Lack of serious effort

Page 1 of 2 (37 items) 1 2 Next >
This post has 36 Replies | 6 Followers

Posts 4
Wilder Bailey | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Jan 9 2010 7:05 PM

As I have seen and read from other posts, I appreciate Logos for allowing me to be able to watch the growth of the Mac version of this new direction in Logos for Mac.  That said, I do not see the kind of serious effort being expended.  With progress coming in small steps, it appears that the Mac version may well be many, many months away from being a credible application.

I believe the fine folks at Logos have simply not made the kind of effort available to the Mac community to bring this much needed work forward.  With the awesome power of the Mac platform and the growth of same, management at Logos should have found a way to be more competent in this  task than they have shown.

Posts 255
Pat Flanakin | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 7:33 PM

Last I read, Mr. Pritchett stated in December 2009 that within 6 months, the Mac version should be up and comparable to the windows version.

 

With more users on the Windows side vs. Mac side, it is a resources question, not an effort question per se.

 

Patience, patience...

I am a Mac user as well.

Posts 666
Frank Sauer | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 7:48 PM

This is not meant to be taken the wrong way... That said, it is really frustrating that Logos gets so many poor comments like this from the Mac community. I am the first to say point out issues with the program so that it can be made better. Team Logos has more than shown that they listen and act on the feedback of the users. That said, it is an incorrect statement that there is no effort for the Mac user...

Bob, Bradley, Phil, George, Melissa and all the other members that have spent months, weeks, days and hours in these forums answering questions, keeping users up to date and the whole team trying to get the greatest bible study tool on the market for both Windows and Mac almost simultaneously... While I can understand the extreme desire for a Mac platform, common business sense says you get the platform up and running that pays your business operational expenses. That would be the PC Version.

While I do not know the Logos percentage breakdown between users of PC and Mac, even if it were double the market share that Mac is in the computer industry, 20% is not going to get the same attention as 75% percent... I think the Mac users should give Logos some credit for even working this fast on the Mac version. Most companies would leave it as an after thought until all functions were complete and bug free on the PC Version...

Posts 4
Wilder Bailey | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 7:58 PM

I abandoned the earlier Mac work done by Logos as I felt the finished Mac version was poorly implemented by Logos, and not at all what the Mac platform was capable of supporting.

I am also remembering that what we are dealing with here is a resource to assist me and countless others in growing in the Lord's Word.  I am patient, but do not want to see this end result poorly finished as the first one.

Posts 1416
Wes Saad | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:01 PM

WilderBailey:
With progress coming in small steps, it appears that the Mac version may well be many, many months away from being a credible application.

There is some truth in this but it is not a surprise, nor does it go against what Logos has stated. Software development *always* takes place in a series of small steps. Nonetheless, we've seen some real improvements to the Mac version since its first Alpha (make sure you note that - Alpha, not Beta) version.

Software development takes time. Nothing happens overnight. Logos has several staff members dedicated to Mac development and they are trying to acquire more (note the Jobs section of their website). From where I stand it looks like development of the Mac version is going a little slower than I originally anticipated, but for myself I am satisfied with the progress I see being made.

Posts 1416
Wes Saad | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:02 PM

Pat Flanakin:
Last I read, Mr. Pritchett stated in December 2009 that within 6 months, the Mac version should be up and comparable to the windows version.

I believe the expectation was that within 6 months it would be quite usable, though not up to par with the windows version. And he made us promise not to hold him to that. :) 

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:13 PM

Thanks for sharing your judgements on the work ethic of the Mac developers Mr. Basiley. While everyne, including Bob Pritchett of Logos would agree that mistakes were made in the 1.x version of Logos for mac (see the Mac disclaimer page), those who have been watching this round of development have seen a very different approach with Logos 4 for mac. Everything this time is "in house" and Logos is still hiring more Mac developers as we type. If you have some specific questions on the work being done in L4mac and how that relates to the L4windows version, please feel free to ask questions. If you want to help make things better and move forword toward a successful project, please feel free to download L4mac and join those of use who are bug hunting and working to support the Mac developers.

