What are the main differences between Signal Express and Labview?
hrh1818
various versions of Labview but no comparison of Signal Express with
Labview. Hence how does Signal Express compare with Labview? What
are some of the things one can do with Labview one can't do with
Signal Express?
Howard
altenbach
- LabVIEW is a full featured programming language that lets you write any kind of program you like.
- SIgnal express is a interactive tool that allows you to do measurment and analysis without programming.
What kind of measurments do you want to do and what kind of requirements do you have?
You can also see for yourself and download evaluation version of both. :)
hrh1818
> You cannot really compare the two.
Why?
>
> - LabVIEW is a full featured programming language that lets you write any kind of program you
like.
Which version of Labview are you referring to? I don't consider the
graphical version of Labview to be a full featured programming
language. LabWindows/CVI is by a long shot a lot closer to being a
full featured programming language than the graphical version of
Labview.
>
> - SIgnal express is a interactive tool that allows you to do measurment and analysis without programming.
I have also heard the same comments about Labview in the past.
>
> What kind of measurments do you want to do and what kind of requirements do you have?
>
> You can also see for yourself and download evaluation version of both. :)
No thanks, there has to be a better way to get an answer to my
question than get involved in a two month study project.
Howard
Dennis Knutson
I've been using LabVIEW since version 3 and I've used LabWindows since version 1. Both are full featured programming languages with different strengths and weaknesses. It doesn't sound like you've used LabVIEW much if at all. What exactly do you base your statement on?
hrh1818
> LabVIEW is the programming language that was used to create the application called Signal Express. Comparing the two is like comparing C++ and Excel.
> I've been using LabVIEW since version 3 and I've used LabWindows since version 1. Both are full featured programming languages with different strengths and weaknesses. It doesn't sound like you've used LabVIEW much if at all. What exactly do you base your statement on?
I am looking at page 23 in National Instruments 2007 Measurements and
Automation Catalog. At the top of the page it says "Labview Graphical
Development Program Platform". Further down on the same page it says
"The open Labview graphical development environment comprises four key
elements.
1. Intuitive graphical programming language for engineers and
scientists.
2. Interactive, application specific development tools and libraries.
3. Hundreds of built-in instruments, I/O, control, analysis and
presentation functions.
4. Deployment to desktop, mobile, industrial, and embedded computing
targets.
No where does it say anything about the object oriented programming
capability of Labview. If a programming language doesn't have object
oriented capability like C# or C++ it is not a full featured
programming language.
Howard
altenbach
Howard,
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. There is no "graphical version" of LabVIEW, there is just LabVIEW. Click on the article <a href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5313" target="_blank">"Is LabVIEW a general purpose programming language?"</a> written by the Jeff K. for some easy reading from a few years ago. It is all still true. :)
One of the main points at this years NI-week was the discussion of how processor development is switching more and more to multicore designs to improve performance because a simple boost in clock frequency is becoming more difficult. Linear, text based code is not well suited to take advantage of multticore design, while the dataflow based LabVIEW programming language automatically scales well to multiple processor cores, without any need to rewrite older code. I would say that only LabVIEW is futureproof in this respect. LabVIEW programmers are not wimps that are simply too stupid to write text based code. LabVIEW is not a toy language for people that don't want to learn a "real" programming language.
LabVIEW is arguably the best programming language in terms of getting things done! I've never felt limited with LabVIEW and my programs often don't even have anything to do with data acquisition or instrument control. The difference between text based code vs. LabVIEW is like "DOS vs. Windows", "Radio vs. HD television". "Trilobyte vs. Homo sapiens" (sorry Putnam :D). Text based code is monochrome, archaic and outdated and its linearity imposes unecessary constraints on the programmer that can only be (partially) overcome by wasting even more time throwing even more code at it.
Sure, a seasoned text based programmer will initially have problems adapting to LabVIEW, just because you would need to adapt to and embrace the power of dataflow and not try to make a literal translation of the text code to LabVIEW, retaining old habits. If you get stuck, come back and ask here in the forum.
You were looking for object oriented features and failed. All you need to do is a quick site search. All the information is out there. Just because you cannot find it in the first five sentences of the glossy brochure does not mean it does not exist. Maybe you want to read one of the application notes such as:
<a href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/3574" target="_blank">LabVIEW Object-Oriented Programming: The Decisions Behind the Design</a>
In general, you should avoid judgement until you have all information. Your opinions seem quite biased and superficial and not really based on hard facts.
Initially you asked about the difference between signal express and LabVIEW.
hrh1818 wrote:> What kind of measurments do you want to do and what kind of requirements do you have?> You can also see for yourself and download evaluation version of both. :)No thanks, there has to be a better way to get an answer to myquestion than get involved in a two month study project.
