"When prosperity comes, do not use all of it." -- Confucius
Posted on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 8:52 AM
Bentley claims new research shows AEC design professionals prefer Bentley BIM solutions over Autodesk Revit. The research took the form of a survey that sought to identify aspects of a BIM solution that would be most appealing to AEC design professionals. Bentley hired AECbytes editor Lachmi Khemlani, Ph.D. to conduct the survey and prepare the results.

The stated objective of the survey was to identify the most important requirements that AEC professionals would like BIM solutions to fulfill. We see the survey as a new way for Bentley to position its architectural solutions against the increasingly strong Revit; we are aware that some Bentley-based architectural firms have switched to Revit or acquired a significant number of seats in recent months.

The Bentley-commissioned study involved 650 respondents, equally distributed between single-office and multiple-office firms. Of those 650 taking part, 46% identified themselves as architects, 14% as engineers or construction professionals, the remainder identified as in operations. They were asked to rate 12 fundamental BIM approaches and 19 BIM features.

“We had two goals for this survey,” explained Huw Roberts, global marketing director, Bentley Building. “Let’s gain a better understanding of our market while providing a comparative measure of the values placed on the relative strengths of Bentley BIM and Revit.”

The two-part survey first asked respondents to rate a variety of features on a scale of 1 to 5, then to select one of two options as more important (or to respond as neutral on their competing value). Here are some sample items from the survey:  

  • Full support for producing construction documents so that another drafting application need not be used
  • Smart objects, which maintain associativity, connectivity, and relationships with other objects
  • Support for construction-related tasks such as quantity take-off estimating and 4D scheduling
  • Direct integration with cost estimating application
  • Automated setup, management, and coordination, reducing traditional CAD management tasks
  • Ability to work on large projects
  • Ability to support preliminary conceptual design modeling
  • Scalable solution supporting collaboration and distributed work processes versus Single database solution featuring easier setup, organization, and management
  • Support for 3D PDF for electronic publishing and distribution versus Support for 3D DWF

Bentley says the results point to a desire for strong capabilities in drawing production; it was the highest ranked feature across all categories of firms and respondents. Other highly rated criteria include enhanced modeling capabilities with smart objects, the ready availability of object libraries so that effort is not wasted in re-creating standard building components, support for distributed work processes, and the ability to work efficiently on large projects.

Bentley says its quantitative analysis of the survey shows that 58% of building professionals prefer the approach and features of Bentley BIM solutions and 38% preferred those of Autodesk’s Revit.

Speaking during a press conference announcing the results, Roberts said Bentley will want to react to each area where Revit performed stronger in the survey and that these results will guide future development, but was not prepared to commit to specifics. “Right now, we hope others will take the survey,” he commented. “Regardless of the result, it can help building professionals structure their thinking while on the path to a decision.”

To that end, Bentley now offers a BIM Wizard—essentially the same survey but now available to all who are interested. It is available online at www.bentley.com/bimwizard. Roberts said the wizard will generate a recommendation of either Revit or Bentley BIM based on a user’s responses.

When we took the survey and answered all questions in as neutral a fashion as possible, the automated results said it was not able to make a solution recommendation. When we took the survey and intentionally tried to skew it in favor of Revit, the results said we strongly favored Bentley BIM.  It would take several more iterations of taking the survey from various hypothetical perspectives to independently judge the recommendations, but the survey website only allows one survey per email address.

The raw numbers of the survey conducted in September 2007, and Dr. Khemlani’s analysis are both available at the AECbytes website.  

  --Laura Lathan and Randall S. Newton

 

Feedback

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/16/2007 11:52 AM by ralphg
Which leads me to wonder, "Why not compare uStn with Graphisoft?"

