The QQ-based BIM platform emphasizes communication over operation, focusing on information transmission rather than manipulating models or handling data directly. While model operations require specific tools and users, this chat box functions as a building model interface, with the tools above serving as entry points for various functions. Most operations happen within the input box below. Additionally, QQ’s main interface offers extended applications. But does this design have universal and practical value? Is it truly feasible? In reality, there are no unrealistic needs—any real-life situation creates a genuine need. As Guanglian Da famously said, users are always right. Some express concerns about controlling information flow in such systems, but permissions and access controls can effectively address these issues.
If Luban has a PDS, it facilitates data transfer between specific users but remains one-way rather than many-to-many. Moreover, PDS is purely a database architecture, not a modeling platform. The core of BIM lies in maintaining a continuous set of building data and enabling centralized applications. It integrates a project into both a data model and a data center. This integration resembles the concept of dynamic equilibrium in biology, where evolutionary paths and species proportions are not artificially controlled. Therefore, BIM development should avoid hurried or radical leaps forward.
Our goal is not to transform BIM into a tool like QQ, as one is an instant messaging app and the other a building information model. They differ fundamentally in entity, industry, target users, data formats, concepts, and external applications—though they can inspire each other. This platform can extract various project-related information, while the terminal remains a compact interface with backend processing handling complexity. The principle is “small terminal, big backend.” For example, a project manager on the move can input owner requirements on a mobile device to retrieve pricing and site information in real time. Terminals like smartphones and iPads enable mobile offices and dynamic management. Can BIM evolve in this direction? At least it can deliver sufficient data volume and significantly support management efforts. This approach represents a form of cloud computing, but more comprehensive than just “the cloud.”
This model could transform traditional business and management practices. So, who should lead this shift? Owners should take the lead, acting as information model providers and offering sustainable, fee-based services. This new profit model avoids blindly burning money. After owners invest, they can continue earning through the operation and maintenance phases, spanning the building’s entire lifecycle.
Integrating multiple data entry and exit points into the basic building model allows authorized personnel to access information easily. For instance, a property owner we recently contacted requested a building information model that offers comprehensive, accurate foundational data or a cloud data center, followed by fee-based information services within a small development zone. This business model is viable, with owners willing to invest. What if Party B refuses to share information on the platform or use the owner’s BIM? The solution is contractual constraints—Party B must comply, leaving no grounds for refusal by Party B or Party C. With terminals that provide easy access to various data, why resist? It benefits management and efficiency without drawbacks. Moreover, informatization is an irreversible trend; reinvesting later may cost more. Whether this requirement is a core business function, its value lies in data integration and enabling numerous value-added services. Challenges remain, such as construction companies having their own information management systems, but these can be resolved through standardized data interfaces.
To date, China’s construction software industry has yet to develop a truly effective building information system. Most available software is a single tool rather than an integrated system. Some foreign solutions exist but lack localization. Ideally, systems should be integrated—those that can and should be integrated first. I believe 5D + BIM (RIB) offers a promising approach. When integration is impossible, data universality and standard interfaces should enable interoperability and data linkage.
We envision a terminal that combines comprehensive functionality with a simple interface. Regardless of backend complexity, the user interface must be friendly, intuitive, and easy to navigate. The three core principles of UI design are: giving users control, reducing memory load, and ensuring consistency. The layout should be logical, clean, attractive, and easy to operate—not cluttered or overwhelming. Designing such an interface requires knowledge of ergonomics, user psychology, visual design, aesthetics, and an understanding of local user preferences and habits. For example, Chinese users value functional diversity and ease of use. The interface embodies the software architects’ vision and reflects the software’s functional framework. To save space, unnecessary tools should auto-hide, and users should freely customize interface styles. Rigidity must be avoided. Usability remains the eternal theme of software. While comprehensive features and simple operation might seem contradictory, striking a balance is essential. The simpler the software appears to users, the harder it is to develop.
Are there two opposing user types—those who want simplicity versus those who prefer complexity? Yes. Some enjoy complex, sophisticated music, while most prefer popular tunes; others favor elegant classical pieces. Similarly, software requires simplicity in some areas and complexity in others. We cannot generalize.
Software developers cannot work in isolation. They must engage closely with users and involve engineers with deep domain knowledge to understand and address real needs. Market research and demand analysis are critical, yet a gap persists between the engineering and software industries, which remain largely separate.
The BIM platform for specific needs, based on QQ, installs a functional module resembling the QQ interface on BIM. Many information systems have instant messaging features like QQ. However, the BIM team using QQ for communication does not equate to a QQ-based BIM platform, since QQ cannot provide engineering data. Even if BIM models are sent through QQ, only screenshots can be shared, which are incomplete representations. Software has numerous data entry and exit points, while screenshots only reveal surface information. Thus, QQ cannot replace BIM platform functionalities, and information transmission limitations are hard to overcome. Comprehensive data can only be accessed by opening original files with relevant software.
QQ-based BIM platforms are likely to become a trend, with mature applications abroad, including Autodesk products. Developing a QQ-based BIM platform is not difficult—Graphisoft’s BIM Server, for example, has added instant messaging features.
Must log in before commenting!
Sign Up