Chris Roberts: alabama24: At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month! Except to get Lion you have to have Snow Leopard first
alabama24: At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month!
At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month!
Except to get Lion you have to have Snow Leopard first
And there are hardware reasons why some are not able to upgrade. Lion requires a minimum of Core2 duo. If they didn't upgrade to Snow Leopard, why would they upgrade to Lion?
I'm not seeing the problem on my Apple 1
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:L4M is, I think it is fairly broadly accepted, held back/hamstrung by Mono. You are the only person I know who routinely makes this assertion. As I've indicated before, your concerns have little basis in fact. Please either stop making these claims or send us a résumé so that you can have the opportunity to create an informed opinion.
Patrick S.:L4M is, I think it is fairly broadly accepted, held back/hamstrung by Mono.
You are the only person I know who routinely makes this assertion. As I've indicated before, your concerns have little basis in fact. Please either stop making these claims or send us a résumé so that you can have the opportunity to create an informed opinion.
David — when I say L4M is held back by Mono I mean, and I believe you know I mean, that Mono/.NET is definitely not doing L4M any favours and is only there because of Logos 4 Windows. That I believe is a fact, if you can show me any way that Mono/.NET is benefitting L4M (performance wise as that is the basis of this, and many threads on the forum) I'll be the first to shut up. I have also said many times - and you know this - that Logos has explained its reason for using Mono, it was Logos' business decision (which is its to make) and I sincerely hope that it does not long term negatively affect the Mac product that, so far, I have spent US $4,502.41 on.
And as for the Mono project itself — well I just hope life support keeps going long enough for it to recover and stay viable. And that's a fact.
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:I believe the 'what' depends on Mono which is overdue for revision, and is itself still based on a couple of versions old .NET. The version of .net we use has more to do with issues in WPF 4 (on Windows) than it does on Mono.
Patrick S.:I believe the 'what' depends on Mono which is overdue for revision, and is itself still based on a couple of versions old .NET.
The version of .net we use has more to do with issues in WPF 4 (on Windows) than it does on Mono.
Oh well, at least we can console ourselves that the Windows users are suffering also . Which doesn't change the fact that the version of .NET in Mono is old — and not 64 bit.
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:Strongly doubt is 64 bit. This is something I'm working on. It is likely that the greatest amount of effort will be spent in our resource display code, which is (and always has been) native code.
Patrick S.:Strongly doubt is 64 bit.
This is something I'm working on. It is likely that the greatest amount of effort will be spent in our resource display code, which is (and always has been) native code.
Great.
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:Unfortunately don't believe the extra horsepower capabilities in OS X (Grand Central) etc. can be used in L4M back-end as the 'engine' is the closed box Mono/.NET running DLLs - no doubt impervious to improvement. This is untrue. It is quite simple to use Grand Central Dispatch from Logos 4. The primary reason that we have not done so is that we still support Leopard, which does not have Grand Central Dispatch. Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies.
Patrick S.:Unfortunately don't believe the extra horsepower capabilities in OS X (Grand Central) etc. can be used in L4M back-end as the 'engine' is the closed box Mono/.NET running DLLs - no doubt impervious to improvement.
This is untrue. It is quite simple to use Grand Central Dispatch from Logos 4. The primary reason that we have not done so is that we still support Leopard, which does not have Grand Central Dispatch. Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies.
But you're not trying to say that Grand Central can be used with/interfaced with Mono/.NET I think. So even if Grand Central was used with L4M overall the Mono/.NET black box would not improve in performance. Which was the point I was making. If I am incorrect in that statement - great, look forward to a significant increase in performance in L4M.
Isn't it possible (I don't know directly) to code/compile separate versions of Logos for Snow Leopard & Leopard? Seems a shame to hold back 93% of users for 7%. I think if Logos polled all the Mac users with a question like, for example "would you upgrade to Snow Leopard if you could enjoy a 15-20% performance increase in L4M?" I believe we can guess the response.
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:On the UI side there is no reason that once content (data) is available that the screen can't be drawn very quickly. In theory, this is true. In practice, the situation is complex. Send us a résumé, and I'll tell you all about it .
Patrick S.:On the UI side there is no reason that once content (data) is available that the screen can't be drawn very quickly.
In theory, this is true. In practice, the situation is complex. Send us a résumé, and I'll tell you all about it .
I'll take your word for it, I have no intention of ascending the calvary of being a Mac developer of L4M — all those pesky users bugging one
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
Patrick S.:Mono/.NET is definitely not doing L4M any favours and is only there because of Logos 4 Windows. That I believe is a fact, if you can show me any way that Mono/.NET is benefitting L4M (performance wise as that is the basis of this, and many threads on the forum) I'll be the first to shut up.
The CLR offers a better concurrency model than what was available on OS X prior to Snow Leopard. I have yet to find an area in which the performance hit of using .NET outweighs the benefits that we get from it. It is true that there are areas of our code that need tuning, but you can write slow code in any language.
Patrick S.:Which doesn't change the fact that the version of .NET in Mono is old — and not 64 bit.
You misunderstand me. Mono is up-to-date with the latest CLR specifications in all the areas we care about. It does have 64-bit support for some platforms, and it does build in 64-bit mode for Mac (we're currently working on patching a couple of bugs for it).
Patrick S.:But you're not trying to say that Grand Central can be used with/interfaced with Mono/.NET I think.
Here is the code for using Grand Central Dispatch from C#: https://github.com/mono/maccore/blob/master/src/CoreFoundation/Dispatch.cs
David Mitchell Development Lead Logos Bible Software
David Mitchell: Daniel Bergquist:Yeah, I just wouldn't be up for leaving Lincoln. ;-) Probably because you haven't yet been to Bellingham… Just sayin'
Daniel Bergquist:Yeah, I just wouldn't be up for leaving Lincoln. ;-)
Probably because you haven't yet been to Bellingham…
Just sayin'
I'm sure it's a great place, maybe I'll visit someday, I love traveling! As far as living... I'm just a Nebraska area guy, family, friends and pretty much my entire existence has been here. ;-)
David Mitchell: Patrick S.:But you're not trying to say that Grand Central can be used with/interfaced with Mono/.NET I think. Here is the code for using Grand Central Dispatch from C#: https://github.com/mono/maccore/blob/master/src/CoreFoundation/Dispatch.cs
Now that's cool. Even if GCD from C# didn't exist, the app could be split into multiple processes to work around any mono CPU/RAM constraints. Mathematica once did that when UNIX processes could do 64-bit but Cocoa processes could not. Chrome does it for other reasons. There are other reasons why splitting up into distinct processes would be a good idea, but I am not at liberty to discuss them on a public forum as I am unsure if they have been publicly announced.
But again this is armchair engineering. It assumes that the various bits of code are well encapsulated so they can be separated. Without access to the code, there's no telling how well a move to GCD or multiple processes would progress. Never mind other items might take priority, such as the aforementioned 10.5 compatibility.
12-Core Mac Pro, MacBook 2.0 GHz Core Duo, Mac mini
Favorites: http://www.piratechristianradio.com http://issuesetc.org
It is amazing what you can do with some ingenuity. Once I solved a problem for a Fortune 100 company who needed to tessellate extensive CAD/CAM 3-D Solids libraries on demand . I set up IPC/RPC code to parallelize the math problem across 500 Unix systems. The code would hunt around for unused CPU cycles across a low latency hypercube bisectional multi-stage, omega, buffered-wormhole routing packet-switch. That was the actual term for the technology, I am not making it up.
Really fun stuff to do - A systems programmers dream environment -
David M -
Any updates on this per your comment regarding users on Leopard holding back on incorporating Grand Central Dispatch. Not sure why you could not to conditional coding -
Snow Leopard and Lion support GCD -
Larry Good: David M - Any updates on this per your comment regarding users on Leopard holding back on incorporating Grand Central Dispatch. Not sure why you could not to conditional coding - Snow Leopard and Lion support GCD -
When possible, we avoid writing different code for different versions of an OS, as it significantly increases the testing burden (especially given that developers really *hate* using old OS releases…). We sometimes take advantage of new features that don't have a deep impact (so full screen mode in Lion is not entirely out of the question), but trying to use GCD in some versions but not others would be a big bucket of hurt.
I'm aware of the user adoption rates of Lion, not only in the wild , but also among users of Logos 4 (which, arguably, is a more important figure). We're certainly getting closer to the day when we won't feel the need to continue supporting Leopard, but that day isn't tomorrow.
I'll take your word on that. Just checking to see where things were at. Thanks for replying back.
