|
|
 | | From: | Martin.D | | Subject: | Re: LabVIEW better than VB? | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 04:10:37 -0600 (CST) |
|
|
 | For me multi.OS capability and distribution with LabVIEW runtime is not an =
issue. We supply OEM machines with the software pre-installed. And an insta=
llation disk for recovery purposes. Our customer uses VB6, but what about V=
B.net on older OS systems - the whole of the .net frame work must be distri=
buted as far as I'm aware. This is now automatically installed with XP, I g=
uess the fact that Microsoft can ship anything with there OS gives them an =
unfair advantage.
Although I would not know how to implement synchro=
nised parallel software loops in VB, I think it's possible - I suspect that=
it's a bit of a headache. For my current application I must continuously: =
monitor DIO lines, service 2 x motion systems, service user interfaces, and=
perform image analysis. I guess a good VB guy could deal with this but it'=
s probably an area where Labview provides advantages, especially 7.1.
r>One thing in favor of VB - the customer asked how much it would cost purc=
hase LabVIEW for themselves!
I guess I'm not going to find what I or=
iginally set out for - a sentence or two that goes some way to convincing m=
anagement that LabVIEW is the best tool for the job. I suppose it mainly de=
pends on the developers skills at the end of the day, most main stream prog=
ramming languages are capable of producing a similar end result with varyin=
g complexity that is largely transparent to management. Personally one reas=
on I choose LabVIEW is because I find it much easier to understand the code=
, so when I push software to my limit of complexity I can achieve more. I g=
uess a more intelligent guy with a more complex tool can achieve the same, =
but they are probably running with a handicap.
Martin
|
|
|
