Interesting Revit/Sketchup discussion

[Scott D Davis]

Check this out at the Sketchup forums...worth the read as its a lengthy thread:

http://www.sketchup.com/forum/read.p...94#reply_23394

[Joef]

Thanks Scott! An interesting discussion. It is apparent that parametrics is becoming a key feature to future CAD products. I find myself in AutoCAD occasionally and get frustrated that I cannot simply click on a dimension and change the length of something. The future should prove very interesting!

Joe

[Scott D Davis]

The most interesting piece is the rumor that started the conversation...Rumor only: Autodesk is positioning to buy @Last....makers of Sketchup.

[mlgatzke]

Maybe Autodesk's just working on licensing the display engine in SU.

[aaronrumple]

Maybe Autodesk's just working on licensing the display engine in SU.

The last thing Autodesk needs is yet another display engine. They written enough from the ground up that they know how to do it on their own. They have Discreet, which is always on the cutting edge when it comes to pushing pixels around. The Inventor graphics engine was developed from the ground up and is a great engine. The Revit engine is no slouch when you consider it is always working in hidden line. I've tried to out some Revit size projects in SketchUp and it bogs down very quickly. About the only thing SketchUp has to offer on the graphics side is the freehand look, which I'm sure Adesk could manage on their own.

What I could see being developed is a massing version of Revit - Revit Sketch. This would have massing and some basic tools like SketchUp. Then this massing would be opened in Revit for design development. Then passed to Revit Structural for structural. Then to Revit MEP for mechanical. Then to Revit Build for construction administration.

Now we're looking at an Autodesk like scheme. A $14,000 software solution.

[Wes Macaulay]

I call SketchUp "time well wasted" since it's part of the problem Revit tries to solve, but in SketchUp's case it could well be argued that SU gets results so fast that the time spent could be very useful indeed.

SU takes you down a path away from CDs and that's why I call it wasted time. Canadian architects make less money that in other parts of the world, and I would say, not entirely tongue-in-cheek, that spending any time in anything other than Revit is a waste of time. Especially at early stages.

Results in SU are so fast though that people may come to a conclusion regarding their design study faster than using anything else. The software is quite addictive, so that could be a problem if people are spending too much time with it instead of doing real work!

With regards to a SU buyout we won't know if it's going to happen, but SU's users' fears are not well founded. Autodesk seems to be buying software not to "assassinate" the products but to increase their dominance of the market. Some might ask which is worse?

[Scott D Davis]

I'm with Aaron....Sketchup as a Massing tool in Revit would be cool. To be able to quickly draw some shapes, and split them, push-pull faces, etc., and then apply roof/wall/floor to this geometry would be huge! I like the idea of Sketchup as the massing tool in Revit, and of course the 'sketch' look that it allows.

The Sketchup users are so afraid of a buyout...sound familiar? I think those Revit users that were here pre-buy-out were skeptical, too. But that has quickly faded. Autodesk seems to have done a good job allowing the Revit Dev Team to continue to run their course mostly unaffected. In fact, Autodesk has changed many of their ways in other products to mimic the way the Revit Team works.

I think a purchase of Sketchup would be good for several reasons. First, it's a really great product. It reminds me of Revit in that it does something we've been saying the computer should allow us to do for years and years. Secondly, it's a great fit with Revit, if it can be parameterized, or if Sketchup objects can be imported to Revit for further development and the addition of parameters. Or if its massing tools can be used as Revit's massing tools. Thirdly, an Autodesk purchase would keep it out of the hands of Graphisoft or other competition. Fourth, it would fill the void in Autodesk left by the termination of Arch Studio, which tried to be Sketchup, but never quite got there.

What I find ironic about the Sketchup users on their forum, is the fact that: First, they don't want Sketchup to be bought. Secondly, they think the addition of a parametric system to Sketchup would make it a 'killer' application. So wouldn't the marriage of Sketchup and Revit in some fashion do this? Forget the fact that it's Autodesk...it's really not nearly as bad as you Sketchup users might think!

[noah]

I'm a heavy sketchup user and recent Revit convert. I think the massing stuff would be cool but the real advantage of sketchup is working in 3D perspective mode and applying materials with a pallette like my kids do on pbskids.org. I also like the section tool in sketchup because you can see the section plane in 3d as well 9double click it to toggle on/off). I don''t think there is anything that sketchup does that can't be developed in Revit. I don't think Autodesk needs to buy Sketchup but they would be smart to pay very close attention. In particular, the biggest improvement I can imagine to Revit would be to have a 3D family editor where you can see the reference planes in 3D, work in perspective mode, and spin the model around as quickly as you can in SU (zoom, pan, and orbit with just the wheel). I think the color cues that SU uses for inference locking is amazing as well. I can't wait until the family editor is as friendly as sketchup. Can you imagine seeing reference planes in 3D? And having the planes change colors when they are parameterized? Push/Pull/lock faces instead of align/lock 2D lines (then change views just to see if it worked the way you intended). Can you imagine being in a Revit project and double clicking on a component to enter edit mode and double clicking outside the object to end the edit mode? The amazing triple click? Selecting two components, right click and group? The number of things you can do with the right click in Sketchup is amazing!

In general I really don't understand why the family editor is removed from the main program in Revit. In SU I can do the double click to edit something why can't this be added to Revit? I can also right click on a component and swap it with another one located outside my project without having to first load it (and I can develop the component in the project, right-click and dump it to my library for later use). That whole load process is sooooo slow, especially when you are in design mode and just trying to see if one thing looks better than another. SU blows Revit away for the early schematic stuff but I agree it could be seen as time well wasted. However, a pencil is equally time well wasted and you can't export a dwg or 3ds from a piece of graph paper.

I plan to use sketchup and revit hand in hand. At some point in DD I will abondon the su model and focus on revit to prepare the project for cd's. however, I continue to use su through cd's to work out details and misc. components. I may even export small components from su and bring them into Revit even during CD's in lieu of the Revit family editor (e.g. a piece of furniture). But when the day comes that Revit's family editor is as easy to use as SU (or is SU) I will be very happy

[Kroke]

AutoDesk can't do their own as they tried in a miserable Architectural Studio, so why not buy the competition?

I agree, I think the major reasons we use SU is for the hand drawn look (myself anyhow), I model everything in Revit, why do it twice? It would be nice to have more of 'those' kinds of features ala the awesome shadows they've already put into Revit for just that reason. Just my .02$

[aaronrumple]

AS doomed itself. It could have been popular except the speed made it unusable. From what I know it was based on something the GIS group used called design server which was a bad choice from the start.

From what I heard, the program also had code built in that was never turned on which would make the "markers" run out of ink. It was all part of that big push for recurring revenue.

AS had a lot of good ideas. It was just very poorly implemented.