When configuring a system definition file in VeriStand, you can spend a lot of time expanding all of the tree items even if there's only one other item under it. I think it would be nice if the tree auto expanded down to the first set of user-added branches. For example, say I have a simple System Definition as shown below:
If I want to get down to the CAN port I've added, I need to expand Controller, Hardware, Chassis, NI-XNET, and CAN. It would be nice if, assuming the only hardware I've added is the CAN Port, that when I expand Hardware it automatically expands all the way down to CAN 1 since it's the first node I've added. Obviously if I'd also added a DAQ card I'd be ok with it only expanding down to under chassis. Alternatively, or in addition, a button that completely expands the currently highlighted section would be nice.
It would be nice for real time sequences to be able to provide customizable feedback/dialog info to the user in the workspace. If this is not feasible due to its running on the real time side, printing to the console would be helpful too. This could act as a debugger and user prompt.
The Update Service supposedly already checked in the background and found I needed updates.
Yet when I say “view updates” it makes me wait on a progress bar while it checks for updates.
And then when I click “Upgrades and Service Packs” it has to check AGAIN with another, extra-slow progress bar.
It should just do all the checking in the background, retrieve the full list of updates, and stop interrupting our work to wait on progress bars.
I had to manually enter the properties of 25 frames and their signals (at an average of ~5 signals per frame). That's not fun, especially since many of them were similar.
The process would be a lot faster if I can clone the frames/signals and just edit the fields that differ.
The size of the NI-488.2 driver files is quite large. I have an inquiry from a customer about the possibility of having a driver that just contains the driver to be recognised by the computer, without all the compatibility files for programs such as C++, Visual Basic etc.
For certain customers, there is alot of overhead associated with downloading a file the size of the current NI-488.2 driver, when the compatibility for different environments is not always necessary.
Here at the University I work at we use a large number of license management software (mainly flexlm). This past semester I installed a new license management service that would be used to serve licenses to multiple labs in multiple buildings across campus. Unfortunately after installing it and deploying it to a large number of machines I realized that my Labview license manager had stopped working because both processes were trying to use the default port of 27000. At this point in time my only option was to change the port on the Labview license manager to a new port (in this case 27006). Unfortunately due to the current nature of Labview I now have to visit 100+ machines in my building and elsewhere and point them to <SERVER_NAME>:27006.
A peer here had a similar issue with the Autodesk software Autocad, which runs on a similar license manager. However, Autocad checks a range of ports automatically if their license server isn’t available on the default port. It would be nice if Labview would do the same. That is, check port 27000 for a license server, if not found, check 27001…up to 27009 then store the port in the software. Because of this, we do not have to tell Autocad which port the license server is on and if it changes, nothing needs to be done.
What I am suggesting is that users not be required to point to a given port if the default is not used. Instead, the Labview client look at 27000 on a given server, if not found, it looks to 27001, this continues up to a maximum of say 27009.
Another potential fix for such issues would be to have a registry key that can be updated through group policy. This existed in Windows XP but in Windows 7 this key was removed an instead an .ini files used.
Title pretty much says it all. I can create them programmatically,why not with a configuration?
Workaround: create the channel programmatically and save it to the configuration.Very inconvenient.
<1% Use case? Perhaps.
I can display it in MAX and it shows the internal channel. It's not like it's hidden from anyone. Being able to select internal channels from a dropdown, just like a Channel Control in LabVIEW, would be entirely logical and consistent. Default behaviour could be external channels, with filter checkboxes just like the aforementioned control.
Hello NI guys,
I want to know when NI will develop a better software than MAX, each new release is more unstable than the previous one.
With the release 5.1.0f0, each MAX execution starts or stops by a crash. It's totaly unusable.
I want to change the name, it hangs !
I want to see the boards on the target, it hangs !
I don't know why it hangs, I can use a computer with only NI Products and nothing else, it will hang on each time.
I'M NOT ALONE IN THIS CASE !
Please hurry up and develop a new software to setup the target !!!!
The custom Device allows to include in the name of generated files a timestamp, with this format: %<%I_%M_%S_%p_%d_%m_%y>T
Today, my customer prefer something like %<Y%m%d_%H%M%S>
Tomorrow? I don't know.
Having a format string configurable from System Exlorer would be really convenient.
It would be nice to be able to control the stimulis from a workspace screen.
It would be nice to had a control like this ...
The stimulus list could be filled according to the content of a Project directory. (Project Root / Stimulis )
As the Idea : Controls for macros , it would be nice to add screen controls in order to handle with procedures !
For the moment, VeriStand RT procedures are only launched using alarms !
It could be usefull to be able to launch or stop procedures using screen objects. (Like the Model controller !)
It would be nice to add some controls in VeriStand workspace screen objects in order to handle macros.
The two controls could be linked to a combobox which could list the content of a "Macros" directory, located under the project root.
These controls could be helpfull when you want to build a simple screen, for users without big knoledges about VeriStand.
The current Device Driver Installer dialog is not obvious to use. First of all you have to figure out which drivers that you need for your products and then you would probably prefer to remove other unnecessary drivers. However, this is a tedious process with a lot of dependencies.
I have seen many people just installing everything (with its drawbacks) to be safe, eventhough they only needed the NI RIO driver.
I'd like to see a more user friendly dialog where drivers are automatically selected.
My suggestion is that the user instead filters out the drivers on a product level like this:
Let say you choose Modular Instruments. Then next page could let you filter on what type of instrument you have; Scopes, FlexRIO, DMMs, RF, Switching etc...
One of the buttons in the bottom would be something like "Add more products?" so you could iterate this process and finally all needed drivers would be filtered out.
What do you think?
/Pelle - NI Sweden
Currently the stimulus profile message box prompt allows user text input, but the user text isn't usable anywhere. I'd like to the text to be returned for use in the profiles/sequences. Thank you.
I'd like to be able to customize the UUT dialog prompt that comes up when the stimulus profile starts. For example, I'd like to be able to see my most recent entries or have them saved in a pulldown for easy repeated access. Thanks.
Say I have profileA which calls sequenceB which calls sequenceC. sequenceC needs to access UserChannelX defined in the system definition. Currently, the only way to do so, I believe, is to pass UserChannelX into sequenceC as a parameter which means it needs to be defined as a parameter in sequenceB as well, even if it's not used in sequenceB. This greatly increases the number of arguments of a sequence which may never be used but is necessary in order to give the lowest sequence access to system definition channels. It seems like we should make sytem definition channels directly available at any subsequence level (sort of like how global variables can be referenced anywhere). Thank you.