Linux version of Logos Bible Software

Page 21 of 28 (560 items) « First ... < Previous 19 20 21 22 23 Next > ... Last »
This post has 559 Replies | 35 Followers

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 23 2015 3:15 PM

It seems odd to me that Logos can run on a Mac using Mono, but not on Linux.  Isn't Mono just as available under Linux?  

James, you mention Chromium Frameworks.  I am unsure about what this is and whether it's available on Linux.  But still, my basic question is that if Logos can run on a Mac (using Mono etc and w/o some underlying Windows technologies), what is the big problem getting it to run on Linux using things like Mono etc?  Does anyone know how much more work it would be for Logos engineers to get Logos running on Linux if they already have it running on Mac?

BTW, I'm running Logos 6 on Ubuntu 14:04 using VMware Player.  Works ok, but requires a heftier computer to work well.  Still even a bit slow for me.  Need to move it over to an SSD.

Posts 5248
Dan Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 23 2015 3:29 PM

James Bernard:
It looks as though Logos will eventually go subscription based - like everything else. Not sure how that will work...

If that ever happens it will be the day I stop being a Logos customer.

-Dan

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 26 2015 9:11 PM

aaylnx:
Isn't Mono just as available under Linux?

Yes & No since Mono for Linux does not include WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation) => http://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/wpf/

aaylnx:
But still, my basic question is that if Logos can run on a Mac (using Mono etc and w/o some underlying Windows technologies), what is the big problem getting it to run on Linux using things like Mono etc?

Faithlife corporation has application code base that uses .NET Framework on Windows and Mono on OS X.  Applications use native operating system frameworks for graphical display and interaction: Windows uses WPF while OS X uses Cocoa.

Apple has native OS X graphical environments that lack open source alternative => Using OS X Native Application Environments - Apple Developer

Logos 4 Mac FAQ mentions Cocoa => New to Logos 4 Mac? START HERE! (Official Logos 4 Mac Forum FAQ)

aaylnx:
Does anyone know how much more work it would be for Logos engineers to get Logos running on Linux if they already have it running on Mac?

If porting graphical environment to open source repeats experience of porting WPF to native OS X, then anticipate three years before open source graphical interaction being comparable to Windows and OS X (similar to Logos 4 Mac Alpha 1 release on 26 Oct 2009 until Logos 5.0a release on 21 Nov 2012).  Logos wiki has => Mac Release Notes and History  Also anticipate open source porting having similar development issues as Android due to plethora of open source distributions => http://distrowatch.com

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 27 2015 1:48 PM

Thanks Keep Smiling 4 Jesus.

Obviously, this is a bigger undertaking than I thought. I think I was mislead by the ease with which I have been able to run BibleWorks under Linux using WINE. I know the BibleWorks guys also developed their offical Mac version using WINE, but it doesn't seem like there is any way to run Logos in Linux using wine. If anyone knows how, please chime in, but I've I've tried and had no success so far.

I suppose the ultimate cross platform version of Logos would be web based. I recently subscribed to Logos Now and tried out the beta web app, but it looks like there is a long way to go before there is anything close to parity with native Logos. If anyone knows anything different about timeline expectations for the web app, please chime in.

Also, the web app has the disadvantage of requiring an ongoing connection. That's becoming less and less of a problem though.

I will most likely continue to use Logos on VMware which really isn't that bad on a powerful machine.

If Logos ever decides to pursue devopment using a truly cross platform graphical framework, QT would be a wonderful choice. Works great under all versions of Windows, Mac, and pretty much every Linux distro.

http://www.qt.io/application-development/
http://www.qt.io/

Posts 51
David J. Ring, Jr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 27 2015 4:12 PM

I think part of the "No Linux" problem for developers is the misunderstanding of open source and selling things, like books, etc.

Certainly work done by a person or corporation should be paid for if that's their wish or need.  I have no problems paying for books, I have no problems with Logos having a book vault where they can check to see if I have paid for the books I wish to access.  No problems at all.  Here take my money, I want these books, I paid for them.

Linux is just so much faster than Windows, my Linux computer is also a web server, and it has been "UP" for over a year without any problem.  My Windows 10 needs to be restarted when it updates and my browsers often crash.  I also have had some nasty viri which i have had to reinstall Windows to get rid of.  Linux is just so much easier for me.  I will pay for programs that I want.  But one of the nice things about Linux is that decent programs are open source and free.  I use GIMP, VLC, Firefox, Thunderbird, PGP, lots of programs that are free.  If there was a faster program that wanted money, I'd pay for it but I don't want to pay $50 just to convert to PDF or change MP3 to WAV, etc.

