I was deeply disappointed to see that it has evolved so little except in cost. Masterspec has been around for decades now. But most of us architects don't specialize in spec-writing, and when called upon to do it, it should not be a completely brain-damagingly difficult task.

I've edited enough specs to know to start from the last page and work to the front, because invariably the product that best applies is buried later in the document. A really helpful guide would tell me in which section I should place certain items, and in which section they don't belong, and why.

There is also a total lack of illustrative examples. There is a total lack of comparative information in the so-called support section. There is a narrative for each specification section, but it gives little if any guidance on how to edit down the section and eliminate choices. Trust me, you will be as lost was you ever were trying to figure out things like which of 12 different millwork finishing systems to use, or what the differences are between spec sections with similar sounding titles. The Arcom website has all these promises of fabulous, detailed support. I had to watch an hour-long tutorial on their website to figure out how the program worked. The graphics are lousy, and the interface is non-intuitive. It isn't even really a stand-alone program, it's sort of a Microsoft Word add-on.

It was dreadfully expensive, over $1100 for a one-year subscription. So I just bought the Arcom Masterspec software for a client's project. I haven't had to write a full-blown spec in a long time, probably six years or so.

Masterworks software guerillas