Bell Blog 3-Revit vs. Autocad

Although Autocad and Revit have been assimilated and transformed so that they are similar programs now, in fact Autodesk bought Revit, they started out with a completely different motive. Revit is design oriented specifically for buildings which is why it is at the forefront of BIM. Revit started out as one of the first 3D design softwares, and with its simple nature took over much of the building engineering world. What set Revit apart from the rest of the competition was the user interface, which was designed initially as a 3D modelling program, unlike others. It was easy to learn and had countless tools, this was especially helpful in the architecture field because design aspects could be viewed easier than ever before. Also, these images could be rendered efficiently to show clients what they want to see and to streamline processes. Furthermore, the 3D aspect allows for better viewing of potential overlaps and crashes. With all of these put together it is difficult to see why any other program would be needed because Revit can do everything.

Autocad was designed in the 80’s which was before Revit by about 20 years, Autocad made a name for itself as one of the first design softwares in existence. There was considerably less computing power then confining it to be a 2D program. Although dated by todays standards, Autocad has been a staple in many engineering firms even today, I spend much of my time using Autocad for work. There are a few reasons why Autocad has not been surpassed in certain fields such as civil engineering, the first is that people don’t want to learn a new product because that would cost large sums of money and “it has always worked in Autocad”. This revolution where the young outweigh the old is coming but I am unsure of when. Another reason is that Autocad has all the correct formats, fonts, linetypes, symbols, etc. to create plan documents. The third reason why Autocad is still used is because 2D printed drawings are still a deliverable so business owners don’t see a reason to change to 3D because it will be printed on 2D paper, which I know is a fallacious statement. Finally, the most important reason is that Autocad can store a large amount of data, meaning roadway designs that span for several miles or city plans should be used in Autocad. Also, roads are fairly unimaginative in general, making 3D design unnecessary.

As a side note, Autodesk tried to update Autocad to make it 3D, but it is quite clunky because the original design of the program did not account for 3D design. Autodesk scrapped that project and instead, invested in completely new programs such as inventor, then Revit was bought, to increase their 3D design portfolio.

Manon,

This is an interesting post, but you confuse me with the problems of BIM, I believe that you are trying to say that the problem with BIM is that people aren't using it enough and don't want to try to use it. Which would not be a problem with BIM, but instead a problem with people. Also, it would be interesting to see what would happen if AI was used in BIM to create things in building.

Pritesh,

I enjoy how you go immediately to the legal issues, because legal problems are often the most expensive. When there is a clash from two different designs, that is where the most problems occur and most money is lost.I also am saddened that not many people use BIM because it is so useful.

Isabel,

I agree that people not wanting to learn BIM is a huge problem but I also think that they don't want to spend any money when they are unsure of the outcomes. I am not defending small firms but it is a large sum of money to buy licenses and to also learn something that is "unnecessary" by some viewpoints. Also I don't know when BIM will be mandatory, but it could be soon and at that point I'm excited to see what happens to the industry.