Bluebeam vs Assemble

Bluebeam's user reviews in the past year paint a picture of a powerful and versatile construction software with some room for improvement. Users praise its intuitive interface, extensive PDF editing and markup features, and seamless integration with popular project management platforms. These strengths are particularly valuable for streamlining communication and collaboration across disciplines, as exemplified by a reviewer who noted how Bluebeam "eliminated the need for paper markups and endless email chains" on their project. However, some users find Bluebeam's takeoff functionalities less robust compared to dedicated takeoff software like OnCenter or PlanSwift. While Bluebeam offers basic auto-scaling and dimensioning tools, complex projects often require manual verification and lack features like real-time material cost integration. This can be a dealbreaker for users who prioritize advanced takeoff capabilities. Another point of contention is the subscription pricing model, which some users find expensive compared to perpetual licenses offered by competitors. However, others appreciate the continuous updates and access to cloud-based features that come with the subscription. Ultimately, the cost-effectiveness depends on individual needs and project scale. In conclusion, Bluebeam excels in collaboration, communication, and general PDF management for construction projects. It's a strong choice for teams seeking a user-friendly platform to streamline workflows and centralize information. However, users requiring advanced takeoff functionalities or those on a tight budget might find other options more suitable.

Assemble Insight offers tools to assess a model’s finish and accelerates its takeoff. It helps compare models with drawings and offers the ability to leverage quantities by group, code and quantity. It generates various metrics to track work progress, swiftly extracts relevant information and offers collaborative model visualizations with team members. However, the system doesn’t calculate variations in models accurately, is slow to handle large projects, has a cluttered homepage and cannot be used as a standalone estimation solution.