Announcing the LabVIEW 2010 Platform beta

[geirove]

---

Nickerbocker wrote:

---

Dennis Knutson wrote:

Argh, need a longer time to edit a post.

What I also wanted to say is that since we pay the same amount for software support year by year, I would really like to see a new version each year instead of just bug fixes. Often, the bugs don't affect what I'm doing and it's nice to know the money spent is for something substantial.

---

I'm in the same position.  The past couple of years of new features have made it very easy for me to justify the SSP costs to my company.

People that need to ensure stability of the product they are using, well, NI isn't forcing you to upgrade to a version with unknown stability.  That is entirely up to you.  It may make complete sense to stay on 8.6 for a few more years rather than upgrade for your project.

---

I have  a problem seeing the logic in what you say: You use the new features as an argument for making your company buy new versions of LV, but you don't really need all these featrues ??

And, for the "good advice"  you are giving the rest of us "just stay with your current version": That would have worked fine if National fixed ALL the bugs before moving on to the next release: But they don't !

So, we are left with the options: 

a)  Stay with the current version: I know the RT stability of this version, but there are bugs I need fixed  OR

b) Upgrade to a new version where RT stability and performance is unknown (and takes a long time to test), but bugs that are crucial to my project are fixed.

Not a great set of options in my book!

[nitad54448]

---

Nickerbocker wrote: 

People that need to ensure stability of the product they are using, well, NI isn't forcing you to upgrade to a version with unknown stability.  That is entirely up to you.  It may make complete sense to stay on 8.6 for a few more years rather than upgrade for your project.

---

and what do you do if you find a bug, like my "square problem", which prevents you from working anymore and no solution seems to exist?there is no bug patch for that so I should buy a new version, right ?  I am not sure it is fair.

You buy a car, after 2 years, the engine does not work anymore. You go to a garage and there the mechanic says : there is no way I can repair this car, you will need to buy a new one. 

so that's it ? 

I want to keep my old car, pay for the repairement if necessary but I don't like to be forced to buy a new one.

[hecmar.arreola]

Actually, yes I do need those features, geirove.

The advancement of these features have made my programs a lot better.  Web Services, for example, has enabled me to create a way for me to track instrumentation usage as my users use my equipment.  This means it is easier for me to properly bill out and charge clients for the instruments in my system because I have a system setup where my instrumentation "phone home".  Web Services made that easier for me.

Object Oriented Programing has compeltely changed the way I approach my design products.  My users have much shorter turn around time for their control system needs because it is easier for me to adopt my old code and extend the functionality to support the feature sets my users need.  OOP also has improved my documentation capability and lowered the amount of speghetti code I use to have to generate (due to time constraints).  The addition of reference based OOP (as oppose to value based OOP) in LV 2009 means I can take advantage of a larger set of fundamental design patterns.

VI Snippets has made interaction with this forum and other forums easier.  It has improved documentation as well.

I'm not trying to be dissmisive about your needs.  Bugs are a problem and NI could do better at addressing these bugs.  But I am generally excited to see what new features are in LabVIEW and I take the time to learn them because NI thought they would be useful for their customers.

Message Edited by Nickerbocker on 02-17-2010 11:04 AM

Message Edited by Nickerbocker on 02-17-2010 11:05 AM

[Ray.R]

Just a general statement... while not taking anyone's side.

It's generally not a good idea to change platform in the middle of a project, regardless of the programming language.

(maybe whisper: especially LabVIEW)

Once I start a project using a platform, I will complete it with the same.  Otherwise, you may miss the release target.  This is true wether it is using LabVIEW, VxWorks, CVI, etc.

[geirove]

Hello,

We never change platform in the midst of a project. In 2007 we finished a LV RT Control System for a plant with LV 8.2 using a cFP 2120.

The RT, for us at least, was stable and solid as a rock.

However, LV 8.2 was a pain to work with: Extremely slow to edit in many cases. Extremely slow to start a project (up to 2 minutes !) Extrememy slow to open Hierarchy window and so forth.

None of these problems was ever fixed. 

This year, the customer is back and wants changes to the system since he is doing changes to the production. We did not want to continue with the incredibly slow LV 8.2 (we did a reinstall, another computer, same problem).

So we tried LV 2009. However, now, as I found out when testing LV 8.5 (see link in previous post in this thread), a cFP 2120 will not run properly on a cFP 2120: It consumes > 200 % more CPU power !

However, the slow editing problem is gone. So we now hope to standardize on LV 2009.....

[Ray.R]

LV2009 SP1 seems stable, so you may want to try that.  Hopefully it will work for you.

