When is good to use Labview and when is good to use Lab windows/cvi?

[Steo]

I'm new to NI's automation softwares. As far as I know, Labview seems more graphical base. But I want to know which tool is more popular in test engineering field? And why? In what cases, we use Labview or Lab windows/cvi the best? Thanks for the replies.

[bilg]

Here is one man's opinion.
It seems that LabView is better in the case where "I just want to get this quick data and plot it,... just this one time." But I think that as "test software", CVI is better. I once had a programmer (who seemed pretty experienced at LabView) always complain when changes were needed to a test program. While the program was small, this was not so difficult, but as the loops became more complex, he used to swear a lot.
For test software, I like CVI. First, I have lots of C code that can be reused. And second, I could never get into the graphical boxes associated with loops... they just seemed more difficult to impliment the desired algorithm.
But, LabView is way more popular, at least that's the way it seems. The vast majority of classes that NI offers are for LabView.
But the support for CVI is good, both from the app engineer support point of view, and from the list of available functions, library routines, etc.
The one downside of CVI is the lack of a good report generator. I ended up using WORD via Active X, and its ok, but just barely. Other than that, I like CVI. I can do a fairly nice GUI, reuse old C code, get the report with graphs and text, all without the pain of MFCs, etc... Its good stuff
Good luck

[test_man]

I agree with Bilg.
We use labview for our validation lab where we do life tests, button cycling but we use CVI for all our production needs.
I think NI advertise Labview more than CVI.
If your program is very complex and big CVI would be a better choice.
If not all, most of things Labview offers, can be done with CVI.
Good luck.

Sheetal

[RobertoBozzolo]

I agree with all the preceding opinions and I can add my 2 cents.

I do prefere CVI because it is a compiler. That is, I can test in the IDE and debug the whole application easy and with powerful debugging tools, but the final release is an executable which the operator is not able to modify. This guarantees repeteability of testing conditions, which is a must in testing equipments where you have to comply with all quality standards and paper and so on.

To use LabVIEW in this respect, I will have to deal with the application builder, which in my opinion is painful and produces *huge* executables (similar applications I have developed in both environments run from less than 1 MB of EXE and UIRs in CVI vs. 6.5 MB in LabVIEW).

LabVIEW is easier to learn if you are NOT a traditional programmer: if you start from scratch you have a fast learning curve, while if you are accustomed to text programming the transition towards graphical environment can be hard and slow.

Apart from this, LabVIEW is powerful and for a precise choice of NI it is always one step ahead of CVI, so if you need *now* the state of the art LV is a better choice.

There are also some items which till now can only be obtained with LV: among them real-time programming with RT DAQ boards and PDA programming.

[Ray.R]

Also look at the comments here

😉

[Ben10]

I agree with everything written above, but I think that the bottom line is that if you are an experienced programmer who used to write code lines, you will prefer CVI. If not - you will prefer LabView.

[Siddu 140]

Even i agree with the experts view. To add on from my work point of view, we find CVI easy to develop IVI drivers as it comes with a Driver Development Wizard. When you work with different instruments or drivers CVI would be easy for writing Test Scripts. In the other case, for developing applications over acquisition, analysis & presentation of data over real time aspects or working with reconfigurable boards supplied by NI or other Boards which NI normally integrates with LabView, programming would be easy in Labview.

Regards,
Siddu