Author Topic: Revit VS ADT  (Read 15866 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2006, 09:30:37 AM »
Does that work well or do most architects using Revit just use generic styles in their design.

We would consider customization if we get something back - like BOM's or cost estimates for the architects for our products. We would be very interested if we could extract shop drawing type details from the models.

That's a great question, I wish more companies would ask it!!

Most architects do go generic when they originally do their designs unless they have your product line specified for the customer. BUT the future is in extractable attributes that allow for BOM's, cost estimates, etc.   Personally I see the future going this way: 10 years from now many (perhaps the vast majority) of manufacturers will have their products in some type of digital format. At this point, how does an architect pick which product he wants to use?

This is a data driven environment, no longer a "picture" or drawing driven one. This means each product contains extractable data that can be sorted with the right program. 10 years from now (likely much less) I'd expect architects to have this program either separate or built-in to their CAD software.  Lets say I wanted a certain kind of window. All I'd need to do is enter search criteria with cost, sizes, details, brand names, etc and all the windows that meet that criteria would show up... then I'd choose.  Yes, many companies already have this with their products (Anderson Windows comes to mind), but this "sort" won't be for just one company and one brand unless the designer specifies it that way. It will be a search through the entire digital library for every product that meets the specified criteria.

Ultimately, for Architects, your drawings and details... frankly are not that important. But to YOU they are worth $$$. Why? Because if you don't start designing your products today to fit into this environment then you'll be behind your competitors when this technology becomes widely available. It will be THEIR products that will be specified and not yours. Granted, you might be able to wait 3 years... maybe 5 years down the road. But you will need to do it... it's not a question of if, it's really just a question of when you want to invest in the future.

Draftek

  • Water Moccasin
  • Posts: 1501
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2006, 10:46:43 AM »
Thanks. Good food for thought.

I have been thinking of adding a position for Revit R&D for some time now. Maybe I should get off my butt and go for it....
Soli Deo Gloria

Birdy

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2006, 12:14:36 PM »
Welcome to the Swamp Brian.  Glad to see you here.

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #18 on: June 26, 2006, 01:25:54 PM »
Welcome to the Swamp Brian.  Glad to see you here.

It's good to be here Birdy, nice Avatar by the way!

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2006, 01:34:45 PM »
I have been thinking of adding a position for Revit R&D for some time now. Maybe I should get off my butt and go for it....

It's not a bad idea. Infact, you might even think of consulting Autodesk themselves about it. They have been really heavily promoting Revit any way they can, so if they know you will be starting a process that could aid in this Revit acceptance they might help you either find an employee, give you some free stuff, perhaps send a Rep out to demo/train your staff, etc.  I'd expect this "base" Revit push to only last another year for Autodesk before they start heavily pushing their "vertical" BSD solutions (that use Revit as a base) instead, so this is a good time to jump on board and get buddy buddy with an area (regional) Autodesk Rep.

glee

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #20 on: June 26, 2006, 08:17:14 PM »
I'm surprised PDJ didn't jump into this thread.
Anyway, personally I think Revit will be the way to go.  Painfully teaching myself Revit but no project to put it on yet. 
Trouble is to supplement things, I have been doing consulting work and most firms are still back in 2004, and some at 2007 and none are using revit.  That's a lot of programs for anyone to have to afford on their machine.  Not to mention the hardrive space all those programs take up.  Wish they make up their minds already and just push in one direction.  Some of us can't afford to buy that many programs.  We have to make a choice and go for it.  (so demo it is for a longgggg time)
No firm I know off personally has made the switch yet.  Everyone is talking about it.  Some are confused and looking at ADT.  But I think it's because whoever their techie is, worked on early versions of Revit. 


I went to an Autodesk seminar and while my questions were too specific for them to answer, the sort of brush off generalized answers gave me an idea of how to get certain things done in Revit. 


<short hijack>I didn't win the ipod they were giving away eventhough I sat through the whole presentation and made myself a pain in the behind by asking tons of questions.  Heck, I really wanted to know if they had the answers and wasn't interested in listening to a glorified sales pitch.  Some joe who walked in late and place his card in at the last minute won one of it. 

