LabVIEW
LabVIEW Tech Preview Opinion
Solved!
I'll cut to the chase.
Isn't it time to pop a bullet into the Tech Preview and move on to a true "next gen" programming and visualization technology?
We all rationally and intuitively know it is merely and mostly some polish on what was a groundbreaking programming concept some 30 years ago, which have been left to flounder in the hands of a quite poor, at best, SW dev. org. But don't get me wrong; I'm NOT talking about the individual dev here, but the organization as a whole.
It truly must be a gigantic money, time and headscratching big question mark to the rest of the guys producing quite fantastic and competent hardware products watching the circus with that old coot and his sidekick dictate the development farce unfolding into failure. 
The game engine devs of today got both the skill and the incentive to produce some truly advanced and productive dev environments, it would surely be reinvigorating for NI to be "inspired" with some propah' SW dev. competence.
Just have a look at the IDE and graphical programming capability in Unreal Engine:
Now, how about putting that extremely expensive experiment to rest and give us a properly top-notch programming and UI development system?
So do us all a favour and give 'em a call and be ready with the checkbook. It surely won't be cheap, but at least it could prove to be a valid business case instead of ploughing more money into a product no one are interested in whenever, if ever, it becomes viable.
Roger
Wrong link, here's the enterprise edition of Unreal engine.
Btw, no comments so far? Did it just go straight into the bellows of the corporate beast without even producing a hiccup, burp, sneer or passive-aggressive comment?
I am bewildered.. Or... Perhaps NI Legal is on the case now? 
Listen I have comments, I have so many comments, once you get me going you're going to be like "hey guy what's up with all these comments." But I figure people like yourself are probably sick of this hoovah guy and I was waiting to see where the conversation went.
Did that unreal engine editor exist in 2008? Cause I'm guessing that's when NI started honestly thinking about what we now see in the preview program. Even if it did I'm guessing NI would have considered it, but there would probably be many issues with licensing another companies IDE in terms of control. NI will want total control, and to be able to present the IDE in the exact way they want with many UI studies before any code had probably even been written. Then there is also the issue of cross platform that NI would have with using someone elses tools. Think the unreal editor will ever come to Mac and Linux? (not that the preview is in Mac or Linux yet). Then there's the fact that NI is going to be using this on all their products not just LabVIEW. They want to leverage all the things they are working on for other NI products. Will it pan out? Remind me to visit this thread in 5 years and find out.
BTW are we even allowed to discuss that outside of the forums specified for that discussion?
I also kinda want to hear the statement you are trying to make more clearly. Are you saying NI should abandon what is being shown in the tech preview, and instead license another company to write their software for them?
@Hooovahh wrote:
BTW are we even allowed to discuss that outside of the forums specified for that discussion?
I also kinda want to hear the statement you are trying to make more clearly. Are you saying NI should abandon what is being shown in the tech preview, and instead license another company to write their software for them?
Which forums?
I'm giving comments, critizisms and discussing what was publicly shown and communicated regarding the Tech Preview at NI week. Of course they revealed that Tech Preview to get exactly the type of feedback we currently are giving them.
They already have handed lots of the control to a deprecated Microsoft Framework. Though, I wonder how that MS sales pitch went almost a decade ago? 
You are referring to the sunk cost fallacy? It is not even an argument for a rational discussion. The only thing that matters is if further investment makes business sense.
@User002 wrote:Which forums?
The ones the tech preview members get access to. I suspect content from it will spill over by member unintentionally.
@User002 wrote:
Of course they revealed that Tech Preview to get exactly the type of feedback we currently are giving them.
Yes in the controled environment of an NDA, or other similar restrictions with all NI beta software.
@User002 wrote:You are referring to the sunk cost fallacy? It is not even an argument for a rational discussion. The only thing that matters is if further investment makes business sense.
I'm aware of this fallacy but I don't think that's what's happening here. If it were I would be the person saying the current LabVIEW is just fine, we've spent 30 years improving it and making it better. We can't go back now we've made the product so much better all this time, going back will make a worst product, and won't recoop the additional cost. The sunken cost of 30 years is a big one. Does further investment make business sense to continue work on the current LabVIEW? Some say no.
It was the first time ever I saw LabVIEW Tech Preview run at the web cast from NI week. It looked very public to me. Just click the video and off I floated into the ohh and aaahs of vector graphics and demo glitches.
Besides, what's so secretive about a slightly improved LabVIEW? I just don't get it? People want to feel "special" invited into an obscure club perhaps? To me, it just reeks of elitism and arrogance. Which is the usual attitude of the halfwits in any sect I suppose.
@tst wrote:Did I do it correctly? You'll have to excuse me, I'm kinda new to trolling.
It could use some more misspellings, and insults to my mother and/or sister.
Also no elitism, just people who feel like contributing by signing up to be beta tests, the barrier to entry for beta software hasn't been lower at NI, no invite, or certification required.
Hooovahh wrote: (...) Bzztt
