Nominal competing for lab system of record

This wedge is really a fight over the system of record for hardware testing. NI already owns the control layer in many labs through LabVIEW, TestStand, and SystemLink, so Nominal often lands first as the better place to watch a run happen, line up telemetry with video, and let engineers investigate failures across mixed instruments. Once teams start reviewing runs and writing analyses there, the center of gravity can shift from NI’s tables and notebooks to Nominal’s timeline and agent workflow.1 2 3 4

• SystemLink is not a lightweight point tool. NI positions it as the web layer for managing test systems, software configurations, results, and measurement data, with native ties into LabVIEW, TestStand, FlexLogger, Python, dashboards, and Jupyter. That makes it sticky wherever NI hardware already anchors the lab.1 2 3
• Nominal is attacking a different daily workflow first. Its product brings telemetry, logs, video, simulation results, documents, and live annotations onto one timeline, then adds an AI analyst that can inspect runs, build editable analyses, and turn test plans into pass or fail checks. That is closer to how engineers actually debug a bad run.4 5
• Coexistence is natural because the two products can sit on the same bench before one replaces the other’s data layer. NI can keep running sequencing and asset management, while Nominal plugs into LabVIEW and NI DAQ hardware to become the place engineers open after each test. The competitive moment comes when customers choose where cleaned data, analysis logic, and review workflows should live long term.2 4 5

The next phase is less about who connects to the instrument, and more about who owns the engineering feedback loop after a test finishes. If Nominal keeps becoming the fastest place to replay runs, compare failures, and generate reusable checks, it can climb from companion software into the main data and analysis layer, even inside heavily NI based environments.1 4 5