Donate Now Goal amount for this year: 2500 USD, Received: 1627 USD (65%)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
Like Tree27Likes

Thread: "AutoCAD has X, why doesn't Revit?"

  1. #1
    Moderator DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 10, 2011
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,980
    Current Local Time
    11:32 AM

    "AutoCAD has X, why doesn't Revit?"

    Guess I'm just in a ranting mood this morning.
    It bugs the crap out of me when people are talking about some feature missing from Revit and say:
    'This feature is in AutoCAD, why don't they just add it to Revit?'

    IT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT THE SAME PROGRAM!

    That's like saying "I really like my bicycle seat. Why can't they put that in my Lexus?"
    Now, I'm not saying that Revit doesn't need new features - or that it's existing features are perfect - but just because one program has something, it doesn't mean that its a simple Copy/Paste into another program. Even if the same company owns both.

    OK, I feel better getting that off my chest.

  2. #2
    The Moderator with No Imagination MPwuzhere's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 14, 2010
    Location
    Coeur d Alene, ID
    Posts
    4,779
    Current Local Time
    09:32 AM
    Need to start hopping into the Autocad forums and say "well Revit has this...why doesn't Autocad?"

  3. #3
    Moderator Robin Deurloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 7, 2011
    Location
    Rotterdam, Holland
    Posts
    1,228
    Current Local Time
    06:32 PM
    Well, one can always move to ArchiCAD if things are missing in Revit
    But I agree, with everything you say.

  4. #4
    Member HansLammerts's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 22, 2011
    Posts
    451
    Current Local Time
    04:32 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by MPwuzhere View Post
    Need to start hopping into the Autocad forums and say "well Revit has this...why doesn't Autocad?"
    Exactly! But IF you look any deeper changes are you may find it in 'AutoCAD' ecosystems. Both do EXACTLY the same. Software to Produces drawings, models, schedules. The BIm thing doesn't make it any differenent. (.. Oops, did i say really that?! *rant*)
    Last edited by HansLammerts; August 31st, 2018 at 05:35 PM.

  5. #5
    Moderator DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 10, 2011
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,980
    Current Local Time
    11:32 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by HansLammerts View Post
    Both do EXACTLY the same.
    If your only concern is the printed page, then yes, they both do the same.
    But if you are at all concerned with the construction and operation of the building, then CAD and BIM are entirely different animals.

    It depends on if you think your final product is the "blueprints" or the building.
    JeffH and Mengelmn like this.

  6. #6
    Member HansLammerts's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 22, 2011
    Posts
    451
    Current Local Time
    04:32 PM
    So, there you have it, Dave

  7. #7
    Senior Member DavidLarson's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 10, 2015
    Location
    Boise, Idaho
    Posts
    660
    Current Local Time
    10:32 AM
    The only valid argument for "AutoCAD has X why doesn't Revit?" is a decent text editor. There really is no excuse for Revit having a text editor that wouldn't be acceptable in 1982.
    Necro99 likes this.

  8. #8
    Junior Member Dude__'s Avatar
    Join Date
    July 13, 2018
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    13
    Current Local Time
    12:32 PM
    I'm guilty as charged. I do that all the time. Many people obviously elevated to Revit from AutoCAD, and many people still use both. My problem was when I am learning to create families in Revit, my mind automatically goes back to creating dynamic blocks in AutoCAD, and I ask the same question. That's because I don't know family creation that well yet, so what I assume works better in AutoCAD, in reality it doesn't. I just haven't adapted perfectly to Revit family creation yet. The more proficient I get in family creation, I find that it is better than dynamic blocks, you just have to learn all the methods.

  9. #9
    Forum Co-Founder Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    10,175
    Current Local Time
    11:32 AM
    I actually disagree with a lot of whats in this thread.

    I DO AGREE that there is no reasonable expectation that one feature can be copied and pasted, JUST because they are owned by the same parent company. Even though i dont program, i can see what a stupid oversimplification that assumption is.

    I DONT AGREE that just because its in *that other program* that we cant or shouldn't ask why it works differently (worse) in Revit. The bullshit *Because Revit is a database* answer is wrong, 50% of the time.

    The Constraint and Part editor in Inventor makes the Revit Family Editor look completely brokedick. As for AutoCAD.... It has a lot of features that actually work really well: How Fence Trim works in Revit (yes, its there) sucks, compared to how it works in AutoCAD. Hell, i think how Trim works in general, in Revit, sucks, compared to autocad. The excuses and arguments people make for Revit not being able to automatically find the centerpoint between two objects are 90% bullshit, programatically speaking.

    Honestly (im being serious) the dumb-table creation tool in AutoCAD, is nice. For the partition type dumb tables that were shown in the other thread, i would have really liked it. And Text.... Yeah: After two painful years of the NEW text editor in Revit, the fifteen year old implementation of MS Word thats in AutoCAD, is still way better.

    All this to say: Nothing would ever make me go work in AutoCAD again: Anyone that thinks what autocad and revit are doing is fundamentally the same si just flat out wrong, and working in AutoCAD sucks donkey balls. BUT, that doesnt mean we cant learn from it, and improve upon what we use by looking at what things DO work in AutoCAD. If you think something sucks JUST because its in AutoCAD, thats super short sighted.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Charles Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 6, 2011
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    985
    Current Local Time
    08:32 AM
    I still don' get why there needs to be anything but the tightest unit tolerance (not dimension) allowed in any flavor of autodesk products. What is the reason for this user option?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. why split topography doesn't have "edit surface" option
    By zohreh in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 29th, 2016, 02:14 PM
  2. Rebar Diameter symbol "Ø" is Showing as "0" in Revit 2014
    By Shefypattambi in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 14th, 2014, 01:49 PM
  3. Changing View Orientation - Similar to AutoCAD's "UCS" function: possible?
    By revit_user in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: June 4th, 2013, 06:07 PM
  4. "Faking" sections tags to reference autocad dwg
    By kev4174 in forum Structure - General Questions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 27th, 2012, 05:45 PM
  5. Autocad "Hide" ability in Revit?
    By John McCamont in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 9th, 2011, 08:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •