Announcing the LabVIEW 64-bit Pioneer Beta

[REM1]

You are invited to register for participation in the LabVIEW 64-bit Pioneer Beta Program.
This is the first beta of LabVIEW as a native 64-bit application on Windows Vista x64. The primary advantage of LabVIEW as a native 64-bit application is the ability to address larger amounts of memory. This is critical in applications that manipulate large datasets. We hope to open LabVIEW to a broad range of applications by adding this capability.
Prospective beta testers should be aware that since this is essentially a port of LabVIEW to a new platform, early betas will be less complete than early betas of recent 32-bit LabVIEW releases. However, we believe they will be complete enough for most use cases. Beta testers should expect a much longer beta period than has been typical for recent 32-bit LabVIEW releases so that the development team can respond to feedback.
You can register by visiting http://www.ni.com/beta and selecting "LabVIEW 64-bit Pioneer" from the list of beta programs.  Please complete the profile questions that will help us understand your experience and use cases with LabVIEW.  Be sure you agree to the T&C of the beta program so that you can be approved.
After you register, please be patient for the beta coordinators to process your application.  You will be notified when you have been approved. Registration does not necessarily guarantee you a position in the beta program. Determination of acceptance into the program is up to the sole discretion of National Instruments.
We will have a private section of the Discussion Forums set up for beta users to discuss the LabVIEW 64-bit Pioneer Beta.

[TiTou]

Hi, Can you give the list of the will be available in that beta version of LabVIEW ?IMAQ ? MOTION ? DAQmx ? etc...Thanks in advance

[REM1]

This is only the 64-bit version of LabVIEW.

[TiTou]

:smileysad:

[dgholstein]

What is the status of Linux x86-64 LabView?    ...Dan

[Adam Kemp]

We currently are only planning on releasing 64-bit LabVIEW for Windows. We have been compiling 64-bit LabVIEW on Linux in order to help with the effort on Windows (gcc finds more issues than MSVC), but we don't currently plan to release it. So far the customers we have talked to about Linux just need a 32-bit LabVIEW to run on 64-bit Linux (without the need for more address space). I know of several customers that have been doing this successfully (sans drivers) for a while now. We're interested in hearing from customers about their needs so we can evaluate where we should spend our time. Can you tell us what your specific needs are for 64-bit Linux support? Do you just need LabVIEW to run on a 64-bit OS, or do you actually need a 64-bit native LabVIEW? In the latter case what are your reasons for needing a 64-bit-native LabVIEW? What is your goal and what are your current limitations with 32-bit LabVIEW?Thanks.

[dgholstein]

Adam, thanks for asking.I can't imagine needing 64 bit address space for any LabView app, apps like that should be written in C/C++ anyway (same could be said for Java and Python, sorry to you LabView Absolutists/Puritans).64 bit "support" would be helpful, though.  Since I'm running 32 bit LabView (7.1) on a 64 bit Linux system, I'm forced to maintain 2 sets of libraries (and drivers) and have to explicitly call for 32 bit compile objects since my system would always automatically compile for 64 bit.  In other words, my job is made more difficult.Skip full 64 bit support, just provide:- 64 bit integers (signed and unsigned)
- 64 bit CFLNs
   ...Dan

[Adam Kemp]

We have had 64-bit integer support in 32-bit LabVIEW since 8.0. As far as I know it is not possible to call or even load a 64-bit DLL (.so) from a 32-bit process in Linux, so we can't support that use case without providing our own out-of-process system. If performance is not a major concern then you could consider rolling your own out-of-process system for these calls using TCP, named pipes, or some other inter-process communication method.Our intent with 64-bit LabVIEW is to support applications which require huge amounts of memory. For applications which do not require huge amounts of memory, a 32-bit version of LabVIEW should be sufficient on either 32-bit or 64-bit OSes.If you don't need a 64-bit address space then why are you using 64-bit Linux at all?

[dgholstein]

Adam;Quite honestly, there are other reasons to use computers besides LabView, 64 bit Linux allows me to run large PIC models -- I use a network of computers.  Yes, I don't need 64 bit LabView address space and wonder if anyone does, but the networks I use are all 64 bit.  Let me repeat, it's a maintenance issue, why would I dedicate a computer (or VM) to LabView when I can run it from where I do most of my work.Certainly, I know about TCP/IP sockets, I've used them plenty, but you posed the question, what would 64 bit LabView users be looking for?  I answer, and you say I don't need that, and ask why I need 64 bit Linux -- that's pretty insulting.What's up with that?  Really sorry I put in my 2 cents.BTW:  From what you've just posted, no one needs 64 bit LabView, they can all pass along the intense computations through TCP to a real program written in C/C++.   ...Dan

[altenbach]

I think Adam gave a perfectly good answer, so I don't know why you (or whoever) would give it a one star rating.





dgholstein wrote:

Skip full 64 bit support, just provide:

- 64 bit integers (signed and unsigned)

- 64 bit CFLNs




As Adam said, 64 bit integers are supported since LabVIEW 8.0, so all you need is upgrade to get that benefit. :)
 
(And what in the world are <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=CFLN" target="_blank">CFLN</a>s???)





dgholstein wrote:

&nbsp;I answer, and you say I don't need that, and ask why I need 64 bit Linux -- that's pretty insulting.



