If logos for iphone, why not for linux or at least wine

Page 1 of 1 (20 items)
This post has 19 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 13
Scott Warner | Forum Activity | Posted: Tue, Dec 29 2009 10:35 AM

I can't understand how the company and programmers can have so much time to program for iphone, but not enough time to at least make it compatible for wine, for use under linux.  I too am another user that has bought resources and only keeps windows around for 1 program.  It can't be that hard to make it work with wine.  Nobody's asking for a free version or even a version completely written for linux, just one we can use within linux, without having to buy windows or mac os, too.  Linux is on 1/4 of the netbooks.  It is big enough to show a little notice and write for us linux users.

Posts 299
Robert Mullen | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 10:44 AM

A few folks have discussed this. Bob has stated that Linux has maybe 1% of the market so it is hard to justify much expense. According to one of the Mac developers they are coding the UI in platform specific technology while the engine itself is .NET. If the Mono.NET group ever implement WPF (not seeming likely at this point) it would likely make the conversion easier. Short of that you are going to have to make something like Wine or Crossover work. Have you tried to make a bottle for Logos? My experience is that rich and resource intensive programs are a tough go. I think a Linux implementation would be neat but the free nature of Linux makes a lot of commercial folks pause and wonder if someone using a free OS would be inclined to purchase their software. I do think it is a valid concern.

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 9:12 PM

Scott, it comes down to market vs. cost.  The cost of an iPhone app is nothing compared to the MILLION dollars or more it would take to develop a Linux program.

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 13
Scott Warner | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:04 PM

Would it really cost millions, just to make the Windows version compatible with wine?

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:18 PM

ScottWarner01:
Would it really cost millions, just to make the Windows version compatible with wine?
As best I can recall, this was the development cost Bob P. shared with us on another thread.  So, yes (to be the best of my memory which may be faulty on the exact dollar amount) 1 Million is the cost.

But regardless of the exact number, Bob has shared it is just not a good business decision until there is a larger market

http://community.logos.com/forums/p/121/991.aspx#991 

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 687
Jon | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:23 PM

The iPhone program is a thinclient for a server based version of Logos which harnesses the core of Logos 4 on a server platform to handle searches, guides etc. You can get equivalent functionality by loading up a browser to library.logos.com in a browser in Linux...

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:36 PM

Good point Jon.

Scott, what this means is that for a minimal cost, Logos can make resources available on an iPhone.  But this smaller cost creates a higher value to both the market of both current users and potential users already using Windows or Mac.  In other words, a small investment in a server applet creates a higher value for the existing Windows/Mac product.  That is, potentially, a good return on investment.  

However, for Logos to invest comparatively large sum of money to open a brand new market (wine/Lunix) is a completely different calculation of return on investment in relation to market share.

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 403
777 | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Dec 31 2009 7:09 AM

ScottWarner01:

I can't understand how the company and programmers can have so much time to program for iphone, but not enough time to at least make it compatible for wine, for use under linux.  I too am another user that has bought resources and only keeps windows around for 1 program.  It can't be that hard to make it work with wine.  Nobody's asking for a free version or even a version completely written for linux, just one we can use within linux, without having to buy windows or mac os, too.  Linux is on 1/4 of the netbooks.  It is big enough to show a little notice and write for us linux users.

Man, I feel your pain.  I LOVE Linux.  I also need decent Bible software.  Since I study in the original languages I find myself wanting when I try to use something like BibleTime or Xiphos in Linux (these are now both available in Windows as well).  Don't get me wrong - BibleTime and Xiphos are both good pieces of software (you can even do things like PRINT, which you can't yet in Logos 4) and I have the utmost respect for the people that code Bible software for Linux.  They are giving away their hard work to help people with the Word and are not doing it to fatten their wallet.

There is nothing to speak of as far as lexicons in any Linux Bible software.  Logos has a wonderful selection of them as well as some very good dictionaries.  I use another Bible software under Windows that I shall not name here (but it rhymes with BibleWorks) that is very, VERY good for original language studies - so I HAVE to use Windows software.  And it pretty much $%#@!  I'm not a big fan of Windows at all.  I'd just as soon use Linux and it wouldn't make any difference if the software for Linux was free or I had to buy it.  I just like how Linux works better.  But the same folks that write Linux Bible software will never offer lexicons and dictionaries of any substance because those types of resources plain and simple cost licensing fees, which most Linux users are not going to want to pay.  I would pay and I'm sure you would pay - so that only makes two of us.

