Worst LabVIEW design feature

[Ton Plomp]

What do you even mean by this? Who needs more than one mouse button? ...Me, my mouse is a 17 button with scroll wheel that also has a middle click (so I guess 18 buttons) To be fair I only use 5 of the buttons, but I don't see how not liking the auto tool means I like one mouse button. If anything it means I like using more than one mouse button for Shift + Right click.

I meant that ignoring such a basic feature (auto-tool) that is very good (I mean very good) just because you don't want to spent the time to use it, is like being Apple (or NI in some cases) wher they ignore the popularity of basic things of life (like a right mouse button for a long time.

In hindsight I might have been a bit harsh in that comment.

Anyway, it's good that there are several bad things in LabVIEW.

Ton

[hooovahh]

I meant that ignoring such a basic feature (auto-tool) that is very good (I mean very good) just because you don't want to spent the time to use it, is like being Apple (or NI in some cases) wher they ignore the popularity of basic things of life (like a right mouse button for a long time.

In hindsight I might have been a bit harsh in that comment.

Anyway, it's good that there are several bad things in LabVIEW.

Ton

It's okay if you were a little harsh, I'm in a good mood and didn't take it personally but if I was having a bad day who knows where I would have went. It's not often I compared to Apple.

I don't like auto-tool, I can't give a reason that I don't, I can't say a programmer would be faster/slower with it, I've just not used it very often and am use to not having it, and that's a bad reason to not like something. It was mostly meant to be a joke with Asbo, who I know likes the auto tool and he posted it as a Best LabVIEW feature. I like having tools for programming, and productivity. I use a couple of quick launch keys, as well as a few others to help me do what I need faster. I've just never like auto-tool, but if NI enforced auto-tool with no option to turn it off I would adapt for sure.

And just to get on a new topic, I hate how LabVIEW will not open a VI with the correct version of LabVIEW, it will simply open it with the last one that was opened. So if I open LabVIEW 8.0, then open LabVIEW 7.1, then double click a LabVIEW 8.0 VI it will give a dialog like "I know this VI was saved in 8.0 and I can tell that 8.0 is open but I tried opening it with 7.1 and I couldn't, try opening this VI with LabVIEW 8.0" Seriously NI? If you can tell what versions I have installed, and you can obviously tell what version the VI is, why would choose to open it in a version that is unsupported? I realize there may be more than one version that can open it, but why would you ever choose a version that can't open it?

[jgcode]

I can't say a programmer would be faster/slower with it

RE: Speed - Darren recommends it - need more be said

2) "Shared Variables" lets take the danger of globals and allow the devlopment of race conditions across platforms? While we are at we can tell the world they are the answer to everything, and lets lock down all of the functionality so users have to wait half a year to get a fix (maybe) and for bonus points let's make our DSC product dependent on them... Wait... We can move all support for the low level stuff to another continent and implement a 24 hour e-mail delay in replies like "BridgeVIEW? I don't know BridgeVIEW, but it was supposed to be like DSC." Yes the quagmiere of treading between "Yes I recomend using LV for this project." and "No, I am not going to take NI's advise to use SV's." can leave a mark on you.

Well, I won't argue the above as I believe the DSC could do with a bit more polish too. But I think Shared Variables are a powerful addition to LabVIEW. The evolution of all these related products - DataSocket, Tags, NI Scan Engine, RSI, Alias IO, streaming, IO Servers, support for type-defs etc... has really impressed me. I looked forward to its continued growth.

[ShaunR]

I'm probably the only one that suffers from this, but......

Millions (OK slight exaggeration ) of activation codes for Dev Suites that assume you have internet and is therefore painless.

[Anders Björk]

The most annoying is that one opens the clones not the base VIs for retreeant VIs when clicking on them. I never remember the keyboard short-cut, so I have to get to the VI-hierarchy.

[jgcode]

The most annoying is that one opens the clones not the base VIs for retreeant VIs when clicking on them. I never remember the keyboard short-cut, so I have to get to the VI-hierarchy.

Ctrl-M - on a clone, opens the standard VI.

Is there a way to do it by clicking on a subVI so it opens as standard?

[Daklu]

XControls are your friend sir.

XControls for modifying the dev environment? I know about making xcontrols for customizing an application's user interface, but I'm not familiar with using xcontrols to customize the Labview environment.

[crelf]

And the icon editor is CRAP.

Can't agree more - it looks like it was rushed and is chocked-full o' bugs. I guess that's why there are replacements here and here.

