because there are endless opportunities to improve Revit. It's a reflection of the great work that you are doing with the software. With a product the size of Revit, a lot of factors play a hand in which features are added to the roadmap. The most important, of course, is customer need. Revit Ideas is one direct way to gauge that, but it is not the only one. The Revit team is regularly meeting with customers in briefings, wishlist discussions (more on this later), team demos, one-on-ones, etc to make sure we are properly evaluating requests. Then there are other factors like difficulty, feasibility, team availability (teams have specialized code knowledge), company-wide goals, strategic alignment, project alignment (sometimes a team is already working in the right code), requests from other Autodesk teams and partners, and the ability to do the work in a generic way that benefits more than just the immediate request. Balancing all of these factors isn't formulaic. The roadmap is a reflection of the delicate balance between these factors. The roadmap is an open and honest way to inform you about which investments we are or aren't making and hopefully give a little insight to why we picked the projects we did.

 

On the subject of the roadmap, there was a question from @robert.glover about roadmap updates. We are not going to do an update for 2017.2, however we are starting to work on an update, so you'll see an update from us in the near-ish future. There are a few changes, so hopefully we'll be able to explain those changes for you guys. @laurasmagin, we can't mark things green until we actually make them available to customers, so at this point I do not believe there are any additional greens yet.

 

To extend @dgorsman's comments, we do pay more attention to the highest voted items. The Revit leadership regularly meets every two weeks to discuss items above 50 votes to determine if we can act on them. There are also reviews for lower-voted subsets (e.g. discipline-specific, API) which may not be able to get to the 50 vote cut-off. We also hold wishlist sessions as I mentioned earlier, where we discuss relative values of some of the top-voted items. One such session at AU took into account cost and customer value by assigning costs to the top voted issues and giving participants a limited spending amount. As you can see in the image below (more stickies = more votes), not all top-voted issues are created equal.wishlist.png

 

@robert.glover@pieter, you stressed the importance of communication and we agree. When we change and issue's status to Archived, we try to provide a detailed answer for why. Sometimes it's customer feedback that this isn't the right feature to build, other times it's just not feasible, and sometimes the suggestions aren't aligned with where we want to take the product.  Please feel free to ask us to clarify if needed. When we change the status to Future Consideration, the reason is actually pretty simple - the idea is a good one, it's just too big for us to take on in the short term. Things in the future consideration status will be regularly re-evaluated so please keep voting on them.

By: Advocate pieter
| Posted ‎03-01-2017 01:03 PM

@sasha.crotty It's a great thing that we can directly interact with the Revit development team in this topic! Thank you for taking the time to give us some insight.

 

We (I'm speaking for my office here) definitely realize that some ideas may be more exhaustive to implement than others, that development resources are limited and that there's different ways Autodesk gathers feedback. However, we still feel that the ideas platform is the most democratic way of getting our priorities out there as attending AU etc just isn't feasible for most offices. As such, we hope that the priorities reflected on the idea platform really start to weigh in going forward.

 

It's great to read that we can interact with the development team on the ideas themselves. We will definitely use that opportunity going forward.

 

I would imagine that a lot of people on the idea platform are bim managers in one way or another. I have found that one can take away a lot of frustration with Revit if we as bim managers can explain to our users why a certain feature isn't there yet, why it takes a while to implement it etc .

 

For exapmple: a common frustration here is the lack of a "mid between 2 points snap". If I can explain to people why this is one is a difficult one to implement, I'm sure our users will be more understanding.

 

Again, thank for you for time. Looking forward to the coming updates of the roadmap.

 

 

 

 

By: Contributor BrendanLaurence
| Posted ‎03-20-2017 03:08 PM

The top item on the road map should be:

"FIX ALL THE SMALL THINGS THAT MAKE THIS SOFTWARE A NIGHTMARE FOR NEW USERS"

 

The inconstancy, the broken commands, the poorly implemented/useless features, the illogic, the countless errors that occur with very few ways to troubleshoot the reason, the constant workarounds to get standard construction drawings out of the software.

 

I consider myself a Revit power user. I can bend the programme to do almost everything. It is my job to implement our office standard and train new users. It is a nightmare and quite frankly I am sick of it. My standard answer to many "why" questions is "because Revit".

 

Try explaining to a new user the logic of having to use phased walls, windows and doors to achieve something as simple as a taggable window schedule because the obvious "legend" view does not work. 

 

Like other posters I used to write down a list of all of the little things that needed to be fixed. But when you have been waiting for 10 years to have seemingly simple things resolved, things that would improve the usability of the software 10 fold, well I just decided to give up. It shows that you don't care about the usability of the software and hence the people who use it. It seems obvious that you just care about implementing shinny new things that you can market to unsuspecting fools who will obliviously pass the pain and suffering of your "gimmicks" down the line to their employees.

 

 

You have marketed this software as "the next big thing" the solution to all the problems that architects didn't even know they had, it will save time! Reduce errors! Everyone will be smiling in our new 3D world! The reality is you have made the process slower, harder to implement within a team, non-intuitive to the design process, and less enjoyable.

