Clicky Web Analytics

Friday, May 8, 2009

Revit Sucks!

He Says: "That's right... you heard it..."
I ask: "But why?"  
He responds: "Uh... I don't know... it just does".

Oh it is an ongoing saga.  Is it really worth trying to force those non-believers into believing?  I say it's not.  I have yet to hear a plausible argument behind the idea "Revit Sucks!".


A couple of the posts on that discussion I would like to pick apart:

  • "As a schematic generator and scheduling, it's great.  I'm not to keen on it for C.D.s"
Definitely never used the program before.

  • "Archicad is more flexible and was the innovator..."
Wow... Just wow...

  • "Would be perfect if it was command based"
That is interesting... I just modeled half a building without clicking a single tool bar...

  • "Projects with curves, non-standard wall assemblies, complex curtain walls, i.e. most of the stuff that makes architecture fun, is not so easy with Revit. You may as well use a good 3d model (rhino because of its acad compatibility seems like the best option these days) and adapt plans, sections, elevations, and details to documents in 2d. and in regards to who is using the program, i found its greatest proponents to be students and firm principals, both of whom have had little to no real world, hands-on project experience with the technology. not to say that revit will not become the industry standard. if clients and contractors begin to demand it, it goes without saying that it will be the future, but it will also have major implications for the way we design. (similar to the way acad changed design in the nineties.)"
First off, that was impossible to read without the use of capitol letters.  Secondly, you just don't get it!  People like that last response will never get it.  It is not worth it to try to make them get it.  Out of all the nonsense in that last response the idea that Revit will change design for the worse boggles my mind.

I want all of my readers and followers to remember that these arguments are simply not worth it.  Become an intelligent building modeler along with your ambition and your creativity and your actions will speak much louder.

Do not let people like that bring you down...  The Revitlution is stronger than that! Muwahaha.


37 comments:

Juan Carlos said...

It's funny how the Revit haters, usually don't back up their claims on why Revit sucks.

I'm sure some have not even given themselves the time or effort to learn how to use Revit properly, and their claims are a clear sign of this.

I think another issue with Haters is that they think that Revit is supposed to do "everything". Hence they almost expect the program to interpret their thoughts and begin creating the building without them even pushing one key.. ;)

Usually it is the people that can't use the program correctly or that don't have the imagination to find a workaround that find themselves frustrated.

Hopefully, when they are forced to change they will become better at taking advantage of all of Revit's features, and realize that the change was for the better.

After all isn't that why we became architects and engineers?

To take a Problem (Project) and find a solution to it (Design).

I think this applies to every aspect of our careers, including solving the problem of using new software.

Matt Lobmard said...

I don't use Revit, I use SolidWorks, and I don't use it for architecture, I use it for product desgin. Solidworks has many people who also, just don't "get it", but I think you have to take them seriously because they are not alone, and they are just as convinced as you are that you are mistaken about something. You have to be able to answer their concerns. Remember, the real world is not black and white. It's not us or them. The people who don't get it might have a point from a particular point of view. The way you leave your blog post, your point is even less substantiated than theirs. You have to be able to make a case for your position, and resorting to name calling like "haters" isn't making a case. You'll never win an argument like this, especially if you only argue by declaring other people wrong.

Anonymous said...

People on Archinect generally hate Revit and other Autodesk products. Doing a quick scan in the image gallery and forums you’ll notice that the most members are students or professional who aspire a career at Zaha Hadid. Therefore applications like Revit don’t get much attention around there as it historically didn’t have the tools to create such architecture. That is why Revit posts go unnoticed while Rhino gets hundreds of hits daily. They pretty much Worship Rhino.

Augi members on the other hand (who generally do off the shelf brick colonials for a living), aren’t amused either by this new release which puts Autodesk in very awkward spot. I just hope Autodesk doesn’t dumb down Revit to ONLY accommodate this group what would be bad for BIM in general.

The Revit Kid said...

@ Matt - I was being a bit facetious in the blog post. I think the over 150 posts I have already on this blog make a case for why I believe what I believe.

Juan does not speak for me when he states "haters" and nor do I believe the world is black and white and it should be us vs. them.

My point was simply that it is not an argument worth fighting.

Juan Carlos said...

