Page 1 of 2 (25 items) 1 2 Next >
This post has 24 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 29
Hayedid | Forum Activity | Posted: Thu, Apr 22 2010 7:55 AM

I don't have an iPad, though I'd like the opportunity to have one.  However, in recently using the iPod / iPhone app, I found it very disappointing, so I have some comments / requests.

The app is very nice when wifi service is available, but was rendered next to useless when I tried using it without wifi avaialable.  At this point, there were constant errors and problems.  The only thing I could really do was browse and read my offline books.  To me, and several others in reading the reviews of the app, part of the point in a mobile Bible application is to be able to have access to Bible searching, etc. when not around wifi.  Your in the mall talking with someone and they ask a question and you want to look up something, out camping, in a non-wifi coffee shop, when power is out at home, etc.

If the iPad application is anything like the iPod application, it will be very frustrating.  The following should be available when 'offline':

1) Searching already downloaded resources

2) Comparative Bible texts (of the Bibles downloaded)

3) Links to commentaries, Greek, Hebrew, etc... of downloaded resources

4) Working footnotes

5) A prayers / notes section

6) A working home page (daily reading plan and devotionals disappeared in offline mode)

---

Should any of these not be available, they should disappear from the application. 

1) It was sooooo frustrating hitting a menu item and being told... 'This function is not available...'.  If a function is truly unavailable, it shouldn't be there to click on.

2) Doing a Bible Search and being told 'No results found'.  It took me a few minutes to discover it hadn't even bothered to try to do a search.  If searching is not available offline, it shouldn't be there to waste your time typing in search parameters and shouldn't tell you no results found.

3) Each footnote (a, b, c, 1, 2, 3, etc) was replaced by a message about missing a resource but gave no indication as to what resource it needed so that I could fix the problem when I went online.

----

All that being said, the online version looked nice.  I expect a lot from Logos Bible software as (1) I've paid a lot for it, (2) I do software development for a living.  I gentlement in tech support mentioned to me that 1 person built the iPod / iPhone application.  If additional help is needed to improve the functionality of this app, I'd even be willing to help with it.

Thank you for a great online app and for listening to my requests for strong offline support.

Hayedid

Posts 1416
Wes Saad | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 8:42 AM

Some of your suggestions are good and right, the app should offer more helpful feedback in offline mode.

Hayedid:
(1) I've paid a lot for it

But not for the iPod/iPhone app...

Hayedid:
If additional help is needed to improve the functionality of this app, I'd even be willing to help with it.

http://www.logos.com/jobs#iPhone

Posts 29
Hayedid | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 12:22 PM

I beg to differ.  On the iPhone, the offline mode might not be necessary, but the app runs on the iPod as well.  If it's going to run on the device and be sold as an iPod application, it should function well as such.

With regard to the job, thanks for the link.  I'm not after a new fulltime job, but I would be willing to help.

 

Posts 29
Hayedid | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 12:48 PM

Ahhh.... if you are referring to the pricing, I totally disagree.  I was a Logos 3 user and, based upon the advertisements for the iPhone / iPod version which said, "Use your logos4 books on the iPod when you buy a Logos4 base package, I upgraded and got an iPod.  Much to my dismay, unless you have a WiFi connection handy, the iPod application is nothing more than a mediocre book viewer.  No searching, etc (as explained above).  So, since the iPod app is being used to get people to move to Logos 4 base packages, it is, in essence, very costly, escpecially when finding out it's pretty much featureless in offline mode.

Posts 201
Garrett Ho | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 1:48 PM

I'm sorry that the iphone app played such a large part in your purchasing decision, and that you didn't realize what you were buying when you spent the money.

As with all software, there are tradeoffs. The app is currently designed so that processing is done remotely and results are returned to the application via internet connection. I don't think we can imagine how slow it would be if our iphones did all the processing. I understand that you are asking that functionality be built in that will allow it to search downloaded resources, and that will require a major change to the code to add in such functionality.

