Leaderboard

I think this is a great decision. Admitting they made a mistake is a bold and courageous step. Onwards and upwards from here.

So this was posted on the NI forums: https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Our-Commitment-to-LabVIEW-as-we-Expand-our-Software-Portfolio/td-p/4101878?profile.language=en

I am happy that they finally realized, that the NXG idea is a way far from being somewhat practical or pragmatic. I am very sad it took NI so long to understand it. If I were NI I would probably go for changing the underlying engine and software stack and would rewrite LabVIEW completely, if I realize that the LabVIEW source code has reached it's end-of-life state and is very hard to maintain. This was one of the driving forces according to the information I got from NI during CLA Summit 2019. But I would never ever change (at first) the interface to the Users and to Developers and re-invent core concepts of LabVIEW just because I can. Then I would probably start adding new features and slowly adding value to the community. I would not ever threaten people by saying that "NXG is the Future", "Programming is optional" and "It is better to start switching to NXG now, because one day we will inevitably stop LabVIEW development".

You can do this. I thought that was the main reason for adding interfaces ☺️. BTW, if you're using LV2020 and classes, the new OpenGDS beta version makes it easy to work with interfaces 🙂

AQ leaves, NXG gets shelved. Insert your rumour-mongering and conspiracy theories here