Does ni-scope and ni-daqmx hardware support overlap?

[Fedor]

I have to write Labview code for a mixed set of NI digitizers. Some are explicitly supported by NI_DAQmx driver library, others are by NI-Scope, with a separation line somewhere around 10 MSPS.

The code I create for both has essentially the same functionality, and it bothers me that I have effectively do twice the amount of work to do the task.

Is there a unified Labview driver stack that support both types of instruments uniformly, and if not, what is the reason not to have a unified library?

[Dennis_Knutson]

Could you perhaps give some model numbers? None of the digitizers have a sample rate of 10MS/s and all of the ones I looked at are supported by NI-Scope.

Are you perhaps confusing digitizers with multi-function DAQ devices? That would be sort of an apples and  oranges comparison. 

[Fedor]

Foe example, we have a number of systems with a mix of 5105, 5922, 6133, USB-625x, etc.

Sorry, didn't want to go into arguments, but I disagree with  apples and  oranges  comparison. We mainly use AI with those instruments, where multi-function DAQ devices function identicaly to "digitizers".

[Dennis_Knutson]

Multi-function DAQ devices do NOT function identically to digitizers. Few DAQ devices do simutaneous sampling (the 625x certainly does not). Few, if any DAQ devices allow you to select coupling. I don't think any of the DAQ devices allow you to select input impedance. The digitizers are mostly intended as replacements for traditional scopes and as such, have internal measurement features and are IVI compatible. DAQ devices such the 625x are not scope replacements. They are capable of multichannel acquisition but with the muxing of the inputs, it quite different and with the analog outputs and digitial I/O, they are capable of doing many additional things.

You may be using such a few of the AI features of the DAQ cards but I don't think it's unreasonable to have two different drivers for device with such different capabilities and intended uses.

[Fedor]

In any case, why not extend DAQmx driver library support to include high-speed devices? I don't see how selectable  input impedance could disallow DAQmx driver support on its own. 

[Dennis_Knutson]

All of the scope specific properties that are in the NI-Scope driver, which are familiar to scope users and probably required for IVI compliance, would have to be incorporated and I think users of both devices would just end up being confused as to what ones apply and which ones don't. At the same time, why not include NI-FGEN, NI-DMM, etc, as well? Same arguements apply, don't they?

This is just my opinions. Maybe we'll get an official response form NI

In the mean time, why don't you go ahead file a product suggestion? If NI gets enough requests for this, it could happen some day.