Well, Adam said "If you don't need a 64-bit address space then why are you using 64-bit Linux at all?", so he's asking you a question. He never said you don't need it.





dgholstein wrote:

BTW:&nbsp; From what you've just posted, no one needs 64 bit LabView, they can all pass along the intense computations through TCP to a real program written in C/C++. ...
I can't imagine needing 64 bit address space for any LabView app, apps like that should be written in C/C++ anyway (same could be said for Java and Python, sorry to you LabView Absolutists/Puritans).


How do you possibly expect a serious answer in a LabVIEW board, if you ridicule and belittle LabVIEW like that. I thought that was pretty insulting. ;)
&nbsp;
LabVIEW can probably run circles around your C/C++ programs, especially with highly parallel code on multiprocessor systems.
LabVIEW is a <a href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5313" target="_blank">real programming language </a>and can be used to write real programs. Unfortunately, seasoned text programmers often have a difficult time to correctly embrace the dataflow paradigm, and you'll end up with grossly inefficient code, peppered with local variables and race conditions. This is not the fault of LabVIEW. Maybe you're currently stuck in that trap. :)

[Darren]

altenbach wrote:
&nbsp;
(And what in the world are <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=CFLN" target="_blank">CFLN</a>s???) I think he fat-fingered <a href="http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/371361E-01/glang/call_library_function/" target="_blank">CLFNs</a>. -D

[dgholstein]

<a href="../view_profile?user.id=7614" class="auth_text" style="font-weight: bold;" target="_blank"> </a> altenbach;OK, CLFN. (you really didn't get it from the context?)I use LabView, I like LabView.&nbsp; There are Puritans here who believe LabView is the best at everything -- when you move into 64 bit address space, with serious physics problems, where the overhead of a simple function call alone moves the programmer to use embedded C macros and MPICH-based clusters; LabView starts to need help.Again, I like LabView, and I was asking for the ability to use the best of both worlds -- the response was:
If you don't need a 64-bit address space then why are you using 64-bit Linux at all?
I suspect LabView is written in C/C++, so why should we argue about which is the most efficient, I'd be pretty impressed if LabView is written, and compiled solely in LabView (isn't it Pharlap C?).My LabView programs are not constrained by text-based programming thinking&nbsp; (defending against the oblique put down), I get LabView very well, thank you.
Adam;Thanks for the clarification.&nbsp; Back to the wish list, for 64 bit LabView, please provide a CLFN for both 32 and 64 bit DLLs, nspluginwrapper may or may not be a model for doing that.&nbsp; I imagine that would not be an easy task, but it would make everyone's lives far easier.&nbsp;&nbsp; ...Dan

[Adam Kemp]

We don't need to debate the pros and cons of LabVIEW on the 64-bit beta forum. Dan, I think you misinterpreted my comments. I am not trying to be insulting at all. I apologize if I was unclear.I am just trying to determine what your needs are. There are many people using 64-bit Linux for many reasons which have nothing to do with large address spaces (for any applications), and I wanted to see if that was the case for you. That does not mean that those people (or you) are wrong for using 64-bit Linux. I wasn't making any judgment. I'm just trying to determine what YOUR use case is so that we can understand how LabVIEW fits into that use case. Like I said, our intent with the 64-bit port is to address use cases which require large amounts of memory in LabVIEW. There may be other benefits to running a 64-bit native LabVIEW, but we have to ask these questions in order to figure out what those uses are, how common they are, and how important they are for our users. Then we can weigh those issues and determine where we should be spending our time.I understand that supporting multiple architectures can be a bit of work. That's what we're doing with LabVIEW in supporting Windows, Mac, Linux, PharLap, VxWorks, and now Windows 64-bit, and that is why we are taking such a cautious approach to adding another architecture before we fully understand the needs of our users.

[altenbach]

Adam Kemp wrote:We don't need to debate the pros and cons of LabVIEW on the 64-bit beta forum.


