AMSLLC

Chris, I do not have a copy of the book but if budget prevails later this year I will look to pick up a copy. At one time I was a big developer with NIH Image (in pascal on Mac). I put together a number of really unique systems but have always felt that since the primetime of the Mac (early and mid 90's) nothing really came close to NIH Image, the Mac, and the various frame grabbers we used at that time. Even till now. I tested an early version of IMAQ around 1997 and NI was copying various routines from NIH Image (public domain) but adding new things too. I kind of went to more part time imaging since I could do more LabView than IMAQ, and with job changes imaq has been something I used only every now and then. Perhaps a few things that may help: I worked with PhD's in various imaging areas, or careers in imaging after PhD, and they often have strong opinions. Don't take them too seriously. If you have read the various textbooks on imaging outside of Gonzalez and Wintz (sp?) you know how opinionated and unusual the field really is. I personally enjoy the hands on practical development area you cover as I see in the table of contents. Despite what the opinionated semi-math major imagers think, the area you cover is well work a text too. CRC usually publishes good material so I don't think the text would be bad if they publish it. They do charge highly though. You might consider a more theoretical area follow-up text just to give it a broader scope, but thats entirely up to you. All for now,

John Thanks a great deal for taking the issue seriously. Having worked in R&D I understand the need to keep it near. NI R&D is some of the best out there and I appreciate the work they do. I really do appreciate the thoughts and considerations on the topic and keeping it in discussion. Of course your poor R&D guys need a free flight to the next Honolulu NI Week too.... Thanks again and I hope to come to an NI week one of these years, since I have tried for more than ten years and have yet to make it, with the month of August being almost universally out for me. Thanks for listening.

Yeah but have you checked the price of the tickets for bringing your global sales force to Austin in August versus one month later or two months later. I know how a lot of companies do travel planning and just have people do bookings and reimbursements, etc. However, and I can gurantee you, that you pay much, much, much, more for tickets in August. Now you said global. The difference of flying international in August versus other months, something I am familiar with, is usually 100%. The only weeks more expensive than flying the first several weeks of August are the two weeks before Christmas. I gurantee it. To fly say 1000 sales force from international locations at a 100% premium seems really high to me, as in millions of dollars. Add that to the dometic US fares which in August are often 50 to 100% higher than almost all other times and we are talking millions and millions of dollars. Not to mentions those who attend who have to pay, I was just talking NI sales forces so far. You also mention the Convention Center. If NI has no pull to get the months wanted at the Convention Center by now I can give you about 100 other Convention Centers begging for you to come. Some of the best organizational meeting that I have attended rotate locations because they get such incredible deals by calling around. Try it, call a few places in Florida or you want cheap call some places in smaller towns with fantasitc Convention Centers. They exist all over the place. I have been to huge meeting in Minneapolis, Toronto, Sarasota, Atlanta, Orlando, Ft Laud, Miami, mid sized towns in upstate NY, etc, etc which had some impressive Convention and hotel accomodations. There is no way one can justify Austin in August based on price. Tradtional maybe, ease of doing what was done before, maybe, but certianly not price, certainly not on airfares, certainly not becuase of lack of Convention Centers available in the US and Canada. I think if you actually look at the numbers by calling around and looking at plane fares paid versus other months that Austin in August might be the most expensive time you could ever have a meeting. And with most people on vacation or starting school (later August years) your attendance is only half the potential it could be. I kid you not. All the best at NI week this year, sorry I have vacation plans......

Yeah but they never had to make duel paths in the first place. AI vi's have been around since LV started and always worked great. If they wanted to make them different when they went to LV 7 they could have just taken the AI VI's and made them something like the Daqmx ones but with similarities to AI. I can understand wanting sometimes to start fresh, but on the other hand I am reminded on my days working in scientific application development for a large institution. Every so often some management would come in and reassign everything for some reason or the other. It never did anything for the people doing real work, but it made some people look like they did something. I would not go that far with NI here, but the concept of over-managed development of new features enters into my mind at least. I am going to use whatever is out there that I need to as a developer and since I follow things I have been aware of what I need to do, but some people will not understand this transition of AI to daqmx like NI thinks as just an obvious to the Austin crowd and as this post shows. AI VI's are in millions of applications so I see a bit of a unusual transition for some and perhaps a bit of overmanaged development here.

I wonder how many millions of people are asking these same questions. I am not sure why NI has so degraded the traditional DAQ VI's. For years there were often several sets of VI's that did the same things and both would be installed during normal installs. It seems that even though millions of programs are out there with traditional DAQ, and will someday be brought into LV 8, NI has decided to call them infernal legacy VI's or something even though they still exist. I love some DAQmx VI's such as AO which I find much more reliable, but I also still like the traditional VI's. I think NI took the wrong stance with traditional daq. Sometimes the aspect I don't like on the new ones is that they polymorph to anything, sometimes even with an accidental click when zipping through various VI's, etc.