@ Matt - , I'm not generalizing the term haters to all people that don't embrace Revit I don't think the world is black and white either, my comment was to state that these people are out there and they are the ones who criticize Revit straight of the bat or any software by that means, without giving it a chance or taking the chance to actually learn how to use it.

Anonymous said...

It's not revit that sucks, its the people that don't understand it, which happens to be everyone else in my office... I wish there was a way to dumb it down even further in explaining workflow differences, parametric design, dblinking, and most importantly: thinking in 4d. I have an odd background of graphic design, computer science, and architecture, but even dumbing down proper vernacular to a form that they would understand is quite a challenge. The new UI seems to be the biggest complaint, and when working with deadlines set by people who know nothing about migration periods, everyone feels the pressure. I wish autodesk came out with a transitional training program for the resellers to teach along with the 2009 distros when a lot of companies sunk money into broad training, or respective powers that be in charge of project team upgrades didn't jump into 2010 without thinking about a training buffer. The unveiling of the ribbon interface, although anticipated with happiness, should have been explained several months before because so many people take that long to acclimate. My major wish would be to have an idiots guide white paper along with the product information, as a lot of PM's have no clue how to use a computer. I swear I spend more time explaining how it works than training or project design.

Anonymous said...

Well, I am not going to say Revit sucks in general, however it does suck for buildings with complex forms. People like to compare Revit to other architectural tools, but step back for a minute and look at other industries and their tools and it makes most of what the AEC industry has look like garbage. Solidworks has one of the best interfaces on the market. The geometry engine in Catia is far more powerful, not too mention its feature to real time render. I can take a same building model in Catia and spin around in 3d, cut a live section, etc while the same model in revit makes it choke and takes over 5 minutes just to produce an elevation. The idea of a BIM tool is that we can get into, around, and under our designs in real time, but on anything larger than a house, it is slow.



Last point, revit sucks at drawings. This isn't just revit, it is for most of the "BIM" tools out there. These tools need to be able to handle representational drawing better. Alot of other industries are able to create drawings at full scale or close to full scale, where as our industry produces documents at magnitudes different than the documentation. To make this work we have various approaches to how we adapt a scaled view of our buildings. For example - a double insulated glass unit is represented as one line instead of 4 at certain scales. Another thing that we do is change lineweights based on if they are in the foreground or background, and make a heavier line around the outside edge of a building. These are all very basic concepts that I have yet to see tools like Revit implement(without a lot of workarounds) even though they are some of the very basic, rudimentary drawing skills we learned in school. Take a look at sketchup, its sections and elevations are far more convincing than revit.

Well thats it for now, can't wait to hear the responses...

Anonymous said...

You can tell an overzealous Revitbot by the way they ignore the most obvious problems with Revit.

'Revit' sucks primarily because it is a painfully slow, glitchy piece of sh**.

If architects want to submit themselves to the massive bloated files, ridiculous load times, constant crashes, incompatibilities, and various other 'features' of designing a building in Revit, then more power to them.

As for someone who has attempted to use it for the Electrical portion of the MEP package - and found it sadly wanting - I can say unequivocally that Revit sucks balls.

Even if I am not using Revit, it is a constant annoyance, as even the simplest tasks become an afternoon of waiting while an architect Revit monkey figures out a workaround to convince Revit that 'yes, I really do want to move that wall'.

I watched it damn near destroy a mechanical designer (literally - had a heart attack from stress) as he flung himself mercilessly at the 'M' and 'P' portions of Revit. This screwed me over additionally, because I'm waiting for electrical information on HVAC equipment that is supposed to be magically filling out schedules.

Thank ACAD that our new mechanical engineer and the team he brought with him are all CAD junkies like me. We've been considerably more productive - and the coordination that Revit claims it will bring to the table happens because we actually talk to each other.

If you are just some douchebag sketching pretty looking buildings in 3D, and not on an actual production schedule (in the real world it's all about the construction documents, making sure things meet code, and getting permits so you can actually build the thing - on time, and under budget).

/Rant_off

Stevo said...

Here's the #1 reason that makes Revit suck:
IT'S NOT A TRUE 3D MODELING SOFTWARE - which makes it easy to use, until you have to do a full set of CD's... (ever tried making stairs?? or a rail? what a pain in the ass)
Reason #2: Autodesk got its hands on it = might as well bury it right now. (WTF is the point of the "ribbon"??? Revit had a very functional and user friendly "ribbon" ALREADY!!!!)
And yes, I work with Revit on a daily basis and have for the past 3 versions.