This is not the 64-bit beta forum, but&nbsp;the plain LabVIEW forum. Still, I&nbsp;agree that this thread should be dedicated to the specifics of 64 bit LabVIEW. :)





dgholstein wrote:
<a class="auth_text style= FONT-WEIGHT: bold" href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/view_profile?user.id=7614" target="_blank"> </a> OK, CLFN. (you really didn't get it from the context?)



Sorry,&nbsp;despite 10+ years of LabVIEW, I have also never heard of <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=CLFN" target="_blank">this acronym</a>. It always helps to spell things out, in order to be <a href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=BreakPoint&amp;thread.id=6099&amp;jump=true" target="_blank">as clear as possible</a>. :)





dgholstein wrote:
I suspect LabView is written in C/C++, so why should we argue about which is the most efficient, I'd be pretty impressed if LabView is written, and compiled solely in LabView (isn't it Pharlap C?).



I cringe at the thought of basing an opinion on a suspicion. Even if it were so, you are falling into an analogy trap. With similar arguments, you could say that a chess program can never play better that the programmer who wrote it, or that a race-car could never possibly&nbsp;go faster than&nbsp;the running speed of the&nbsp;designer.&nbsp;Silly? Right!



dgholstein wrote: My LabView programs are not constrained by text-based programming thinking&nbsp; (defending against the oblique put down), I get LabView very well, thank you.



Sorry, again I don't know what an <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=oblique+put+down" target="_blank">oblique put down </a>is, but my comment was very generic and based on actual&nbsp;observations <a href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&amp;view=by_date_ascending&amp;message.id=112401#M112401" target="_blank">here in the forum</a>.&nbsp;Why does everything I write need to&nbsp;have negative or positive connotations or be read as a personal attack? :D How many smileys do I possibly need to add? :D:D:D
First, I don't even know if you are a "seasoned" text programmer, and second, I sometimes do pick up on subtle nonverbal clues, such as the ability to spell LabVIEW with the correct capitalization. It is often (but not always, such as apparently in your case ;)) a sign of <a href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=BreakPoint&amp;view=by_date_ascending&amp;message.id=6208#M6208" target="_blank">LabVIEW skills</a>. :o
There are plenty of old discussions in the LabVIEW forum comparing LabVIEW and text based code. If you feel that you have any new insights, more specific data,&nbsp;and if there is general interest, I started a <a href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&amp;thread.id=348060&amp;jump=true" target="_blank">new thread</a> to continue this discussion.

[Chata]

Hello everybody,

I'm new to this forum and I have two questions.

First - How do I post new topic (message)? :)

Second - If i make application in Labview, what software do I have to buy on other computer in order to run my application on that computer. Is NI LabVIEW Express VI Development Toolkit (http://www.ni.com/toolkits/lv_express_vi_dev.htm) enough or I have to buy whole Labview software?

Any answer would be great,

Alan

[mathan]

First of all,
&nbsp;
prepare a small subject and do a search in the forum with that subject. There will be some threads listed relating to your subject and it depends. Try to get help from any of this thread.
If still want to post a new one, you can find



Post Question



below&nbsp;the search list.
&nbsp;
Hope this helps.
Mathan

[mathan]

Dear alan,

If i make application in Labview, what software do I have to buy on other computer in order to run my application on that computer.


Basically if you create an exe of your LabView application, then just runtime engine is enough to run in any computer.
&nbsp;
Mathan

[Chata]

thanks Mathan. What about this Labview Express? I'm not sure what is it really for?
I read some documentation about it but If I make program in Labview 6, can I run it on other computer just by using Labview Express (version 6?). Never mind now LabVIEW Run-time Engine. What is the main purpose of Labview Express? Is it short version of Labview with all functionality or?

thanks in advance

[Pnt]

This post is named : Announcing the LabVIEW 64-bit Pioneer Beta
If you have questions, do not post them here.. Open a new post..

[Cory K]

Is this a free version you would like us to test?
Or are you just informing us there is&nbsp;a new version out?

[Dennis Knutson]

Beta <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Beta" target="_blank">definition</a>.

[altenbach]

Cory K wrote:
Is this a free version you would like us to test?


Did you completely read the first post of this thread?
&nbsp;
I's free in a sense that you don't&nbsp;have to pay for it, but it is expensive because it will take a lot of your free time. It will expire once the beta is over.
&nbsp;
Unless you are an experienced LabVIEW programmer and have access to a 64bit machine, you should probably not apply. ;) It is not a good idea to learn LabVIEW on a potentially buggy beta version.

[REM1]

Cory K wrote:
Is this a free version you would like us to test?
Or are you just informing us there is&nbsp;a new version out?


This post is to inform you that LabVIEW has a new <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Beta" target="_blank">beta</a> program open that you can apply to join.