Do I hope they add basic Bible searching and additional features? Yes. But I'm not upset about it because it was clearly stated what the application could do. When the app first came out there wasn't even offline reading! So, I'm grateful for the work that has been put into it.

Posts 557
John Kaess | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 3:34 PM

Offline reading is the reason I got the iPad app, its what I want and need to do.

The other features are all gravy.  I would never expect an iPad/iPhone app to do what logos 4 does on my high powered desktop computer.

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 3:39 PM

Hayedid:
Ahhh.... if you are referring to the pricing, I totally disagree.  I was a Logos 3 user and, based upon the advertisements for the iPhone / iPod version which said, "Use your logos4 books on the iPod when you buy a Logos4 base package,

It featured heavily in my decision to upgrade to L4 as well, but offline reading wasn't available at all then. I would like to see what they have planned for it (much as is done with L4 and L4Mac) rather than just taking what is handed to us. Although with the Apple review process hoop to jump through, this may not be possible.

 

 

Posts 29
Hayedid | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Apr 22 2010 10:36 PM

Yes.  You are right, Apple does make things difficult.  However, if OliveTree can do it, I don't see why Logos can't.  :)

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Apr 23 2010 8:38 AM

Hayedid:
Yes.  You are right, Apple does make things difficult.  However, if OliveTree can do it, I don't see why Logos can't.  :)

 

You mean that the Olive Tree app will do something that my iPad app won't??? I find that hard to believe, given Logos' technical superiority. Wink

 

 

Posts 29
Hayedid | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Aug 23 2010 1:45 PM

Perhaps not everything, but searching is a very basic functionality.

Posts 33
Stephen Coles | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Aug 26 2010 5:43 AM

I've been disappointed with the IPhone app, too.  The idea of being able to use Logos on my iPhone was part of my reason for upgrading but, like others here, it's very limited away from a good internet connection (e.g. in my local church).  I had Laridian's MyBible on my previous Palm and that could search, highlight and make notes.  I've now loaded their app on my iPhone and it's head and shoulders above Logos in usability - I now use that and forget Logos on the iPhone.

As an aside, I've been trying to run Logos on my laptop when travelling - it works but painfully slowly.  I've tried Laridian's desktop application there and it runs at a much better speed (and syncs notes, bookmarks and highlighting with my iPhone, too).  I now use that for quick look-ups or references - even on my desktop, Logos struggles, so it's kept for times when I need the more in-depth resources. Ironically, I went to check something this morning and inadvertently fired up Logos3 - was a nice reminder of how much quicker it all was before v4.

Posts 299
Robert Mullen | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Aug 26 2010 7:16 AM

Stephen Coles:

I've been disappointed with the IPhone app, too.  The idea of being able to use Logos on my iPhone was part of my reason for upgrading but, like others here, it's very limited away from a good internet connection (e.g. in my local church).  I had Laridian's MyBible on my previous Palm and that could search, highlight and make notes.  I've now loaded their app on my iPhone and it's head and shoulders above Logos in usability - I now use that and forget Logos on the iPhone.

As an aside, I've been trying to run Logos on my laptop when travelling - it works but painfully slowly.  I've tried Laridian's desktop application there and it runs at a much better speed (and syncs notes, bookmarks and highlighting with my iPhone, too).  I now use that for quick look-ups or references - even on my desktop, Logos struggles, so it's kept for times when I need the more in-depth resources. Ironically, I went to check something this morning and inadvertently fired up Logos3 - was a nice reminder of how much quicker it all was before v4.

I am in the same camp with the iPad/iPhone app and have been vocal about it. I really hope that Bob moves some devs from the L4M team to the iPad team as that product releases. It has been said that the iPxx team is a team of one. If that is the case it is no wonder things are slow to progress. Unfortunately the competition is still developing with Logos plays catch up here. I know Bob has the resources and vision to get this done but I also must confess impatience as I use the existing app every Sunday and see only incremental improvements at best.

