LabVIEW
LabVIEW 2016 SP1 expected release date?
Solved!
@Blokk wrote:
@billko wrote:
I thought the whole idea behind the service pack was not to introduce new features, but to clean up the base release? You can't tell me that LV 2016 was so flawless it didn't need a service pack. 😉
I think his point was that the regular patches (f1, f2, ...) have the same purpose as the service pack. As I understood?
Would you rather install LV 2016 SP1 or LV 2016 + f1, f2, etc? As I understand it, some fix releases are for very specific issues and are sometimes even discouraged unless you have that particular issue?
If I had an SSP based on the belief that my free upgrade was going to be to a "fixed" version of my version of LabVIEW, I'd be a little annoyed that I instead get to upgrade to another new, untested - and unvetted - LabVIEW version.
Hi,
- it's nice to read this NI statement on their website. I wish they had informed by direct communication with NI's SSP clients…
-Yes, I prefer "stable" SP1 releases: One time install, with all previous patches included. Delivery to customer and keeping the same version on development and deployment computer. Some time later (aka "several years") upgrading both to a new "stable release" aka SP1 version…
- I think this shift in release date really helps to avoid confusion! (Something along the lines of "Which LV version do you use? I'm using LV2016. No wait, it's LV2015SP1. But why is it LV2015 when I got the DVDs in March 2016???".)
If only NI had not forgot to tell all this to their clients…
The problem is that even SP1 releases still contain bugs, as evidenced by the fact that there were actually 7 bug fix releases after 2015 SP1. As such the assumption that SP1 is significantly more mature than the original 2015 release is not anymore true. This religious believe about SP1 stability was very much true for LabVIEW versions like 8.0 were the introduction of the project environment introduced serious instabilities that got partly fixed in the SP1 release although it was still anything but really stable there too. This huge change took actually several full release versions to finally arrive at a stage that could be called stable. Same about the introduction of classes or libraries and later the 64 bit release of LabVIEW. The changes introduced by the last few versions were definitely not as huge and far reaching, usually isolated to a small subsystem that even if it contained bugs would not be encountered by anyone who didn't elect to use that feature.
The SSP is also a bit of a red herring. Having an SSP entitles you to receive updates during the valid terms of the SSP, this includes bug fixes, service packs as well as new releases. So you are not loosing anything except the fairly overemphasized assumption that an SP1 release is significantly stabler than a new release. This was true a few years ago but with the gradual improvements and small feature additions in the last few years, a pretty outdated idea.
Basically you could consider LabVIEW since maybe 2012 more a long term stability release than a true new release every year. The reason for this will probably get more clear during NI Week, when NI will show more about the future of LabVIEW as they have worked on it for several years now, but which took a bit longer than they had initially hoped for.
@rolfk wrote:
The problem is that even SP1 releases still contain bugs, as evidenced by the fact that there were actually 7 bug fix releases after 2015 SP1. As such the assumption that SP1 is significantly more mature than the original 2015 release is not anymore true. This religious believe about SP1 stability was very much true for LabVIEW versions like 8.0 were the introduction of the project environment introduced serious instabilities that got partly fixed in the SP1 release although it was still anything but really stable there too. This huge change took actually several full release versions to finally arrive at a stage that could be called stable. Same about the introduction of classes or libraries and later the 64 bit release of LabVIEW. The changes introduced by the last few versions were definitely not as huge and far reaching, usually isolated to a small subsystem that even if it contained bugs would not be encountered by anyone who didn't elect to use that feature.
The SSP is also a bit of a red herring. Having an SSP entitles you to receive updates during the valid terms of the SSP, this includes bug fixes, service packs as well as new releases. So you are not loosing anything except the fairly overemphasized assumption that an SP1 release is significantly stabler than a new release. This was true a few years ago but with the gradual improvements and small feature additions in the last few years, a pretty outdated idea.
Basically you could consider LabVIEW since maybe 2012 more a long term stability release than a true new release every year. The reason for this will probably get more clear during NI Week, when NI will show more about the future of LabVIEW as they have worked on it for several years now, but which took a bit longer than they had initially hoped for.
There's this thing about bundling all the fixes together that you get a good feeling that everything installed the same from install to install, and that you won't forget anything along the way. That's why software companies create stuff like that. Imagine if you had to install Windows XP and then all the little fixes that bring you up to SP3. With WinXP SP3 at least you have a relatively recent baseline to work from.
I suppose most of this is academic since this is (likely) a one-time occurrence. 🙂
@billko wrote:
I suppose most of this is academic since this is (likely) a one-time occurrence. 🙂
It pretty much is 
Consider 2015SP1, you have 7 bugfixes there (I'm using 2015SP1 f7 here on my computer). So it is a service pack, but there were 7 bug fix releases after that, each fixing one or more issues too. The nice thing about the bug fix releases is that they are normally cumulative, meaning that when you install f7 you get basically all the previous bug fixes too (safe from a few possible exceptions when a particular bug fix might be known to be fixing a specific issue that might cause problems on other systems). So it is far from a black and white situation anyways.
2016 had two bug fix releases until now, so could be considered more stable than 2015SP1.
@rolfk wrote:
@billko wrote:
I suppose most of this is academic since this is (likely) a one-time occurrence. 🙂
It pretty much is
Consider 2015SP1, you have 7 bugfixes there (I'm using 2015SP1 f7 here on my computer). So it is a service pack, but there were 7 bug fix releases after that, each fixing one or more issues too. The nice thing about the bug fix releases is that they are normally cumulative, meaning that when you install f7 you get basically all the previous bug fixes too (safe from a few possible exceptions when a particular bug fix might be known to be fixing a specific issue that might cause problems on other systems). So it is far from a black and white situation anyways.
2016 had two bug fix releases until now, so could be considered more stable than 2015SP1.
What do they say? Clear as mud? 😄
I too was half expecting a SP1 of 2016 for a while. As the 2017 beta came out I knew that the focus would probably be on a new 2017 release so that NI Week can have a couple of "What's New in 2017" sessions. BTW just like 2016, 2015, 2014, there is basically one new major feature to talk about (and a couple of small ones). I heard of some bug fixes taking place in 2017, but I'd expect more in the expected SP1 in November?
@Hooovahh wrote:
I too was half expecting a SP1 of 2016 for a while. As the 2017 beta came out I knew that the focus would probably be on a new 2017 release so that NI Week can have a couple of "What's New in 2017" sessions. BTW just like 2016, 2015, 2014, there is basically one new major feature to talk about (and a couple of small ones). I heard of some bug fixes taking place in 2017, but I'd expect more in the expected SP1 in November?
Did we get a new icon?