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 5
Todd Frazier Michaels | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:25 PM

The Alexandrian approach: I'm going back to a 300$ HP netbook. Everything I have been told from every angle has been outright wrong. I bought paralells for the explicit purpose, and with assurances and that there would be no problems running Logos 4. Wrong. I can't even install it. There is no option that I can find for changing where the app installs to. So, it tries to install to a drive that doesn't exist. Still waiting for the actual discs.

I was told how great mac was. Great for watching beachballs and bleeding out cash to a company stuck in a scarcity mentality. 'Its a great company' Really? I don't get it.

Don't get me wrong. Windows works, poorly, but at least it does work.

So, no offense if I have less than stellar expectations from Logos. I definitely won't hold him to it for the sake of charity if nothing else. If the netbook doesn't work I will hopefully be 3 grand wiser and save my coworkers some time and expense. Back to scratching my head over paper, and maybe God want the money to go to the poor. Maybe that is the real lesson. 3 gs? What was I thinking. Maybe sinful extravagance. Consequences. Noted. God bless.

Posts 5571
Forum MVP
Rich DeRuiter | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:34 PM

m1chael5@me.com:
The Alexandrian approach: I'm going back to a 300$ HP netbook

Logos4 is not designed to work on a Netbook. But it could, if it meets the system requirements listed below.

http://www.logos.com/support/techfaq#sysreqs

 Help links: WIKI;  Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:39 PM

m1chael5@me.com:
Everything I have been told from every angle has been outright wrong. I bought paralells for the explicit purpose, and with assurances and that there would be no problems running Logos 4. Wrong. I can't even install it.

 

Computers suck when they don't do what you want them to. I know the frustration you are experiencing because I am responsible for many, many computers. Take a deep breath, grab a coke, see a movie. Get away from the problem for awhile. When the frustration level goes down, start working with the technical support groups for the products you are having problems with. Take it slowly, when the frustrations start to raise, take another break.

 

I use a Mac, I use Fusion and I have used Parallels, I use L4Win and L4Mac just like a lot of other people with no problems that can't be over come. Michael, you can too, and there are a lot of people that will devote a lot of time on this forum to making sure that you can. If there is anything I can do to help you, just email me at help2010@poperszky.org.

 

 

Posts 5
Todd Frazier Michaels | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:44 PM

Thanks, sorry for the brevity. Beachball hates me but God doesn't so oh well.

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 8:50 PM

Michael, I replied to your other thread with similar concerns here http://community.logos.com/forums/p/8364/73814.aspx#73814

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 343

Logos doesn't have to develop their program for the Mac at all if they didn't want to.  It is a benefit to Mac users, it' s not like we could demand "how much effort" they should put into the Mac product.  Obviously since they've allowed you to pay for it, they're working on making the product!  But hey, anything could happen to prevent that from finalizing.  God is in control! Smile  

That being said, I think the Logos 4 Mac is going to be increasingly having quicker surprises of what they were able to accomplish between releases.  My assumption is that right now they are focusing most of their Mac development on programming background code, and a little bit on the User Interface (Visual Display of the program).  Already they've said things in their release notes that they developed the code for certain features, but that they are not yet possible for the end user to activate the use of such.  That makes me think that once they have a lot of the background code done, then they'll put more of their Mac developers to the User Interface to code and we'll see quicker recognizable abilities and features.

If people keep on complaining about the Alpha Release, and how they spent too much money on a program that doesn't work right...then Logos is probably going to be tempted to not allow everyone to test their Alpha's & Betas in a future version, thereby everyone that enjoyed being involved in the process and having extra resources before the final product was released...they would then have to suffer as well because of those that complain about the very issues they put on their disclaimer page!  Though I still use Logos 1.2.2 most of the time, I enjoy being able to use the Alpha version as well for some of the other resources that weren't able to transfer to the older version.

Jason Saling

Posts 505
Michael Kares | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 10:45 PM

I would like to add that I think the Mac Dev's are going above and beyond what they are required to do.  Not only do they take time to do tech support, one of the Dev's does support when he's at home (and probably off the clock).  If that isn't serious effort, I don't know what is!

 

Also, most of the background code (base code) is the exact same as is used for the Windows program.  The Dev team is working on building a native Mac UI using a combination of Cocoa, and open-source framework, and a custom bridge between the two.  This will take time--but not as long as writing the whole program from scratch.

