[kls]

I currently professionally use Archicad, I have used Revit, and I have used Rhino and AutoCAD. Training on new software is very time consuming and switching for a single project would guarantee a loss for the architect if the traditional 10-12% of construction cost is used as the fee. If any of my firms had to use a new software and make money on a single project the cost would be about double.

I am not an architect, but I would second this based on my experience with 3D modeling and having to dabble in AutoCAD at times. The learning curve for this type of software is steep, so steep that it is almost generational. In other worlds, it takes a new generation to come up using something else for the market factors to change.

Having done both, 3D and dev work, I would argue switching 3D packages is harder than getting up to productive speed on a new language and it's stack. This is why Blender has taking so long to get uptake and adoption by the industry.

The issue at hand is it is really frustrating to be able to do quality 3D work in one software package and then in another you can't do anything but get basic shaped on the screen. Compounding this is these packages are almost all keyboard based when you get to a power user level. Switching package means all that muscle memory just evaporates. When I was doing simulation we were on 3D Studio Max and there was an initiative to move to Alias/Wavefront (now Maya). We lost a significant amount of productivity over the next 6 months. The only reason the 3D artist switched was because it was a company wide initiative. They were happy afterwards as Wavefront had some features did not have at the time, but it was painful.