Introducing LabVIEW 2009

[Dennis_Knutson]

---

kmcdevitt wrote:

....

At worst this is a lie.  At best this is an untruth.  It is not a one-off decision.  It has become a pattern.  You did it with Trace Execution Toolkit.  You're doing it now with Math Script.  And you'll be doing it in the future with other toolkits and modules.  Why not just be honest and upfront about it.

Kevin. 

---

Since when was the execution trace toolkit ever part of either the base, full, or pro versions of LabVIEW?

[a100man]

Seriously where is the documentation? There is NONE! I tried the parallel for loop and one of the loops that the wizard Identified as a "green light" had a bunch of shift registers, and the data was corrupted by the parallel process. No run arrows were broken or any indication that this was not a viable implementation. Just bad data. So my question is this:

Where can I find the documentation on how this feature is supposed to work? What happens when you use a shift register? I need more than the one paragraph help screen that doesn't explain much!  

[Intaris]

I have trouble giving much credence to the "we didn't know who was using it" argument.

Wouldn't a form while registering cleared that up for you?

This way you're making us pay so that you can find out where your market is.  That's not a very friendly way of doing market research.

Shane.

[kmcdevitt]

---

Jeffrey P wrote: 

We definitely considered an automatic grandfathering clause.  The problem here is that then everybody would recieve the updated software, and we would be back to not knowing who is actually using MathScript.  With this approach, we have a clear definition of which LabVIEW users are using MathScript, and gives us the outlet to work with you for new features, what features (or lack of features) are roadbumps for you, and how we can ultimately make the experience better. Automatically grandfathering everyone would only delay this conversation until a year from now.

---

A Sales Person and The Customer are inherent adversaries.  This is just the way it is.  For those who don't understand this concept, take one of your grand mother's blank checks to any car dealer and let the sales person decide on both the car and price.

Being on the opposite sides of the fence, we will from time to time see things differently.  All that I know is that it has become the customers burden to OPT IN to get something that they are already entitled to.

I don't see how it is any different for MathScript than it is for all the other toolkits and modules that are part of the Full, Pro, and Suites.

I am sure there are other ways you can request feedback from the end users of MathScript than charging us twice for it.

And also, for those who don't opt in, you'll probably not get feed back from them for a product you have take away, because they won't be able to use it any more.

Jeffery, do the right thing.  Make it automatic.  Make it a non issue. 

Looking forward to LabVIEW 2009 and ALL of its happy new features. 

Kevin. 

[Jeffrey_P]

Kevin,

I really appreciate your taking the time to provide feedback.  I know it sometimes may seem futile, but believe me, I hear you. Your feedback will be considered.

Respectfully,

[wired]

Tha addition of Mathscript was a much ballyhooed feature by NI marketing when it first came out.  The fact that we are losing something we paid for rubs me the wrong way as well, even though I haven't used Mathscript yet.  However, the fact that is is being removed from the Developer Suite pretty much ensures that I won't ever try it.

[kmcdevitt]

---

Dennis Knutson wrote:

---

kmcdevitt wrote:

....

At worst this is a lie.  At best this is an untruth.  It is not a one-off decision.  It has become a pattern.  You did it with Trace Execution Toolkit.  You're doing it now with Math Script.  And you'll be doing it in the future with other toolkits and modules.  Why not just be honest and upfront about it.

Kevin. 

---

Since when was the execution trace toolkit ever part of either the base, full, or pro versions of LabVIEW?

---

Hello Dennis,

One of the reasons, in my opinion, that we maintain our LabVIEW on SSP is so that we can continue to use this Development tool with new equipment as they are introduced.  The SSP also entitles us to upgrades and new releases.  Another option is to order the new releases a la cart.  A final option is to stagnate at a particular version.

Trace Execution Toolkit was available for quite some time on LabVIEW RT.  Maintaining it on an active SSP means that we are entitled to the upgrades and new releases and enjoy its broader deployment capability.  When NI achieved this broader deployment to "Desktops", they choose to break The Promise.  They took away what we were entitled to and make it a separate product.  If you still want it then you have to purchase it a second time.

Ironically, Trace Execution Tool Kit was available on RT first, and then came out several years later on "Desktop" LabVIEW.

MathScript, on the other hand came our first on LabVIEW Desktop, and then several years later on LabVIEW RT.

Kevin. 

[kmcdevitt]

---

Intaris wrote:

I have trouble giving much credence to the "we didn't know who was using it" argument.

Wouldn't a form while registering cleared that up for you?

This way you're making us pay so that you can find out where your market is.  That's not a very friendly way of doing market research.

Shane.

---

Shane,

You are correct of course, and you have said it more succinctly than I am able.

I tend to rant and ramble on and on...

Kevin. 

[kmcdevitt]

---

Jeffrey P wrote:

Kevin,

I really appreciate your taking the time to provide feedback.  I know it sometimes may seem futile, but believe me, I hear you. Your feedback will be considered.

Respectfully,

---

Jeffrey,

Thankyou.

Kevin. 

[tst]

I believe the VI analyzer used to ship with the dev suite and when the new development tools (debugging and unit testing) were introduced, it was removed from the dev suite and into a separate package with them.

---

Ray.R wrote:

It has to be a special image to contain the code.  It cannot be from a regular image..

---

It's a PNG file. The PNG format allows for custom binary data to be embedded in the file, which is what NI is doing.