comparison buildingsus archicad

[Mario Napodano]

hello to all
In these days I am seeing the trial version of buildingsus and sincerely I don't get excited about it any more so I go better with archicad, the problem that I pose is this: I already have other programs that connect with each other, would be a progrmma that integrated with others would bring me great advantages? Is it better to buy this building, but I have seen that it restricts me much compared to archicad where I can get mixed up?
as mentioned before with archicad I feel good even if I am looking for a motor to make more performing because the internal motors to archicad are not a great deal, what do you recommend me to do?

 

[Arch.Salv67]

Hi.
one of the novelties of archicad 18 (which will come out in the coming months) is the internal rendering engine greatly improved.
I personally, if you know Archicad well, I suggest you continue to use it.
work productivity is achieved by knowing well a program with its prayers and its defects.

Save.. .

 

[Mario Napodano]

Hi.
one of the novelties of archicad 18 (which will come out in the coming months) is the internal rendering engine greatly improved.
I personally, if you know Archicad well, I suggest you continue to use it.
work productivity is achieved by knowing well a program with its prayers and its defects.

Save.. .

thanks for the information I have been of help I will wait for this new version of archicad

 

[Geometra72]

guys I "use" (the quotes are mandatory) buildingsus for more than a year. How do you define it "a good project that must still be refined" just I don't know! I say it with all respect; especially if those who say it do not have the program and tried it for a few days (although after a few days you can realize that it serves very little). Buildingus is a disaster with which it is impossible to work. I challenge anyone to make us even the most trivial and simple work.
take a look (not superficial) to the graphic plates produced by edifiucius: elements that should be seen and that there are not and vice versa; impossible to get shady prospects; graphics (in the tables!!!!) from cartoon; approximate architectural elements; assonometric views where elements are missing or the viewing priority is not respected (e.g. an element that should cover another one because in the foreground but does not).
not to mention the difficulty in the realization of model 3d: relationship between elements on contiguous levels; impossibility of solid modeling if not interfaced with sketchup; snap little or not practical, lack of architectural objects fundamental for architectural design or building in general: lack foundation plinths, the possibility to realize countertops!!! (this is incredible) etc.
comparison with archicad is not likely. less than ever the comparison with allplan, on all the sw for those who want to work. if I had not spent 2,800,00 euros approximately (including a mandatory year of amicus service) I would have already taken allplan, which I tried for a month in the version 30th edition and that I will acquire as soon as possible.
Excuse the vent. Hello, colleagues.

 

[alpearchitetto]

I understand your outburst and I can't figure out how it happened that you wanted to cite in such an adventure. I've been using several programs for years now, with a really professional assistance, but I haven't seen it since the beginning. use revit since 2008 and, as understandable the problems are not lacking, I find myself with an excellent program. if I add the possibility to use in combination 3ds max for rendering well then dear programmers happen leave time and danars and devote to other.

 

[Geometra72]

Yes, even in my opinion this time they have embarked on a larger undertaking than them (at least for the moment the facts say this); Then, for love, I would be very happy to be denied. Meanwhile because having purchased the sw I first (and all those who have given confidence to acca) I would benefit from these results; and then because it is pleased that an Italian company can compete, perhaps also on the international market, with a quality product and with a high added value which is a sw bim.
agree with you also on the good quality of other products happen not to mention the service service, this is referred to: if buildingsus was worth 1/10 of the quality of the assistance that it offers to its customers, it would already be a good product; therefore no prejudice and no disbelief against software! In fact...
But... In my opinion, the publicized integration with other sw acca remains a good idea. and this because of the extremely approximate approach of buildingsus in the realization of the model 3d, which is the one on which the other sw set their elaborates.
Let me give you an example.
Buildingus integrates among others with primus. that is, according to the metric compute, once charged the data that outline the model in buildingsus, just one click, opens primus and the game is done.
sin that in buildingsus structural elements such as sects or pillars "do not contribute" to the closure of the rooms; for which it is forced to prolong the walls (they are plots or perimeter walls) so as to incorporate the pillars themselves. the consequences on a plot made so you don't need to be here to tell you.. .
and if you present it you find someone who tells you to disprove excess walls manually. Okay, but then what's the point of integration? ? ?
and there would be so many things... Maybe they're letting you out while he's doing stuff anything but transcendental. . and then you ask yourself: But why... Did they make it that way? mystery.
Hello colleagues, soon.