Labview 6i upgrade: avoid if you can

[Michael Solonenko]

Here is my experience with the new upgrade; it is short, and I put it plainly,
so that you would judge for yourself.

Good:
- look of graphics controls
- pseudo polymorphism of vi's inputs (pseudo because you still need to write
a vi for each input type, and polymorphic VI cannot call polymorphic)
-a few new wizards (which I never use, thou)a few new diagram tricks and
Internet features.

Bad:
the speed of execution is generally SLOWER in 6: a looped routine that calles
random number generator runs as much as 2 times slower in LabView 6i! Guess,
in LabView 7 it would just stop.

All routines that use symbolic computations (nonlinear fits etc) are as well
~ 2 - 3 times slower (note: I ran everything on PIII500, 96M
B)


- it is not possible to save in previous versions

- An upgrade (fortunately free one) for Application Builder is required,
and it has to be ordered separately,after the disk with 6i upgrade is received.

My impression: the upgrade is not worth the bother. Few cosmetic improvements
plus expended Internet functionality are not worth the loss in the performance
they cause (NB: on LV 4.0 my programs ran yet faster; do we see a trend here??)

[Jim_Kring]

A few thoughts abouts LV 6

1) You CAN save as a LabVIEW 5.x using the "save with options" feature.
2) Now you can create a DLL from your LabVIEW code.
3) The new array functions are great.
4) The new control references are awesome.

-Jim

"Michael Solonenko" wrote:
>>Here is my experience with the new upgrade; it is short, and I put it plainly,>so
that you would judge for yourself.>>Good:>- look of graphics controls>- pseudo
polymorphism of vi's inputs (pseudo because you still need to write>a vi
for each input type, and polymorphic VI cannot call polymorphic)>-a few new
wizards (which I never use, thou)a few new diagram tricks and>Internet features.>>Bad:
>the speed of execution is generally SLOWER in 6: a looped routine that calles>random

number generator runs as much as 2 times slower in LabView 6i! Guess,>in
LabView 7 it would just stop.>>All routines that use symbolic computations
(nonlinear fits etc) are as well>~ 2 - 3 times slower (note: I ran everything
on PIII500, 96MB)>>>- it is not possible to save in previous versions >>-
An upgrade (fortunately free one) for Application Builder is required,>and
it has to be ordered separately,after the disk with 6i upgrade is received.>>My
impression: the upgrade is not worth the bother. Few cosmetic improvements>plus
expended Internet functionality are not worth the loss in the performance>they
cause (NB: on LV 4.0 my programs ran yet faster; do we see a trend here??)

[joeyoravec]

"Jim Kring" wrote in message
news:39d6bf27@newsgroups.ni.com...
>
> A few thoughts abouts LV 6
>
> 1) You CAN save as a LabVIEW 5.x using the "save with options" feature.
> 2) Now you can create a DLL from your LabVIEW code.
> 3) The new array functions are great.
> 4) The new control references are awesome.

Also many features went untouched, especially picture VI's and front-panel
display. A non issue unless you're making a pretty user front-end, in which
case the display (as reported by profiler) can eat up lots and lots of time.

If you want fancy internet stuff which is N/A to my work, then sure it's
cool. I would have preferred to better timings in the core features, that
way I don't have to test in Labview but write the serious fr
ont-end in
something with faster graphics display.

-joey

[altenbach]

"Michael Solonenko" wrote in message
news:39d50cbf@newsgroups.ni.com...

Mike,

You should have probably used it first for a few days before such a global
verdict. You probably would have found the "save as 5.x", etc.

> Bad:
> the speed of execution is generally SLOWER in 6: a looped routine that
calles
> random number generator runs as much as 2 times slower in LabView 6i!
Guess,
> in LabView 7 it would just stop.

A quick comment about your performance testing:
Did you just load the 5.x version and run your benchmarks? For a real test
you MUST save it as 6i first and then do the timings. Could you recheck and
retest.

Personally, I have not seen any performance hit.

6i is more stable, there are a few editing "tricks" in 5.1.1 (e.
g. changing
array dimensionality of an array inside a cluster) where I can crash LabVIEW
at will. None of them "work" anymore in 6i. 😉

Cheers
Christian

[Ryan Allen]

The Tab control was, in my opinion, the most important feature and I couldn't
wait to give it a try. But, like you, the installation gave me the shakes.
I've been a LV user since version 2.5. After all these years, I feel it's
more or less a given that NI just can't get their installation process together.
And I'm usually pretty good at it. But I guess I'm getting too old for this,
for they outsmarted me. And I had hopes for this version. Right off the bat
I got a message that my machine had to be re-started. Huh??? That's a new
one. But I went along with that. Then the LV folder location has been changed.
Oh-oh, getting a bit uneasy, here. And then, after slowly saying yes to
the rest of the dialogs and thinking everything is installed, up comes the
box informing me that my version of IE is going to be updated. No cancel
button...wouldn't help, anyways, 'cause I was numb! I couldn't believe my
eyes. What is NI doing kissing Microsoft's ass? My desktop is now changed
and my uninstaller didn't catch it. Big ouch.

And like you, I went rummaging through the contents of the box looking for
the app builder. It was shipped with 5 and 5.1. Did they forget me? No,
you have to call and request it. When on earth are they going to include
the most important part of the programming process, a COMPILER, imbedded
with LV?

It's not getting any easier. Wish you luck.



"Michael Solonenko" wrote:
>>Here is my experience with the new upgrade; it is short, and I put it plainly,>so
that you would judge for yourself.>>Good:>- look of graphics controls>- pseudo
polymorphism of vi's inputs (pseudo because you still need to write>a vi
for each input type, and polymorphic VI cannot call polymorphic)>-a few new
wizards (which I never use, thou)a few new diagram tricks and>Internet features.>>Bad:
>the speed of execution is generally SLOWER in 6: a looped routine that calles>random
number generator runs as much as 2 times slower in LabView 6i! Guess,>in
LabView 7 it would just stop.>>All routines that use symbolic computations
(nonlinear fits etc) are as well>~ 2 - 3 times slower (note: I ran everything
on PIII500, 96MB)>>>- it is not possible to save in previous versions >>-
An upgrade (fortunately free one) for Application Builder is required,>and
it has to be ordered separately,after the disk with 6i upgrade is received.>>My
impression: the upgrade is not worth the bother. Few cosmetic improvements>plus
expended Internet functionality are not worth the loss in the performance>they
cause (NB: on LV 4.0 my programs ran yet faster; do we see a trend here??)

[Kevin B. Kent]

Ryan Allen wrote:

> Then the LV folder location has been changed.

Yes , and I am glad so that I can still use 5.1

>
> Oh-oh, getting a bit uneasy, here. And then, after slowly saying yes to
> t I couldn't believe my
> eyes. What is NI doing kissing Microsoft's ass?

Gee, all the goodies since V5.1 have been activeX, Where does that leave us
poor stupid UNIX users (the ones that never crash by the way).

> My desktop is now changed
> and my uninstaller didn't catch it. Big ouch.
>
> And like you, I went rummaging through the contents of the box looking for
> the app builder. It was shipped with 5 and 5.1. Did they forget me? No,
> you have to call and request it. When on earth are they going to include
> the most important part of the programming pr
ocess, a COMPILER, imbedded
> with LV?

My hunch on this is that 6i now makes DLL's directly (or so I am told).
That coupled with the (possibly vaporware) Labview Player might just
spell the end of the App Builder (at least in the future)


By the way has anyone noticed that the player is 16M !!!!!
Does that seem bigger than a cut down version Labview.
I mean the Labview.exe is 4.5M

Oh well .
Kevin Kent