this next segment Sean Flaherty touches on several
interesting aspects, including the necessity of an
industry-standard for CAD components delivered by
manufacturers. Interestly, he suggest that McGraw-Hill
is perfectly suited to steward this industry effort.
Nemetschek North America's CEO explains, VectorWorks
2008 includes both bindable and non-bindable xRefs,
but the true benefit of the latest version of the CAD
stalwart is its simple approach to dynamic referrencing
in general--something that gets explained a bit in
this segement of the interview.
Systems, Libraries and the role of McGraw-Hill
have True File referenceing now, is this on par with
AutoCAD in your mind? If not, what is the difference?
No, no. I don't think you can ever look at VectorWorks
as one-to-one with AutoCAD because we just approach things
so differently. It's a bit like comparing apples
is a key component of what we heard people wanting of
xrefs. I think the whole Xref system and all the binding
options and things like that are very confusing. They
are very powerful, but it forces the user to make a lot
of decisions. Even when you look at Revit, they have
a lot of the same complexity of decisions that are allowed.
we are mainly interested in when we say "True File
Referencing" is that we don't merge the data
together. So, when you open a file and there is a reference,
we dynamically go get it.
the benefits are the dynamic data connection and file
Yes. So it doesn't take that file size impact.
That is what we are getting at with true referencing.
And sometimes you do want to merge things together, and
AutoCAD calls that binding, and we want that, too. So
we have bindable and non-bindable Xrefs in VectorWorks
no, I don't think we ever feel we need to sit down and
do a feature-by-feature chart with them (Autodesk) because
we do some things very differently. The ability to workgroup
reference a library, so you are not actually bringing
all this data in, but you are bringing a hierarchy or
rules from a central library--that is something that
is unique to VectorWorks.
you have design-layer viewports. You have added another
level to viewporting information. What was the goal there?
More and more of our customers are working with BIM workflows,
so you need true referencing, you begin to break this
model down so you can have ten people working on it.
And that is what design-layer viewports are aiming at.
you have top brand product libraries like Herman Miller,
Sub-Zero and Forbo flooring. Are we going to
see more of this and how aggressive will you be in getting
more top brands?
Yes, we'll get more of this. I think the whole industry
has been waiting for everyone to get together to find
a standardized way to exchange components. This just
hasn't happened yet. I think the 3D Warehouse is the
closet thing. Of course, that is meant for SketchUp
and here we have full curve support. We hear that people
want a toilet with rounded-curved edges.
Nemetschek we have actually formed a department for building
and gathering these libraries. All these manufacturers
use CAD. Standing back from this, I see it as a 5-10
year kind of thing. One day the component industry will
have to solve this problem. We are working with the same
people as Bentley and Autodesk. I think someone like
McGraw-Hill is better positioned to do this, but they
don't have the technology background right now to do
we talk about a CAD component standard, we are talking
about companies like Herman Miller not wanting to be
responsible for putting out a million different versions.
They will put it out in one format or another. Kohler
had DWG files you can download. They have all been faceted
so they are easy to read, but there is the rub, they're
faceted. They don't want to publish five different formats
of the file. It is a lot of work.
we are doing this work for our customers. I would love
IFC to become this component standard. So Nemetschek
North America is doing this work--getting the CAD data
and doing the conversions. We do this once and distribute
to our thousands of customers. We are trying to form
partnerships with the bigger names on both the library
side and the technology side. We need to get this standardized.
1 | 2 |
3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
Feedback: Talk to us: