Leaderboard

Yes you can. The official form is at https://www.ni.com/en/forms/perpetual-software-licenses-labview.html Some things to keep in mind: There is a current promotion (valid till the end of December 2024) where those who used to have an SSP can renew it today as if the SSP never expired in the first place. That means you can get the latest version of LabVIEW, under a perpetual license, at a discounted price (compared to buying it "new"): https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/LabVIEW-subscription-model-for-2022/m-p/4398958#M1296289 Quotes/sales are now handled by external distributors, rather than Emerson/NI. Lots of people have reported that they didn't get a response to their quote requests, or didn't get the expected discount applied. If that's the case, message Ahmed Eisawy, the Director of Test Software Commercialization (who wrote the forum post in my link above) and he'll get it sorted out.

Totaly justified by productivity gains brought by all the amazing new features, right? Someone has to pay for the NXG failure I guess.

As of yesterday, November 18, the Perpetual licenses for LabVIEW and LabVIEW+ are officially back and should be directly orderable through the normal LabVIEW order page . But yes compared to before when the subscription was pushed down our throat the costs have significantly increased. I would say it is almost a 2.5* price increase if I remember correctly. The current Professional Developer price is higher than what the Developer Suite used to be back then, which also included LabVIEW Realtime and LabVIEW FPGA and just about any possible toolkit there was.

We bought a new perpetual license of LabVIEW for our VIA a few months ago. It worked just like the old one. I was able to add it to the VLA software, then create disconnected licenses for my users, or machines. The discount offered was frankly way more than we were expecting. It wasn't in the budget this year, but my manager was able to push it through. When this year is up, we will look into if it makes financial sense to purchase another year or not. I think we skipped 3 years of software buying, so upper management was happy to have saved those years in software cost, and am grateful we didn't take NI up on their offer to get a locked in price for 3 years on the subscription model. Oh and as for Windows 11, it doesn't have to be all bad. We have a set of software that gets installed on a base Windows 11 that uses OpenShell to bring the start menu back, ExplorerPatcher, and a couple WinAero Tweaker settings to do things like have the normal context menu, bring paint back, set remote desktop, and various other things people are used to. None of my users so far have realized it isn't Windows 10. These tweaks shouldn't be necessary, but at least there is options to make it better.

I checked on a system where I had VIPM 2013 installed and looked in the support/ogb_2009.llb. Maybe your newer VIPM has an improved ogb_2009.llb. Also check out the actual post I updated the image.

Not quite! It's better to actually modify the Copy Resource Files and Relink.vi. Just add an additional case structure to handle shared libraries. The VI in question is this one: This will unconditionally change the linking name of all shared libraries in your build. There is a possibility that that is not desired although I can't think of a reason why that could be a problem right now. Fixup Shared Library Name.vi

There is to my knowledge no way to modify the JKI Builder. Although I think they did fix in recent years a bug that sounded exactly like what I ran across. But the JKI Builder has many other limitations that I'm not fond of so I still rely on my own setup. I basically use ogrsc_builder_3.0.0.11 for the renaming of the VI hierarchy with the opglib prefix with one modifications and then a heavily modified version of the OpenG Package Builder to package everything into the OpenG package. One caveat here, the ogrsc_builder_3.0.0 is from ca. 2009 times (and in 8.6 source code version). It will likely not go well with modern lvclass' and lvlib's and even more likely with lvlibp's files. It does have support for at least lvclass and lvlib but that is most likely fairly unmature seeing when it was last touched. lvclass and lvlib still were fairly new back then and had several quirks even in LabVIEW itself. I changed deep in the belly of the OpenG Builder in OpenG\build\ogb.llb\Copy Resource Files and Relink VIs__ogb.vi, that for shared library names the file name is changed back to the previous <file name>*.* with some magic to detect the 32 or 64 in the file name if present. It's not fail safe and for that not a fix that I would propose for inclusion in a public tool, but it does the job for me. What basically goes wrong is that when LabVIEW loads the VIs, it replaces to magic place holders with the real values in the paths in the VIs in memory and when you then Read the Linker Info to massage that for renaming VIs, you receive these new fully resolved paths and when you then write back the modified linker info you cement the not-platform neutral naming into the VIs and save it to disk. The OpenG Package Builder modifications mainly have to do with a more detailed selection of package content and special settings to more easily allow multi-platform support for shared library and other binary compiled content. In terms of user experience it is the total opposite of VIPM. It would overwhelm the typical user with way to many options and details that it could be useful for most. I had hoped to integrate the hierarchy renaming into the Package Builder too, since the information in the Package Builder would be basically enough to do that, but looking at the core of the OpenG Builder in Build Applciation__ogb.vi will for sure make you get the shivers to try to reimplement that in any useful way. 😁 And yes the naming of the tools is a bit confusing. The OpenG Builder is the tool that massages an existing hierarchy into a new on with VI renaming and relocating them into a configurable tree and fixing up relative paths to be correct for the new names and locations, while the OpenG Package Builder grabs a list of files and simply pushes them into an OpenG package (basically a ZIP file with configuration file). It would be quite useful to integrate the OpenG Builder as an extra prepare step into the OpenG Package Builder but that is a taunting exercise.

Welcome back. Retirement not all it was cracked up to be? My only comment about this (because I still use LV 2009-best version ever) is that generally: Never do it in the middle of a project. Upgrading LabVIEW is a huge project risk. Don't upgrade if the software already works and you are adding to it (only use it on new projects). Only upgrade if everyone else in your team upgrades at the same time. Upgrade if there are specific features you cannot do without. Upgrade if it will greatly reduce the time to delivery (unlikely but it has been known). Upgrade if there is a project stopping bug that is addressed in the upgrade you are considering. Remember that you can have multiple versions on the same machine. You don't need (and should never) go and recompile all your old projects.

Welcome back! Yes we remember you 🙂 So I think you can now actually buy perpetual licenses again. I have not needed to do this myself as my org has an enterprise agreement with NI, but it is possible (I think...)

Welcome to the forums! Yes this is exactly how the good old perpetual license works. Even without SSP the license is valid indefinitely. At my work we also stayed with LabVIEW 2019 for our codebase. The old licenses are still valid and haven’t been renewed. We have an additional subscription license for support reasons, though.

@hooovahh Is still weeding out the spam. I think he's in the eastern US time zone so he's 3 hrs. ahead of me ☺️. Much thanks to him. But I'm also improving the filters. Unfortunately, I think there are some sleeper accounts that were created before the changes that are starting to post. But, yes, I think it's getting much better. BTW, I just discovered that if you ctrl+right click a posted image you can set its' size! neat.