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/17/2007 7:12 PM by I have read this report and I would love to believ
I have read this report and I would love to believe Bentley, but from what I have gathered is that Revit was way ahead of Bentley with Archicad in a distant third place. I like Bentley's product but I had to make the switch to revit because of the ease of use. I know countless numbers of others in the industry who have made the switch or who are planning on switching. I really think you guys at Bentley systems really do have your work cut out for you. Maybe now is the time to innovate and that is what Revit is doing in a fraction of the time. Go on read the results for yourself http://www.aecbytes.com/feature/2007/BIMSurveyReport.html

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/18/2007 10:07 AM by Wes Macaulay
Bentley Architecture is toast. ArchiCAD is a good product whose future is somewhat clouded, and Revit's future is a blazing white-hot light to which many are running (or if they hate Autodesk, they are running away). This survey should confirm the worst for Bentley: their software is too hard for most firms to use. uStation is a good platform, but BA has no future without major modifications towards improving usability. Having worked for a Bentley reseller, and as a beta-tester for BricsCAD Architecturals (a derivative of Triforma), this platform is a nearly complete failure in the mainstream market; the workflow and tools and UI are not easily understood. Add-ons like Generative Components give some new life to BA, but only as a niche product.

Revit and ArchiCAD are hard enough to learn and use: BA is completely unreasonable.

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/18/2007 12:00 PM by anonymous
Totally agree with Wes' comments...well almost. I don't think BA is toast, but they certainly have a very very very long way to go to catch up to the other platforms usability.

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/23/2007 8:13 AM by anonymous1
I'm not sure Wes is unbiased enough as the Revit Architecture WishList Manager for AUGI.

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/25/2007 8:25 AM by Lawrence
It boggles the mind to think that a company would actually produce any form of survey where their competitors name and product range could be the answer to their choices. You didn't have to put on a blindfold and taste something; aka coke and pepsi. I didn't have to answer the tricky question about whether I prefer iPod or Zune (who?). So I find it saddening that the advocates of other platforms seem to live their entire lives with a pair of blinkers on and as soon as someone, in this case Bentley, wants to hear from professionals about their needs and concerns, they decry the whole study as fake. I think this might point the finger back at those evangelists and ask the question, "Charlatan?"

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

10/25/2007 10:43 AM by anonymous1
Actually, I step back. Wes' comments now are totally off my radar, as he is an Autodesk Reseller. Sounds like it's just someone who wants to sell software try trashing others. Take the high road, like others have.

# re: Bentley BIM Survey Results: Industry Analysis or Marketing Outreach?

11/1/2007 6:51 PM by BentleyUser
Reluctantly agree- Bentley Structural, TriForma & MicroStation are (unnecessarily) complicated; reasons?

Bentley seem obsessed with keeping every option open- nothing is ever disposed of even when (apparently) obsolete or unnecessary. The K.I.S.S. principle has no currency with them.

FOUR text editors, each behaving differently

MULTIPLE 'solids' types (dumb graphics, TriForma Solid/ Form, Structural Solid, Feature Solid). Operating on these with MicroStation tools, Structural tools or Feature Modeling tools produces differing results.
Translation to steel detailing packages is compromised.

Dimensioning tools are many & varied, some completely unnecessary (tool for overall length of a slotted hole? ditto for chamfer??)

Drawing Extraction Manager & Structural Rules- convoluted 'in extremis'. Would benefit from a sensible 'default' set-up which the user could easily customise. Updating drawing output is manual; should be automated; the only reason I can guess at is automated update might overload the system....?

Data Cleanup- why can't this be automated so multiple instances of co-incident duplicate elements are removed without operator input? Hidden line extractions often plot as solid; file size can be adversely affected.

Bentley are not wholly receptive to these sorts of criticism, responding with "it's what our users demand" or implying that these are insignificant matters. Some users resist change and some make demands that suit only their narrow 'needs' so I feel Bentley is perhaps TOO user-driven in some cases.

I'm not surprised Revit is making inroads if it is easy to use & propagates change automatically. Bentley had no wish to acquire Revit, in line with its 'Evolution, not Revolution' philosophy, so must accept the consequences.

In spite of this, Bentley's strength lies in its file format, scalability and file handling capabilities- far in excess of AutoCAD; few of the major international multi-disciplinary design houses still use AutoCAD, to my knowledge and Autodesk don't seem too interested in this segment.
Comments on this post are closed