Logos and the MacBook Air M1, compared to a maxed out 2019 MacBook Pro 16"

Page 5 of 8 (145 items) « First ... < Previous 3 4 5 6 7 Next > ... Last »
This post has 144 Replies | 16 Followers

Posts 427
Wilson Hines | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 10:57 AM

JT (alabama24):

Gregory Lawhorn:
Indexing is a brutal operation.

When I purchased L4 (my first real foray into Logos), I had a brand new Mac. The indexing took more than12 hours! 

I’m honestly not trying to one up you, but when the whole Indexing thing started, I think I had an old AMD processor in a custom box that wasn’t very new at that time. maybe a gig of RAM or something. It took 18.5 hours and I may have had 1,500 books. 

Wilson Hines

Posts 2690
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 11:13 AM

Indexing is one area where the Mac traditionally ties up all one's RAM. My old Mac has 16GB of RAM which goes to near zero during indexing even with L9. I really wonder how well it goes on in the M1. 

The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter

Posts 29036
Forum MVP
JT (alabama24) | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 11:14 AM

Wilson Hines:
I’m honestly not trying to one up you

No worries! Smile I don't know how long it took, 12 hours may have been a conservative underestimate! I do know that I started in early evening and it was still going when I left for work. 

The biggest point is that indexing IS a "brutal operation," but in perspective, 3 hours for nearly 10,000 resources is nothing compared to 12+ hours for less than 2,000! Surprise

macOS, iOS & iPadOS | Logs |  Install

Posts 2690
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 2:05 PM

https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/24/m1-mac-external-display-workaround/

The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter

Posts 427
Wilson Hines | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 2:39 PM

mab:

Indexing is one area where the Mac traditionally ties up all one's RAM. My old Mac has 16GB of RAM which goes to near zero during indexing even with L9. I really wonder how well it goes on in the M1. 

On my existing MBP (2014, i7, 8 GB RAM), if I buy a book or a dozen books or a dozen or more get updated, the indexing is so intense, near the last 20% or so, I can't even get Safari page refreshes LOL

Wilson Hines

Posts 2690
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 4:24 PM

Mike Prewitt:

I neither have the room or the monitors but the one caveat I noticed is that you weren't necessarily getting 4K either. Pioneers are known for the arrows in their backs.Geeked

The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter

Posts 9
Bob Lozano | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Nov 24 2020 9:26 PM

mab:

The M1 appears to operate like its siblings on an iPad. I never notice that I have a half dozen apps open unless I look. On a traditional computer, that often becomes a big headache but not on the iPad.

In this case the memory management behavior is a property of the OS, not the processor. While the emphasis has evolved over time, at a first order  iPadOS (like iOS, etc) focuses on working well with smaller amounts of ram. So apps / parts of apps that are not currently running may have their memory footprint drastically reduced through a whole variety of means.

In contrast, MacOS will very much assume that apps desire to remain in memory, at least partially so. There are strategies to reduce memory requirements when necessary, but for the most part the goal is to use whatever memory is available in some useful way.

So I would propose two quick conclusions-

  1. memory (ram) requirements for an m1 Mac will more closely resemble an Intel Mac than an ipad
  2. buy as much memory as reasonably fits in your budget.

The exact mix of of ram vs ssd will depend on what you do, but it's worth keeping in mind that small, sturdy and fast portable ssd are relatively cheap and can be added at any time, while the ram simply cannot be expanded, ever.

Posts 1
Pastor Lillard | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 2 2020 5:59 AM

Maybe you can help me with something.

I use Proclaim and Logos, too and I agree they run on the Apple M1 chipset just fine.

But here is my problem, I also use Ecamm live to live stream and while it works on the intel based CPU to Send Proclaim to Ecamm Live, it does not with the M1 chipset. 

First of all the NDI scan converter crashes every time. a No Go.

Second I bought the scan converter from Sienna, which was supposed to work. No Go.

Can't Proclaim build NDI into its software like Pro presenter does?

I am reluctant to switch to the M1 if this cannot be fixed, either by Newtek, or Faithlife proclaim.

Anyone out there have the same experience? Any solutions?

Posts 3
Florian Schoffke | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 1:03 AM

Hello,

we ordered a M1 Mac Mini and launched proclaim with it. Everything seemed to work fine, we just have one issue which I wonder other M1 users have as well:

When displaying a bible passage within proclaim everything is butter smooth in the "edit" view. But as soon as I enter "preview" view or "on air" the bible passage stutters a lot. Slide transitions are all smooth, only the bible passage feature doesn't seem to work smoothly.

Do others also experience this? Any setting I need to adjust?

Posts 432
Gregory Lawhorn | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 1:50 AM

Florian Schoffke:

When displaying a bible passage within proclaim everything is butter smooth in the "edit" view. But as soon as I enter "preview" view or "on air" the bible passage stutters a lot. Slide transitions are all smooth, only the bible passage feature doesn't seem to work smoothly.

Do others also experience this? Any setting I need to adjust?

Hi Florian - I presume you're using "On-Screen Bible," and I see the same thing on my MacBook Air. I don't use On-Screen Bible, just the plain old Bible slides, so I never though to test it in my video. I apologize for that. 

My guess is that in spite of the movie "play" button in the preview window, Proclaim isn't generating a movie file for the slide ahead of time, but animates it on the fly during the presentation. The small version in Edit mode is much, much smaller than the projected version. If you resize the preview window in Edit more (drag the vertical bar to the left to make the preview bigger) you'll see it stutter there, too.

The preview size on my MacBook Air is 565x317, which is 179,105 pixels. If Proclaim's On-Air size is 1080p HD, that would be 1920x1080, or 2,073,600 pixels, which is 11.5 times bigger. 1280x720 is 921,600 pixels, more than 5 times bigger. Proclaim is already hitting the GPU hard, and adding an HD on-the-fly animation is more than Rosetta 2 can handle. 

Posts 3
Florian Schoffke | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 1:53 AM

Hi Gregory,

thank you for your reply, we use the on screen bible. The one which contains the animations and such

Posts 432
Gregory Lawhorn | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 2:35 AM

Florian Schoffke:

Hi Gregory,

thank you for your reply, we use the on screen bible. The one which contains the animations and such

I edited my answer, and you had already answered, so I'm pasting it in again to make sure you see it.

Hi Florian - I presume you're using "On-Screen Bible," and I see the same thing on my MacBook Air. I don't use On-Screen Bible, just the plain old Bible slides, so I never though to test it in my video. I apologize for that. 

My guess is that in spite of the movie "play" button in the preview window, Proclaim isn't generating a movie file for the slide ahead of time, but animates it on the fly during the presentation. The small version in Edit mode is much, much smaller than the projected version. If you resize the preview window in Edit more (drag the vertical bar to the left to make the preview bigger) you'll see it stutter there, too.

The preview size on my MacBook Air is 565x317, which is 179,105 pixels. If Proclaim's On-Air size is 1080p HD, that would be 1920x1080, or 2,073,600 pixels, which is 11.5 times bigger. 1280x720 is 921,600 pixels, more than 5 times bigger. Proclaim is already hitting the GPU hard, and adding an HD on-the-fly animation is more than Rosetta 2 can handle. 

Posts 3
Florian Schoffke | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 2:40 AM

Thank you for your answer! 

So I also tested that with a 13" Macbook Pro from 2015. With an i5 and 8GB Ram, so nothing special. And that one delivered also a smooth experience on the projector. 

So would you assume that a M1 optimized version would improve that? Have you heard of any plans to develop that?

Posts 432
Gregory Lawhorn | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 2:55 AM

Florian Schoffke:

Thank you for your answer! 

So I also tested that with a 13" Macbook Pro from 2015. With an i5 and 8GB Ram, so nothing special. And that one delivered also a smooth experience on the projector. 

So would you assume that a M1 optimized version would improve that? Have you heard of any plans to develop that?

I do think the M1, or "universal" app, will solve the problem. Final Cut Pro is native to the M1, and there is no stutter. It drives the GPU harder than Proclaim does; the fans on my 16" MBP run all the time in Final Cut, and never in Proclaim. 

Posts 432
Gregory Lawhorn | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 2:59 AM

Florian Schoffke:

Have you heard of any plans to develop that?

Sorry, forgot the second question. No one knows Faithlife's timeframe, ever. The first official word on Logos 9 came the day it was released. Faithlife will obviously create M1 versions of Logos, Proclaim, etc., but they won't even promise that until it's at least at the beta stage, and maybe not then. I did my video test partly because Faithlife's official answer is that Logos is not designed for the M1 processor, and you're on your own if you install it on one. I'm not complaining; it's better to not promise, than to make a promise and then not deliver. And, the issues with the Intel 11 chip are proof that tech advances can and do break things. 

Posts 2809
Kevin A. Purcell | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 6:15 AM

For your info I did some testing of Logos and other Bible apps on my MBP M1. All are linked here.

https://community.logos.com/forums/p/196433/1140597.aspx#1140597

Posts 9020
LogosEmployee

Gregory Lawhorn:
Faithlife's official answer is that Logos is not designed for the M1 processor, and you're on your own if you install it on one.

You are not "on your own"; support is provided for customers running Logos on M1 hardware.

(Edit: This doesn't mean that the program works flawlessly or that all problems can be fixed by contacting Support; for example, there are known performance issues with CEF-based features. We plan to fix them in a future update, but until then there are no known workarounds.)

Posts 432
Gregory Lawhorn | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 3 2020 6:32 AM

Bradley Grainger (Faithlife):

Gregory Lawhorn:
Faithlife's official answer is that Logos is not designed for the M1 processor, and you're on your own if you install it on one.

You are not "on your own"; support is provided for customers running Logos on M1 hardware.

I stand corrected - thanks for posting that.

Page 5 of 8 (145 items) « First ... < Previous 3 4 5 6 7 Next > ... Last » | RSS