Be Honest - Would you buy again?

Page 2 of 4 (69 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >
This post has 68 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 300
John Graves | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 3:00 PM

Joe Miller:

JohnGraves:
I guess I should have said first priority.  My post was not meant to reflect negatively on Logos.
It's all good my friend.  You are always welcome to express your view here brother.  Respectful and honest disagreement is healthy and you have been both your expressing your views. :-)

JohnGraves:
But they did put out the windows version before the mac version.
True, and I think it was the right business decision AND, in my opinion, the right decision for the best software development process.  If you will indulge me, I will tell you why.

1. The Windows version represents a much larger market share.  We all know that is a fact.  Therefore, sales of L4win can be used to subsidize the L4mac development.  That is smart business decision making sure you can pay your bills before they come due :-)

2. While it is true the L4win version was released first, that fact is also a bit misleading.  Why do I say that?  Because the Logos business model for the future is multi-platoform Bible software.  So yes, L4win came first, but the Mac development was latent in the base code.  So every bit of code being worked on right now in the current Windows beta cycle, is already being used and tested on the Mac side (thus one of the glitches with A10 to 10a to 11).   My point is, that the development from day one has, to some degree, been supportive of the Mac development--even though the interface for the Mac is still lagging. These first two points lead to the third observation.

3. I was a Beta tester for L4win and asked back in October '09 about the Mac because I was hoping to see something soon.  I was one of the people asking Logos to release the Alpha for testing so our Mac community would not get discouraged that nothing was coming for us AND I am so glad they allowed us to be a part of this development cycle which is often kept secret from users.  I mention this history because based on my experience with the L4win Beta, I believe it was more cost effective to delay the Mac UI development.  Why?  Let's pretend that Logos said, "we are going to release both L4win and L4mac at the exact same time!"  What is the consequence of that decision? I think it would be negative for Logos and therefore negative for the future of this software.  Look at this way.  As we, the beta testers, worked with Logos, there were a LOT of changes Logos made based on our feedback.  Now imagine how expensive it would be to pay twice every time Logos wanted to make a change in the UI or base code.  Imagine if, based on user feedback, Logos wanted to add a whole new feature and then they would have had to pay the Windows team to change things and then pay the Mac team to make the same exact changes.  From my perspective, simultaneous development of both platforms would have driven the costs up with no added value or benefit to the program quality.  Instead of this approach, Logos decided upon a shared Base Code with a lagging UI development.  Letting the Mac UI lag, meant that all the user input during L4win development from Mac users, like me, ultimately benefited the Mac base code and paved the way for the coming UI.

Sadly, this does make us a bit behind for us, but again I don't think this should be construed to mean that the Mac community is of lower priority to Logos nor should it be taken as a slight toward the potential they see in the Mac market for Logos.  IMHO, it is just a practical business and development decision that any good business or President would make. 

Anyway, I am sure some will disagree and I don't really want to argue with anyone about it... just share my opinion that may be helpful to some in seeing that the glass is really Half-Full and not Half-Empty.

Blessings. :-)

Joe, thank you for your kind response.  You state the situation quite well.  I to am glad that they did things in the best way to raise money and keep going.  I don't mind using fusion until the mac part is complete.  I am new to the mac world so it is taking some time getting used to the same software not being available to me.  Anyway, as I have thought more about my initial statement earlier today, I would have to say that I would indeed purchase logos again if I were given a do-over, no question.  Thanks again for being kind.    

Posts 2915
Forum MVP
Jacob Hantla | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 3:08 PM

I would buy again, and I continue to invest. Logos is the most used software on my computer.

I have spent more on Logos (resources) than on any other software I own; and I consider it the best bargain.

Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org

Posts 3
Jonathan Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 6:17 PM

YES! Even upgraded to Platinum!

Posts 22
Thomas Reindl | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 10:38 PM

I have to say that I think that I would buy it again. I have had my moments of frustrations and really hate waiting for all the indexing and long downloads but all in all I think that it will be worth it. I really love my new Mac and if you use it to actually read and not just to skip around all the time it is great. I use the PC version for really deep study and think it is really kewl! I am blessed to be able to be a part of the Beta and will never forget the experience. Thank you to all the people that work so hard here on this forum and I will keep praying for you!

 

Blessings,

 

Thomas

Posts 18651
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 10:56 PM

[deleted by poster]

Posts 1928
Donovan R. Palmer | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 11:10 PM

Joe Miller:
First, Logos has designed the ENTIRE Logos 4 platform to work with both PC and Mac. They put a lot of effort into making sure the core functionality and base code for Windows and mac is the exact same.

Was this the original intention from the beginning with the rewrite of version 3 for Windows? I'm glad it worked out this way, but because 2009 was the year of Mac 1.x, I had the impression that the decision to develop on dual pathways came shortly around the time of the release of version 1.

Posts 1928
Donovan R. Palmer | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jan 14 2010 11:20 PM

Christopher Guest:
I've hesitated over the past few weeks on buying Logos before the sale period expires (having already rejected buying Accordance), and have routinely read this forum for users' experience on the Mac version.

I have good days and bad days on this. The resources on Logos are invaluable to me. I have been bought in for a very, very long time and love Logos. That said, there have been moments of frustration.  I'm not having a moan, but last year version 1.x crept along in functionality.  We found out by the end of the year why... the product was a dead end.  Now we are waiting for L4 Mac. It is making good progress, but at times when you can see how refined L4 Windows is becoming, its hard to not feel like the Mac version will be playing catch up for a long, long time.

