LabVIEW 2011 Beta Program
NI is now accepting requests to join the LabVIEW 2011 Beta Program. Visit ni.com/beta to sign up.
As you may have heard at NI Week last August, the main focus of this release is improving performance and stability. It will also include some features that were suggested on Idea Exchange. However… there is a little extra something I’m working on that needs some fine-tuning before its final version ships and I’d like to hear your opinions on how it should work. So please, if you have time, join the Beta program and then talk to me on the Beta discussion forum. The Beta software should be available soon; if you join the program now, you’ll be notified when it’s ready to download.
2 Comments
This entry is filed under LabVIEW.
You can also follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Or you can subscribe to all comments site-wide using the comments feed.
Or perhaps you're just looking for the trackback and/or the permalink for this post.
Dear Christina
I appreciate if your team is working on stability. While my app is becoming bigger and bigger LV becomes a little bit unstable. Specially when updating clusters in objects (using LV2010,SP1 and implementing the whole app OOP).
I hope that feature I missed the most will be implemented in LV2011. I described it at http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Advanced-Code-Commenting-Functionality/idi-p/1452396 and the community gave some really valuable comments.
This is more then cosmetic on the IDE only!
I will join the Beta program as soon as possible.
Chris
Chris,
I appreciate your high opinion of our development speed, but I’m afraid that features for a given LabVIEW version are determined well in advance of its Beta release. With our annual release cycle (new versions in August), an Idea Exchange submission in February is considered for the next year’s release.
I have been following the discussion on your commenting idea with interest. It seems like different people have different preferences for how it would work. I’m looking forward to seeing responses to the post from my teammate PatrickC. I think his post is a good summary of the requirements presented so far.