Ok, I'm really confused now.
I understand NIdaqmx and NIdaqmx Base have not much to do with each other exept for the looks of the subVIs.
I have programmed a linux-box with a 6034E using NIdaqmx Base without
problems. I was completely happy because NI seems to be closing the gap
between WIN and Linux.
Now I took the same card (6034E) in a Windows-box and tried to run that
VI but I get an error -200220 (device identifier is invalid).
I tracked that down to the following problem:
The Windows-Box has both NIDaqmx and NIdaqmx Base. Using MAX, the 6034E is found inthe traditional DAQ and DAQmx (Dev1).
When I start the NIdaqmxBase Task Config Utility, the board is not found.
Now I get the feeling DAQmxBase supports more devices under Linux than
under Windows. Is that right? In that case you really got me confused.
My goal has always been to be platform-independent. That's one reason
for using LV in the fist place. If that is the case, why use the name
DAQmxBase? For my ears that sounds like the base=low level DAQ (that
all OSes are using) and DAQmx is one level above that. But that's not
the case. It takes about one day reading the forums to find out, that
DAQmxBase and DAQmx are as different as cats and dogs.
And then, DAQmxBase and DAQmx are huge and slow-loading (a simple
single point aquisition vi loads about 900 subVIs. Polimorphism is ok,
but here it looks like I am loading the support for every NI-board ever
sold. That gives me the feeling of swimming in a lake wearing workman's
boots).
Besides all criticism, thanks for "going linux" with DAQmxBase.
-DB