If you would answer the first question quoted above, we could certainly help you with the decision. Isn't that the main purpose of this thread?
You can also contact your local LabVIEW Field Engineer to go over your requirements and help you make a decision. They usually know their stuff! :)
Gabi1
About the subject: arent you looking for excuses not to do rather than just do? if you feel more confortable with C/C++, and need OO for this project, well, signal-express is not for you to begin with, and Labview will only induce you frustration, being so alienated against it already.
anyhow: for an specific task, i have never (ever) seen a C/C++/Fortran programmer doing the job as fast as done in Labview. with just that in mind, LV is already worth consideration. Message Edited by Gabi1 on 09-03-2007 09:50 AM
hrh1818
The original reply I received " LabVIEW is a full featured programming
language that lets you write any kind of program you like." was not
very informative. I was looking for more specific information about
how Signal Express compares with Labview. Now it seems this thread has
gotten off course with most repliers more interested in defending
Labview as a full featured programming language than comparing Signal
Express with Labview. Hence I propose we call a truce. You are
entitled to your opinions and I will look for a more productive method
for comparing Signal Express with Labview.
Howard
altenbach
Maybe you meant: <a href="http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/25A18738FF4EE1C88625730900694E03" target="_blank">http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/25A18738FF4EE1C88625730900694E03</a>?
altenbach
Thanks for clarifying your question. In a nutshell, that one sentence answer was a good start IMHO. We are not clairvoyant to sense what kind of depth you want in the answer, and we sometimes don't have time to write a tome, covering all conceivable aspects. :D
So, instead of nitpicking on the answer, questioning its basic validity, the right thing to do would be to ask a more specific question. We still have no idea what you are trying to do. If you would tell us, we could certainly help you decide on the product.
As a start, you can look a the price difference between Signal Express and LabVIEW. It is significant! So, what can you do with LabVIEW that you cannot do with signal express?
Here's a quick list of some examples what LabVIEW can do that signal express cannot:
Calculate all 35660 decimal digits of 10000! (factorial) in under 100ms from scratch (probably much faster on a modern computer):<a href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5299" target="_blank">http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5299</a>
Model the solar system in 3D:<a href="http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5292" target="_blank">http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5292</a>
Write a program that fully analyzes 4x4 tic tac toe (sorry for the misspellings on the front panel ;)):<a href="http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&message.id=247044#M247044" target="_blank">http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&message.id=247044#M247044</a>
<img src="http://forums.ni.com/attachments/ni/170/184759/1/DeepestToePlayer.png">
The list goes on and on...
There are many more examples from the fields of Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry, Finance, Entertainment, Biology, Computer science, Astronomy, etc, etc. It would really help to narrow down the answers if you could just tell us your fields of interest. Since you are not telling us what your main interest is (areospace, automotive, geology, ...), we can only guess or keep the answer generic. Maybe you can find an application in the case studies (<a href="http://sine.ni.com/cs/app/main" target="_blank">http://sine.ni.com/cs/app/main</a>) that matches your needs. :)
And here is a list of things that LabVIEW cannot do:
{this part intentionally left blank}
:D
altenbach
<img src="http://forums.ni.com/attachments/ni/170/269382/1/solarsystem.png">
(You should also be aware that the original challenge was done in an early version of the LabVIEW 3D picture control which is somewhat different to the 3D picture control that is native to newer version of LabVIEW.)Message Edited by altenbach on 09-03-2007 12:25 PM
solarsystem.png:
http://forums.ni.com/attachments/ni/170/269382/1/solarsystem.png
tst
I can think of two good answers to that question:
- Some applications would be very hard or practically impossible to do in LV. Examples - Flash like animation, low level memory handling, games with fast graphics, other programs with dynamic interfaces. That's OK. Not every tool is suited for everything.
- LabVIEW is very expensive. When you can download very good IDEs for free, ~$4,000 for LV Pro isn't that great a deal, especially if you've never heard of LV before. Sure, if your company already owns LV and you know it, you can use it for a great many applications which are not at all related to interacting with hardware (I know I do), but no one in their right mind would buy it just to use it as such.
NI does not attempt to push LV as a G.P. language. They probably make most of their money from hardware, and I don't think they have any interest in trying to compete head to head in a market which isn't their natural market. Instead, it seems to me that they're taking a rather clever approach, but one which requires a lot of patience - they're introducing LV and graphical programming in the educational system and through toys (Lego Mindstorms) - this allows them to get the next generation of programmers to already be familiar with their stuff.
Kabul, from looking at the URL, you probably linked to an article which is only availble to NI personnel.
tst
In Windows, you can do that very easily -
<img src="http://forums.ni.com/attachments/ni/170/166537/1/ShowCursor.GIF">
I expect I would do exactly the same in C.
I also wouldn't be surprised if you can load an empty cursor using the cursor VIs.