I understand the market base thing, so on the other hand I am grateful.  There aren't many choices for Bible software on Mac. So overall, Logos is a good thing for the Mac market.  The thing that really helps is that virtual machine software is really good these days and therefore L4 windows can be run very effectively while we wait.

Posts 2774
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 15 2010 12:32 AM

Donovan R. Palmer:

Joe Miller:
First, Logos has designed the ENTIRE Logos 4 platform to work with both PC and Mac. They put a lot of effort into making sure the core functionality and base code for Windows and mac is the exact same.

Was this the original intention from the beginning with the rewrite of version 3 for Windows? I'm glad it worked out this way, but because 2009 was the year of Mac 1.x, I had the impression that the decision to develop on dual pathways came shortly around the time of the release of version 1.

My impression is that the decision came long before that, but I don't feel the need to argue about the minutia of the timeline.  The main point I was making is still the same. the base code is designed to work on both platforms and that was not an accident.

 

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 4508
Robert Pavich | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 15 2010 2:58 AM

JackCaviness:
Superb summary, Joe. Thank you.

Yes Joe...very nicely said...

PS: I can tell you're an author....it took you 750 words to say what I'd have said in 100.... Big Smile

Robert Pavich

For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__

Posts 18
Christopher Guest | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 15 2010 12:08 PM

Out of interest, has anyone tried L4W via CrossOverMac Pro?

My Mac can go all the way to OS XI

www.bournvillechurch.co.uk

Posts 1928
Donovan R. Palmer | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 15 2010 11:47 PM

Joe Miller:
My impression is that the decision came long before that, but I don't feel the need to argue about the minutia of the timeline.

Joe it is significant if you use it as an apologetic for the wait for functionality. You wrote " They put a lot of effort into making sure the core functionality and base code for Windows and mac is the exact same."  The Logos disclaimer states: "We had to choose between continuing that effort and having a Mac product that remained a generation behind, or starting a new Mac project that shares code and matches—or exceeds!" To me this sounds like an evolved decision... which is brilliant and how most awesome ideas are hatched.  However, that statement does not give me the impression that when the command to start L4 Windows was given, one of the design criteria was to have shared code with multiple platforms. If it was a goal from much earlier on, then I think it causes even more questions to be asked.  I could wrong, but either way it is speculative because of the limited information and therefore is not a good argument for or against why users should be patient.

One thing about this decision, is that if Logos can pull this off, it does set a new standard in the industry for being Bible software being multi-platform. You can see this other products like Evernote.  Pure brilliance and I give my full support to the team because I honestly hope that L4 Mac can become a world class Bible software product.

Posts 88
Rus Howard | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 7:01 AM

Yes I would buy again - this is an investment for me.  Investment have long term rewards.  You'll be glad you di.

Rus

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 7:22 AM

Christopher Guest:

Out of interest, has anyone tried L4W via CrossOverMac Pro?

I haven't. Two reasons:

1. Past experience with the product has been lack luster and they are limited in what programs they do work with.

2. VMs have come so far, work so well, and are so easy to use that the wine based products really hold no appeal for me.

 

I am the lead sys admin for a medium sized IT department, out of all the various geeks that wander our halls, everyone of them is running at least one VM, on their desktops. Not one of them is using wine or it's crossover. This speaks to me, because if wine based products offered any advantage, these guys would be running it.

 

But if you choose to try it, I would be interested in what your experiences are.

 

 

Posts 45
WAM Project | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 4:52 PM

I'd considered trying it out, but I think it uses the .NET architecture which is still incompatible with Crossover...

 

 

Posts 58
MarCya Mooney | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 5:19 PM

Definitely NO!

I bought my first Logos program about 13 years ago for about 20 bucks on a floppy disc – I loved that version and so I upgraded every year since then.

The L4 is very disappointing and buggy even in Win.  They released it prematurely and are overwhelmed with phone calls for support and it makes then testy and rude! 

This is my first bad experience with Logos – so that’s not a bad record for them but in all honestly I still would NOT have purchased if I’d known how many features were missing and how buggy it was. IMHO

 

(And before anyone jumps down my throat – HE ASKED)  Also, I don’t see well and that is why the large font!

 

Posts 2212
Damian McGrath | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 5:37 PM

MarCia Mooney:
Also, I don’t see well and that is why the large font!

I'm not sure why it's red. 

MarCia, if you need to set the font larger so that you can read it while typing, that affects no one. But please, before you hit the "post" button, return the font to it's normal size. 

 

In fact, by clicking on the "more" button and selecting "edit" you will be able to go in and modify this post so that it's font size is normal and its colour black.

Posts 3767
Forum MVP
Friedrich | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 5:44 PM

Christopher Guest:

Rosie Perera:

Hey, are you the Christopher Guest? Smile

There's more than one John Smith in the world. Cool

 

yeah, but if you are THE CG, then you, of all people, can appreciate that L4Alpha now "goes to 11".    Devil

I like Apples.  Especially Honeycrisp.

Posts 352
Mike & Rachel Aubrey | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 10:26 PM

that colour is going to give someone a seizure -- or at least a headache.

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 16 2010 10:49 PM

MarCia Mooney:
Also, I don’t see well and that is why the large font!

Ouch. Now I don't see so well either. Cool

Please MarCia,   Damian is correct -- you can use the "more" button to edit the red ink and shrink the font a little.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 10523
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jan 17 2010 3:58 AM

MarCia Mooney:
Definitely NO!

Unfortunately, Marcia has a habit of complaining, ignoring all attempts at assistance, and yelling, although this the first time she has yelled in red.

Marcia, do you want assistance or not?

Page 2 of 4 (69 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next > | RSS