I used to wonder why Logos couldn't just park someone in the corner to tweak their code to run with WINE.  Then I realized something....

Logos and that other software were already here and I had already purchased them and just because I like Linux better doesn't mean that I can't use Windows.

And then I bought Windows 7 Professional and I *LIKED* it.  Better than XP.  Better than Vista.  I liked that I could set the system clock in Windows 7 to UTC because on all of my computers I have swappable drives (even the laptop) and I can swap out Windows and swap in Linux.  With the UTC clock I no longer have to reset the time when I boot Windows after using Linux.  And Windows 7 is pretty good.  I've been using Linux since RedHat 3 or so and Windows 7 is pretty good stuff.  And if you knew me personally, you'd find it hard to believe that I was saying this.

So if you want to use the tool that you want to use, you're going to be better off sucking it up and using Windows.  It's here now and you can use it today.  Logos has made it clear that they are not interested in coding for Linux or even bothering to make their product work for Linux.  They're still beating on their Mac product and from what I can gather on these forums, it's  going to be a spell before it comes close to the Windows version.  If you want to run Windows software, then you might have to resort to running Windows.  I know... I know.  I'd like Logos in Linux too.  Reality says it ain't gonna happen.  Windows 7 has taken some of the pain out though.

As far as WHY Logos can write code for the iPhone and not for Linux goes... their iPhone programmer is too busy writing iPhone code.  Everyone at Logos has to have an iPhone by now, so they're going to keep this coder working on the iPhone stuff.  If everyone at Logos was running Ubuntu or Debian or Fedora or Mint or Mandriva or whatever, then you'd be getting your Linux version.  It's not happening.  Go get Windows and go study your Bible. Or go learn to use gcc and spend the next 10 years writing Linux Bible software code before you get a chance to use it to study.

Reality is what it is.

Mike

 

Posts 9
Changhee Chang | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 8:30 PM

Sorry for bringing this thread back up after so many months but I think developing a compatible bottle for Logos under wine would be very welcome by many and not just the small number of linux users.

Open source wine and the commercial alternatives like crossover work in OSX also.

It's not just for linux users but also for Mac users.

The official Mac version of Logos4 is long over due and it's still in its alpha phase.

Perhaps it might be easier for the Logos programmers to officially support Logos on Wine to run under both Linux and OSX.   

Posts 60
Edwin Kwok | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 8:40 PM

Hmm. Then perhaps Logos for wine development would be much better than Logos for Mac. I have given up waiting for Logos for Mac for a long time now. Can someone at Logos with better IT knowledge look at that please? You might be able to save millions by doing wine instead of L4Mac.

Edwin

Posts 201
Garrett Ho | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 8:47 PM

I think this question has been sufficiently answered. What you're proposing is that they stop implementing features on Logos 4 to make it compatible with wine, and completely abandon Logos 4 Mac? I'm sure you'd like to have a version that works on Linux, but that doesn't seem like a prudent solution.

As was mentioned earlier, you can use the web version for now. Even if they did implement your idea it would be quite a while before it was functional, and then minimally.

Posts 60
Edwin Kwok | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 8:55 PM

Hi, I am a Mac user, never touched Linux in my life.

Just wait and see, Logos for Mac, if it ever see daylight, will NOT have the full functionality of Logos4 for Windows.

A wine application? It is a full port of L4 into the target environment, no re-coding of anything else but the "hooks" between L4 and wine.

Edwin

Posts 9
Changhee Chang | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 9:02 PM

Did I mention that wine works on Macs? 

This would not only benefit linux users but also Mac users. 

Logos 4 does not have to be re written to run on linux or osx. 

It is worth exploring the Wine path. I believe it is the more economic choice actually contrary to what some of you think.  

 

 

Posts 201
Garrett Ho | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 9:14 PM

Yes, that has been mentioned.

I think people are still underestimating the ease of porting it into Wine. They are also underestimating the benefit of having a native application (or front end). Furthermore, we do not know the performance of such an implementation. Finally, the program would be dependent on an open source 3rd party program which has its own potential development and compatibility issues.

Considering the complaining in these forums about (1) indexing and (2) tech support, I think there are a lot of questions to be answered before championing Wine as the panacea. That is all. Let us not easily presume to know so much more than those devoting their lives to the success of this application.

Posts 9
Changhee Chang | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 10:43 PM

Garrett. 

