What do you guys think about this?

[RubenH]

These people are playing rough:

http://aecnews.com/articles/3658.aspx

[mike m oz]

Not good. Seems to me to be a quasi merger strategy devised to allow Autodesk to become a defacto monopoly without actually crossing the legalistic line that would stop a real merger from happening.

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

All I see is mention of DWG and DGN. Conspicuously absent is any mention of RVT, Autodesk's BIM file format. I don't think I see that much great advantage to Bentley to read/write DWG better than they were already able to do. The RVT file format, now that would be a coup for Bentley. Otherwise, an API for DWG... who cares?

[brudgers]

From the editorial.

In the long run, I believe, access to Revit will prove to be the strategic advantage in this deal for Bentley.

I would expect that both firms are playing long...I can't believe that I'm the only person who sees a huge market for multi-platform BIM interoperability.

Edited July 9, 2008 by brudgers

[rDesign]

I care- and in light of this news I would love to see better DWG implementation within VectorWorks.

I *wish* that you could place a DWG file into a VW file and be able to view it without having to convert it first to VW format. If you wanted to edit the data in the DWG container, then you would have to convert it. Much the same way we can currently insert non-editable references to PDFs, image files, EPS, etc.

If I have consultant drawings that are provided to me in DWG, I would like to keep their references in DWG format so that I don't take on the liability for any possible changes to the data in the DWG>VW conversion process.

Regards,

Tim

[Dieter @ DWorks]

And from all the dwg's I imported, none of them where imported correctly. The same mistake happens everytime: the hatches are wrong! If you look with a dwg viewer, its correct, so it is vW!

[RubenH]

I see some alignement from those firms that eventually will disbalance the market from it's current state.

Maybe the only thing that they are not considering is Apple and the fact that their strongest competition, "Vectorworks" + "Archicad"+"Maxon", relies on Apple platform. The only software they actually produce for the Mac is Maya.

Another fact is the implementation of IFC. ?Will it bring it's fruits in the medium term, with two big softwares developers defining the ways of the interoperatibily between a vast group of users?

Edited July 10, 2008 by Mr. Gog

[RubenH]

Regarding Apple, Bim, Ghery Tech, and Nemetschek.

From Architosh:

http://www.architosh.com/news/2008-07/0707_apple_bim_opportunity.html

http://www.architosh.com/news/2008-07/0707_apple-gehry-tech.html

[Jeffrey W Ouellette]

Ben,

Randall can editorialize all he wants, but there is NO statement on an agreement on the RVT file format or access to RVT APIs, just DWG. That is an entirely different animal. RVT is the future of Autodesk, DWG is not.

[islandmon]

rDesign's suggestion to containerize DWG within VW = brilliant !

[brudgers]

Here's the orginal press release:

http://pressreleases.autodesk.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=436%3C%2Ftd%3E

It doesn't say that revit is excluded from the deal, but maybe it is.

On the other hand, Autodesk does BIM in the dwg format using the ADT/Autocad Architecture series products.

If I were to draw a roadmap for Autodesk which assumed that Revit was the future, it would almost certainly include dwg technology as well...there's too much cash involved.

I don't think the sky is falling, as you know, I am a proponent of interoperability between BIM packages.

[Jershaun]

I also think rDesign's suggestion to containerize DWG within VW is excellent. Only I would still like to snap to the elements unlike the current implementation of PDF's.

rDesign, please put this on the wish list.

My 2 cents. Thanks.

[rDesign]

I wish I could take credit for an original thought: I got the idea when I saw how Archicad appears to deal with external DXF/DWG content. The externally referenced DWG files are still vectors so everything is snappable, etc.

I agree with Shaun that the current PDF implementation without snappable elements is not that useful (especially when it comes to consultant drawings).

Tim

[Christiaan]

DWG WGRs are already on the wishlist:

http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=93277

[RickR]

How about combining the issues?

Make a PDF of the DWG/DWF/DXF/whatever using ACAD tools for authenticity. Then reference the snapable PDF.

As a consultant I would much prefer to supply PDFs in the first place.

[mike m oz]

Another view on the deal between Autocad and Bentley:

http://www.aecbytes.com/buildingthefuture/2008/AutodeskBentleyAgreement.html

[Christiaan]

Another view on the deal between Autocad and Bentley:

http://www.aecbytes.com/buildingthefuture/2008/AutodeskBentleyAgreement.html

This makes more sense to me. They're doing it to minimise the threat that IFC poses. Bit like Microsoft attempting to make their Office file a standard to minimise the threat posed by ODF.

[mike m oz]

Unfortunately IFC appears to still be very much a work in progess, and it is unlikely to be an effective means of data transfer any time soon. Autodesk and Bentley would gain a considerable advantage if they are able to convince the regulators that IFC is not necessary because there is already a defacto standard in place (theirs) which covers most of the existing built environment. That would leave everyone else out in the cold fighting over the scraps.

[RubenH]

I think that's one of the intentions of this joint, Mike. I can see a tremendous effort in centralizing all the aspects regarding Bim interoperability: Revit, Revit Structure, Green Building, Ecotect, Revit and Mental (renderings). And i don't see it good.

NNA may have a good solution with thermorender...but all the users are needing more of those solutions that make colaboration with other disciplines a smooth condition, always supportting open technologies like IFC, or standards like PDF and PDF 3d.

I have found that some electrical engineers like the electrical module, but they need a little more sofistication in some aspects. Why not a real module for pipping, with all the standards considered.

I always say that VW is a really powerfull software. It's light in a good way, flexible, and people like to learn it.

You can solve many design problems, from concept to finished project. Why not push it a little more...again...remember the days of minicad.

Edited July 12, 2008 by Mr. Gog

[RubenH]

The Apple part. That can be fresh air for softwares that relies on the Mac, like Vectorworks and Archicad. Think in velocity and, think pc's won't have it in the near future (they are working to fix vista fiasco). Autodesk relies on the pc.

http://www.architosh.com/news/2008-07/0717_gpu_piranahs_opencl.html