Additional NI Software Idea Exchange

Community Browser
Top Authors
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

Currently the "Created By" is fixed asTagRuleEngine. It is helpful if one can modify the name to filter alarms. (Currently the property is read-only.)




Created By.png

It would be nice to be able to add all of our instruments to the Asset management tool.  Not just the ones in MAX or that are connected.  This way we can have 1 tool to manage all of the assets.

The new compactRIOs come with a very useful USB-ethernet interface. I would like to access this on systems without the full driver set for low power hosts where we don't want to fill the system with a full driver install.

For example, I have a surface go which would be great if I can just plug it in to access the web interface for debugging.


It's not just me either:


We request "Disable Licensing Wizard" function.

This request from my customer.

The customer is managing a bunch of software licenses with Flexnet.

If the client user try to use some software when there are no available licenses, only NI software pops up the licensing wizard.

On the wizard, there is "Evaluation" button and once the client user mistakenly click the button, the software launches as a evaluation for around month and the Flexnet cannot detect the evaluation software, the customer cannot count the number of clients who is using the software.

If there is "disable licensing wizard" function, the issue never happens. 

First time poster here so please excuse my ignorance if I am posting incorrectly.


I know NI supports CentOS and SUSE GNU/Linux distributions, but Debian distros are the most popular according to distrowatch.  I would like NI to consider creating 488.2 driver support for Debian based distros.  Specifically Linux Mint and Ubuntu.  I have been using Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and recently switched to Linux Mint 18.3.  Mint 18.3 works so well, I abandoned Windows 7 on my personal computer and only use Windows 7 at work (because I must).  I can use NI USB devices on Mint (and Ubuntu) by installing the driver in a Windows 7 virtual machine and passing through the USB in VirtualBox.  However this does not work for PCI cards.  Drivers are a big roadblock to migrating our test equipment off Windows so I am hoping NI considers better GNU/Linux development in the future.  Thank you.

I am also a Keysight IO libs user and was disappointed to find NI-MAX does not have the ability to add instruments manually? (Instruments are populated via scan only.) I am trying to quickly communicate with an instrument without scanning and resetting older equipment.

I realize this is a smallish use case, but I am posting here for future interweb queriers.

I have several functional, yet discontinued, HP8970B Noise Figure Meters that preset whenever NI-MAX performs a 'scan for instruments' or when I attempt a 'communicate with instrument' on them. Using IO Trace, I found the culprit is 'ibclr'.

Given this instrument predates SCPI, it does not understand '*idn?', and will reply with an error code. That is fine, but presetting is not. This clears my calibration and other settings. 😞

To be specific, I am talking about the link below from the 3.x NI License Manager (this is on a VM I use for LV 8.5 development)

Web Activation.png


It had the nice feature of filling in your computer's information and all the products you are activating as part of the link.  Unfortunately, NI's website no longer supports this pre-filling - using this link in 3.x now just redirects you to the normal result of typing in into your browser.


My typical workflow with this screen would be to enter my real serial number into the preceding dialog, use this dialog to get the activation link, go back to the preceding dialog and enter in a fake serial number, press next twice to get the activation codes entry dialog, and copy the activation codes into the dialog.

In NI License Manager 4.x, you either need to use web activation (which saves your serial number everywhere) or enter codes manually, requiring a trip to for every product that needs activation (and trying to figure out how the name of an application in License Manager - say "Vision Development Module Runtime" - matches against the website's entries - say "Vision Development Module", "Vision Development Module (FRC)", "Vision Development Module Runtime (FRC)", and "Vision Runtime") and a bunch of e-mail spam if you choose to get a copy of the activation e-mailed to you.  Note that activating LabVIEW alone requires two of these trips (or at least used to), as the Professional Development system and the Application Builder activate separately.


As far as why I often don't want to use the built-in Web Activation, it stores your serial number on the computer.  This leads most (I think LabVIEW 2017 is an exception) versions of LabVIEW to display your serial number in their splash screens and about boxes - this could be visible in a public setting or at a customer site.  It also stores the serial number even after you deactivate it, so if you temporarily activate a tester while you are doing its initial debug, your serial number will be stored for your customer to reactivate (and possibly distribute).


I labelled this as MAX, as there is no License Manager Idea Exchange - in a way this applies to all NI products.


I would like to be able to simulate XNET devices in MAX (with minimal support). I would not expect these devices to simulate data on the bus. They could help us developers catch some bugs before we integrate with the actual HW.


It would be easier for a developer to be able to create configuration files, databases and test them out without connecting to the actual HW. In most cases, the HW is on a rig which is in use, or the HW is not yet delivered for the rig. We would not need any data on the bus in these cases.


I have been struggling over the past few months, to be able to define databases or use databases and test my configuration UI without the actual HW. And I have faced lot of error with creating multiple sessions, opening sessions after the HW is reserved etc.


I would hope that such errors could be tested and fixed using a simulated device, where the actual messages on the bus are not important.


It would be very good if the DSC llb will be reentrant (vi property -> shared clone reentrant execution).

It's no problem if I work with 50 citadel databases in parallel from executable files. But if I do it from one exe (with reentrant VI that work with citadel) then it works very slowly and very often with critical memory errors... And 50 exe files is not a good solution any way.

Increase the size of the "handles" used to resize the display panes in MAX so that it can be done on a touchscreen interface. It is impossible to "grab" the border between two panes on the MAX window using touch to expand a pane. It would also be very nice if MAX remembered its window/panes positions between sessions.

