I hope that I didn't start something here and make some people get defensive.
My point is that if you look at a company like Microsoft, they didn't make their
money from a "good" product. They made money by trying to bury the competition.
As you mentioned already, perhaps HP should market Vee more aggressivley.
However, this is none of my business. Personally I like Vee over Labview. HP
donated the upgrade cost to the 4.0 version to our facility. Very nice of them.
Now, the students who use the equipment in our facility become familiar with
Vee over Labview. That is good advertising.
> I would offer the opinion that the tail should not wag the dog. I
> think Vee users should take a hard look at their options, and quickly
> learn how to make use of either DLL's, Active X, or even the
> macro-languages for Excel (writing scripts to run in a seperate
True, and I think that the users in the Vee community should share their
options. For example, I have a DLL for reading the PC joystick in Vee. I use
it to move a 3 axis stage around. Pretty neat. Anyone interested in it? It's
> My major support for this arguement is to note that the extra analysis
> libraries for Labview make the price, let's say, a bit high.
Completely agree. Vee is much cheaper than Labview for reasons such as these.
> Second, I think in adopting a philosophy of playing catch-up, HPVee,
> and anyone else for that matter, would lose Big.
You need a good balance between excellent engineering and strategic business
To this end I will probably not reaspond to any comments you make further on
this subject. I only reasponded this time so as to put in another plug to my
joystick DLL. To my knowledge only a couple people tried it out and they didn't
get back to me about how well it served them.