"Christine Kroker" wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > > I need some good comparison data on why LabView is better than HP Vee, especially > detailed benchmark data. I haven't seen a good comparison in a couple of > years.
I can't speak to the benchmark data, but I tried both about a year ago. At the time it felt like Vee's interface was awkard, slow to program in, with a steep learning curve compared to labview.
I would definately try some basic algorithmic things in both before I made a decision. Vee had some predone drivers for the instrument, but I found it very non-intuitive.
A couple of years ago I talked with a VEE developer and at that time such tasks as doing an FFT with VEE was significantly slower (by a factor of ten or so). Instrument communication is limited by the GPIB bus so there's little difference if you use HP's VISA library or NI's. The last benchmark on program development that I saw was a study paid for by HP and very biased in my opinion. Also, benchmarks are only a small part of the story. Except for Agilent instruments, you won't find many native VEE instrument drivers. A lot more manufacturers of data acquisition cards supply drivers for LabVIEW. VEE doesn't have the variety of toolkits that LabVIEW does. If you ever need to do database interface, SPC, vision, motion control, sound/vibration analysis, or internet c onnectivity, you'll find that the VEE either doesn't have the tools or that they're not as mature. A LabVIEW program is portable across Windows, Mac, Sun, and HP Unix. There's also an embedded, real-time version of LabVIEW. Lastly, look at the user community for LabVIEW. There's this forum, the info-labview mail server, and the hundreds of Alliance members across the globe doing LabVIEW consulting.
"Christine Kroker" wrote: >>I need some good comparison data on why LabView is better than HP Vee, especially>detailed benchmark data. I haven't seen a good comparison in a couple of>years.