Not trying to flame NI, looking for some real feedback

[lecroy]

I have been using LV since version 2.   Serious use started in version 4. 

When version 7 came out, I needed another license and bought a copy but continued to use version 6.  I tried installing 7 but it was so different from the older versions I removed it.    Recently I had to upgrade to version 8.2.1.    I have been using it for a few months now.    While it does have a few features that I actually like, the problems that I see with it far out weighed the improvements. 

I am talking about things like speed,  version 8 is a dog compared to 6.  Just simple things like connecting a wire is very slow now.  Other things like doing a simple drag operation where I draw a box around the objects I want to drag and the box that LV shows is some where in deep space.  It selects the right objects, but seening the box not where you draw it just makes it not very smooth to use.   Then there is the moving of some of the drop down menus for no good reason that I can see.  Some MBA or manager should have been fired over that one.  Even after 2 months I still hit the wrong menus.  Just from having used LV for so many years I have developed a habit.  You poor people that need to run both versions!!  Then there are the crashes.   I don't even want to think of how much time I spend trying to find functions now....

Some of this I am sure can not be helped I'm sure but the bugs with the select box, graphic entry speed  and crashes are something I am not used to with LV.   Over time I will get used to the new menus as long as they don't move them again.  This version IMO was the worst I have seen from them.  We needed some of the low level features it has, so we are stuck. 

My question is if I upgrade to version 8.5, has National just added more fluff that I will never use, or have they actually improved the graphical entry speed and made it a more bug free environment?    










 

[PhillipBrooks]

I will ask the most obvious questions; what computer you are running on (Mac or Intel)? What type of CPU, OS version, video card, system memory etc. Have you compared you system to the minimum and reccomended requirements for LabVIEW?  http://www.ni.com/labview/requirements.htm 

If you're running on a PC that meets the requirements but has been in place for a long time, you might be experiencing "windows rot". I rebuilt my 2 year old system a few months ago and it was like replacing an old headlight in your car; you don't realize how much dimmer it was until you replace it.

Not trying to flame you or question your computer skills, just trying to understand your environment...

[tbob]

I have been using Labview since 5.1.1.  I've used 6, 6.1, 7, 7.1, 8, 8.2.  I have never witnessed a slow down in such things as connecting a wire or dragging items.  I think you have computer problems. 

I do agree with you on moving menu items and functions.  Just when I get used to where things are, they change it.  Not a good thing to do.

[Ben]

LV 6 to LV 8.2

Going from a lean mean machine to LV8.2 probably hurts.

Yes there are bugs fixes that would help you. There was a very nasty bug where LV would flip around your bundle by name elements so that the right value got stuffed in the wrong element. That alone was worth the update.

There have been discussions of issue with LV 8.X speed in the development environment that would hit you if your VI's are large or you have updated a DSC app.

Ben

[Dennis_Knutson]

I've been using LabVIEW as long as you and just upgraded from 7.1 to 8.2.1. While I still miss the old menus and palettes, I have not noticed any difference in wiring or an increased number of crashes. I did get an upgraded pc soon after and everything has been as solid as the older versions.

[smercurio_fc]

I would actually have to concur with the perception of version 8 being a "dog" (not exactly the way I'd choose to decribe it, though), especially compared to 6. I experienced the same problem, albeit I was running 7.1. These machines were P4s with decent video cards, so it wasn't the machines. 8.2 was way better in terms of speed. Because of the slowness of 8.0 I did not update the computers from 7.1 to 8.0, and waited until I got 8.2 and I saw that it was much improved. It does take longer to start up than 7.1 (I have both on my computer).

So, with respect to the specific comment regarding version 8, I am in general agreement about it being slow, especially when compared to 6.

As far as crashes are concerned, I saw no increase in crashes. One key piece of hardware that plays a major factor in slowness and crashes is the video card, so you might want to get this looked at. Previously the computers here were being puchased using the video chip on the motherboards. When I started ordering the computers I discontinued that practive, opting for plug-in video card that was far better than the motherboard video.

As far as newer versions are concerned, each new version increases system requirements. This is, unfortunately, the same with all software because users demand more and more and then complain when the application becomes a hog as opposed to that nice little piglet.

[all477]

Ben,

I just want to make sure: the bundle-by-name bug was already fixed in 8.2, correct?  I looked back at the original thread about it, and it looks like it was on track to be solved in 8.0, but that thread hasn't been updated recently and your wording here was ambiguous.  (Is the bundle-by-name bug an example of one that he would avoid by upgrading to 8.5, or one he has already avoided by ditching versions 6 and 7?)

Curious because I use 8.2, and my program lives by the bundle.  I don't want it to die by the bundle.

Thanks a lot!

[Ben]

I have read ONE posting where someone claimed the bundle by name was buggy. When asked, they did NOT provide an example. With that exception, I have not read or heard of any issue with bundle by name. I still have a paranoia from this bug so I look for it and have not found it in any of my code. From what I know, the bug first appeared in LV 6.1. I found it and reported it in LV 7.0. It was fixed in LV 7.1.

There was another bug ( CAR# = 41SEH2R0 ) tht affected the unbundle, but that showed up the bug fix list for LV 8.2.1.

So I think its OK.

If not let me know!

Ben

[altenbach]

Yes, 8.0 had a problem with slow startup, but usage was fast.

Overall, this are faster. I believe that the addition of all the new LabVIEW features is well overcompensated by the technological advances in computer technology. 🙂

[lecroy]

Thanks for all of your input.

We have a six licenses for LV and use it on a few different types of PCs.  All run much slower now that we did the upgrade.  The PC I am currently using has an Intel P4 3GHz w/ 2GB of RAM.  It has an NVIDIA dual view something card with two LCD monitors.    When I upgraded to version 6, I was running on a PIII 750MHz with 512M and it worked fine.  For that matter, I own a copy and use it at home on an old dual 200 MHz Pentium and it runs fine (yep that right).  It's not just the startup that I think it slow (which it is) it's just the normal drawing that is a real drag for me.   Run time seems fine still for the most part.   However, I tried to put the new version 8.2.1 on my LeCroy 8500A DSO to do some post processing.  Just loading LabView with no pannel was enough to bring the DSO to it's knees.   I gave up on this idea real fast. 

I am not sure what a big VI would be.  Typical program for me may have 20 sub VI's, some calls to external DLL's to talk to some hardware and a lot of math.  Looks like the current program I am working on is about 2 Meg in size total (all the VIs added up).  Not what I would call big.

I like LabView.  It has saved me countless hours over the years and I have brought up many prototypes and done a lot of tests with it.  I just don't like this version.  I'm not really into all the cute little things they add.  I use it to get work done.  If they have forgotten that feature (that it needs to actually work) then they missed the point.  

I may just order one license just to see if there is any improvements.   It sounds like you have uncovered problems that I have not yet ran into so it may be good just to have it in my bag of tricks.  

Thanks again.