I hear you about LV8.0 & LV8.2.  My preferences are LV7.1 & LV8.5.  I hope to add LV2009.  🙂

.... and since the topic is LV2010, hopefully add that one, too? 😉

Message Edited by Ray.R on 02-17-2010 08:43 PM

[MogaRaghu]

>> My preferences are LV7.1 & LV8.5.  I hope to add LV2009. ..

Well any version can come and go but for me it is LV7.1 in terms of stability. OK LV2009 seems to be more mature than its earlier sibling and just when I was feeling happy, there is another 'delivery' imminent. 

The suggestion to stick with a previous version is a good one provided your client will agree to it. In more than one instance I have been forced by the customer to use the latest version for no joy at all. But then he is the one paying for it and I need to concede.

Now after so many posts there are varied needs on new version releases. Maybe as a way to satisfy all of that, NI can plan to release new versions when there is a substantial amount of features added and not work themselves into a tizzy to release one every New Year !

[JÞB]

Getting back to the bug fixes versus version upgrade.

<Rant>

  I'll have to say that I am not pleased with how NI handles version maintenance.  (one of my few complaints about NI).

My possition is this.  I bought a product (Say LV V 8.6) with a 3 year SSP.  I got my bug fixes for 1 year and the authorization to load Previous versions.  (Currently 7.1, 8.0, 8.20, 8.5.1, 8.6.1 and 2009f3).  My version of 8.6.1 will not get another bug fix despite the bugs still being found and reported.  This is a disservice to users.  While I realize that not EVERY bug in EVERY version can be removed I would like to see patches for each version for 3 Years from it's release.  NI offers a 3year SSP for each product and in my opinion maintaining each product for the SSP duration should not be too much to ask.  Yes, the SSP Price might go up - I do understand the cost involved - But it would be easilly justifyable to my managment as I would have repaired versions of LV to support my slow adoping customers .

<Rant/>

[nitad54448]

---

Jeff Bohrer wrote:

Getting back to the bug fixes versus version upgrade.

<Rant>

  I'll have to say that I am not pleased with how NI handles version maintenance.  (one of my few complaints about NI).

My possition is this.  I bought a product (Say LV V 8.6) with a 3 year SSP.  I got my bug fixes for 1 year and the authorization to load Previous versions.  (Currently 7.1, 8.0, 8.20, 8.5.1, 8.6.1 and 2009f3).  My version of 8.6.1 will not get another bug fix despite the bugs still being found and reported.  This is a disservice to users.  While I realize that not EVERY bug in EVERY version can be removed I would like to see patches for each version for 3 Years from it's release.  NI offers a 3year SSP for each product and in my opinion maintaining each product for the SSP duration should not be too much to ask.  Yes, the SSP Price might go up - I do understand the cost involved - But it would be easilly justifyable to my managment as I would have repaired versions of LV to support my slow adoping customers .

<Rant/>

---

hi

this is exactly my point. I would buy an upgrade if the additional features are enough. But I would expect that the NI take care of the bugs (NI has yet to answer something about the bug I reported three days ago !!)

I am afraid that now "the suits" -without necessarily big knowledge in software engineering...- hey, what do you need THAT when you got an MBA, huh ?! - are "taking over" as in Dilbert,.. mentioned before in this thread...

N

[REM1]

---

nitad54448 wrote:

---

Jeff Bohrer wrote:

Getting back to the bug fixes versus version upgrade.

<Rant>

  I'll have to say that I am not pleased with how NI handles version maintenance.  (one of my few complaints about NI).

My possition is this.  I bought a product (Say LV V 8.6) with a 3 year SSP.  I got my bug fixes for 1 year and the authorization to load Previous versions.  (Currently 7.1, 8.0, 8.20, 8.5.1, 8.6.1 and 2009f3).  My version of 8.6.1 will not get another bug fix despite the bugs still being found and reported.  This is a disservice to users.  While I realize that not EVERY bug in EVERY version can be removed I would like to see patches for each version for 3 Years from it's release.  NI offers a 3year SSP for each product and in my opinion maintaining each product for the SSP duration should not be too much to ask.  Yes, the SSP Price might go up - I do understand the cost involved - But it would be easilly justifyable to my managment as I would have repaired versions of LV to support my slow adoping customers .

<Rant/>

---

hi

this is exactly my point. I would buy an upgrade if the additional features are enough. But I would expect that the NI take care of the bugs (NI has yet to answer something about the bug I reported three days ago !!)

I am afraid that now "the suits" -without necessarily big knowledge in software engineering...- hey, what do you need THAT when you got an MBA, huh ?! - are "taking over" as in Dilbert,.. mentioned before in this thread...

N

---

1.  What is the bug you reported?  Do you have an SR#?

2.  As a general FYI...with the exception of the CFO, and the heads of legal and HR, all our "suits" have science and engineering degrees.