 

You even have the cheek to market it to officials and developers to get them to "require" "BIM" models that can only be produced with great cost and difficulty and are practically never used by the recipient because they don't have the expertise........

 

Autodesk I hate using your software. You are making a large aspect of architecture about as enjoyable as a kick in the face.

I can't wait to start my own firm, you will be nowhere near it.

 

Revit - So much potential, so little thought.

 

/rant

 

 

By: Contributor ttourangeau_svn
| Posted ‎03-20-2017 05:18 PM

@BrendanLaurence as someone who moved from ArchiCAD to Revit, I can completely relate. I cry a little every day. I, too, will likely abandon Revit when I start my own practice.

 

I was just reading an article about suburban sprawl, and the analogy is uncanny - Autodesk's approach to software is suburban sprawl: keep adding more and more, don't focus on the connections between things or how well they work, just keep developing... onward + outward, new features, leave the old thing behind in favour of the shiny new thing. Software like ArchiCAD is more like a European town that just keeps evolving in place, getting better and better as time goes on because they know their market and they're fine-tuning the software for them. They deal with the problems because they are always staring them in the face.

 

Don't get me wrong, I admire the goal of being the best BIM platform for every single trade. But jeez, they can't even create a logical system for creating/managing drawings + sets or solve some of the basic issues that have needed solving for 10+ years.  

By: Contributor brumloop
| Posted ‎03-21-2017 12:33 AM
@BrendaLaurence
@ttourangeau_svn

Got an email yesterday from AD:

Subscription fee for Standalones +5% this year
+10% in 2018
+20% in 2019
2020...??????

But where is the beef again?

I know that annual fees are more expensive on ArchiCAD but you get a mighty Double W from year to year - for that investment.
I hesitated all this year and wanted to see the 2018 improvements first,
but now i cannot see any reason for going on with Revit anymore, definitely switching to AC!

Thanks Autodesk to make my decision!
By: Contributor trombe
| Posted ‎03-21-2017 01:46 AM

Brumloop

 

I  agree this e-mail we got is very bad news.

 

I find it extremely frustrating being penalized for having a perfectly reasonable software installation method, and I worry further, that this is just the early stage of cloud only, short term monthly/quarterly cloud only subscription distribution for Revit,  at which point with respect to Sarah Crotty, all of the possibilities for development take on a new meaning for giving genuine attention to alternative software platforms.

 

Now don't you all go and tell me I am a hater and not in the spirit of this forum.

I have a legitimate concern that very much has to do with the very elements of this forum,  in that when discussing the future of Revit development, licensing and overhead, is one of the most key aspects of continued and/or, further investment.

 

I  am actually asking Sarah Crotty here, to be very clear about exactly why, Autodesk think it is OK to charge me a premium for wishing to retain the software on my workstation , paying an annual fee in the accepted manner for the past 20 or 30 years that works fine and is actually a cheap and easy way for the vendor to distribute the software via their server, being simply and readily able to upload a revised version ?

 

Further, to come out and declare whether the plan is to sell/license/distribute Revit other than as a standard single installation or network installation on a User system, to the point that Revit will only be available in the cloud, and paid for monthly or quarterly ?

 

I wish to retain my stand alone version on my workstation as my preferred method for use, and pay a reasonable fee on an annual basis.

I am very unhappy at having to pay a draconian levy to retain my existing method for use, which works perfectly for me the customer and User.

 

Will you please confirm this is the case, and if not, please clarify precisely,  what the company is planning and how because I find the  e-mail we got, to be somewhat ambiguous, and deeply disturbing.

It genuinely does give me cause for a lot of concern about the future .

Please advise here.

regards

trombe

 

 

 

By: Observer mansellred5
| Posted ‎03-21-2017 05:03 PM

just had a thought, I wonder if  subscription money is being spent on a "death clock" for a pay by the month software experience.

ie try and use the software 1 second past 30 days and bang - no work.

I will jump off the mouse wheel and stay at 2017. it works fine, external consultants are on same version or older , so till retirement I will play with what I have and maybe use more existing tools than I have previously.

be interested in other folks opinions on this pay by the month / cloud licensing issue.

By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎03-21-2017 06:27 PM
I have once (or more than once) read on this forum that "Autodesk is fully aware of the problem and it will hopefully be addressed soon". This assumption is faaaar too optimistic. I have personally a list of more than 130 problems in Revit, which is growing at a rate of several per month. Some of those issues I have reported to Autodesk for years in various ways, mostly with little effect. One bug with which I was especially persistent with was indeed fixed, but after 4 YEARS of fight! Hard to believe ? Yes, but true.