David

aaylnx:

If Logos ever decides to pursue devopment using a truly cross platform graphical framework, QT would be a wonderful choice. Works great under all versions of Windows, Mac, and pretty much every Linux distro.

http://www.qt.io/application-development/
http://www.qt.io/

Posts 16
Perry Webb | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 27 2015 5:10 PM

From Bob's previous feedback about Linux, he knows what it would take to put Logos on Linux.  The reason Logos hasn't put Logos Bible Software on Linux is Logos doesn't think the Linux market is sufficient to justify the cost to put Logos on Linux..

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Dec 27 2015 6:57 PM

Perry,

You are undoubtedly correct.  The Linux market would be insufficient to justify a yet another graphical framework which would, presumably, sit on top of a shared Mac Mono code base.  If, however, there were someway to use something like QT (or some other framework) to have a single UI codebase for all platforms (Windows, Mac, and Linux), then it might actually make some financial sense. Theoretically, that should actually bring down development costs.  However, I've no idea whether something like QT (or GTK) would be suitable for this as a cross platform graphical framework.  Moreover, I'm sure it would be a long time of development before there was a payoff.  Still, it might be a decent long term plan.

However, to me it looks like Logos' long term cross platform plan is to develop for the web.  The Logos Now beta app is quite interesting.  It's at app.logos.com if you're a Logos Now subscriber.  Again, it's got a long way to go before there's feature parity, but if they can pull this off, it would be pretty great.  I wonder however if current web technologies would allow for feature parity.

Adam

Posts 51
David J. Ring, Jr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 28 2015 3:57 AM

I don't know how "GREAT" that would be.  You have a program that allows you to read and use your digital books for free, and you trade it for a paid subscription that costs you monthly to read and use your books. It wouldn't be bad except for already having payed for thousands of dollars in books before you pay for a monthly subscription to use them.

David

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 28 2015 7:02 AM

David,

I agree with you on the financial issue.  I was thinking only from a technology perspective.  I'm not sure how Logos will deal with the issue you're raising.  Maybe give a discount to existing customers who have a history of purchase?  I also, don't like the idea of renting books.

Still, even if the web app hit complete feature parity tomorrow with the existing software, I don't think Logos would discontinue the existing software anytime soon.  Perhaps the subscription fee will just be for the web access?  Logos now is something like $9 a month and I wouldn't mind paying that for full web access plus other Logos now features.  It would be handy to use Logos on a device like the Chromebook I'm using right now.  Chromebooks are getting popular, the web app would be a nice way to run Logos on them.

Posts 1083
Myke Harbuck | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 28 2015 9:14 AM

Steven Yu:

Once again, I am pushing foward for a Linux version of Logos, a lot of user are using Linux, and we have been struggling to break away from Windows, but Logos has always been the single software that require us to either dual boot or run a virtual machine with Linux OS.

Anyone share the same view?

It's kind of funny if you think about it...Linux OS is seen by Logos as not a profitable endeavor (and they are probably right, or at least maybe right) due to the low market share of this OS. Yet from the interest this forum has generated (200,000 views and hundreds of replies!!!), it seems as though there is much more interest Logos for Linux that what was first thought. WOW. Havent seen a 200,000 view post in a while. Im not a Linux guy, but the interest here is quite surprising. Big Smile

Myke Harbuck
Lead Pastor, www.ByronCity.Church
Adjunct Professor, Georgia Military College
Mac OS 10.13.6 High Sierra, Mid 2015 iMac, 2.5GHz i7, 32 gbRAM, 1tbSSD

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 28 2015 9:57 AM

Myke Harbuck:
.Linux OS is seen by Logos as not a profitable endeavor (and they are probably right, or at least maybe right) due to the low market share of this OS.

This is not the reason Logos is not on Linux. Bob Pritchett said he would welcome the ability to run Logos on Linux and offered to put money behind it. The real issue is the technology incompatibility.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 961
John Goodman | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2015 3:59 PM

Myke Harbuck:
It's kind of funny if you think about it...Linux OS is seen by Logos as not a profitable endeavor (and they are probably right, or at least maybe right) due to the low market share of this OS. Yet from the interest this forum has generated (200,000 views and hundreds of replies!!!), it seems as though there is much more interest Logos for Linux that what was first thought. WOW. Havent seen a 200,000 view post in a while. Im not a Linux guy, but the interest here is quite surprising. 

I thought the market was about 15 people if I'm honest. I'd be one of those people. If there are as many as 100,000 people then maybe there should be a community pricing product for it so that it can be crowd funded?

My understanding of the effort involved for Faithlife is that it would be equivalent to the effort it took to get ported to the mac. That seems to have been huge!

I'm very eager to see if the web app ever gets offline functionality...

גַּם־חֹשֶׁךְ֮ לֹֽא־יַחְשִׁ֪יךְ מִ֫מֶּ֥ךָ וְ֭לַיְלָה כַּיּ֣וֹם יָאִ֑יר כַּ֝חֲשֵׁיכָ֗ה כָּאוֹרָֽה

Posts 54
Andrew | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2015 4:16 PM

It was put up to be crowd funded but sufficient funds were not made available. The crowd funding option, however, was simply to make it run under wine (well, crossover, the paid product). There has never been a push to rewrite the GUI into something cross platform such as QT of which I am aware. 

The base windows package makes liberal use of new advanced .NET libraries that are not yet in Wine (sadly). Not sure why they did not try QT when they went MAC since that would have provided uniformity across all platforms. 

There is also the problem that many "open source" users flat out refuse to pay for software. 

Posts 5248
Dan Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2015 4:17 PM

I know this is not news that helps Logos users but there are many Accordance users running on the latest Wine 1.7x and Wine Staging. And of course web app as mentioned above is always an option.

Dan

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2015 2:07 AM

Andrew:
Not sure why they did not try QT when they went MAC since that would have provided uniformity across all platforms. 

Mar 2013 Blog describes slow Qt scrolling performance on OS X => http://www.zestymeta.com/2013/03/qt-and-peril-of-multi-platform.html?_escaped_fragment_=#!

Noted last QT blog article for OS X was 29 Oct 2014 => http://blog.qt.io/blog/category/macosx/

Programmer blog => Why aren't more desktop apps written with Qt? [closed]

FYI: Logos UserVoice suggestion now has 307 votes => https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-6/suggestions/3635847-make-logos-4-and-5-avalible-to-individuals-on-ubun

Between Feb and Nov 2015, OS X desktop usage increased substantially more than Linux => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems 

  • OS X increased by 2.15 % from 7.21 % to 9.36 % while Linux increased by 0.16 % from 1.34 % to 1.50 %

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 1
CERNA DANIEL VICTOR | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 18 2016 7:45 AM

Linux version Please.

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 17 2016 5:58 PM

I'm not sure how or if this affects matters with a Linux release, but looks like MS is now going to be releasing .NET for the Linux Desktop.  Personally, I would like to know why MS is releasing .NET on Linux.  I'm guessing they are tracking some sort of desire/interest for developers to run .NET programs on Linux.

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 17 2016 10:20 PM

aaylnx:
Personally, I would like to know why MS is releasing .NET on Linux.  I'm guessing they are tracking some sort of desire/interest for developers to run .NET programs on Linux.

The week in .NET – 5/16/2016 => https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2016/05/17/the-week-in-net-5162016/ includes several Web development articles.

Suggestions Thread => USERVOICE: Logos on Linux discussion includes:

Logos Now subscribers have access to https://app.logos.com that Faithlife Corporation is developing.  Logos wiki => https://wiki.logos.com/Mac_Release_Notes_and_History#Mac_Alpha_Pre-Release_Notes_and_History includes Mac Alpha releases when Logos 4 was ported to OS X user interface. Web browser port may take a bit longer to deliver Logos 6+ functionality, which would be usable on open source distributions and mobile devices.  Uninformed user speculation is web browser access being a Logos Now subscription perk as web servers have ongoing usage and maintenance costs.

Logos UserVoice suggestion now has 346 votes => https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-6/suggestions/3635847-make-logos-4-and-5-avalible-to-individuals-on-ubun with comment on 19 Jan 2016:

Phil Gons (Faithlife):

Our solution for Linux users will likely be our web app at app.logos.com. If it's full-featured enough, will this meet your needs? Or is offline support a concern?

Subsequent User Voice comment on 15 Mar 2016:

manebule:

@ Phil Gons (Faithlife) Sorry, but a web-based solution will not meet my needs. Where I work doing Bible Translation the internet is slow and expensive... Offline support is essential, to the point that I turn Logos's internet access OFF whenever I'm there. 'Syncronised scrolling' with other translation programs is also essential. I'm not sure a web-based solution would do that...? An added benefit of a Linux version is that I could encourage others to use legal software rather than the pirated versions so ubiquitous in some places in the world. Imagine--you could help with that! :-)

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 50
aaylnx | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, May 18 2016 2:23 PM

Thanks.

Not sure whether reaching parity with the Windows/Mac offline apps will come any time soon.  I am already a Logos Now user.  I'm afraid there is quite a long way to go before any kind of parity with the desktop app is achieved.  My sneaking suspicion is that development for a Linux native app would actually be faster - if reaching Linux is the goal.  I would be happy to be proved wrong.

Adam

Page 21 of 28 (560 items) « First ... < Previous 19 20 21 22 23 Next > ... Last » | RSS