NI charges for bug fixes? SP1 not free.

[herrlin]

So I get a new Buick with an installed program that is proven well supported and lets me hit 59 mph.  A new version comes out in a year that now lets me hit 67 mph in my Buick however, it’s not as proven as the older version.  The dealer says since it is within a year since I got my Buick I can choose to upgrade but I will not be eligible for further updates to the new version unless I pay up. I feel this is fair.  I mean at the end of the day you are driving a Buick.   

What up now.

PS I drive a Buck.  Dont knock it till you rock it.

Message Edited by herrlin on 04-15-2010 04:54 PM

Message Edited by herrlin on 04-15-2010 04:56 PM

[Orion HE]

My analog is more in line with a Buick that lets you hit 59, but crashes when you apply the brakes while rolling down your window, returns an error when you try to use the wiper fluid between the speeds of 40 and 42 mph, and incorrectly displays the fuel in the tank by an error of +/- 2.4 gallons.  These are not acceptable.  Buick should fix the broken program for free.  Buick are jerks for selling a product as whole only to sell you the fixes later. 

NI wants to charge you for fixing these bugs.  There are more, but there is a 10,000 character limit.

 ID     Legacy ID     Fixed Issue
93296     4FSGQ6C4     Terminal information is not being passed correctly
122321     
—
    Mixed Signal Graph does not resize plot legend when in executable
145796     
—
    Choose implementation dialog does not bring-to-front VIs which are already open but hidden
151665     
—
    Memory leak when using .NET callback in LabVIEW
158487     
—
    Application Builder errors when building file with a slash in the file name
160585     
—
    Error 6 occurs when path is too long when building an application
162215     
—
    Cannot change RT FIFO from multiple variable editor
171913     
—
    3D Graph Surface Plot Color Matrix Yields Colorless Surface
173068     
—
    Error when trying to drop things from the HTML help
174619     
—
    Open and Closing VIs with variables leak about 50-200KB of memory
175643     
—
    Deployment dialog display on built application
175788     
—
    MAX could not be launched from LabVIEW on Windows 2000
175997     
—
    3D Comet Plot does not show the animiation and static plot in application with default build settings
176266     
—
    Plot of Waveform Graph can not be renamed in property page if input terminal is wired
176379     
—
    Crash when fixed point number is wired to a case structure
176597     
—
    Get/Set Control Value and Run VI Methods fail when used with a strict VI reference to a reentrant VI
176834     
—
    Inserting a feedback node on a wire drops corrupted feed forward node
176860     
—
    Terminals property of feedback node doesn't include the enable terminal
177230     
—
    Weather Monitor example readme file is corrupted for French
177239     
—
    LabVIEW crashes when a VI tries to deploy its parent library programmatically
178232     
—
    Block Diagram Clean Up may break VI when cleaning up large VIs
178234     
—
    Data Value References wires do not coerce
178313     
—
    VI hierarchy shows tip strip with old (library-qualified) name when VI is removed from the library
178614     
—
    Type defined constant can lose value when updating to edited typedef if feedback node also on diagram
179002     
—
    Changing variable container property node causes LabVIEW to crash
179140     
—
    LabVIEW hangs when trying to restoring the topmost windows
179375     
—
    LabVIEW crashes when using "To Variant" with Single Process variable
179472     
—
    The Write to Measurement File Express VI cannot be set to "Save to series of files"
179677     
—
    Dependency conflicts for internal VIs in stored in vi.lib may appear when upgrading projects
179711     
—
    Web Service palette VI reads incorrectly
179854     
—
    Invalid variable configuration when opening variable properties
180451     
—
    Application builder UI hangs
181478     
—
    A class dynamically loaded into a running framework which statically loads its own child may not reserve the child's VIs correctly
181495     
—
    Nested parallel FOR loops are not completely parallel
182053     
—
    Custom About screen not displayed with a LabVIEW built application
182414     
—
    Memory leak when probing an error cluster in a while loop
182420     
—
    LabVIEW hangs when using highlight execution with more that 17 I/O Variables
182771     
—
    Open VI Reference using strictly typed constant results in 1031 error
182831     
—
    LLBs are not detected in project when located in auto-populating folders
182844     
—
    Tab Controls don't save Default Visible Tab
182865     
—
    VI Crashes on load if Call by Reference Node Statically Configured to a VI and has a Reference Out wired
182961     
—
    New value node in timeout event structure
182990     
—
    LabVIEW crashes when changing shared variable property
183005     
—
    Save for Previous to 8.5 or older will crash if VI contains an event structure
183239     
—
    LabVIEW crashes when adding a folder to project
183560     
—
    Graph does not display timestamps on X-axis as expected when using timestamp data type
183837     
—
    Type uintptr_t * cannot be built into a shared library (DLL)
183972     
—
    Conflict message when main VI in project opens
184040     
—
    Not a refnum constant wired to a mouse down event causes compile error
184077     
—
    LabVIEW Load Error Code 3: Could Not Load Front Panel When Opening a VI in the Development Environment
184463     
—
    Open VI Reference cannot recognize type when upgraded to LV 2009
184557     
—
    User defined refnums are improperly grouped
184830     
—
    Build error 1502 when using global variables.
185219     
—
    Error 1502 while building a LabVIEW application
185348     
—
    VIs with large data types (like the Enum) will crash on load after being saved in LabVIEW 2009
185812     
—
    Crash when saving for previous version
185867     
—
    Aggregate comparator causes LabVIEW to crash
185980     
—
    Editing An Event Structure With A String Event Might Crash Localized Versions Of LabVIEW 2009
186211     
—
    LabVIEW crashes when saving for previous version
186276     
—
    Certain references (SoftMotion, WSN...) may incorrectly refer to data associated with a different reference
186392     
—
    Cannot Save sparse rings with unit labels in LV 2009
186404     
—
    Default values lost when upgrading from LabVIEW 7.1 to 8.6 or 2009
186418     
—

[smercurio_fc]

---

Simon H wrote:

If you choose to not renew your SSP subscription then you could get in the situation where you have LabVIEW 2009 (due to your purchase of LabVIEW 8.6 and the 1-year SSP subscription that came with it) but you would not get SP1 since your SSP subscription had expired.  At this point you are welcome to use the version of LabVIEW you purchased (LabVIEW 8.6) and it's update (LabVIEW 8.6.1) or even the new feature upgrade (LabVIEW 2009).

---

Herein lies the problem, and I think Orion's point (which I agree with, by the way). If SP1 is considered a bug fix, why should having the SSP have anything to do with being able to get it? We had this situation with 8.2. We had decided to not renew the SSP and we were not able to get 8.2.1 since it was released after our SSP expired. Because of this our company is downright hostile to upgrading LabVIEW.

To Orion: What you are seeing is actually not limited to NI. We've seen this with other products as well. Gone are the days when bug fixes were considered free. Now they're all considered "upgrades", allowing companies to "wiggle" around the issue. 

Note that the above is my own opinion.

[Orion HE]

Companies that I use that offer free updates (not upgrades).

Ableton

Adobe

Microsoft

Native Instruments (not National Instruments)

inicom

AutomationDirect

Kepware

Apple (I don't use them, but they do offer free updates)

Autodesk

All these are premium products, but the manufacturer fixes their own bugs for free.  This is how you support a product. Why should I pay for bug fixes?  I don't know.

[tbob]

NI is certainly in the business of making money, but I think they sometimes go too far.  Charging for bug fixes is a good example.  They should be free, regardless of whether you have an active SSP or not.  Bug fixes should not be considered as an upgrade.

Another good example of when NI goes too far is to make certified people take a re-certification exam every 2 years at $200 a pop.  2 years???  Come on, it should be 5 years at the least.  If have a FCC license, and it is good for life.  My AZ drivers license is good for 15 years.  My CLD is only good for 2 years?  Just a money maker.  When my certification expires, tough cookie, I'm not renewing and I don't need it.  I have a grudge against NI because of this.  (But not enough of a grudge to quit Labview).

[PJS]

Someone wish to list the difference between f3 and SP1?  f3  is free!

[battler.]

---

Simon H wrote:

"NI does not charge for service packs for any version of LabVIEW which you purchase."

It is called Service Pack 1 and in these situations you do charge for it.

[RavensFan]

---

Orion HE wrote:

My analog is more in line with a Buick that lets you hit 59, but crashes when you apply the brakes while rolling down your window, returns an error when you try to use the wiper fluid between the speeds of 40 and 42 mph, and incorrectly displays the fuel in the tank by an error of +/- 2.4 gallons.  These are not acceptable.  Buick should fix the broken program for free.  Buick are jerks for selling a product as whole only to sell you the fixes later. 

---

So now we are talking about Toyotas?

[Coq_Rouge]

I do not think NI will change its license policy du to some angry postings in this forum. But it always feel better blowing of some steam. But despite all the fine from NI about why. They have done it to it to secure their income. And that income is needed to do R&D, pay employees, pay for this site among many other things. Doing R&D to adjust to the market trends is important. Else they will end up like the American car industry. Making a product that even the Americans hardly are interested in.

[Intaris]

Well, you could all go over to the idea exchange and vote for a "LTS" (Long-term support) version of LabVIEW in order to try to decouple bug fixes from new features.

Shane.

Message Edited by Intaris on 04-16-2010 03:33 AM