It makes sense to run the Volume License Manager on a server-based environment.

Typically these environments are managed by the IT departments with restricted access to users.

Managing licenses like it needs to be done with the Volume License Manager is sometimes the responsibility of key-users outside of the IT-department.

With the Volume License Manager have to be operated as an application on the server, this often makes it difficult to get the necessary access rights (remote desktop...) granted from the IT department.

It would be much easier to do the license management via a web based interface provided by the Volume License Management Service.


see also:


It should be interesting to can make deploy using command line for automatize the process without to do many clicks with mouse in RAD.

Define and store XNET sessions within MAX rather than (or perhaps in addition to) a labview project .
Data Neighbourhood seems like a logical place.
This would expand the scope of a session to a host machine from a project. Making executables to reference a predefined session would be simple and flexible.

The ability to create/import CAN messages is already there. Other integrations of CAN/XNET into MAX would be welcome, E.g., launch the database editor from the Tools menu.

Would it be possible to access the settings found in the following dialog box without try to get the dialogue to reappear?



Currently if we accidentally set it to "Always Send" it looks like we don't have a good way to stopping this if we can't get the dialogue to reappear.


A current work around is to disable NIER reporting found in the article below but it seems like we should be able to reset the flag found in this dialouge more easliy.


How do I disable NI Error Reporting (NIER)? -

OK, I admit that I find keyboards a useful input device. And I like to keep my fingers on the keys instead of switching back and forth to the mouse.


This said, I should appreciate when I can use the <tab> key to navigate through dialogs. Such as the scaling dialog in MAX: If I mouse click into unscaled max, I can tab my way through unscaled min - scaled max, scaled min. But -Lord forbid! - not into scaled unit! why not? wouldn't this be the most natural dialog box behaviour? To be able to tab through all fields of interest? Given that LV has a great tool to select and organize tabbing behaviour of user interfaces - why have all MAX dialogs escaped this small improvement ever since (as far as my knowledge goes back to MAX  1.0)

Please give some programmer this half an hour and let him improve this detail.

Thank you


I would like to suggest implementing software tools in which to objectively calcuiate audio/speech quality based on the industry standards (i.e. Perceptual Evaluation of Audio Quality (PEAQ), Telecommunication Objective Speech Quality Assessment (TOSQA) and Perceptual Speech Quality Measure (PSQM))

thank you.

I love being able to simulate DAQ hardware and write the program before ever connecting the hardware to actual instruments, but the default waveform that is generated from a simulated device is not always a great representation of the expected signal of the actual hardware. Right now I have to program in a way to select between signals from the simulated DAQ device using DAQmx Read or a Simulated Signal express VI. It would be great if the Simulated Signal express VI was built into MAX so that the signal from each simulated DAQ device could be modified from Max. This would simplify the LabVIEW code needed and allow me to easily test the code.



Currently it's possible only to assign number of bus from 1 to 100 in MAX (e.g. "CAN1", "CAN2", ... "CAN100").


When you are working with test systems with multiple test sockets and each UUT has got many interfaces (e.g. 3xCAN, 4xLIN, 1xFR) it's hard to manage system configuration.


1. Right now it looks like this

e.g. :

Socket 0 => CAN1, CAN2, CAN3, LIN1, LIN2, LIN3, LIN4, FR1

Socket 1 => CAN4, CAN5, CAN6, LIN5, LIN6, LIN7, LIN8, FR2



2. You could also assign numbers that first digt equals socket number, second interface number, like "CAN23" = UUT2, CAN bus number 3 :

Socket 0 => CAN1, CAN2, CAN3, LIN1, LIN2, LIN3, LIN4, FR1

Socket 1 => CAN11, CAN12, CAN13, LIN11, LIN12, LIN13, LIN14, FR11


Looks better, but here you are limited to 10 test sockets since bus numeration is limited to 100.


3. With custom aliases it would be much easier to manage multiunit - scalable test systems and reduce debug time. Example :

Socket 0 => Vechicle_CAN_0, Private_CAN_0, Backbone_CAN_0, Ultrasonic_LIN_0, AlarmDetector_LIN_0, Control_LIN_0, InternalLight_LIN_0, Safety_FR_0

Socket 1 => Vechicle_CAN_1, Private_CAN_1, Backbone_CAN_1, Ultrasonic_LIN_1, AlarmDetector_LIN_1, Control_LIN_1, InternalLight_LIN_1, Safety_FR_1



4. Or in more generic way :

Socket 0 => CAN-A-0, CAN-B-0, CAN-C-0, LIN-A-0, LIN-B-0, LIN-C-0, LIN-D-0, FR-A-0

Socket 1 => CAN-A-1, CAN-B-1, CAN-C-1, LIN-A-1, LIN-B-1, LIN-C-1, LIN-D-0, FR-A-1


Dear NI Community,


it would be a good feature, if it'll be possible to see directly in NI License Manager list of licenses, and expiration dates - all at once. If it'll be possilbe to export it, it would be really great, because then you can sort them, check what will expire first, and so on.


Because when sometimes we use trial keys for toolkits, activated at different time - it's a mess, because one needs somehow to track when trial license will expire, and when you need to ask for new one / to purchase final license, and so on...


Why don't to make it more easier for users then? Smiley Wink


Thanks a lot,

Sincerely, kosist90.