I am an ArchiCAD user - it is FAR superior to AutoCAD in my opinion. I've been using ArchiCAD for 6 years myself.

I know what you mean about AutoCAD being the industry standard. You're right, if you want to get a job with a firm 99% of them will require knowledge of AutoCAD. Although, some will train you, especially if you already know other CAD software. Also, ArchiCAD exports to AutoCAD format and imports AutoCAD documents with no problems so you can always bring that up too.

Just get a book on it and learn it on your own. I learned it years ago but I hate it so much I haven't used it since, of course I work for myself, so I can do that but every time I try to use it to keep my skills fresh on it, I get bored and remember why I hate it so much!

Good luck learning it though - it's not difficult it's just clunky and inefficient compared to ArchiCAD in my opinion.

Honestly, I thought autoCAD was pretty intuitive...

Prior to AutoCAD, I was a microstation user which was a totally different method of drafting. (no key-in commands and such) I was able to get right into it and when I didn't know how to do something, I just tapped on someones shoulder right next to me.

No problem.

Turns out I liked key-in commands way better than point and drag...

Thanks, dallasarchitect and med.!

I like ArchiCAD a lot too, but in this economy, if you want an employment in a large firm as a senior architect, you seem to have to know AutoCAD well. I'm sure it's just like where the buttons/ what the commands are, and getting used to drawing everything in 2D, and it would only take me 1-2 weeks to get used to...

They have "ArchiCAD for AutoCAD user" book, but there's no opposite! All the books seem to be for people who doesn't know how to draft yet :(

I appreciate for your opinion!

We use ArchiCAD at my firm (the firm I work for). I learned autoCAD before ArchiCAD, and have always said I will never go back.

AutoCAD is really pretty easy to figure out. If you get a trial version or something, you could probably teach yourself in a few weeks. Especially if you already know archiCAD.

Hopefully you will find a firm that will allow you to use archiCAD, because it is insanely more efficient. But I guess learning any new programs could only help.

If you're licensed maybe you can get work on your own instead of going to another office using AutoCAD. You can look into a local ArchiCAD Users' Group, make contacts and you might find work that way. I've been an ArchiCAD User for seven years and find it far superior to AutoCAD. I hate to see the continued domination of the profession by REVIT/AutoCAD cabal.

HotTuna,
Yeah, after using ArchiCAD, doing everything in 2D just seems insanely inefficient!!

jcr,
I know, it's like monopoly. Someone said ArchiCAD's problem is that the file gets so heavy quickly especially when you are using it for large project.

I wonder how similar REVIT is to ArchiCAD?

someone once told me that Revit was the American copy of Archicad, a european program

Revit is NOT, in my opinion, as easy to use as ArchiCAD. It's similar but isn't as robust in my opinion.

You will always hear Archicad user say Archicad is better than Revit.

As far as i know both of them are at the same level. The big difference is in paramtrics and documentation

Revit is better than Archicad in terms of general and parametric modeling. The easy modeling tools in Revit and parametric constrains and creation environment make it so easy to create/extend your object library, and the fact that they kind of work like blocks that get saved with the project is a real lifesaver. Maybe that's why AC brought the refined library management in AC13, sort of their own in-place families. Revit modeling and libraries (families, as they are called) are evolving. An example of this would be the change in a lot of libraries that now sport an "instance parameter" structure, which means that each library part may have different settings in its parameters, and still can be scheduled easily. Some time ago, most library parts came with "type parameter" settings, like the old AC libraries worked. There's an advantage to this: if you now you're going to use the same window all over the place, you use a "type parameter", and really use the same window (settings and all) in the project. AC lacks real cloning of elements.

On the other hand, AC better than Revit in the model-work-documentation paradigm. The way model->layers.combos/views->layouts->publish work is in my opinion THE way BIM should work. Revit says it doesn't use layers, but categories. Some may find these categories restrictive; and although they do help you to keep your model organized (unless you create a toilet using a door template and it gets categorized as a door, which I don't see happening), its may not be easy to, for example, have different dimension "categories", say one for general dimensions, or other for detail dimensions. Layers/layers combos are a better approach to these documentation problems, and when used in combination with the cloned VIEWS, it's just unbeatable.