Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

running multiple version of LabView on same pc

Is it ok to run multiple version of LabView like  7.1 or 8.2 on the same machine?

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 8


0 Kudos
Message 2 of 8

To set up a PC to run multiple copies of LabVIEW, install oldest first, then newer ones.  Let LabVIEW install in the system-specific default window (which keeps the libraries, examples, etc. apart).


You need to be careful when opening VIs with multiple LabVIEW versions.  You cannot open a "newer" VI in an "older" version of LabVIEW, and it will "warn" you when you try.  However, you can open older versions in newer ones, and if you Save the VI, it will become "converted", and will no longer be readable by the original version.  I recommend that you create separate directories for your different LabVIEW code repositories and try not to mix them up!


One final note -- by default, the last version of LabVIEW that you explicitly open becomes the "default" version if you double-click on a VI.  So if you've worked with LabVIEW 8, have closed it, and then double-click a VI in your LabVIEW 7 folder, LabVIEW 8 will open (and potentially convert) it.


My preference, when I've had to maintain code with two different versions of LabVIEW, was to build a VM to hold the older version.  That way, the code stays very separate, and I'm much less likely to make mistakes.  I also recommend some form of code repository if you are planning a dual-version scenario to help you recover from the inevitable "Oops!" moment.

Message 3 of 8

Yes multiple versions of LV can be installed on the same machine.


That does not however apply to drivers and tool-kits. THe Installer for drivers and add-ons are implemented to only support a lmited number of versions 3-4. When you install version that is 5 revs or more beyonf the oldest, it will do a very thoruogh job of deleting what it does not support. So the older versions of LV will still be there and work, but their acess to the outside world via drivers or toll-kits will disapear.


For this reason I maitanin multiple PCs with multiple boots partitions.


The multiple PCs comes in very handy when one of my coworkers gets a project to tweak a LV 8.2 app since I can just lend them a machine and save them a day of feeding disks to do a 2 hour job.



Retired Senior Automation Systems Architect with Data Science Automation LabVIEW Champion Knight of NI and Prepper LinkedIn Profile YouTube Channel
Message 4 of 8

I have used oracles virtual box to do this ( I had LV) 2010 installed but needed to be able to use 8.6. Install virtualbox (its free) . Then all you need do is install OS then NI tools. Its reletivly easy




Please remember to accept any solutions and give kudos, Thanks

LV 8.6.1, LV2010,LV2011SP1, FPGA, Win7
Message 5 of 8

Bob and Ben


Instead of virtualization (bulky) can I have partitions (D: E:...)for Labview versions and the drivers, mainly cRIO ? I don't have multiple HDDs. Thanks. I appreciate your help. 


Best regards, Pavan 

0 Kudos
Message 6 of 8

Partitioning didn't work, even when I copied the install CD to F: for 2009 and chose the F: drive to install to. It installed things over in C:! Onto virtualization.


Best regards, Pavan 


win XP Labview 2009

0 Kudos
Message 7 of 8

I have often worked with several LabVIEW versions on the same partition.  The trick is source code control!  Trust me when your noob comes in a mixes everything up a backup of the SCC gets pretty handy.


VMs: I use them for old driver/ TK configurations and move my "no-longer supported by latest" LabVIEW version off the main machine.


Meanwhile - I do try to be an early adopter of NI software-  It's burned me a few times but its usually worthwhile.  (I've only had to rebuild 1 small project into a previous version to make my deliverables)



As to the order of installation.  Any order at all works-  but re-install latest last.  (There is only 1 of some components installed, like the app builder, 7.1 and previous don't check if there is a more recient version onboard)

"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 8 of 8