There is currently 1860 requests/bugs on Revit Ideas website. Assuming that only 50% of them make sense and the rest is rubbish (I actually think that many more make sense) we have 930. So if Autodesk keeps fixing bugs and addressing user's request at the current pace (23 per year - a rough calculation based on what's new in Revit 2017.1) then we will have a more less proper tool in 40 years. And this is assuming that no new bugs and requests appear, which is obviously unrealistic. Some of us may retire or die by this time...



So Autodesk should really get up to speed (employ more people doing stuff NOT selling stuff). One of the ways to help would be dividing bugs/requests into the following categories:

1.. Obvious - issues which have obviously been overlooked or obvious bugs with an obvious way to implement/fix (functionally not programatically). Such list should be put to immediate implementation (no need to vote, etc.) and would include multitude of small issues untouched for years, which are easy to fix and very annoying. All such obvious issues (50-100) should be fixed within max.12 months.
2.. Must have - issues which have obviously been overlooked, but which can be implemented in various ways. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK to gather ideas FOR IMPLEMENTATION ONLY of those issues from the users for a limited time - say 3 months. All the powers users known to Autodesk should be specifically contacted to gve their expert opinion. After 3 months the implementation methods for all of them (40-50) should be selected and within further 12 months "must have" issues should be implemented - total 15 months.
3.. Good to have - issues which make sense, but are still disputable, may be combined with others or may be dropped. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK for open discussion about the PRACTICALITY AND IMPLEMENTATION of the issues concerned for a limited time - say 12 months. Those issues, which would be decided valid would be moved to category 2 - "Must have". So total implementation time for "Good to have" issues - 27 months.
The above is only a rough plan, but at least it is some plan. Right now Autodesk seems not to work to any reasonable plan with IMPLEMENTING (not gathering) our request.

Comments are very welcomed and encouraged.



Marcin Klocek
BIM Manager
P&T Architects & Engineers Ltd.
Hong Kong
e: klocekmarcin@p-t-group.com
t: +852 2575 6575 ext: 6349
By: Enthusiast marcin
| Posted ‎03-21-2017 06:27 PM
I have once (or more than once) read on this forum that "Autodesk is fully aware of the problem and it will hopefully be addressed soon". This assumption is faaaar too optimistic. I have personally a list of more than 130 problems in Revit, which is growing at a rate of several per month. Some of those issues I have reported to Autodesk for years in various ways, mostly with little effect. One bug with which I was especially persistent with was indeed fixed, but after 4 YEARS of fight! Hard to believe ? Yes, but true.



There is currently 1860 requests/bugs on Revit Ideas website. Assuming that only 50% of them make sense and the rest is rubbish (I actually think that many more make sense) we have 930. So if Autodesk keeps fixing bugs and addressing user's request at the current pace (23 per year - a rough calculation based on what's new in Revit 2017.1) then we will have a more less proper tool in 40 years. And this is assuming that no new bugs and requests appear, which is obviously unrealistic. Some of us may retire or die by this time...



So Autodesk should really get up to speed (employ more people doing stuff NOT selling stuff). One of the ways to help would be dividing bugs/requests into the following categories:

1.. Obvious - issues which have obviously been overlooked or obvious bugs with an obvious way to implement/fix (functionally not programatically). Such list should be put to immediate implementation (no need to vote, etc.) and would include multitude of small issues untouched for years, which are easy to fix and very annoying. All such obvious issues (50-100) should be fixed within max.12 months.
2.. Must have - issues which have obviously been overlooked, but which can be implemented in various ways. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK to gather ideas FOR IMPLEMENTATION ONLY of those issues from the users for a limited time - say 3 months. All the powers users known to Autodesk should be specifically contacted to gve their expert opinion. After 3 months the implementation methods for all of them (40-50) should be selected and within further 12 months "must have" issues should be implemented - total 15 months.
3.. Good to have - issues which make sense, but are still disputable, may be combined with others or may be dropped. Such list should be posted BY AUTODESK for open discussion about the PRACTICALITY AND IMPLEMENTATION of the issues concerned for a limited time - say 12 months. Those issues, which would be decided valid would be moved to category 2 - "Must have". So total implementation time for "Good to have" issues - 27 months.
The above is only a rough plan, but at least it is some plan. Right now Autodesk seems not to work to any reasonable plan with IMPLEMENTING (not gathering) our request.

Comments are very welcomed and encouraged.



Marcin Klocek
BIM Manager
P&T Architects & Engineers Ltd.
Hong Kong
e: klocekmarcin@p-t-group.com
t: +852 2575 6575 ext: 6349
About sasha.crotty
sasha.crotty

Sasha Crotty joined Autodesk, Inc., in 2005 as a developer for Revit Structure software. She went on to lead the Revit Structure Development Team before switching gears into product management. As the Revit Core product manager, she is responsible for the direction and evolution of Revit's multi-disciplinary tools, performance, and the API. Sasha holds a BA in Architecture and a BS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the University of California, Berkeley, as well as an MBA from Boston University. In her spare time Sasha enjoys growing miniature orchids and traveling around the world.

View Full Profile

Connect with Revit

Twitter

Facebook

Blogs

Youtube