Auto tool (you're welcome asbo).

Auto Tool is a much better feature than Quick Drop.

Yeah, I said it. Have at it.

[jgcode]

Can't agree more - it looks like it was rushed and is chocked-full o' bugs.

IMO the Enhanced IE 2009 is not crap - sure it could use a little work, like anything else.

I love the new layering feature for icons - i.e. the ability to edit the text layers is much faster than manually doing it with the older version.

[Grampa_of_Oliva_n_Eden]

Can't agree more - it looks like it was rushed and is chocked-full o' bugs. I guess that's why there are replacements here and here.

Auto Tool is a much better feature than Quick Drop.

Yeah, I said it. Have at it.

I'll still give you a chance to withdraw that comment.

In my book the auto-tool helps someone that doesn't know what they need to do next (switch tools) and the QD helps those that know exactly what they want to do faster.

Or are you just trolling?

Ben

[asbo]

Auto Tool is a much better feature than Quick Drop.

Yeah, I said it. Have at it.

I don't agree with you in the slightest but it depends on how you've come to habitually use your computer. I'm much better with the keyboard than the mouse .. if there was a way to drop and wire with the keyboard, I would

[ShaunR]

Can't agree more - it looks like it was rushed and is chocked-full o' bugs. I guess that's why there are replacements here and here.

Auto Tool is a much better feature than Quick Drop.

Yeah, I said it. Have at it.

Quick drop? What's that?

[Ton Plomp]

This is quite interesting.

January first 2011 a poll will be started that includes the input from this thread to decide what the worst design feature of LabVIEW is. If you have any ideas left, please post them!

Ton

[mje]

I also don't understand the auto-tool hate. Just diable it?

But it is not better than the quick drop. Those who say otherwise are clearly just wrong.

I'll throw in support for UI/panel "feel" gripes. The icon editor was a huge step in the right direction and I didn't criticize it in 2009 since it was new, but since it's still chock full of bugs in 2010, I feel laying into it is justified. It's a good idea not fully executed, and as a result poorly executed. I won't say it shouldn't have been released in the state it's in, because it is better than the old one, but it is slow and annoying to say the least.

-m

[Grampa_of_Oliva_n_Eden]

And one of my pet peeves...

The EULA for the Beta program that effectively eliminates most serious testing and forces us to use the "dot-zero" version for BETA testing.

Ben

[crelf]

IMO the Enhanced IE 2009 is not crap - sure it could use a little work, like anything else.

You're kidding, right? Sure, I love the new features, but you can't seriously tell me that it's buggy-ness is the same level as everything else in LabVIEW.

[crelf]

In my book the auto-tool helps someone that doesn't know what they need to do next (switch tools)...

I guess I don't know what to do next Actually, I disagree with your statement. If you put the mouse in the right place (like anything new, it takes some practise, and a steady hand sure helps) then it automatically switches to the next tool that *I* want. I know exactly what I want to do, auto-tool does it for me. I used to be a tab-key kinda guy - now all my left hand does on a normal day is space and delete.

...and the QD helps those that know exactly what they want to do faster.

I think in pictures, not words. I missed some questions in a certification exam once because I couldn't remember the names of a few primatives - I knew what they looked like, where they were on the palettes, what they did, and how to use them, but, becuase I didn't know their names, I was screwed (same thing happens every year in "Challenge the Campions" at NI-Week - the noobs get points because they know the names of the Express VI - ugh!). QD is essentially useless to me (unless, and this has happened maybe twice, I completely forget where something is on the palette, but then it takes so long to load it's not worth it - yes, I know I can load it on LabVIEW open, but since I use it so rarely, there's no point - and no, this is not a chicken-and-the-egg situation).

[Grampa_of_Oliva_n_Eden]

I guess I don't know what to do next Actually, I disagree with your statement. If you put the mouse in the right place (like anything new, it takes some practise, and a steady hand sure helps) then it automatically switches to the next tool that *I* want. I know exactly what I want to do, auto-tool does it for me. I used to be a tab-key kinda guy - now all my left hand does on a normal day is space and delete.

I think in pictures, not words. I missed some questions in a certification exam once because I couldn't remember the names of a few primatives - I knew what they looked like, where they were on the palettes, what they did, and how to use them, but, becuase I didn't know their names, I was screwed (same thing happens every year in "Challenge the Campions" at NI-Week - the noobs get points because they know the names of the Express VI - ugh!). QD is essentially useless to me (unless, and this has happened maybe twice, I completely forget where something is on the palette, but then it takes so long to load it's not worth it - yes, I know I can load it on LabVIEW open, but since I use it so rarely, there's no point - and no, this is not a chicken-and-the-egg situation).

