Is LabVIEW’s Installer Engine officially deprecated? Windows SAC making it unusable.

[thols]

I want to address the growing incompatibility between the LabVIEW Application Builder’s standard installer engine and Windows 11 Smart App Control (SAC).

The technical failure:
NI has acknowledged in KB 287957 that the legacy WinMIF/CAB-based architecture causes extreme slowdowns on Windows 11. However, on standard Windows 11 machines with SAC enabled (which is the default), the issues go much deeper:

• Extreme slowdowns: Installation can take hours as the legacy engine's file extraction triggers aggressive, real-time security scanning for every single small file.
• Total blocks on air-gapped machines: Since SAC cannot reach the cloud to verify the hundreds of extracted temp files, it often defaults to "Block" even for signed installers.
• The 63% Stall: Even with an internet connection and EV-signed binaries, we see "Forbidden by system policy" errors mid-install.

The NIPM "Solution":
NI’s recommendation to move to NI Package Manager (NIPM) is not viable for many professional distributions. External customers often demand lightweight, "clean" installers without the overhead of NIPM’s background services and infrastructure.

Current Workarounds:

1. Connect to internet: This sometimes allows SAC to verify the signature/reputation but is often impossible in secure lab/industrial environments.
2. Disable SAC: Warning! This is a permanent, one-way switch in Win11. It requires a full OS reinstall to undo.
3. Third-party (The 'Real' Fix): Migrating to Inno Setup or WiX. Using a single, modern Solid Compression binary (SHA-256 signed) works perfectly even offline.

My Question to NI:
We pay for the Application Builder license, yet its primary "Installer" output is now technically unfit for professional distribution on modern Windows environments.

Is there a roadmap to modernize the legacy engine to be SAC-compliant, or is this functionality being intentionally deprecated in favor of NIPM lock-in? Should we officially consider the built-in installer a legacy feature and move to Inno Setup for good?

[alexderjuengere]

good catch, I wonder if that is the reason, why there is the NI package manger 

[alexderjuengere]

---

@alexderjuengere wrote:

good catch, I wonder if that is the reason, why there is the NI package manger 

---

...in coexistence with the application builder...

[alexderjuengere]

oh, I mixed up NI package manager with NI package builder....

Create a Package Installer From NI Software Offline Installers
https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA03q000001ECSwCAO&l=de-DE

for me, the package builder is a valid alternative for  application builder in terms of creating a clean installers, as thols pointed out

but maybe your issues are the same for both application builder and package builder?

[BertMcMahan]

---

@alexderjuengere wrote:

oh, I mixed up NI package manager with NI package builder....

Create a Package Installer From NI Software Offline Installers
https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA03q000001ECSwCAO&l=de-DE

for me, the package builder is a valid alternative for  application builder in terms of creating a clean installers, as thols pointed out

but maybe your issues are the same for both application builder and package builder?

---

That shows how to install NI software (LabVIEW, TestStand, etc.). Can you use it to install your own executables?

Also, I have noticed the "takes multiple hours to install" issue for new software. I have taken to always creating two installers- one "full" one with all the runtime engines and one "upgrade only" one that only updates my own executables. It's kind of a pain to remember both and handle the two outputs, but the update installers go REALLY fast.

(It would also be nice if the output was a SINGLE file, or if you could auto-zip it or something when it gets generated.)