Derpwards Compatibility

Greetings Fuckheads,

I decided to browse the Interwebs yesterday evening to see what people were saying about backwards compatibility (or more accurately - the lack thereof) in Das Revit.  I read a few posts extolling the virtues of always using the most current version (why wouldn't you want to use the most current version?), and half-ass 'explanations' as to why backwards compatibility isn't compatible with the way Revit does shit (and you are on a subscription plan aren't you - of course you are!)

Those who were having to Revit with outside firms seemed to be having the most fun - since a lot of those firms couldn't justify paying the money for 'new' versions of Revit that had questionable gain for considerable money.  Some of the 'features' that the new versions would tout (such as default view naming, etc.) barely rose to the level of 'new features' and were guaranteed to have only take a few minutes of programming (leaving the Revit development team more time to fistfuck each others assholes).

A few Revitbots cried foul, claiming that not all of the 'improvements' to Revit were readily quantifiable as 'new features' (such as increased speed/stability - good luck there).  I don't really have the time or mental energy to waste flaming these people on their forums (and would probably just get blocked anyway) but a few people were holding down the fort by pointing out how the Revitbots could always be relied on to never be critical of anything that came down the Revit poop chute - which is absolutely true.

I was also amused by a number of people who pointed out the fact that contractors and fabricators usually end up developing their own drawings since Revit doesn't come even close to having enough detail for them to construct or fabricate - which is intentional, since design intent is all they are trying to convey (negating the point for all of the extra work necessary to build a Revit model), with the responsibility for 'means and methods' being on the contractor (read: the guy who actually knows how to build buildings, install systems, etc. - as opposed to architects and Revitbots who couldn't build a fucking stack of Legos without putting out an eye).

What you are left with are a bunch of buzzwords (starting with the old standby 'BIM', 'collision detection', '3D', 'Database', etc.) in place of demands for functional software that doesn't constrain every move you make while failing to make good on promises from nearly a decade ago.  I fucking hate buzzwords - it's a guarantee that whoever is using them doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about.  I've seen hundreds of presentations for a variety of different products, and as soon as they start breaking out the buzzwords - you might as well take a fucking nap.
 
'Coordination' is a big one that the Revit elite like to use (when they aren't busy wiping ejaculate off of their monitors).  Now, this is a massively important part of any project, but as I've said in the past - you can't expect software to do it for you.  In the last few months, I've watched as repeated efforts by different disciplines attempting to use Revit for 'coordination' failed miserably (and these are people who are, and have been on board with Revit for several years).

The big killer is reflected ceiling plans.  These used to be the sole responsibility of the Architect, who would compile the lighting, mechanical diffusers, fire sprinklers, and other equipment into one plan - and make sure everything was *coordinated*.  As soon as Revit hit, the Architects immediately tried to shuffle this responsibility off onto the different disciplines - but no amount of effort on anyone's part has seemed to result in this resulting in a functional RCP.

Part of the issue stems from the pathetic way that Revit links files together (which has always been at the center of my argument for working in one model).  First - there is never any reason for a linked model to be centered any other way than directly the fuck where it needs to be to line up with everyone else.  This 'origin to origin' or 'center to center' bullshit needs to go fuck itself.  Even when every discipline has been careful to select the proper option, Revit will occasionally decide to shit its pants and leave stuff strewn everywhere.

If there is a fucking ceiling - that is the fucking ceiling.  Having lights, diffusers, etc. show up anywhere other than IN THAT FUCKING CEILING like they were placed is a failure on the part of the software.  Obviously this can be caused by user error - but that should throw up a flag, not leave everyone fucked into a hole in the ground (and certainly not having people point the finger at the ones who actually did it correctly, and forcing them to point out that it's somebody else's fuckup - which seems to be the standard operating procedure).

Listening to people who spend vast amounts of time and effort attempt to coordinate - only to have those attempts thrown back in their face by fucktarded Reviteers is nerve-wracking.  It just about got one architect lackey tossed out a window the other day (and not by me) as they accused someone (a seasoned Reviteer and designer at that) of not 'coordinating', as if they were just dicking around and wasting time rather than making every effort to complete the project so they could get on to the next one, and the next, etc.

Trying to get these views in linked models (or even in some cases - views within one model) to show up correctly, and allow all of the necessary items to be seen by all disciplines can take more time than is allotted to complete the entire project - and all it takes is one dipshit to change one setting, and you are back to square one.  The argument that this isn't Autodesk or Revit's fault is disingenuous, because this isn't like blaming a car manufacturer for a driver failing to press the brake pedal and causing an accident.

It's like someone knowingly buying a car that doesn't have brakes installed on it, and then blaming the person they run into for not taking into account that they couldn't stop.

Fuck Autodesk, Fuck Revit, Fuck Revitbots, and if you don't like it - then I would like your reasons why you don't like it - and maybe I will take them into account, and if (after careful reflection) I find them to be valid, then I will issue a retraction of the aforementioned statements.

Just kidding - FUCK YOU!!! And eat a dick while you are at it.

Sincerely,
THe MoTHeRFuCKiNG MaN WiTH THe SKuLLFuCKiNG PLaN