I'm not trying to cause trouble here. Please don't misunderstand me in that regard. I do not in any way think that I know more than the logos staff and from your replies I can gather that you are much more of an expert on this matter than I am. 

But all that I am suggesting is that the wine option is worth exploring for the many mac users out there. And that this is not just a linux only thing. 

I think the main argument against logos for wine (if you read the past threads) has been that the user base and the demand for it isn't high enough to warrant development hours and resources to be channeled into such ventures. But if you consider the many Mac users who are running the windows version of Logos in virtual machines, it might just be worth it.

Also, many of us I'm sure would be more than happy with just a list of windows components and drivers that are needed (in theory) to make logos run. And people can try for themselves and experiment with wine. This is exactly how many windows applications have come to run satisfactorily under wine over the years, not through official support but through the amateur community, experimenting and tweaking with components and drivers. 

Companies like Mims Online, who only make a windows version for their database software, do not officially support wine, but they do release the list of drivers and components needed to run their software. The Community has taken the information on board and many now run Mims in Linux and OSX under wine without having to install virtual machines and windows.

Just tossing up some ideas. Not trying to offend anyone ok? If it can't be done, then it can't be done. I'll just stick to running the windows version of logos on my mac in a virtual machine.

Posts 1692
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 10:49 PM

We use WPF in Logos 4, and I believe that doesn't work on Wine. (Not sure -- I'm not an expert.)

We just don't have a large enough Linux user base to justify a special port. (There are 15+ people just porting to the Mac.) I know Linux share is up, but it isn't up in our customer segment, which trends more consumer than techie, more desktop than server, and more "high powered" than netbook.

There was a better chance technically of getting Libronix working on Wine, I believe, and we even contributed to the "bounty" to get its issues addressed. But we don't have the skills or resources to do it ourselves.

Posts 201
Garrett Ho | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 3 2010 11:18 PM

Bob,

Thanks for your response. I'm always encouraged by the amount of time that you spend responding to forum posts. And you don't just post during work hours, but throughout the day!

Changhee,

Thanks for your post and clarification. I'm sorry if I came across too hard to you; that was not my intention. Your posts were very carefully worded suggestions to consider Wine, and I think it is a legitimate suggestion. However, you posted in a thread in which the OP was much less careful with his words. I was responding to the general attitude that we sometimes believe we know better than those actively developing the product, and did not mean to imply that you are in fact demanding change. My apologies to you.

Posts 316
Thinking | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 3 2011 1:10 PM

Actually, I believe Logos for Windows running under WINE would have been a wiser move than the MONO Mac Logos. WINE is free. an automatic installer is reasonably simple and putting the effort and time into WINE would have caused fewer complaints then programing for MONO. Despite all the confidence exuded on this forum for MONO's bright future, only time will tell whether it survives. Logos made a choice to go with MONO. You may want to hedge your bets with a WINE port. I run one program for Windows on my Mac under WINE. It actually runs faster on the Mac than in its native Windows.

Posts 201
Garrett Ho | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jun 3 2011 1:15 PM

This is an old thread. Now that development has been going on for some time, this discussion is somewhat moot. 

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jun 4 2011 5:08 AM

Phil Mills:

Actually, I believe Logos for Windows running under WINE would have been a wiser move than the MONO Mac Logos. WINE is free. an automatic installer is reasonably simple and putting the effort and time into WINE would have caused fewer complaints then programing for MONO. Despite all the confidence exuded on this forum for MONO's bright future, only time will tell whether it survives. Logos made a choice to go with MONO. You may want to hedge your bets with a WINE port. I run one program for Windows on my Mac under WINE. It actually runs faster on the Mac than in its native Windows.

Observation: Logos 4 under WINE would still need MONO for .NET code base shared between Mac and PC.  The old MONO project never had plans for Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) => http://www.mono-project.com/WPF  (technically not viable for Logos 4 PC to run using WINE since lacked WPF for application display and interaction: could index resources, but not read them).

Appears Xamarin CEO has a mobile development framework focus => http://nat.org/blog/2011/05/xamarin/ consistent with new items in blog announcing Xamarin company (MONO project follow-on) => http://tirania.org/blog/

Apologies, currently not know about MONO future after Attachmate's acquisition of Novell and SuSE linux strategic direction return to Deutschland (Germany).

Wonder about possibility of running Mac OS X (Cocoa) interface on Linux (with MONO) ? => http://wiki.gnustep.org/index.php/Writing_portable_code

Keep Smiling Smile

Page 1 of 1 (20 items) | RSS