Autodesk Forma vs. Geomagic

It is well suited in helping the team analyze plan changes for change orders. It is good for plan file organization and keeping the entire team on the same page. It is not well suited for adding the client to the project as sometimes it can be too much information for them

Incentivized

For the computer-aided design, I would not recommend Geomagic, and would prefer AutoCAD. In the case of other designs, the GeoMagic is good with the sheet metal design. I would work with this in the future for sure. The working UI is good but needs improvement and has lots of features that can be improved.

Incentivized

• Cloud model access.
• Easy collaboration between users in different locations.

Incentivized

• Stop renaming the product (BIM 360, BIM Collaborate Pro, Autodesk Construction Cloud).
• A desktop app would be nice.

Because it is very user friendly and it also adapts the software to the device... For example , iPads are more Superintendent friendly and the desktop version is more useful for PM and Project Engineers. I also like that theres versions of the software that are on our desktop or ipad, so when we have a network failure we are still able to do the majority of our work

Incentivized

I didn't select Forma; we are forced to use what the Architects and General Contractors set up for a given project. There is really no alternative to the cloud model hosting aspect of what Forma does, but for documents, I would not use it if given the choice.

Incentivized

• It has allowed us to work with larger architectural firms.
• We have been able to coordinate earlier in the project life cycle and more often.

• Improved the design workflow.

Incentivized