LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

My Big Book of Grievances and Bugs concerning the new 3D Surface

Hi Ben,

 

I'm still checking this thread when I'm in the office, and I appreciate your feedback. I'm trying to think of the best avenue for getting your input to the right people. There's always the idea exchange, which see a bit more interaction with the developers, or opening a new forum thread. Since what you describes really crosses a few different product areas beyond the 3D surface, opening a new thread may be a good option so that we can keep this thread open for filing new CARs.

 

Tim W.

Applications Engineering

National Instruments

http://www.ni.com/support 

0 Kudos
Message 51 of 54
(842 Views)

@Tim W. wrote:

Hi Ben,

 

I'm still checking this thread when I'm in the office, and I appreciate your feedback. I'm trying to think of the best avenue for getting your input to the right people. There's always the idea exchange, which see a bit more interaction with the developers, or opening a new forum thread. Since what you describes really crosses a few different product areas beyond the 3D surface, opening a new thread may be a good option so that we can keep this thread open for filing new CARs.

 

Tim W.

Applications Engineering

National Instruments

http://www.ni.com/support 


 

I suspect this is an issue that has to be handled at the highest levels. Coordination between the US developer that did the old version and the off-shore developers.

 

A paraphase of the reply I got from the person that support the tag-engine replacement said "I don't know how BridgeVIEW worked."

 

What should happen is NI should be recruiting heavy users of the old version to find out what they use in addition to actually looking at the old version. Simply making the screens that configure the new 3D with the old 3D would have pointed out the short-coming instead they appeared to have taken a quick glance and then went of to "make it better".

 

So if anything bring in marketing since they are the ones that have to explain why the new version .... and also have the pull to make it happen.

 

as always just my 2 cents,

 

Ben

 

Retired Senior Automation Systems Architect with Data Science Automation LabVIEW Champion Knight of NI and Prepper LinkedIn Profile YouTube Channel
Message 52 of 54
(837 Views)

Re: the CW licensing:

 

" I checked into this and it turns out that the manual you referenced is just really old. The license policy was updated around 10 years ago that all Component Works objects fall under the general NI licensing policy. "

 

So we're all good to go.
 

QFang
-------------
CLD LabVIEW 7.1 to 2016
0 Kudos
Message 53 of 54
(831 Views)

I agree with Ben 100%. I have pointed my local sales team to his post.

As for me and my project, I just finished reverting to the CW component with better perfomance, visualization and features with simpler code for me. A win-win by any definition. I'm leaving this "big book of grivieance" for now. 🙂 

QFang
-------------
CLD LabVIEW 7.1 to 2016
Message 54 of 54
(825 Views)