"Zaha Hadid Architects and Grimshaw among architects to criticise Autodesk's BIM software"


1 Like

Autodesk has been very successful by most measures, i’m sure there’s been lots of patting on the backs and 7 figure stock options exercised.

Anyone seeking honest value out of their products and a true partner would say otherwise.


If you charted on how much i enjoy what McNeel has produced and how they do business it would be on the same trajectory.


I really hope BIM in grasshopper picks up in industry. It’s just such a different way of doing things. We are already trying some things which would never be possible in Revit or even Tekla.

And I am not super surprised that there is lack of innovation. Usually happens with industry incumbents that grow to such sizes and are unable to make quick decisions due to the size of the organization and hierarchy

Together with VisualArq, Rhino makes a nice BIM package, and definitely the most cost effective one. Yet Revit is still much more feature rich. No wonder, AD ist a giant.
What is Rhino’s weak spot, when used for architecture anyway, is everything related to plan graphics/layouts/details. Revit has this super powerful viewport templates to define very granular and precisely what a viewport should display. No way around this when producing complex 2d plans. This is a big topic, and there are many things involved - which have been discussed elsewhere. For my part, this is the area where I’d like to see progress here the most.
I’m aware that Rhino is a general purpose 3d application, not just architecture . But even so, producing plans is needed almost everywhere. Also, doing graphic design (Illustrator-like) besides plans is also very desirable. All this is within reach, I’d like to believe.


There are some attractive things about Revit, now that Rhino is Inside.

If you consider what a plan, elevation, section and detail actually are it isn’t too much of a stretch to generate a more data driven custom workflow in Rhino/GH that is far superior to Revit – which many have done, but kept proprietary.

We need more open source workflows, like Front has provided in elefront. Too many companies clamp down on innovations in an effort to gain an edge, which slows things down. I’m a proponent of open source everything, and will gladly share anything i learn to push things forward.

1 Like

The use of 2D plans varies by industry. My understanding is 2D plans which can be printed are almost universal in architecture and construction of buildings. The use of 2D plans in the auto industry, at least at the the very large auto manufacturer I worked for, essentially vanished close to twenty years go. All designs were communicated with 3D digital data.


Ok, true. In architecture, the good old paper plans will not vanish anytime soon however. Buildings are built by people (not industry robots like for cars), and if the plans were digital, some device on the (dirty) site would be necessary to see them. That’s where the trouble would start. Paper is simple, big enough, lightweight and you can draw on it.
If Rhino is also dedicated to cater for architecture, better tools for plan graphics would be super welcome.


Already this topic brought into discussion

I See. Sorry, will search next time.

1 Like

Within the next 10 years I expect Augmented Reality to come about enabling builders to fully visualize the construction instructions to minute details without papers. It’s used in many industries of equal complexity like aircraft.

Honestly, I somewhat lost my faith in technology like this, and I’m as much a nerd as the next guy here.
We have VR glasses laying around in the office. Nobody touched it in a year… I get a headache wearing them.
Reminds me of those projectors in the lecture rooms in the technical university. They work, but how many times did the teacher struggle with the settings of his laptop, the cables, the remote.
It will never be as easy as unfolding a plan and have a look.

1 Like

This is the workflow I’m trying to emulate. I chatted a bit (via YouTube comments) to whomever VisualARQ’s rep is and they are very responsive. I really want to give it a go and find a way to make money using their plugin.

I’m looking to produce drawing sets for small (and eventually medium) sized buildings. My planned workflow is going to use a traditional CAD program for 2D (Either AutoCAD LT, BricsCAD Classic, or a program called GStarCAD) to create documentation. I will use Rhino3d/VisualARQ to model the building and generate the views. I’d also like to create 3D construction details but would need to find a way to justify the creation of those to a potential client. I could achieve something similar using Autodesk’s Revit/AutoCAD LT Suite. But I feel like Rhino/VisualARQ has a higher ceiling. I really like how Rhino is put together as well. I never adjusted well to Revit’s style/interface.

It’s not so much the cost of Autodesk solutions that has deterred me from using them, it’s the fact that they are getting bogged down with many features that I don’t really need. I’ve been wondering if a more competitive (and cheaper) solution exists. If that solution is Rhino3d + a plugin + whatever else, I will have a competitive advantage within the industry. If I simply do work in AutoCAD and Revit, then I’m simply dropped into a pool of tens-of-thousands of potential candidates basically offering the same thing(s) more or less.

I feel ya, but I think someday it WILL be as easy as unfolding a plan. And easier for most people to visualize what goes where. But for now those headsets and hololenses aren’t super great, and especially AR, is in the trough of disillusionment. It’s the problem when people’s first experiences are crappy so they don’t want anything to do with a new technology for a long time until those who stay engaged improve upon things so much that it eventually becomes a clear advantage to have the technology. And when it doesn’t cause headaches or motion sickness too :nauseated_face:

1 Like

I think I disagree. People used to say that about CAD as well, look where we are now!

It is bound to get easier to use over the years. Even the cost barriers will go down substantially. VR is already in a good starting space for architecture, where you can explore the model at a 1:1 scale, and it does a really good job. I have also trained people with minimal computer knowledge on how to open models in VR, it isn’t that hard.

The problem is subscription, with significant costs and very little innovation. That’s the problem with Autodesk, Adobe, and now Trimble SketchUp that we’re giving up.

The key to this situation is Grasshopper and software mastery with Grasshopper. This will last as long as the Rhino license stays cool… if not there will be Blender.

For the record, in the latest Trimble SketchUp update, they added the ability to display strokes with different thicknesses, and colors, on the layout via layers. I’m glad Trimble has discovered what we’ve had for decades on CAD software. Trimble innovate, they discover the technology of color strokes.

And besides the latest update doesn’t even work properly.

1 Like