If Revit could do true 3D sweeps it could actually be a great user friendly program.

The Revit Kid said...

Thanks for the comment Stevo.

#1 - Do a search of this site and the many blogs out there using Revit. It most certainly is a 3D modeling software. I just modeled a 3D door in it today.

#2 - You would not even be using Revit right now if Autodesk did not get it's hands on it. I understand people resentment towards "the man" but the little firm that developed Revit would not have had the millions of dollars in R&D to push it to the point where Stevo even knows about the program.

#3 - Yes, I have done CD's in Revit. Yes, I have made stairs and railings in Revit. I have also benefitted greatly from using Revit stairs and railings. Ever try changing the slope of a handicap ramp in elevation with strictly line drawing in CAD? Re-trimming balusters that are set at 2"o.c.?

If you truly have worked with Revit for as long as you say... you would have had a much more intelligent, in depth, and detailed description of why you think Revit sucks.

Thanks again for reading the blog and bringing up these points.

Paolo said...

Hello, I know for sure the London office of Zaha Hadid uses Revit...I saw it with my eyes.

Anonymous said...

Lets face it - BIM is the future.

Revit is Autodesk's BIM solution.

We are stuck with it.

The premise of BIM, and therefore Revit, is awesome. But the reality, so far, is severly lacking in what is being promised (and sold).

It isn't good enough. Yes it can do this, that and the other ('I can lock this door to this wall?! really?!!')- but there are still major holes in what is being released (site tools anyone?!)...

Maybe in 5 years time, and if Autodesk finally bother to listen to their users and supply the tools they NEED, Revit will be an amazing piece of kit.

Until then, I can't wait to stop using it for a while and have a rest from inventing constant work arounds : |

Anonymous said...

It does suck
it's full of restrictions and you have to get around thousand errors for the simplest stuff. When you make square houses it's easy. When you go for a few diagonal or curved walls you get yourself into a disaster!
I really hate them errors, they should have just made it error free and give you much more control and freedom. Right now I just want to move a group of lines and I can't move it diagonal?? Why not what the heck. Anyway
greetings

The Revit Kid said...

Thank's for the comment anonymous,

You have clearly not used Revit enough and do not understand the program. I appreciate your opinions but you cannot knock something that you do not understand. I don't express my my opinions on particle physics because I have no knowledge and understanding of it.

SantiagoM said...

I for one do beleve there are some serious issues with revit, esp, for new users. No matter how one sees this, learning any kind of bim software is a hard and lengthy process.

And there, i believe is where the problem lies. Sure, an argument can be made about needing professional training to learn and use any kind of professional software. That is where i disagree. In my field, i´ve already received 5 years of professional training, as an architect. Shouldn´t this be enough?, or at least a good foundation to learn any kind of construction oriented sofware.

Can you measure the average time it takes a user to become proficient in revit, and then can you compare it against the time it takes to do the same thing in say, Sketchup, or photoshop, or even autocad. I can say, from my own experience, it is certainly longer.

That is where, in my opinion the problem lies... People want to be productive in a short period of time. With other software, this can be done in a matter of days, (that does not mean they are pro users), with revit, well, from my experience, this simply is not possible. People above you expect results,fast, and this is not possible with revit in a short period of time

I took v. 4.5 for a spin, said wow!, then tried doing something more complex and gave up, then for another job, learned and became proficient in archicad in3 months, loved it, but still found it too restrictive, then, for another job, needed to model some mechanical installations for a large ish building, to check for clashes and such. This main model was done in revit. Started, did some research, started banging my head, some more research, time was still running, and finally gave up on revit, too complex. Took out sketchup and a few plugins, got the installations done in a couple of days and swore to not touch revit again.

Sure, this is my experience, yours may be a different more succesful one, but i am almost sure, you all needed some kind of proffesional training, and a long...ish period to become a proficient user.

The Revit Kid said...

Santiago,

Thanks for you comment and for reading the blog. I would like to address your comment for a moment:

First, you cannot compare the training of Photoshop, SketchUp and AutoCAD to that of Revit. The programs are completely different in every aspect.