I think it unlikely that you can be successful. It is hard enough to get these systems to identify bad parts on a PCB but the subtle aspects of a human, no chance any time soon, at least not with these toolsets. I have seen systems setup with some 20 years development and imaging or optics PhD's on staff where they kind of crudely work but there are many many pitfalls. Again, some work kind of crudely but are used at a few airports from what I hear.

I have brought this up with people at NI but I don't think it has been ever looked at seriously. That is that NIweek is placed at the wrong time of the year for most to attend. When it occurs early in August this is the total peak family vacation time. Don't believe it? Try to get some vacation plane flights for early August. I guess I am not too different from most because that is when we often take a vacation or travel overseas, etc. When it occurs later in August it often interferes with the exact starting week for school in most places in the US. Ok so NI week serves well those who don't take vacations and don't have kids or go to college, university, etc. What about the rest of us? Would it kill NI, to move NI week to another time in the year? I don't recall it ever being in another part of the year but it may have been. :!: Please, NI, change the month of NI week. :!: Thanks

Great observation!! I think what happened is they copied aspects of the "VI Properties>>Allow user to resize window" by accident. Just the parts on the grab handle. Of course it still resizes so they got that part right. On the other hand maybe it was intentional, although it seems kind of contrary I'll have to actually start using LV8 on a project, well at least the one on my desk to do.

Just be sure all your devices are showing up in MAX. I have seen the error before several times when devices used no longer showup in MAX. In W98 that happened occasionally just because W98 was pretty unreliable and would lose card configuration info. You certainly see it less in W-XP but sometimes a person has been pulling on cables on PC cards and the card is not seated properly, etc. Just be sure everything shows up in MAX properly, that you use correct device numbers when initializing the device (look at MAX and your program to be sure the device number is the same). Good luck with it.

You can certainly do an amazing amount of things with labView with little work in comparison to other environments, however, after reading your post a few times you are going to need more than just some base student edition. It is true that LabView costs a great deal compared to other environments, but it is the lowest cost to develop with especially when it comes to some of the things you want to do. The support and hardware capabilites of LabView are without real equivalents (except to other NI products....!). I would check to see if your university engineering department has a more complete package available. You can buy the student package to start with, but use the schools entire package for the more complex things you want to do.

I wanted to thank the many posters who have followed up continue on with thread. Thanks especially to crelf, Louis Manfredi, Michael (the "Greek") Aivaliotis, justin, Chris, Irene, and Jim (the "King") Kring. I am much more positive about the whole matter but here is what it breaks down for me: Positives :thumbup: --------- 1) Can learn a ton in process, just learn a whole, whole, lot 2) make new contacts all over place 3) pick up jobs by having cert and doing process as many have mentioned Negatives :thumbdown: ---------- 1) current structure of certification process is too large, complex, etc 2) I gave up guaranteed jobs in government and industry to be independant LabView'r because it made my family life a ton easier. My wife is a professional but we like our kids and some things go first in life. If I take all the extra time and effort to do all the certs, well, I am sort of going back to what I gave up in first place. 3) The process is kind of a snub on the older LabView community circa early 90's, guys like me who where around when nobody cared, and helped bring lots of people to LabView in first place, got our training the hard way without all these classes that are around, etc. So for me, at the moment, it is grey but is essentially negated by my negative item #2. I actually have some time at the moment, but not sure I have that much time.... I suppose there are other issues about the whole process that have been brought out to be debated. I think it is good to debate it.

Its all a matter of how much you want to write versus buy and use. If you want to write it, I would look at several items out there including "Test Sequencers". That has always been a positive model for NI and LabViewers. Also take a look at dynamic loading and execution. The ever popular state machine is an alternative. You can always just buy TestStand. One can fairly easily stick to execution of a set of tasks till complete with TestStand. You don't even write anything other than the guts of the test or whatever it is you are doing (you write in LabView). TestStand is a type of model of execution I mention above as a "test sequencer". To some extent I don't advise TestStand if your model does fit what it does. One can modify TestStand but you may as well stay in LabView if you are doing heavy mods of the model. Get your NI sales rep to show you TestStand before you write, and if budget provides.

I hoped you solved the problem, and not that this helps but I ran into a similar problem with my dynamic loader that I use on lots of test setups. But it occurred on just one customer computer and no other computer so that I could duplicate what was going on. I could not see anything obvious, and so on just that one system I included a bunch of subvi during initialization and the problem seemed to go away. I was convinced there was something about the early version of Win XP on that system but not exactly sure on that. That was LV 7.1 and probably the first XP released.

What comes to my mind is temperature testing VI's with thermocouples, on SCXI chasis. I think some of NI's own examples in that area do just what you ask. I think the processing is simply getting a "mean" temperature to record though.