I never win anything.   :-(   <end>

Oh, I keep on reading that Autodesk is going to go for Revit and leave ADT in the dust.  Dilbert seems to have confirm that.  (Is this the same myers from augi?).  Is this written by Autodesk anywhere?  If so, is there a timeline where they intend to scrap ADT or even autocad.  I need to start planning when I put up a dinosaur avatar too.   :cry:

DinØsaur

  • Certified Bovine Scat Distributor...I lay it on THICK
  • Needs a day job
  • Posts: 5424
  • But I don't WANT a Day Job
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #21 on: June 26, 2006, 08:33:20 PM »
I'm surprised PDJ didn't jump into this thread
PDJ has been absent from these boards for several weeks for some personal reasons  :-( - for anyone interested, he seems to be quite happy and selling the heck out of Autodesk products and has taken on some additional training duties as well.

. . . I need to start planning when I put up a dinosaur avatar too.   :cry:
Don't worry, it is only a temporary blow to your ego.  Be warned though, it can be difficult to find a suitable one that meets specs. :wink:
Stephen R. Sherrill,
The DinØsaur
Civil 3D Specialist Emeritus

YAY ME !!!  I made it out alive !

CADaver

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #22 on: June 27, 2006, 08:06:04 AM »
Oh, I keep on reading that Autodesk is going to go for Revit and leave ADT in the dust.  Dilbert seems to have confirm that.  (Is this the same myers from augi?).  Is this written by Autodesk anywhere?  If so, is there a timeline where they intend to scrap ADT or even autocad.
nah, won't happen like that, the two will converge somewhere downline.  Based on some discussions I've had with a couple of the programming peons over there, they are working to glean the best advantages of each and port them over to the other and at the same time develop new features.  They are currently maintaining amd developing for two seemingly competing programs for little reason than legacy users.  Then again, I'm talking to grunts and not the "movers/shakers".

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #23 on: June 28, 2006, 08:23:13 AM »

Oh, I keep on reading that Autodesk is going to go for Revit and leave ADT in the dust.  Dilbert seems to have confirm that.  (Is this the same myers from augi?).  Is this written by Autodesk anywhere?  If so, is there a timeline where they intend to scrap ADT or even autocad.  I need to start planning when I put up a dinosaur avatar too.   :cry:

 :-)  Yes, this is the same Myers guy from AUGI.

Autodesk is not getting rid of ADT any time soon. It's still the #3 product in its product line and its Autodesk Building Systems is typically used along with it.  There is no time table to get rid of it. But, its being billed as AutoCAD for Architects and no longer a BIM solution which is critical since Autodesk is staking its architectural future on BIM products.

As stated, Revit and ADT are looking more alike as time goes on, but from what I've seen a true "merge" of the products will never happen and ADT in some format will always be around as long as there is a demand for AutoCAD itself within the profession of Architecture.  This comes from me, one of the first people to say it looks like they may merge.  Ultimately there is no way for these two technologies to totally merge from a technical standpoint, but this is where data interoperability comes in... its likely they can be merged from a data standpoint and the data they could share between each other.  So an ADT user and Revit User will one day be able to share data much more cleanly than they do today... just the data each program will be able to use will be different. ADT will be a way AutoCAD users can speed up their drafting process and less expensively share data with engineers and heavy-duty Architect types.  Revit will be the choice for most Architect types and they'll be able to share their data with AutoCAD/ADT types.  ADT will be for creating buildings with Materials and ease of noting.  Revit will be for creating data rich models to share with contractors etc that use CAD as more than just a drafting tool.    In autocad terms: ADT will be like AutoCAD LT, while Revit will be AutoCAD. 2 programs that can do many of the same things, both with good production rates, just the data created by Revit will be more information rich and will tie in better with the rest of Autodesk's architectural services. If you don't need this extra data then fine, use ADT. If you do (and ultimately I would expect most people will, which may be a topic for another thread) then Revit is the way to go.

jbuzbee

  • Swamp Rat
  • Posts: 833
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #24 on: June 28, 2006, 08:09:06 PM »
Quote
In autocad terms: ADT will be like AutoCAD LT, while Revit will be AutoCAD

Except the opposite: ADT will be fully custmizable whereas Revit will be OOTB.