Secondly, you used SketchUp for a mechanical installation?? I would like to see those documents, or were there any documents? You cannot compare a program like SketchUp to Revit. The program itself and learning it are completely different. That would be like placing Microsoft Paint and Photoshop... But, even less similar than those two programs.

Obviously, the more a program can do, the longer it will take to learn.

I, personally, have not had an professional training. I began using Revit less than 3 years ago and am now running this blog and consider myself a very advanced user of the software. I am completely self taught and have used Revit on countless jobs (professionally and in school).

In my personal opinion, which is what you visit this blog in search of, Revit can be self taught. It can be understand and learned within a reasonable period of time. Additionally, once understood, it is more efficient than every program you have mentioned here.

Timmy Kay said...

Hello all.

First of all I would like to say that I am a structural engineer.

Revit is great for complex geometries and 3D modeling. It does however run into snags when it comes to construction documents. I will provide only two examples to illustrate this point. After cutting a section, you annotate the section with relevant information but you can not make any leaders of any kind point at any 3D object. The best you can do is zoom in close and point the leader in the general location. Also, there are no stacked fractions in text. For a structural engineer those two are critical for producing readable, professional drawings. I commonly receive drawings from architects where weld symbols and text leaders are pointing at nothing and it requires coordination over the phone to fix these issues.

There are other reasons that I find Revit difficult to use to produce construction documents. I will say that some of the reasons may be attributed to having only 2 years of Revit experience, but much of the reasons are valid issues. So, to conclude, can some Revit-lover please tell me why I have to create my own weld symbol (it is an industry standard) and I can't point at anything when I annotate details cut from the 3D model? Why are there no stacked fractions? And please cite your profession because I find that people who do not produce construction documents don't have a clue as to why details such as this are important.

Anonymous said...

Revit is an awful program. It fails to deliver on the hype, and is only supported by those that stand to profit from its use.

My proof is years of experience with Revit Structure, starting with release 2008. These are not problems that are based on lack of understanding. These are problems that the Autodesk software team can not fix.

Ex. 1 - When adding hosted line loads to beams, the error "The line load is slightly off axis and may cause inaccuracies." appears. The beam is not off axis. How can a hosted element be off axis when the hosting element is not? The Autodesk development team couldn't answer that one. The result is I'm stuck with a model with 300+ warnings that I can't fix. The only reason I even cared to fix the warnings is that I was told by Autodesk that a large number of warnings slowed down model performance.

Ex 2. - Using Revit 2011 I needed to use the "Select by ID" tool. I didn't see it on the same menu as 2010. After a quick search I check the help file. The help file points me to the Modify Tab on the ribbon. Nope, it's on the Manage Tab. This is a good example of the poor documentation that Autodesk provides.

It is my belief that any Contractor, Architect, or Engineer that says anything positive about Revit is trying to get work. Anyone who stands up and says Revit is no-good is looked upon as a weaker designer. Weaker designers get less work. So everyone perpetuates the lie that Revit is a useful design/documentation tool. Revit is a miserable program.

vanaardt said...

There definitely are some nice features but the overall Revit does suck.
1 - When placing structural concrete columns in masonry walls its not visible, sure it shows the outline but not the hatch / fill. Masking elements completely defies the purpose of the software.
2 - How do you manage and count parkings in 3 basements? Don't even have a simple increment text tool?!
3 - Why do you have to unload links to edit when you cant edit it the main file?! (Not talking about worksets)

Don't want to be nasty but if you think modeling a door in in Revit is 3D then you clearly haven't used a proper 3D CAD package. Its like back in the 90's when you had to change the UCS in ACAD every time you want to draw a face / polygon.

Thanks for the blog though, will keep reading for 'work-a-rounds'.

Anonymous said...

Hey Revit Kid....

Here are a few of your own words:
"I, personally, have not had an professional training. I began using Revit less than 3 years ago and am now running this blog and consider myself a very advanced user of the software. I am completely self taught and have used Revit on countless jobs (professionally and in school)."

I bet you have never used ANYOTHER BIM software huh? Get a grip and get off your high horse.

Another of you quotes:
"If you truly have worked with Revit for as long as you say... you would have had a much more intelligent, in depth, and detailed description of why you think Revit sucks."

What a load of condescending tripe! So insulting! How do you know the gentleman's experience... more intelligent?? Learn some humility dude!

