The topic focus shifted from nanoVNA PC software to LabView :-D Sorry for that.
When I was(am) talking and thinking about LabView I am talking about the way that platform works. It is a different way not many programming languages have.
So, management way and decisions apart, LabView is a nice tool to use (once you get to know it). It has for sure it's shortcomings, but very useful for the purpose we use it at our company (academic hospital research and innovation) to rather quickly build an working system (mostly data-acquisition, but also more complicated stuff like we build a "robotic setup for in the MRI" on Real-Time platform single board RIO that talks with a control PC through a long fiber connection). Their hardware is often more expensive then the others, but if we can build quickly at the end it saves money. So for "Lab purposes" data-acquisition, measurements, visualization, logging and automation it is a good tool. Most of us can work very quickly with is. In not time you can setup a measurement with their USB DAQ for instance.
You also have a direct and clear visual overview what is happening (the data flow) and the structure of your program. If you are disciplined and use a good structures and subVI's (smaller functional blocks packed together) it can can get quite neat, and the schematics can almost be your documentation.
So yeah, management aside, LabView has potential. And maybe, if we think positive, maybe there will be another management one of these days :-)
But yes, for example C/C++ and Python are universal languages here to stay and less prone for the market and companies troubles and policies. With commercial companies is would always be a gamble. On the other hand the developments are going fast, so things we make today could easily be outdated "tomorrow" so to speak. And we see that with all other systems that are not compatible anymore and supported anymore. Nothing last forever.