Gotcha!

Andrey has a solution just for you!

Image removed because LAVA did not like the extenstion.

See here

http://forums.ni.com...288372#U1288372

Ben

[mje]

That is the most awesome thing ever.

[crelf]

Image removed because LAVA did not like the extenstion.

That's because the NI Forums attachments don't have extensions

Here they are:

[Mark Smith]

OK - so this isn't about any specific design feature - but I find that I don't use any of those things that are designed to help me "wire faster". One is because of habit - there were no "quick drops" or "auto tools" in LV4 (as least I don't think there was an auto tool - but I'm old and memory often fails me!). The second is because without any of those features I can wire a lot faster than I can think - LV's graphical environment is so easy to use that my limiting factor is figuring out what to do next ("is it the difference of the integrals I need here?") rather than anything relating to coding speed. I am in awe of those of you that can design code fast enough to efficiently use these tools

Mark

[jgcode]

You're kidding, right? Sure, I love the new features, but you can't seriously tell me that it's buggy-ness is the same level as everything else in LabVIEW.

Its not like the issues are show-stoppers for a client's application - and yes, I have had more issues with other things in LabVIEW.

Anyways, I am just thinking its a little harsh to hate on it as I think it is better than the previous one, flaws and all.

[NI_Eagle]

This type of feedback is invaluable for the LabVIEW team here at National Instruments. Knowing where users struggle with existing features or what future functionality could ease development pains helps us prioritize the scope of each release. I would highly encourage you to post your ideas to the LabVIEW Idea Exchange. This public forum is designed to give the LabVIEW Community a place to present ideas to both the rest of the Community and the LabVIEW development team. You can vote other ideas up, and the most popular ideas get added to each version.

If you have any questions, just let me know!

[crelf]

I bet a large portion of auto-tool haters just have not spent enough time with it. It actually pains me now to watch old-timers (its always peeps with 10+ years experience with LV) using the tab like crazy, and still being way slower than me. Also, as a lefty, tab was never a good option as I would have to take my left hand off the mouse. At the moment my right hand rests on the arrow keys to do very quick node adjustment or ctrl-double click etc.

...although I'm not sure I'm happy about being called an "old timer" Seriously though, when it first was released, I resisted, but after forcing myself to use it I wouldn't go back.

[ShaunR]

I bet a large portion of auto-tool haters just have not spent enough time with it. It actually pains me now to watch old-timers (its always peeps with 10+ years experience with LV) using the tab like crazy, and still being way slower than me. Also, as a lefty, tab was never a good option as I would have to take my left hand off the mouse. At the moment my right hand rests on the arrow keys to do very quick node adjustment or ctrl-double click etc.

Only code monkeys need speed....for all the changes I want them to do

About the icon editor, I agree some of the behaviour is a bit unexpected (took me a long time to figure out you cant use the text inputs for the banner text), but it allows me to edit icons so much quicker. If I have an API type icon with standard glyph it takes about 10 seconds to edit the text if I clone the VI for a different API command. With the old editor you would have to paint over the old text, manually position the new text etc etc.

I too like the new editors purely because you can import icons. It used to take me ages to try and make a new icon pixel-by-pixel...now I just import an image and (sometimes) make a box round it ...much quicker.

For me the one of the worst "feature" is bloat. The context menu for some operations is nearly as high as my laptop screen! I would really like a low-cal version of LabVIEW, and one that does not install dozens of NI services which I do not use very regularly.

Amen!

Data-finder? What's that? Never used it. and If I ever decide to find out what it does I probably never will. NI device Monitor? I don't have any USB devices. NI PXI manager? Don't have a PXI rack., NI Motion Device Manager, NI WebServices.... et al.

Otherwise it has to be the limited front panel control customisability. Its a pain to do any serious non-standard UI work... The whole UI feels stuck in the mid 90s. System style controls do go a very long way to fixing this problem, but they lead to quite boring UIs.

This is one of my pet peeves too. Along with the amount of coding that must be done just to make a UI work. Most projects I find nowadays are about 60% UI code and 40% real-stuff. The UI hasn't really changed much since the MAC original (in look and feel). No matter what you do. It always "looks" like LabVIEW. I think we would see many "new" looks if NI gave us access to the controls canvas and "onPaint" event..