I wonder about the previous use of ADT vs. the current use of Revit. I know personally of many firms who claim to use ADT, but their use is limited to walls, doors, and windows. Everything else is still done using the computer as an electronic pencil.

Early on, I was convinced to move to Revit, but the more I found out about it the less it seemed attractive. All the work we do requires intense collaboration with all other disciplines. At the time, Revit only had architecture, so it was no good for us. Then, structural came limping in, but it’s not “BIM”, in that the structural model is a totally separate file. Finally, MEP staggled in, and as far as I know, still struggling to catch up with architecture. And, oh yeah, it is a separate model, too. The term as applied to Revit products should be BIMs (Building Information Models), if it is used at all.

If Revit has improved that much in the last couple of years, please forgive me.

Finally, how does Revit do details?

Although the Autodesk executives told us at the initial roll out that “Revit is the future of Autodesk,” ADT is still here, and it now contains many of the features that make Revit so attractive, without any of the negatives.

In summary, I would like to see a real comparison of usage between the two pieces of software. For those who complain of having to learn too much, I don’t recall hearing the same complaints with Rapidograhp pens, pin bars, and scissors drafing. We just sucked it up and excelled.