Effort should be focused on sharing the information with the widest audience. The challenge should NOT be about pageantry or spectacle. Physical presentations are nice, but counter to the larger mission. Therefore the results should be shared digitally.
![archicad vs vectorworks archicad vs vectorworks](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0083/3834/1948/files/CAD_VS_BIM_WORKFLOW_copy_large.jpg)
We forget that answers can’t be deduced from single iterations. Now there’s a clue to why BIM Challenges and CAD shootouts in the past fail or are inconclusive. This isn’t a groundbreaking concept, it’s just standard run of the mill data collection. Pros, amateurs, non-users, ex-users… The results could be aggregated. The challenge becomes not about the random teams that volunteered for whatever personal reasons, but little exercises that many people can do. Perhaps it’s not One Grand Challenge but a lot of little ones.
#ARCHICAD VS VECTORWORKS FULL#
Replicating a full project is fraught with too many distractions (does project type really matter? does size? does construction type?). What should the challenge look like? How do you remove the varied natural talent of the teams? Like I mentioned above, it should be a competition in parallel against an ideal. It shouldn’t be about winners and losers. It’s about the love of BIM and sharing that with everyone else. Of course for me the primary focus are the architects, but that’s just my bias. The BIM Challenge should be for the enlightenment of the entire AECO community. And then compare Revit, ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, etc. We need to think not about what our current tools CAN do, but what our dream tools SHOULD do.
#ARCHICAD VS VECTORWORKS SOFTWARE#
Instead of comparing software directly to each other, which by the nature of yearly product releases, is an endlessly moving target, we need to compare them to the Platonic Ideal of BIM Software. And if it can do those things, then it is worthy. No, we should determine what a BIM application needs to accomplish. What good does that do anyone? Are all the users of one program going to revolt and switch to the other? I doubt it. I really dislike the idea of saying Program A is better than Program B. So let’s daydream about what the BIM Challenge should or could explore. Then we can better understand the value of our tools.
![archicad vs vectorworks archicad vs vectorworks](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/gA2zti7Rgq8/maxresdefault.jpg)
We need to get to the root of what it means to be a BIM application. Much like in earlier posts we dissected what BIM means (and what its various levels are), we need to look at BIM software with a similar critical eye. Trying to declare one as superior over the other has little utility. It’s like comparing Koalas and WhistlingĪs I get further down the BIM path, or at least as I get further into unraveling what BIM means, I realize that comparing software is a red herring. No one has succeeded in recent years to compare these applications, but to quote Arrested Development “It might work for us!” (spoiler alert: it didn’t). Last week (early February 2013) a group of BIMnerds with noble goals and aspirations thought “Let’s do it! Let’s put these applications in a head-to-head contest!” The goal was to systematically compare ArchiCAD and Revit, and maybe even some other programs (the list now includes Vectorworks and the search is on for Tekla users, Bentley users, etc.). A lot of people are annoyed by this thread, but as I’ve said before the longer it goes on the more I love it and the more I learn. By now you probably know my favorite Mine vs Yours, ArchiCAD vs Revit saga: The Unkillable Beast with a 1,000 heads. The histories of BIM and CAD are littered with shoot-outs, comparison tests, and pissing contests.
![archicad vs vectorworks archicad vs vectorworks](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wb5UzdHngYo/maxresdefault.jpg)
Understanding the Challenge of a BIM Challenge