I'll stick with ADT.  To think that a contractor - any contractor - would utilize a computer to build a building is ridiculous, hell, mine won't ever read the drawings that I provide!!  I'm not talking about Nuclear Powerplants or Billion dollar projects: I'm refering to 98% of the commercial projects out there.  Does Revit really make sense??

jb

BTW - never spent any time with Revit, just going by what I've read.
James Buzbee
Windows 8

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2006, 11:10:48 AM »
I'll stick with ADT.  To think that a contractor - any contractor - would utilize a computer to build a building is ridiculous, hell, mine won't ever read the drawings that I provide!!  I'm not talking about Nuclear Powerplants or Billion dollar projects: I'm refering to 98% of the commercial projects out there.  Does Revit really make sense??

It's a good question!

First, yes, Revit isn't fully customizable. It can be customized greatly, just not to the level some companies do with scripts, etc. Of course, the arguement is that the reason AutoCAD is customized is that it couldn't do everything to begin with! :-)   Revit or the verticals will do virtually everything you want them for without program customization (you can customize the doors, windows, objects, etc... just not add script commands, etc), but this might not be everything every professional wants. That's why ADT will be around for a long time to come.

Ultimately you'll find more contractors that will use the computer. Why? Because it will speed up the bidding process and also the construction documents will begin to get reviewed digitally instead of on paper.  Really. The first communities are starting to appear that actually REQUIRE a digital version of the plans. 10 years from now programs will exist that actually check the data against local codes and it will only will take a general review by plan review to get passed. As a result, the review process will greatly speed-up and the cost for having such employees on staff (to review plans) will greatly decease.

But lets not talk about the future.. lets talk about now. Revit is more intuitive to the design process and produces better deliverables than ADT for most companies. Projects may take just as long to complete, but in the time it takes to produce a model in ADT you get a more information rich model in Revit which can be used from easier to create presentations for clients to more easily doing energy calcs and mechanical sizing.  Neither product is bad, Revit just provides more potential ways to create data which can be used to reduce costs in the building lifecycle as well as more services/deliverables your firm may be able to provide. I won't say Revit is better if you are using ADT to its full potential, but Revit has the capabilities to expand the deliverables provided by your firm more than ADT will in the next 5 years.  Long-term Revit is likely (for architecture firms) to be a better solution, but it might not be the best solution for every individual in every architectural industry.

CADaver

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #26 on: June 29, 2006, 12:07:16 PM »
 Revit or the verticals will do virtually everything you want them for without program customization
ONLY for architects

10 years from now programs will exist that actually check the data against local codes
Analysis tools (STAAD, RISA, etc.) already do code checks

But lets not talk about the future.. lets talk about now. Revit is more intuitive to the design process
There's that Bentley word again.  "INTUITIVE" has been so over-used as to now be completely indefinable.  What is "intuitive" for you may be counter-productive to someone else.

Long-term Revit is likely (for architecture firms) to be a better solution, but it might not be the best solution for every individual in every architectural industry.
Only if that Architectural firm does nothing but architecture.

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #27 on: June 29, 2006, 01:03:30 PM »
Well, Revit Building is mostly useful for Architects. Revit Structure will be good for Structural Designers, Revit Systems will work for the Mechanical systems, etc.  Revit isn't just Revit anymore so not just one fits all. So perhaps I wasn't stating my point clearly,   Revit (or ArchiCAD or whatever does nice full, interoperable data solutions) will not be be useful for everything... the point is that the building model it creates will be useful for most everything. This isn't just used within Revit, but in software packages ranging from controling the trades during construction to Facilities management for long-term lifecycle management of a site and structure. ADT isn't currently able to deliver this type of data in a usable way among the majority of software programs which we will soon see because its just a very detailed model of a building, not an actual virtual structure based on evolving real-world data.

Also its true that programs already exist to check codes, yet I'm talking wide spread adoption as well as set-up to check all the little codes for your municipality at once. Most places are no where close to this, it will likely be a minimum of 10 years before the majority of counties/cities are set-up that way and even then many/most will still accept paper... just it will take longer to process.

Finally, I agree that "Intuitive" is subjective. Yet for the majority of Architects/Designers ... really people... when you think of a building you typically don't envision things like Elements and Constructs making up your building which is how ADT is typically used in a 3D environment. Most people I believe think along the terms of floors, spaces, and elevations.  As a result, Revit tends to work more along the lines of developing a project as a whole compaired to developing it in sectional elements that comprise the whole.  Its not a negative comment toward ADT, it's simply the way most of us have grown up and experienced structures and design. As a result, most newbies without CAD experience say Revit is easier to learn than ADT... and it is.  So yes, ADT may work geat for you.. thats why you use it. Ultimately its not the program, may it be AutoCAD, Revit, ArchiCAD or Microstation that matters... its the product you put out the door and profits you make from it.  Revit (and other BIM products) typically allow for a better, more coordinated, data rich products that can be used (or will be as software develops) with long term building management.  Does this matter to home builders? Not so much... does it matter to commercial designers? Yes, very much so.