Or this:
"You have clearly not used Revit enough and do not understand the program. I appreciate your opinions but you cannot knock something that you do not understand. I don't express my opinions on particle physics because I have no knowledge and understanding of it."

What a cop out!! What a load of condescending junk. You are sooo full of yourself!! Just like a bratty kid that just heard his newest toy really sucks!

I for one do know Revit and KNOW it limitations.... I actually started using it when it was still Charles River Software... and I do know its limitations. I'm also well versed in several other major BIM applications (and I do not mean SketchUp) in my 15 years of experience with BIM (before the term was invented). So like were you in high-scholl then? What I conclude from this thread is that I fully believe you have not learned anything BUT Revit. Maybe if you had used some other BIM software and knew it as much as Revit, then you would realize there are a lot of things about Revit that are totally backward, limiting and truly do SUCK! I'm not saying any of the other BIM application out there are perfect... They all have their problems, but to always act as if you Sh%$ don't stink leads me to believe only one thing. IGNORANCE TRULY IS BLISS.

I personally do not have the time OR effort to create a HUGE list of the significant issues, failures and limitations of Revit, or will I ever try.

And yes, Revit really is one of the worst 3D modelers available.

Anonymous said...

"Re-trimming balusters that are set at 2"o.c."

This statement makes me understand why you think Revit it great

Emiliano said...

I think Revit is great, compared with a no-BIM life.
But - talking about Revit Structure - it´s clear that is not so developed in the Structural side, being more architectural.
only two things I´ll mention:

1. on plan, you can visualise only 2 wall (and column too) types: cut, and one projection, when engineers want to have 3: cut, projection..and a third one: the walls in the flor above, that have to show, e.g., a dark surface, through the transparent projected/cut walls.
This is only possible through a filter, and to do this you have to use the wall Comments field, on every wall of the building, indicating the level position.

2. the analytical model are a big problem on particoular structures, so that we cannot export the model to any structural analysis sw:

- ramps:
ramps are not structural; if you simulate them with a sloped floor, than the analytical model will be a hell because it will never meet the one of the floors is connecting;
- trusses and complcated beam systems:
the the analytical models simple do not end where they should, and there´s no way to force them (unless maybe if you are ready to have sth like hundreds of different 3d reference planes, but it´d not be feasible anyway).

That´s our problem with Revit, and we already had to leave 2 projects for this reason.

Apart from this BIG problem, it´s really very very useful.

Sorry for my english,
regards

Anonymous said...

You need to do your history champ. AutoCAD = flatland. Architectural Desktop = joke. So AutoDesk buys Revit (like everything else).
ArchiCAD has been pure 3D, pure BIM since the day it was invented. That's about the same time as AutoCAD has been around!! Do your research. Wow alright. You're just ignorant. In the meantime buy more hardware because you need it and hire an IT expert, because you'll definitely need one if you intend working on the cloud. And good luck with all that!

Anonymous said...

BIM for plumbing does not work. The product is not ready for use.
They still have no idea what a chair carrier is.
Revit sucks.

Anonymous said...

Jeff-

Any responses to all these so-called Revit-haters? I know the ink on your degree is still drying but I think that by now you have enough experience to understand that Revit is an architectural BIM program, which is problematic because the entire purpose is to facilitate communication between trades. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that none of the other trades use Revit Structure or Revit MEP simply because it is a nightmare. With our massive team of Autodesk trained Revit experts, it is literally thousands of "workarounds". What is the point of Revit when every single customizable item is a workaround? It also does not help that you belittle anyone who speaks negatively of Revit. It only highlights your ignorance of the needs of anyone other than the architect. Do you know why people are still posting on this thread a year later? It's because people google "revit sucks". Want to know why?

Dan said...

I can only speak for Revit Architecture (It would make sense that Revit MEP and Structure are a few years behind in terms of usability)but to me, it is mind boggleing that people are so unreceptive to Revit. It just reeks of ignorance.

I am an architect, and I've been using Revit full time for 5 years (I think I started on 9.0) I don't even have Vectorworks or AutoCAD on my computer anymore. The idea that CD's are lower quality is just not my experience. Since adopting Revit, our firms RFI's and ASK's are down %70-%90.

And never has Revit hindered our firm in the design of abstract forms. Its the opposite in fact. With new massing tools, Revit is even more flexible than sketchup for abstract shapes.