Yes well just put a condition to stop the execution of the start event activities while they are executing. That is inside the start event activities be sure you also check for some sort of exit or termination condition (in this case not event triggered but checking a flag of some kind).

I haven't got the upgrade myself but I use the old version in dozens of test sets. It is really a super product, don't be discouraged by this experience, and as mentioned looks like you get the upgrade.

Well I'll take the beer, but intellectual pride some like to feel motivates, nah not my bag. I'll take being married to life and wife, not LabView. In all serious, thanks for many good thoughts by many here and the link earlier as mentioned.

You are still alluding to the same positive side that I am actually agreeing with you on. No, NI, being envious of MS for making "certified" people and making half the alliance members misfits seems unwise to me. I have seen other NI mistakes over years, I was a huge beta tester of TesStand and I advised tons of changes many that made it in. As to making misfits of alliance members because that is not the angle some wanted to pursue (certification) (not the learning or "good" you bring up) I don't see it. I have worked with certified alliance members too, some with good technique, some I simply would advise avoiding. I see it as a negative by NI overall, and really a MS envy type of play some manager probably got a bonus for.

You can put it in Greek, we all want to hear (see) it.... Although I understand what you are saying, I was hoping to get a few more of the truly freelance styled alliance members posting here. Perhaps they have, not sure, but the ones I know from work over years are now no longer seen on alliance webpage resource. I think NI took a wrong step here despite what you are saying. Stepping on feet of ones allies is probably not all that wise, even though it looks good on paper. There probably is a way to say that in Greek but well, I don't know Greek...

Super thanks Chris once again, great link. I suppose it would help if I actually looked at all the NI mailing on certification since I kind of just keep them on a pile or two, or circular file..... Perhaps a true academic styled NI teacher. Some of us remember G. Johnson's first book and before. It has been a fun career thats for sure. I sure hope NI does not implode someday. There are aspects about this whole certification, sales type of driven rather than application use type driven that concerns me. I can't answer about the future on that, but I remember NI well before it was a stock Company, and I do have doubts now more than past. Early on the future of NI seemed real super positive, but with engineering psoitions in US on decline, and combined with the whole certification thing kind of undermining about 50% (just a guess) of the alliance members I do have my concerns today. Basically the whole NI alliance program was cut in half by certification. Oh sure they are still in the alliance, but it seems really undermined to me.

Thanks Chris, yes it is about 2+ hours from me that I know. Actually a long time customer I work with has 4 guys who have taken basics I and II plus more, and done all kinds of work but they still had me set everything, and I mean a real real lot, up for them. I meant to snag the books on I and II just to have them and then read for test. As mentioned I learned LV in 1990-1991 timeframe so I will have to look at it a bit differently and more "textbooky" than the way it was when I did some pretty incredible things.

I don't have any doubt I can learn a ton, I think you misundersood my point. Actually what you describe would be "good" I could get for sure. I don't go for the intellectual pride aspect of it though. Learn, yes I need that, for pride, nah maybe another time. My problem is more the time/money and the fact I simply can not do the needed travel at the moment. Perhaps that will change soon, we will see. I guess one has to look at the good in the process, and as stated there is a real positive side too. Actually I went freelance because it made time with the kids possible, but I'm not a woman as the discussion has been sidelined towards. Just a guy doing my part. Perhaps there is a way to do this without the travel and splitting time slices even more. Don't know.

If you were your own employer instead of an employee I think you would be saying the same thing as me. It is one thing to play along with the office talk but entirely another to run ones own business. But I hear the voice of the practical too....

Wow, I had a boss like that once. I am glad I don't work for him!

I hear you Ben. On the other hand I am a one man shop, it is one thing to work in a company paying for it all but if I take a month off to read a bunch of books and travel to test locations I think my bottom line would just about die. I may have to go that route, unfortunately. Actually I taught a course in LabView in about '94 or '95 or something at a large government facility. I was a bigger NI promotor than most who are out there writing these tests. I remember telling my class not to get caught up in models but each person should find their own kind of model while looking to what is out there for code assistance (ok steal code from people). I guess I'll have to tell myself that some guys book really does have all the answers. Actually it isn't academics that we are talking either. Academics are something I enjoyed at one point and at this point are almost a hinderance if I applied at some jobs. Try explaining research to an employer and the eyes start to look tired and strained.... But I hear the pragmatic advice.... Thanks for the thoughts. I always did LabView because a) I enjoyed it, and b) it got work done that almost no-one else could do. I don't think you are agreeing with Ben! Again you are suggesting commitment is your motto. How does this test infer commitment? See your way of talking LabView and mine really differ. I always impart to companies that they could not get the job done because they WERE using the wrong platform (like C++ or whatever), that is always my angle on LabView. If I read you correctly you don;t care what platform they use it is all just a job. No way. I save companies a bundle by using LabView I know it.