Its not a matter of one being better than another, its a matter of which one will be better for you and the client?  Ultimately the BIM applications have more potential in these areas and will have greater long-term success... but don't expect the other options to go away anytime soon.

CADaver

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #28 on: June 29, 2006, 06:12:09 PM »
Well, Revit Building is mostly useful for Architects. Revit Structure will be good for Structural Designers, Revit Systems will work for the Mechanical systems, etc.  Revit isn't just Revit anymore so not just one fits all.

See that's part of the problem, I need something that'll do it all, and so far Revit isn't it.  I'm excited about Revit Structures 3, for the first time they are getting close to something we could use.

the point is that the building model it creates will be useful for most everything.
"Most" just won't do.  Throwing an uncontrollable Revit Structures model into the middle of an AutoCAD project just won't fit.

This isn't just used within Revit, but in software packages ranging from controling the trades during construction to Facilities management for long-term lifecycle management of a site and structure. ADT isn't currently able to deliver this type of data in a usable way among the majority of software programs which we will soon see because its just a very detailed model of a building, not an actual virtual structure based on evolving real-world data.
Fine for architects, but until Revit can handle every aspect of a facitility (not just the buildings) as smoothly as we can with just plain AutoCAD (heavily customized) it'll remain lees than useful for what we need.

Finally, I agree that "Intuitive" is subjective. Yet for the majority of Architects/Designers ... really people... when you think of a building you typically don't envision things like Elements and Constructs making up your building which is how ADT is typically used in a 3D environment. Most people I believe think along the terms of floors, spaces, and elevations.  As a result, Revit tends to work more along the lines of developing a project as a whole compaired to developing it in sectional elements that comprise the whole.  Its not a negative comment toward ADT, it's simply the way most of us have grown up and experienced structures and design. As a result, most newbies without CAD experience say Revit is easier to learn than ADT... and it is. 
that's an opinion not yet shared by all

So yes, ADT may work geat for you.. thats why you use it. Ultimately its not the program, may it be AutoCAD, Revit, ArchiCAD or Microstation that matters... its the product you put out the door and profits you make from it.  Revit (and other BIM products) typically allow for a better, more coordinated, data rich products that can be used (or will be as software develops) with long term building management.  Does this matter to home builders? Not so much... does it matter to commercial designers? Yes, very much so.
There agiain, only commercial designers in the Architectural field.

Its not a matter of one being better than another, its a matter of which one will be better for you and the client?  Ultimately the BIM applications have more potential in these areas and will have greater long-term success... but don't expect the other options to go away anytime soon.
This would be true, ONLY if development for the others stagnates.  I doubt that it will.  Looking at the differences in the software over the last 22 years, from where it was to where it is, one would be hard pressed to declare that the the same data-rich elements would NOT be available for plain AutoCAD in the next 5 or 10 years.  The fact that both packages are to be developed and marketed by the same entity makes convergence all the more likely.

Dilbert

  • Guest
Re: Revit VS ADT
« Reply #29 on: June 30, 2006, 11:19:34 AM »
We'll need to agree to dis-agree on some things since only time will tell.

But I will add this: the purpose of interoperability is so we can exchange information between programs. As a result of this, we can have multiple programs that serve different functions... which means we likely will never have a program that can do it all for everyone because not everyone needs all those capabilities.

The question as posed here may actually be wrong. I don't believe ADT will ever become a true BIM product because its still just objects regardless of how its cleaned up. But what if ADT data can be transformed into Revitesque BIM objects? So far there is no signs that Autodesk plans to do this as they are making a very conscious effort to describe it as AutoCAD for Architects and no longer promote it as a BIM solution. But, if AUTOCAD can begin to understand BIM information then we have an entirely new ballgame with a huge potential for a Revit/ADT merge.  AutoCAD would at that point potentially become interoperable with both Revit and Inventor and the program could be customized to their users hearts content.     

The Billion Dollar Question for Autodesk is do they want to allow AutoCAD to generate components based off of Database information. To me that makes sense, I'm just not sure if it will to Autodesk...