One of the biggest benefits is SPEED, SPEED, SPEED. I'm able to modify my model on the fly during design review meetings with clients... not just floor plans, I mean in a 3D view, new windows, doors, Roof changes etc. etc. etc.

That said, I can't wait for computer hardware to catch up and make it possible to do these kind of changes on a model that is filled with stuff for IFC.

I agree with most comments that Revit has a steep learning curve. It can take weeks to months to become productive, and years to become thoroughly competent. But speaking from experience, its well worth it.

Again, it just sounds ignorant to try and compare Revit to Sketchup and Solidworks. It is completely neglegting the "I" in B.I.M. Once you figure out how to make the schedules and intelligent DATA work for you, you're productivity will increase significantly. It has taken our firm (small firm,10 ppl)years to develop libraries of families that have the data we need, but I can't stress enough, it eventually pays off in spades. And the process of building this library never slowed us down in the process. We built families as we needed them, and we still had DP, BP and IFC sets ready to go quicker then ever.

I know that not everything in Revit is perfect or even always streamline, but if you actually commit and dive into it, (with a committed BIM Manager) you will save time and have a better quality product for your clients, even allowing time lost on workarounds redos.

I have to reiterate that I am only speaking for Revit Architecture. It wouldn't suprise me if the Sturctural and MEP modules were less refined and more difficult to work with as they have only come into prominent focus in the last few years.

Anonymous said...

Interesting insight you offered in your article in defending Revit (the overall package, regardless of Architecture, MEP, Structure, etc.)

There are some holes in your assessment, however, which makes it invalid to proclaim that Revit does not suck…

You might whole-heartedly believe in Revit and how it can change the world… But this might not be true to other professionals in the trade… by that, I mean, other engineers and designers and architects and even tradesmen.

To be honest, Revit is not a bad program. But it is not a program for everything and everyone. Being an architect, as yourself, you ought to understand that Architecture and Design is not about software. It is NOT about choosing Revit over ArchiCAD or AutoCAD.

Rather, it is about collaboration... From an architect’s vision that transcends into an actual structure that people can experience… That collaboration is a process that supposedly brings together all the trades in the industry to solve design and engineering issues, so that the end product can be true to its original design intent.

Software(s) in which a design is built-on is just merely a tool. The fight over which software is “better” or more “superior” is purely garbage…

Anonymous said...

Lastly...

My third concern (and my biggest disappointment) in BIM is its development time… specifically outside the USA and Western European countries.
Most projects in outside the “Western World” occur FAST; and most of the time, with lower budget. Almost all of them are design-build (or IPD).

Most common +/-20,000SF commercial interior projects have a Construction + Design cycle in a warp speed of 3 – 4 months. You want to volunteer to build your precious model within that project schedule? Can you deliver as promised using BIM…. or Revit, for that matter of speaking?

Revit has no use outside the States… (I know because I am an Architect and have been working in Asia for 3 years now… Before that, I worked in the States for 10 years for a prestigious architectural studio in Washington DC.)

And for those of you who have to deal with Business + Design aspect of the trade… That’s where the real money is… the churn work that occur every 5 – 10 years… And that’s why specifically, BIM is not successful outside the States, where software companies can successfully influence the Unions… the market, the legislations… and all the worthless & overly educated paper pushers turned architects/designers.

BIM, alone, does NOT equate to making a living outside the States or the classroom.

You have to provide the end product to your client… which is the building (or interior design, pending on your professions)… To that end, BIM (or Revit) is just a tool to aid you along the process. No one software alone is superior to the others… the more software you can use, in your disposal, the better you can complete your project(s).

I can’t believe you spent so many hours of your life, only to justify your existence (or corporate identity) as a gloried CAD/BIM Manager… while hoping that other people will buy into your pointless campaign (that was brought forth by Autodesk).

Stop this non-sense… and get back to what you should be doing… DESIGNING… and not documenting… Dream again… not inside the “box”…

Anonymous said...

Architects love Revit because it keeps them from having to actually coordinate anything with their MEP engineers.

Fact is, that if they say, "Oh, let me move this wall..." without regard to the fact that it just affected all of the plumbing piping within that particular wall, and just caused the engineer countless hours of rework trying to maintain slopes and inverts.

Revit...great for architects...a pain beyond imagination for engineers.