Larry
Just askin: Is it not true that many companies have developers that live all over the country and, even all over the world?
Is this not part of the eco-system in the open source world?
If this is true, then "why not" take advantage of some developers/engineers that are willing to work with Logos , but cannot relocate.
Seems there is one or two around the forums that might be quite able and, willing to get on board.
Just Askin.
alabama24: David Mitchell: Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies. At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month!
David Mitchell: Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies.
Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies.
At $30 it might save Logos money if they pay them to upgrade so they can drop legacy support that is apparently holding them back.
Kevin Purcell
Get my columns at Christian Computing Magazine
Too funny Kevin.
Mac | iOS | L5 Gold | Win Logs | Mac Logs
Kevin A. Purcell: alabama24: David Mitchell: Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies. At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month! At $30 it might save Logos money if they pay them to upgrade so they can drop legacy support that is apparently holding them back.
Don't think I haven't considered it!
Hey David: This was on another thread but, you may not have seen it.
When I called support and we screen shared and all of that, one of my issues was that when using my outboard monitor/monitors several of the "buttons" cease to be functional.
Tech support tried several things and said this was a " currently unknown" bug and would report it as they were ( i guess) able to duplicate it.
Thus, I am unable to use Logos on larger screens when on my Macbook.
The question is: Is the a "workaround" available, something I can do on my end?
Not trying to be a pest, just trying to give old eyes some room to work-smile.
If need be, can move this to new thread, if inappropriate, we can just remove the post.
Thanks.
David Mitchell: Kevin A. Purcell: alabama24: David Mitchell: Approximately 7% of our active Mac users are on Leopard. When a considerable number of them have upgraded, we'll consider dropping support and using newer technologies. At $30, hopefully all 7% will upgrade this month! At $30 it might save Logos money if they pay them to upgrade so they can drop legacy support that is apparently holding them back. Don't think I haven't considered it!
Wonder about special "rebate" promotion for active Leopard users ? If upgrade to Snow Leopard, then receive $ 30 Logos credit for future purchases.
Email to Logos 4 Mac Leopard users could include performance improvement (Snow Leopard is noticeably faster than Leopard in many applications) plus Logos plans to improve Logos 4 Mac using technologies in Snow Leopard and OS X Lion.
Keep Smiling
Logos Wiki Getting Started Logos 5 Beta
Fr. Charles R. Matheny: Thus, I am unable to use Logos on larger screens when on my Macbook. The question is: Is the a "workaround" available, something I can do on my end?
With display attached to MacBook, wonder about moving menu bar => http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/apple-osx-move-bottom-dock-top-menu-bar-second-monitor/ then use Logos 4 Mac on display with menu bar ?
Fr. Charles R. Matheny: Hey David: This was on another thread but, you may not have seen it. When I called support and we screen shared and all of that, one of my issues was that when using my outboard monitor/monitors several of the "buttons" cease to be functional. Tech support tried several things and said this was a " currently unknown" bug and would report it as they were ( i guess) able to duplicate it. Thus, I am unable to use Logos on larger screens when on my Macbook. The question is: Is the a "workaround" available, something I can do on my end? Not trying to be a pest, just trying to give old eyes some room to work-smile. If need be, can move this to new thread, if inappropriate, we can just remove the post. Thanks.
The case has not yet been brought to my attention (this is not unusual—the Logos Desktop development lead is generally the first to receive such reports). That being said, I'll be happy to look into it if you post a more detailed description of your issue in a new thread.
ok, will start thread.
Thanks
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :): Wonder about special "rebate" promotion for active Leopard users ? If upgrade to Snow Leopard, then receive $ 30 Logos credit for future purchases. Email to Logos 4 Mac Leopard users could include performance improvement (Snow Leopard is noticeably faster than Leopard in many applications) plus Logos plans to improve Logos 4 Mac using technologies in Snow Leopard and OS X Lion.
Email to Leopard users could include link => http://www.macintouch.com/specialreports/snowleopard/slfaq.html since upgrading from Leopard to Snow Leopard has some potential issues. Appears most programs that work under Leopard continue to work in Snow Leopard => Snow Leopard compatibility list
Regarding Grand Central Dispatch. Snow Leapord and Lion both support Grand Central Dispatch.
This graph indicates as of October about 75% of the install base can support GCD. Leopard is curve is downward
Vanilla Leopard does not, but its at 14% market share.