On the subject of the desktop though, I too have used Laridian's Windows desktop in the past and have to say that the comparison to L4 is not apples to apples. Craig did a nice job on his desktop but it is in know way as feature rich and capable as L4. Those features come at a performance price though and I am more than willing to put up with it when I see incredible tools like the Exegetical Guide, Bible Word Study, Sentence Diagrammer, et. al L4 sets the bar very high for the competition and also for itself. I have faith that Bob and team will continue innovating in the future.

Posts 33
Stephen Coles | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Aug 27 2010 12:42 PM

I agree a Logos/Laridian comparison is not apples to apples - that's probably the reason the Laridian offering has significant performance advantage.  Logos tries to do too much on the iPhone (and users are asking for yet more) and, in my view, just isn't up to the job I need. 

The desktop is similar - I can't do all the sophisticated lookup and cross-referencing with Laridian's PocketBible.  However, when I just need to look up a passage and type up notes, as I sometimes like to do during a service (and sitting at the back on the sound desk, when not preaching, gives me the freedom to do that), Logos is just too slow on my laptop; I can also do some basic background information lookup in a commentary or dictionary and get the info before the speaker has moved onto another verse!

Logos is head and shoulders better when doing deep research (as long as your PC is up to it) but trying to be all things and so too much means a simpler tool is sometimes necessary.

Just my $0.02 worth...

Posts 87
Ray D | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 28 2010 9:47 AM

Robert Mullen:

I really hope that Bob moves some devs from the L4M team to the iPad team as that product releases.

I sure would also love to see more investment in the iPad app. I too am disappointed in the current functionality and usability. At this point, I pretty much don't use it. I have however purchased Olive Tree as well as the Crossway ESV Study Bible which are both superior in usability, but quite limited themselves. What that translates too I guess is this... for the time being I'm tied to my laptop for any real study.

Since I am on a roll, I guess I'll share something that I have wanted to share for some time. Quite honestly, I really struggle when Logos or others say or imply that we ought to be happy with what we have since the app is free. It's not free in my humble opinion. It's a means by which Logos promotes L4. In other words, if the iPxx apps are used in marketing materials in an effort to get folks to purchase or upgrade to L4, I kind of view that as part of the overall offering.  At least in my humble opinion, which I of course could be wrong. And for those of us who made substantial purchasing decisions in order to have resources available on the iPad. The whole discusion is rather frustrating to say the least. Having said that, I really do appreciate the folks at Logos, and would encourage them to share with us a little more in the way of a development plans for the mobile apps. That might lesson some of the frustration.

Posts 299
Robert Mullen | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 28 2010 11:00 AM

Ray D:
I sure would also love to see more investment in the iPad app. I too am disappointed in the current functionality and usability. At this point, I pretty much don't use it. I have however purchased Olive Tree as well as the Crossway ESV Study Bible which are both superior in usability, but quite limited themselves. What that translates too I guess is this... for the time being I'm tied to my laptop for any real study.

Since I am on a roll, I guess I'll share something that I have wanted to share for some time. Quite honestly, I really struggle when Logos or others say or imply that we ought to be happy with what we have since the app is free. It's not free in my humble opinion. It's a means by which Logos promotes L4. In other words, if the iPxx apps are used in marketing materials in an effort to get folks to purchase or upgrade to L4, I kind of view that as part of the overall offering.  At least in my humble opinion, which I of course could be wrong. And for those of us who made substantial purchasing decisions in order to have resources available on the iPad. The whole discusion is rather frustrating to say the least. Having said that, I really do appreciate the folks at Logos, and would encourage them to share with us a little more in the way of a development plans for the mobile apps. That might lesson some of the frustration.

Bob has shared that they are porting the desktop engine to the iPad. If this means what I think it means it will probably translate to gains on the Mac desktop as well. The Mac desktop uses a lot of common .NET functionality from the Windows side via Mono but having worked a little with that product I know it sometimes leaves a bit to be desired. If they are porting back end functionality to the iPad it has to be in Objective C/Cocoa (native OS X code) which will perform better. It does mean a lot of duplication of effort but I don't think Mono offers the free lunch that is implied. Cross platform has been promised forever in programming languages and other than the browser world it has been a compromise that users don't typically enjoy.

