Jump to content

Chris D

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Chris D

  1. We would suggest setting up a local cloud on a Windows Server with individual login and application use for Revit. You can keep your Macs and use RDC Remote Desktop Connection. You would buy a very powerful and RAM loaded Windows box to achieve this and it would not matter the speed of the Mac.

    Thanks Stan, useful contribution as ever. We'll look at this option.

  2. I?ve been using Revit since 2009. There are plenty of shortcomings in Revit too ? its not perfect in any sense and you?ll find yourself just as frustrated ? but over different issues and problems. You?ll just be posting on the Revitcity community board instead. :)

    Thanks Rubes. No doubt Revit will be frustrating too but in different ways like you say. We'd much prefer VW to evolve very quickly instead! I hope threads like this one are a wake up call for NVInc before frustrated users do defect.

  3. giving up grid reference lines, and guides. Text styles, polygons, custom hatches, poly-shaped viewport crops, sketch rendering styles. Importing PDFs and DWG for edit. Conceptual 2D poly drawings on model layers. Image props, image polys. Truetype to poly for signs. Copy and paste between project files. Import any resource from other project files.

    We couldn't be without those and for years to come our 2D workflow will be bigger than our 3D workflow. Therefore we plan to keep VW around (on a minimal upgrade path), but perhaps on Windows.

    It's funny that we have both VW2008 and VW2012 installed and most of us stick to 2008 as it's faster and slicker for 2D work....no working planes to worry about etc. I imagine it will work for another 5 years too...

  4. Are you considering Archicad, given that it has a Mac version?

    No. We've never had a major contractor mention ArchiCAD to us. They only ever mention Revit. BIM=Revit to them, so if we're changing we'll go with the big one.

    The Mac hurdle is a biggie. For 2D we're not changing to AutoCAD (why would you when VW is better), so we might move to VW on PC instead. All of our Macs are Intel so it's a case of installing Windows on them. (groan).

  5. Why we're moving to Revit is is a slightly provocative subject line for this post, and it may or may not be true. Truth is, we don't know what Revit can do for us, yet. We do know that Vectorworks can't do BIM the way we want to do it, so we're looking for something that does.

    The people coming to give us a Revit demo wanted a list of VW's perceived failings so they could address these in their intro to Revit. Here's what we gave them.

    This is our broad brush overview of what's wrong with Vectorworks as it stands. (For details see my moans on this board).


    - No live sections

    - No multiple model windows e.g. plan and section open at same time

    - Poor architectural tools, windows, doors, stairs, roofs, curtain walls etc

    - Missing architectural tools rooflights, gutters, foundations etc

    - No multi-core / multi-thread support e.g even auto-save stops you working while it saves

    - No building materials, just 2D hatches, textures, fills with no relationship between them

    - Poor workgroup referencing. No workgroup server or BIM server

    - Poor stock component library, especially for the UK

    - Poor Coordinate System support. No multiple UCS (moving origin doesn't qualify).

    - No 3D working grid or reference lines related to storey settings

    - Poor Stories implementation. No split levels, mezzanines, double-height spaces etc.


    - No 3D hatches so all drawings need to be rendered for presentation

    - Render quality needs to be set very high for decent elevation output

    I can't claim this is a definitive list of the broad changes that NVInc need to address as we only got so far with our BIM trial. We gave up because there was no hope that VW was the right tool for the job.

    When September Comes, I can't see all of these failings being fixed.

  6. This is good. This goes beyond the idea of having building material definitions.

    I like the idea of saving wall component definitions individually because wall layers have lots of properties that need intelligent re-use in the BIM world such as U-values weighted for the mortar joints of brickwork etc.

    It would also allow Nemetschek to supply a default set of wall components without having to supply 1000 wall style definitions.


  7. I don't think the problem is simple. Spaces should understand what finishes are in a space, agreed, but the Space tool doesn't seem like a natural way to control finishes. For a start it doesn't deal with external finishes.

    It's only unnatural because VW doesn't do it right at the moment. When you're specifying finishes, colours, fixtures, fittings etc in real life, you do it by space...therefore a BIM tool should do it by space.

    The external finishes of walls are unrelated to internal finishes and should be controlled via an association with the wall, but again there is a more elegant solution. In your Wall Style definition you should be able to assign a fixed range of external materials for each style that can be applied by-instance in the design layer.

  • Create New...