Anonymous said...

could Revit have f'ed up the copy and paste anymore? I am asking a serious question....

Anonymous said...

I feel that revit is seriously broken in certain area's. There's so much It can't do well at all. What I find annoying is how glitchy it is and how much warnings it generates for even is a simple house model. I particulairy feel that the beam system feature is broken or barely usable, for instance, when I have a cavity wall, it refuses to make proper pocket bearings. Whatever I try, a refplane or cut geomerty, it seems to want to join the beam's end to a wall instead of creating a baering pocket. This is so frustrating! Somehow I think revit isn't really made with european/dutch building practices in mind. It has trouble with certain T-connections of insulated masonry cavity walls. And detailing of course is also a pain with revit. Don't get me wrong, I think revit has many good points, but also a lot of weirdness. Also, they should create a system family for precast hollowcore floors, because that's what we use the most in holland.

Anonymous said...

I can't say it sucks, I have it and I just haven't figured out how to use it yet. Im pretty sure its great. However, Im an expert at 3D autocad and I'm an Electrical Engineer, the reason I haven't taken the time to learn Revit is because... I DONT NEED IT. Autocad MEP does everything I need it to do. I cant stand when "old fashion" designers dont take the time to learn 3D, yet I sound like one of them when I dont take the time to learn Revit. They say it can speed up the design process, I say, "If it aint broke, don't fix it". They also say it will eventually take over, I dont think so, but I'm hoping for a merge. Fat chance

Anonymous said...

I've now taken (3) courses in Revit, and I've been using it for a year.
We have contracted a team of Revit experts to help us trouble shoot the program, and we call them in at least once a week.
I'm still plagued by random issues within the software.

My team of talented designers and I find ourselves in a constant battle to get our intended results out of Revit.

The complexity of team parametric modeling is so complicated that we have concluded that REVIT SUCKS, as we aren't computer freaks, we're building geeks, and we have enough to learn about buildings, and design to keep us busy.

Anonymous said...

Revit Sucks Massively!

Anonymous said...

Been using various versions of MEP Revit for the past few years, starting with 2009 and up. I've complete roughly 40 projects of various sizes with it. The biggest issue I have with it is we can't make money using it. Even the best Revit jobs take us 20-30% more time to complete than with plain AutoCAD. Making the best projects barely a break even job. That's the single biggest thing that makes it a loser in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, some things work out fairly well with it, but our clients will not pay a premium for it. Buy Design Master for ACAD and you'll be better off.

Anonymous said...

It all depends on your job requirements. I believe Revit has a enormous potential with modeling and artistic layout,but on the other hand from drafting and design plans I feel that its faster than cad for section drawings and elevations. For cad it takes time to set up elevations and plans but you have a better control of what you want to show. In Revit if your not creative with the program you will not succeed as a user. If you are really creative you can use other programs with Revit and make your design work. The program doesn't suck it's the user.

Anonymous said...

How did you learn Revit? A class? A book? Ono-on-One instruction? The Internet? Well, I have none of the above. I write down my issues and come home to look up the internet (my company canceled internet when they found 75% of the company playing on it almost all day). Now guess how hard it is to read about Revit and try to learn about it without the program right in front of me. I can't afford the books, classes, one-on-one training and the budget for training through my company is $0. I've been a AutoCAD user for ten years, training 237 people and managing a small team of three for the last couple of years until all the lay offs so its just me. I dare you to learn a new program with the limitation I'm going through. Double Dare You. Revit is in no intuitive. With parameters and Check boxes and Visible Graphics how can it be? It's a dance, with so many complex, through a mine field. One wrong move and Start all over again. Undo doesn't work very well with complex parameters! Most people I training, and including myself, love working in a 3D environment, why can't Revit do that? Families are a joke to try and figure out without the internet or someone to help, definitely nothing intuitive there! And then look at all the websites from TOP Revit people say you have to UNLEARN one to "GET" the other. "Forget to Walk so you can CRAWL!" Revit has it's place but not "all-in-one, one stop gizmo" like it's being sold by the sells men. One last thought, if AutoCAD in a Shovel then Revit is a Backhoe. You can't mess up, real fast, real bad with a shovel and everyone can use it, maybe not well but it's intuitive. A Backhoe, with no training or supervision, you can destroy something real fast, real bad!