Anyway, this is a big undertaking and I am excited that Bob shared this vision. I would be interested to know what the development team plans are though too. If it is all going to be done by a single developer it is going to take a while. If we are a year out I am going to have to spend some money with OliveTree to get the tools I need for functional bible study on the iPad. I don't want to because I am confident that what Logos comes up with will be better.

In the end I agree that some more information would be really helpful for those of us who are struggling to use their iPad to it's fullest measure.

Posts 87
Ray D | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 28 2010 11:18 AM

Thanks for the reply Robert!

Posts 87
Ray D | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Sep 8 2010 12:42 PM

Ray D:

Robert Mullen:

I really hope that Bob moves some devs from the L4M team to the iPad team as that product releases.

...

Since I am on a roll, I guess I'll share something that I have wanted to share for some time. Quite honestly, I really struggle when Logos or others say or imply that we ought to be happy with what we have since the app is free. It's not free in my humble opinion. It's a means by which Logos promotes L4. In other words, if the iPxx apps are used in marketing materials in an effort to get folks to purchase or upgrade to L4, I kind of view that as part of the overall offering.  At least in my humble opinion, which I of course could be wrong. And for those of us who made substantial purchasing decisions in order to have resources available on the iPad. The whole discusion is rather frustrating to say the least. Having said that, I really do appreciate the folks at Logos, and would encourage them to share with us a little more in the way of a development plans for the mobile apps. That might lesson some of the frustration.

In view of the post linked to below which summarizes rather nicely what I was trying to articulate in the above. I would love for Logos to share a little more detail as it relates to specifics of the development plans for the mobile apps.Wink Not trying to still anything up, just would like to be a little more in the know.

http://community.logos.com/forums/p/22659/169242.aspx#169242

Posts 2
James Gilbert | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 9 2010 8:20 AM

I agree with you Ray. It frustrates me every time I read that it is a "free" app. I invested a lot of money into Logos and as a customer expect to have as much access (with full functionality) to my material as possible. The reality that we are moving quickly into a post-computer, mobile society is clear. The iPad is clear evidence. I LOVE logos and recommend it to all my ministry friends. I just think logos needs to be throwing more resources toward mobile platforms.

Posts 299
Robert Mullen | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 9 2010 9:24 AM

James Gilbert:

I agree with you Ray. It frustrates me every time I read that it is a "free" app. I invested a lot of money into Logos and as a customer expect to have as much access (with full functionality) to my material as possible. The reality that we are moving quickly into a post-computer, mobile society is clear. The iPad is clear evidence. I LOVE logos and recommend it to all my ministry friends. I just think logos needs to be throwing more resources toward mobile platforms.

I agree with this as well. The unfortunate part is that Logos is still a company with limited resources. The push to get L4 to feature parity (and beyond) with L3 is still underway and the Mac desktop release is in its final push as well. I do wish we could see at least some incremental progress with the iPad app as it really is 3rd in a 3 dog race right now IMO. I am confident it will be a real player at some point but it would be nice to have a little more information about when that might be and how the application is being improved.

Posts 2725
Kevin A. Purcell | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 9 2010 7:29 PM

It is important to remember that the iOS version of Logos is backed by a great and growing larger company. However, this app is developed by a guy. Dave Dunkin is working hard on his own. I think Logos might have hired some help for a time, but I believe he is at this time working alone. He may correct this, but I believe I'm right about this. Other apps are maintained by teams of 2 or more people. Many are a one man band. But few have the expectations of the Logos customer base trying to do an app by his or her self. Early on I was very critical of the app, but realized this and then started to test and review literally EVERY iPad app (that is every one available in the spring time - many more available now - and realized I was being unfair. So be patient and while I know nothing more than anyone else about what is coming, the app has grown steadily better over the last 10 months. Wow! It is not even a year old yet.

Page 1 of 2 (25 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS