Michael Aivaliotis

Looking for a new profession?

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

I'm using my own installer builder for my LabVIEW app. I now want to include some NI drivers. What is the best approach? I don't want to use the NI installer builder. I've seen this here, but not sure if the output of this can be called from my 3rd party installer builder. What have others done? https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA00Z000000fyxySAA&l=en-US

Having a bad day? 😀

I worked in Toronto for many years in the past and can tell you that this is nothing new. The "market" for LabVIEW in that area is not very strong. I don't know why, but it's always been like that. There are definitely LabVIEW "Hubs", where there are more opportunities. It also highly depends on if there is a concentration of companies that use LabVIEW in one area. For example, the SF Bay Area where I am now has many job opportunities. LabVIEW users\developers knowledgeable with the language jump from company to company spreading the word. What makes LabVIEW grow is the same as it was from inception. Someone falls in love with the language and becomes an evangelist that then carries the torch and spreads the word. NIWeek was definitely the "church", where we brought others to hear the "good word". Whether we like it or not, my friends, this is a religion...

I'm thinking of going. Anyone else?

VI Shots is looking to hire a full-time software developer with experience in LabVIEW. Please see posting here: vishots.com/careers

How Software Companies Die – Orson Scott Card The environment that nurtures creative programmers kills management and marketing types - and vice versa. Programming is the Great Game. It consumes you, body and soul. When you're caught up in it, nothing else matters. When you emerge into daylight, you might well discover that you're a hundred pounds overweight, your underwear is older than the average first grader, and judging from the number of pizza boxes lying around, it must be spring already. But you don't care, because your program runs, and the code is fast and clever and tight. You won. You're aware that some people think you're a nerd. So what? They're not players. They've never jousted with Windows or gone hand to hand with DOS. To them C++ is a decent grade, almost a B - not a language. They barely exist. Like soldiers or artists, you don't care about the opinions of civilians. You're building something intricate and fine. They'll never understand it. Beekeeping - Here's the secret that every successful software company is based on: You can domesticate programmers the way beekeepers tame bees. You can't exactly communicate with them, but you can get them to swarm in one place and when they're not looking, you can carry off the honey. You keep these bees from stinging by paying them money. More money than they know what to do with. But that's less than you might think. You see, all these programmers keep hearing their fathers' voices in their heads saying "When are you going to join the real world?" All you have to pay them is enough money that they can answer (also in their heads) "Jeez, Dad, I'm making more than you." On average, this is cheap. And you get them to stay in the hive by giving them other coders to swarm with. The only person whose praise matters is another programmer. Less-talented programmers will idolize them; evenly matched ones will challenge and goad one another; and if you want to get a good swarm, you make sure that you have at least one certified genius coder that they can all look up to, even if he glances at other people's code only long enough to sneer at it. He's a Player, thinks the junior programmer. He looked at my code. That is enough. If a software company provides such a hive, the coders will give up sleep, love, health, and clean laundry, while the company keeps the bulk of the money. Out of Control - Here's the problem that ends up killing company after company. All successful software companies had, as their dominant personality, a leader who nurtured programmers. But no company can keep such a leader forever. Either he cashes out, or he brings in management types who end up driving him out, or he changes and becomes a management type himself. One way or another, marketers get control. But...control of what? Instead of finding assembly lines of productive workers, they quickly discover that their product is produced by utterly unpredictable, uncooperative, disobedient, and worst of all, unattractive people who resist all attempts at management. Put them on a time clock, dress them in suits, and they become sullen and start sabotaging the product. Worst of all, you can sense that they are making fun of you with every word they say. Smoked Out - The shock is greater for the coder, though. He suddenly finds that alien creatures control his life. Meetings, Schedules, Reports. And now someone demands that he PLAN all his programming and then stick to the plan, never improving, never tweaking, and never, never touching some other team's code. The lousy young programmer who once worshiped him is now his tyrannical boss, a position he got because he played golf with some sphincter in a suit. The hive has been ruined. The best coders leave. And the marketers, comfortable now because they're surrounded by power neckties and they have things under control, are baffled that each new iteration of their software loses market share as the code bloats and the bugs proliferate. Got to get some better packaging. Yeah, that's it. Originally from Windows Sources: The Magazine for Windows Experts, March 1995

So we are all meeting up again this year? Yay?

I think you're more of a sidekick.

The online stuff is OK, but nothin beats in-person. NIWeek used to be where I connected with the community, met old friends and made new ones. It's sad really.

I would use a PXI chassis with an NI embedded controller. However, you need to decide if you get a Linux controller to run LabVIEW Real-Time or Windows. It depends on what you want to do. It sounds like you have some power in the decision-making, so I would look at what the final outcome should be and work your way back from that. If existing components can be used, fine, but don't be married to them. Sometimes creating the glue that sticks old stuff together is a headache. Question what the issues are with the current system and see how things can be improved or automated to save time and operator errors. At the end of the day, if you are responsible for the outcome then you want to put your best foot forward. Let someone else higher up slash your budget if they have to but do a proper design. If everything works, nobody will question your decision, but if it fails, then you will have to justify why you cut corners and didn't go for the better solution. As far as licensing, get what is most cost-effective for your team, assuming more than one person will be developing with LabVIEW. You don't need a full LabVIEW license if you are running an executable or doing Real-Time. But of course you probably know that already. I've worked in Aerospace, Semiconductor and a multitude of other industries about the same amount of time as you.

Thanks for that link. However, that post is for running LabVIEW on MacOS natively, not inside of parallels with Windows.

Does anyone have any experience running LabVIEW on Parallels on the new M1 Macs? I need to upgrade my Intel Mac to an M1 and was wondering if there are any gotchas. I already know that I need Windows11 ARM. But will that work ok with LabVIEW and how about the drivers? Will Windows emulation cover all the issues?

Yes, empty string is invalid JSON, but so could be malformed text, which is more serious than an empty string which could imply reading a non-existent JSON item. How should I handle reading JSON files where data elements are missing? I like having the default data input so if an item is missing, it returns the default, of course. But now I have to write special code for every node. What is the best practice when using this toolkit for this use-case? I guess I could create custom wrappers. But I wanted to avoid the extra work for something that's common. Am I using it wrong?