Just looked at the LabVIEW Real-Time Idea Exchange and noticed that only one idea is marked completed, and two more (both posted in 2009, nearly 5 years ago) are "In Development." Those ideas aren't even the top-kudoed ones. NI - why ask for ideas for improvements, and then not implement any of them? (Yes, I have a personal interest here - the second-most kudoed idea in the real-time area is one of mine.)
Wow there are some really good ideas in there. Going to spend some time kudoing them, not that I'm sure it will mean anything. Thanks for bringing attention to this.
I was about to ask the same thing yesterday but wasn't sure if those two ideas had been implemented and just not updated. I agree completely - it would be good to see some response, even a reason why it won't happen is better than just being ignored.
True it's a shame that the RT section is generally ignored, I go there about once a month to check new ideas but I don't use RT products alot so I haven't had good ideas to post there.
Another problem with the whole idea exchange is that it doesn't seem to be updated very much by NI, duplicate idea are quicly marked as duplicates but I guess that's because users report them as duplicates ; but so may ideas are still "new"... a buch of them have been implemented (not because they were posted and voted up, but because they were in NI's plan anyway) and the rest well... too few are actually being reviewed and marked as "declined".
We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.
First off let me say thanks to you and all of the Idea Exchange contributors. The whole purpose of the Idea Exchange is for you, the users of the NI Platform, to bring your considerable experience to the table as we continue adding features and functionality to the NI Platform. Your passion is one of the primary forces that causes the NI Platform to grow and change in varous ways so that the application challenges of scientists and engineers all over the world can be solved.
There are many user suggestions across the whole Idea Exchange for us to weigh when considering how to allocate our development resources. We try to judiciously consider which ideas will have the biggest impact on the NI Platform users, and as a result we often have to say "no" or "wait" to some ideas so we can say "yes" to others. You're definitely correct that the statuses need to be updated and I'll be doing so in the near future. Though this may give the impression of being ignored, I want to assure you that the ideas are read and evaluated by the R&D and Product Marketing departments with careful thought and deliberate intent.
We hope that events such as NIWeek bolster your confidence in the progress of the NI Platform as you see the new hardware and software features being introduced. Though you may not see an immeadiate reward for your dilligence in suggesting ideas, please continue submitting your ideas. The long term effect will be a powerful platform of products designed to meet the community's needs. Thank you for your continued support and engagement.
I don't want to be harsh, but that is the most marketing based answer you could have given. Asking for suggestions on product development, then not updating progress on the suggestions for 5 years is quite discouraging.
The quality of suggestions by users will be affected by NI's ability to provide feedback. It was even an idea that NI must respond to the top ideas. I look forward to NI's updating of these suggestions.