03-19-2013 10:30 AM - edited 03-19-2013 10:35 AM
@Phil_ wrote:
It has 2013 written all over it...
So, LV2012 SP1 = Developer Suite 2013 DS1?
Yep. Confusing enough for you?
03-19-2013 10:34 AM
That's rubbish!
Bug fixes are no fun, I got all excited at the prospect of new toys to play with.
03-19-2013 11:06 AM
@Phil_ wrote:
That's rubbish!
Bug fixes are no fun, I got all excited at the prospect of new toys to play with.
My own experience is that LVn SP1 > LVn+1 for all versions released so far.
Also, seriously, has there ever been a year where the DVD label question has not been asked. Phil_ is far from the first, and will not be the last.
03-19-2013 05:57 PM - edited 03-19-2013 05:58 PM
Hello all,
The versioning on the Developer Suite discs has been a source of confusion. The Developer Suite packages multiple products that do not all have the same version, so the Developer Suite is not intended to directly mirror the LabVIEW versioning scheme. We do understand that this is an area of continued confusion, and we are always considering better ways to avoid confusion.
04-01-2013 10:18 PM
@Danny_F wrote:
The Developer Suite packages multiple products that do not all have the same version, so the Developer Suite is not intended to directly mirror the LabVIEW versioning scheme. We do understand that this is an area of continued confusion, and we are always considering better ways to avoid confusion.
This is kind of like Intel calling its CPUs "Core 2 Solo" 😛
Is there a way for users to contribute to the process of "considering better ways to avoid confusion"? I'm sure there are plenty of willing and capable volunteers.
04-02-2013 12:19 PM
There was considerably less confusion regarding the LabVIEW version prior to 2009!
04-02-2013 12:51 PM
@LV_Pro wrote:
There was considerably less confusion regarding the LabVIEW version prior to 2009!
Agreed!
http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Revert-to-old-LabVIEW-version-naming/idi-p/1047557
04-03-2013 10:02 AM
The confusion arises from versioning both the Developer Suite and LabVIEW itself using the 4-digit year, when the version numbers aren't in sync.
So far, the suggestions I've seen are:
(1) is terribly disruptive and doesn't account for the multitude of NI products with different version numbers.
(2) could work.
A 3rd option: Change the Developer Suite versioning scheme. We could add the month to the DS (e.g. "Developer Suite Mar. 2013"), or copy Ubuntu's versioning: "Developer Suite 13.03". Users probably care more about the LV version number than the DS version number, so LV should get the "cleaner" number.
04-16-2013 05:57 PM
04-16-2013 07:59 PM
@kmcdevitt wrote:
There is only one possible solution to the versioning problem that makes sense. Move NI Week 6 months. Forwards or backwards, no difference. This brings NI week to February, and brings the new version of LabVIEW to coincide with the Developer Suite DVD shipment DS1. DS2 would ship in August.
That's what I meant in Option #1 in the post above yours. However, it's very disruptive, and doesn't take into account the fact that there are other products on the disk -- they might not have the same year-number as LabVIEW.
What do you think of Options #2 and #3?