Leaderboard

LabVIEW never has been a money maker for NI directly. They were able to develop LabVIEW because of what they earned with their hardware sales. And LabVIEW was used to drive those hardware sales. A very successful model that drove others like HP Vee and such out of the market in the not very long term. Maybe HP/Agilent also was simply already to big for that market segment that they could possibly target with a product like this. The entire T&M component market isn't that huge. For HP it was what they had been starting with, but the big money was earned (and sometimes biggly lost) already in other areas. T&M was good for a steady revenue, but nothing that would stand out on the yearly shareholders report. It was unsexy for non-technicals and rather boring. That was one of the big reasons to separate HP into multiple companies. An attempt to create smaller entities that target a specific market segment and could be fine tuned in the sales and marketing efforts to the needs of that market. About 10 years ago NI reached the size where they started to feel the limitations of the T&M component market themselves. There simply was not a big enough market left that they could capture, to continue their standard double digits yearly sales grow for much longer. Some analysts were hired to look into this and their recommendations were pretty clear. Don't try to be the wholesale everything for all little parts manufacturer in T&M, but concentrate on specific areas where big corporations with huge production lines invest their test and measurement money. Their choice fell on semiconductor testing and more recently the EV market. It has a huge potential and rather than selling ten-thousends of DAQ boxes to hundreds of integrators, they now sell and deliver hundreds of fully assembled turnkey testers to those corporate users and earn with each of them more than they could ever earn with several 1000 DAQ boxes. What used to be NI's core business is nowadays a side line, at best a means to deliver some parts for those testers. But more and more a burden that costs a lot of money in comparison to the revenue it could even under ideal conditions generate. If you can understand this you also can guess where NI is heading. They won't die and their shares will likely not falter. But what they will be has little to do with what they used to be. If LabVIEW still has a place in this I do not know. Personally I think it would be better if it was under the parapluie of a completely separate entity than the new NI but I also have my doubts that that would have long term surviving chances. Earning enough money with a development environments itself is a feat that almost nobody has successfully managed for a longer period. But the sometimes heard request to Open Source LabVIEW has also not a lot of chances. It would likely cause a few people to take a peek at it and then quickly loose interest, since its code base is simply to complex. And there is also the problem that the current LabVIEW source code never could be open sourced as is. There are so many patent encumbered parts in it and 3rd party license dependencies, that nobody would be legally allowed to distribute even a single build of it without first hiring an entire law firm to settle those issues. While NI owns the rights for them or acquired a license to use them, many of these licenses do not give NI the right to simply let others use them as they wish. So open sourcing LabVIEW would be a fairly big investment in time and effort before it could be done. And who is willing to foot that bill?

You can call opkg install from the CLI and manually install a package you have copied over. Some discussion here where I built such a package. We use SystemLink which makes it easy to add the custom feeds and such, but hopefully this could help some?

Ehh why not... <gets chair and looks intensely at camera> I think that NI will sell in the next 2-3 years. I agree with X on the churn rate. There's zero chance NI comes out on top in the long term with this plan. NXG is dead; LabVIEW as a competitive language is no more from a professional standpoint. It's firmly an enthusiast language now. That means like other enthusiast languages it's user base will continue to shrink from here on out. Now you've got two options to deal with this problem; embrace it or hasten it's demise. NI is obviously going with the later. 2-3 (maybe 5?) years of increased revenue while people work their way off the LabVIEW bandwagon (which they were going to do anyways when NXG was nuked) and then they are moving on. It's possible NI just understands the 'make hay while the sun is shining' concept and are going to get every value out of the product in the next half decade because, either way, LabVIEW is dead weight on the company in 5-10 years. The other possibility is that subscription revenue has a higher impact on company value (on paper) than on-off sales. I think subs are a 2-3x multiplier on estimated value. If NI is looking to sell, moving everything to subs and holding for a couple years until they hit the peak of the revenue curve in 2025 and then shopping for a buyer makes the company look 50-100% more valuable than it was in 2021. All that's conjecture and theory. I'm more than happy to be proven incorrect, but I believe I am saying the quite part out loud here and I think that's a good thing. (I hope) Best Tim

I have validated this library against LibreOffice 7.2 and Windows 10.

Got it! I got the files installed, put them in a package build spec in the project explorer. Configured the source file to go where you said and wrote a simple script to run the ldconfig as a post install action. See screenshots below. I installed the package and ran the same test code that errored on deployment and it worked great this time. No manual moving of libraries on my end. Package attached. Thanks for all the help! openg-zip_1.0.0-2_x64.ipk

Hi Lavans I'm working on releasing our Medulla ViPER Dependency Injection Framework to the community as an open source project. ViPER has been a labor of love that I have been working on for close to 8 years. The motivation to develop ViPER was to reduce the cost, time and frustration involved in deploying test systems in highly regulated industries such as medical device manufacturing. The big problem that ViPER solves is that change does not require you to perform a full top to bottom verification of the system, only the new or changed component needs to be verified. We used ViPER at Cochlear to test implants and sound processors and is the standard architecture used within the enterprise. ViPER was also used to develop a system to parallel test up to 100 Trophon 2 units simultaneously for Nanosonics by implementing a Test Server running on an NI Industrial Controller. HMI Clients were implemented on tablets for operators, engineers and admins. Although ViPER is useful for test its not used just for test systems, you can build any system with ViPER. ViPER is a plugin architecture, it implements a recursive factory creator that injects pre-built (and verified) components into a system at runtime defined by a Object Definition Document. ViPER can build rich and deep object hierarchies, even inject into ancestors as well. Components include soft front panels and attribute and configuration viewer and are built on GDS4 class architecture. ViPER systems are also slim and efficient because they are not carrying around redundant classes in their builds that may or may not be needed. ViPER includes an Object Editor that allows you to create or edit the Object Definition Document but is also a useful engineering tool allowing you to navigate the object hierarchy, configure and launch Soft Front Panels for any sub objects. Included is a Project template that allows you to create your own ViPER Components. I presented ViPER the GLA Summit last year and to the Sydney LabVIEW User Group, I've posted the Video of the presentation on LinkedIn, I'm keen to find a few gurus to have play with it before I release it. ViPER: A Dependency Injection Framework for LabVIEW Cheers Kurt