deploy labwindows code, what version is required?

[QuerulousJohn]

I want to develop code and to be able to deploy it to another XP or Win7 PC. What version of LW/CVI is required to do that? Can I deploy using the minimum cost version of LW/CVI?

[RobertoBozzolo]

CVI source code can be moved from one machine to another, but to be able to execute it the two machines must share the same set of libraries and accessory software. If you use only the built-in libraries you can simply move the whole project to the other machine. On the other hand, if you are using additional software (NI or third-party software or libraries) you must install them on the second machine as well. Regarding actual release of CVI, if you plan to move the code between the two machines, you should have the same release of CVI on both. I have no experience on the possibility to have base version on one machine and full version on the other.

Now, depending on the reason you have to move the code, there may be alternative solutions like debug license or remote debugging.

[QuerulousJohn]

Ugh, that's not so good, having to install CVI on both. R U sure? I thought I should be able to simply install a loader on the 2nd machine.

What I was most concerned about is if I can use the base CVI to develop the code and then to deploy it on the 2nd machine. I don't want to have to put out $2500 or more for the more complete CVI version.

I found this regarding distributing CVI code

http://www.ni.com/white-paper/5987/en

but I don't know if it is saying that I have to purchase the "way" expensive full CVI development system.

[D-Cubed · Accepted solution]

Hi QuerulousJohn,

To develop a LabWindows/CVI application, you will need either the Base Package or the Full Development System on your development machine.  To deploy a LabWindows/CVI application, the deployment machine will need the LabWindows/CVI Run-Time Engine and supporting drivers, depending on whether your application makes use of extraneous drivers.  The LabWindows/CVI Run-Time Engine can be downloaded without cost, and is used to run executables created using LabWindows/CVI.  For more information and tutorials, please refer to the Getting Started with LabWindows/CVI  document.  We also provide several technical resources, which you may want to look at for help (click here for additional technical resources).

Warm Regards,

[RobertoBozzolo]

Seeme I misunderstood your question, but when you spoke about deploying the code I supposed you want to be able to develop your app using two different computers. It's a situation I am always facing, when I start developing on my desktop PC and proceed on the go with my laptop.

The documentation you have already found and the documents linked by Daniel show you the alternatives to deploy the final application to your customer.

[QuerulousJohn]

Thanks very much Roberto and Daniel. I was pretty sure I could get a good answer promptly from the LW/CVI Users Forum. As usual the Users Forum didn't let me down. However, now I see that the LabView base price is less than the LW/CVI price and since I'm on a very tight budget, I should consider LV. I'm not experienced with LV and am not confident about becoming proficient with it, but perhaps I should give LV a try after checking with the LV website and Users Forum about deploying/distributing LV code to other PC's.

Again, thanks very much.

jb

[RobertoBozzolo]

Well, in making comparisons, consider that if you want to create and deploy an executable LabVIEW base version is not enough, you need either to buy an add-on or to switch to professional version. Here you can find LabVIEW versions comparison table and here the Application Builder description page.

On the other hand, every version of CVI integrates the ability to create executables and installers..

[QuerulousJohn]

Thanks Roberto. I appreciate your comments. I have been busy watching the stock market today and just now starting looking to find out how to distribute LV executables, finding

http://www.ni.com/white-paper/3303/en.

It looks like a real can-of-worms with the LV executable distribution process and I don't know if I want to bother with it. It seems like a lot of trouble according to the comments following the description in the white-paper. Rather disturbing and disappointing if this is the best that NI can do.

I have done some LW development, deploying my code to single board computers. One was a WinSystems LX800 board with an LCD touch-screen for a battery powered data acquisition and control system. The NI tech support seemed not to be sure that I could get my executable deployed to the XP-based SBC but it worked very well. LabWindows was perfect for the application as I was able to control pumps and valves, get pressure and flow measurement data and graph it on the screen, also recording data files on the onboard semiconductor memory. The only shortcoming was in trying to add an extra remote screen, external to the system box for the user. So I am a real believer in LabWindows and probably should stick with something that I know works rather than trying to see if I can get LabView to work.

Thanks again.

jb

[RobertoBozzolo]

jb,

choosing between CVI and LabVIEW is a challenge! From time to time this argument is discussed here in the forum and in my opinion there isn't a "right" answer to the question "which is the best".

Nevertheless, if you are already confortable with CVI you should consider among your costs the time to spend to get a reasonable skill in LabVIEW, which can be not negligible. The question infact isn't whether you can get LabVIEW to work or not: I am confident that you can build your app in LV; the real question is how much time it will take to you!

[QuerulousJohn]

Thanks again Roberto.

I looked for the LabWindows vs LabView discussion, finding 13 pages of it. Fortunately all the posters seem to be good spirited, not mean-spirited. However, for me at least, I think the arguments for readability of the LV code are a bit specious.

Anyhow, I was impressed that the discussion was good-spirited, not mean-spirited, and I could find no compelling argument to use LV rather than LW/CVI.

However, there is a deficiency in LW as far as a remote screen or panel. LV has the remote screen/panel capability built-in and NI should provide it for LW as well. I was able to make a remote terminal for my LW code, but it required quite a bit of code to communicate from the remote sceen to my main code and consequently was slow.