 

Blessings,

Michael Kares

Posts 2778
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 9 2010 10:59 PM

Jason, one bit of info you might be interested in is this. The Mac team is not developing any of the base code. The Windwos version shares exactly the same base code as the Mac version. so every new feature added by the Windows team is already built into the Mac version. The Mac team then is focused on developing the UI for us so we can access the features already there. In this regard, L4mac is not a typical Alpha project since in terms of features, it is already planned and designed.

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 343

Great!  Will go quicker than normal then as long as bugs in the open source software they're using to help develop the program don't prevent them from moving forward.

Jason Saling

Posts 33
rom | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 10 2010 12:32 PM

I was pretty ticked off that I paid more than I should have for Logos 3 (Mac). Not going to sugarcoat it -- and I won't, but I basically feel like I bought abandon-ware.

However Logos 4 seems to be developing quite nicely IMHO for Mac. It's nowhere near the L4 Windows version (itself not exactly the epitome of stability nor responsiveness) -- but it's getting to the point where I can fire it up and use it as more than a mere curiousity. In fact, the passage guide on Alpha9 seems to run faster(?) than my Vista box with virtually identical system specs to my MacBook Pro. Of course Vista does seem to slow down my PC considerably more than OS X slows down my Mac. So be that as it may.

From Thanksgiving -> Now has been a little more than a month. From Alpha5 to Alpha9 has been a HUGE improvement in L4 Mac and I'm pleased to see the direction it's going.

At this rate sometime in February I might not have to fire up my Windows machine :)

Posts 10649
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 10 2010 1:15 PM

RomeshPrakashpalan:
I was pretty ticked off that I paid more than I should have for Logos 3 (Mac). Not going to sugarcoat it -- and I won't, but I basically feel like I bought abandon-ware.

I can identify with your first sentence here. I felt the same way and expressed my low opinion Logos Mac 1 (Not 3) on these forums. However, I would not call L1.2.2 "Abandon-ware". Logos had been working of a Mac version for a few years. L1 Mac  was based on old technology to get a usable Mac version out the door. I did not like it, but many Mac users did. L4 Mac is a logical upgrade to L 1.2.2, and this path was stated several months ago by Bob Pritchett, CEO of Logos. You could update to L4 Mac and/or Windows without cost, but you would not have some of the enhanced resources that came with the upgrade packages. BTW, the upgrade prices are super deals.

RomeshPrakashpalan:
It's nowhere near the L4 Windows version

Not yet. But both versions share the same bas code and will therefore operate alike. The Mac Development Team is now hard at work writing the interface code to make the system work on the Mac. And, as you said, they are making remarkable progress. While I complained about L1 Mac, I am excited about L4 Mac.

Posts 33
rom | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 10 2010 5:16 PM

I agree with you 90% of the way. I don't think 1.2.2 of Logos Mac is anything that I would have represented as Logos for Mac. Call it something else if they wish, but someone using Logos 3 for Windows would probably be mortified that the Mac version cost the same (at least it was when I bought it). Just because they threw a Windows license with it doesn't really mean much to me -- as I'm a Mac user, and only recently have been using Logos on a Windows box.

Anyhow, be that as it may -- I did purchase the Logos 4 upgrade -- and I upgraded my collection to Scholar Silver. It is a fantastic bargain, and watching the Mac version progress (I use L4 on Windows primarily) has been encouraging.

I still don't feel like I got my money's worth with Logos 1 for Mac, but I think Logos 4 Mac will be worth the struggles we've gone through as Mac users. It has already been a blessing for my studies and teaching Smile

Posts 1692
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 10 2010 9:09 PM

WilderBailey:
That said, I do not see the kind of serious effort being expended.

Well, clearly you aren't walking through our offices very often. :-)

The Mac represents around 10% of our user base right now. Exactly 30% of our application development team is working (exclusively) on the Mac. (Plus one part-time intern, who is also on the Mac.)

We are sharing code from Windows to the Mac; a reason for the slower progress of the "visible" parts of the app is that we're finding / fixing / working-around issues in the cross-platform framework. This is getting stable, though, and more energy can be given to the surface-level interface, etc.

Page 1 of 2 (37 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS