Linux version of Logos Bible Software
Comments
-
You make the point why it will most likely not happen, there is limited potential for NEW sales to pay for the tens of thousands in development cost?Nigel Cunningham said:The trouble with going off market statistics is that they're just statistics. Linux users like myself are hidden because we're using Windows as well via VMware or dual booting or such like, even if we're only using it because we have to for Logos.
0 -
Nigel Cunningham said:
They'd make money. Remember that they sell books, not the software itself.
The trouble with going off market statistics is that they're just statistics. Linux users like myself are hidden because we're using Windows as well via VMware or dual booting or such like, even if we're only using it because we have to for Logos.
Last I read, Linux as an O.S. was about 1% of the market share and Apple was 10%. Granted this took into account global demographics. I suspect that this number would skew if you looked at different market segments. For example, if you looked at market share of home users, the Apple and Linux users might be higher, because in enterprise Windows is generally a more commonly deployed solution.
Regardless, how many hidden users would you need to lift Linux's share even to 5%? You are going to need a pile load more. Don't get me wrong. I love Linux and have been using it since the 90s before many even knew it existed. However, I just don't see it in the numbers and from experience, even if I fudge the numbers. To be honest, I am not certain how Logos can make money on the Mac engine, except to say that among young students right now, the Mac market is pretty hot. Presumeably, a number of Logo's customers are students entering into seminary and Bible school, which may swing the numbers high enough to justify the development and maintenance costs. That's also what a lot of people forget about. Spending a bunch of money on developing a package is one thing, but it continually needs development and maintenance as the software platforms change.
Maybe what is needed is for someone who is so certain about the Linux market to put up some venture capital for Logos to develop an engine? Personally, as much as I love Linux, I wouldn't bet my house on it. [:)]
0 -
Joe Miller said:Nigel Cunningham said:
The trouble with going off market statistics is that they're just statistics. Linux users like myself are hidden because we're using Windows as well via VMware or dual booting or such like, even if we're only using it because we have to for Logos.
You make the point why it will most likely not happen, there is limited potential for NEW sales to pay for the tens of thousands in development cost?
There's plenty of potential for new sales. I for one am still purchasing books (not single ones, either!), and there have been over 5,000 views of this thread, so there's clearly some interest in the possibility and therefore some money to be made there.
Further more, it doesn't need to be gazillions of dollars in development cost if it's done right. If a cross-platform framework is used (QT / Mono / whatever else...), then there should be a lot less work to do than there would be otherwise.
The software doesn't need to be open source either, so there doesn't need to be any greater chance of unscrupulous users circumventing licensing controls under Linux than there is under Mac or M$.
Regards,
Nigel
0 -
Just one more voice wanting Logos to run on Linux.
0 -
I've never been able to completely switch over to Linux because I have never been able to run Logos on Debian. Logos is the only thing holding me back from going all Linux. I know of at least one other person in the same boat, and many more who dual boot Linux/Windows and would appreciate a functional Logos for Linux.
0 -
I am a computer programmer and he's not far off the mark. There's a great deal of planning and design work that goes into software development. That is if you want a quality product. The only difference between libronix and a navigation system is that no one will get hurt if libronix is written wrong.
Running on ASUS Windows 10 I7 24 gig of ram, 1 Terabyte drive.
Philippians 2:3 Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.
0 -
While I know what you mean James, and agree; there is a side of me which just begs to say:
However given that Logos is written to assist in proper Bible interpretation, getting it wrong will have more dire consequences than a failed navigation system. Eternity is a long time.
Please accept my comment in a spirit of congeniality - for that is how I offer it.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
After reading about the version 4 of Logos for Windows and noting that it is at least partially .net JIT code and not native code I'm wondering if I'm barking up the wrong tree even asking and hoping that Logos comes out with a Linux version. .Net code is just slow bloated code. You'd have thought that C/C++ and assembler would have been the route to go, seeing that you'd want to squeeze as much out of the hardware as you could to make Logos SING.
I don't hear much singing from the folks that bought into version 4. I'm not of the mind to upgrade anything to version 4 any time soon as I figure paying for a bloated version that runs on Windows and not my OS of choice would be just paying Logos to code something completely away from what I'd want, and I don't see any point in giving them any loot for producing something that I don't need.
I've also come to realize that buying Logos books is like buying music with DRM. I can only use my Logos books with their reader software. I'm a prisoner of their whims. Why they couldn't sit down like SMART people and code a reader using wxWidgets so everyone could have a native viewer written in C/C++ and not that fluff code that Microsoft is pushing is beyond me. Owell. I think that I'm pretty much done with Logos at this point. I'll use what I have with version 3 under virtualbox and see if I can't help out the Linux Bible software push. It may not be as fancy as Logos, but I can buy real books to use with the cash that I'd otherwise be sending off to Logos. Logos has not earned my money, and they're not getting it. There's no DRM on real books and searching the old fashioned way never killed anybody. I don't think that Peter and Paul had to wait 2 days to index their files and I figure they did just fine.
Later...
0 -
-
Actually C# using Mono.
0 -
-
Hmmm, following that thread, the possibility of a linux port seems much easier! (Still not easy, but easier!) All we'd need on linux is a custom GUI?
In the meantime, I'm waiting for my new Logos4 package to arrive so that I can test it out using Wine. There's been some success running .NET applications under wine. (Even using the MS .net suite!)
Will post later on regarding the results if anyone is interested. (It won't be soon - I ordered the Physical discs rather than the download - very old fashioned of me!
)0 -
Good to hear more people are taking intrest in getting Logos running in Linux!
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free", John 8:32.
"你們必定認識真理，真理必定使你們自由", 約翰福音 8:3.0 -
I'm quite interested Nicholas. I just need to locate another Linux test machine.....Nicholas van Oudtshoorn said:Will post later on regarding the results if anyone is interested. (It won't be soon - I ordered the Physical discs rather than the download - very old fashioned of me!
) Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Nicholas van Oudtshoorn said:
Hmmm, following that thread, the possibility of a linux port seems much easier! (Still not easy, but easier!) All we'd need on linux is a custom GUI?
Indeed: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page
Can anyone say crossplatform?
0 -
-
apparently, according to their FAQ, it's just that they like monkeys (Spanish: Mono).
Either way, Logos was smart in going in this direction.
0 -
WOW.
I'm not a fan of Java or .Net, but I decided to go ahead and take a look at this new Version 4 of Logos.
WOW.
It is still indexing, so I have not yet had an opportunity to take it through the turns, but the first eyefull is pretty interesting stuff.
I may go back to Windows and actually upgrade my Logos package for this. I'm certainly glad that I gave it a twirl. Bible study is important to me and NOTHING on Linux is going to get close to this in the next decade - unless the folks at the Mono project can make this work. I'm impressed. So far - so good.
Mike
0 -
MikeM said:
WOW.
I'm not a fan of Java or .Net, but I decided to go ahead and take a look at this new Version 4 of Logos.
WOW.
It is still indexing, so I have not yet had an opportunity to take it through the turns, but the first eyefull is pretty interesting stuff.
I may go back to Windows and actually upgrade my Logos package for this. I'm certainly glad that I gave it a twirl. Bible study is important to me and NOTHING on Linux is going to get close to this in the next decade - unless the folks at the Mono project can make this work. I'm impressed. So far - so good.
Mike
I am a part of the Fedora Project, I write documentation and software for the project and when Logos 4 came out I purchased a copy of Windows 7 and installed it and Logos 4 on my machine. I have been a Linux only person (at home) for almost 10 years but when I saw Logos 4 I knew that a VM was not going to cut. I am very happy that I did this. I have been working on Fedora from within a VM and Logos is available to me at all times. If some day I have Logos on Linux I will switch back but until then my work will get done this way.
0 -
I have had Logos4 running on a Virtualbox VM (guest XP - 32bit) hosted on a Ubuntu 9.04 machine for about 10 days now. I gave the machine a 3.2 gb of memory out of a total 6gb available on an older Intel quad-core and I haven't noticed much difference in responsiveness over a native boot of XP. It could be that running on a 64-bit os might make a difference.
0 -
Zachary Oglesby said:
I am a part of the Fedora Project, I write documentation and software for the project and when Logos 4 came out I purchased a copy of Windows 7 and installed it and Logos 4 on my machine. I have been a Linux only person (at home) for almost 10 years but when I saw Logos 4 I knew that a VM was not going to cut. I am very happy that I did this. I have been working on Fedora from within a VM and Logos is available to me at all times. If some day I have Logos on Linux I will switch back but until then my work will get done this way.
Hi Zachary,
I tried the XP install but ran into issues with XP SP3 and my dvd burners so I went ahead and installed Vista Business and it's working A-OK. I use drive caddys to change operating systems usually but had wiped all of my Windows installs in favor of various Linux and BSD systems. Vista Business seems to like my hardware just fine too.
I just ordered the Logos 4 minimal crossgrade on DVD a few minutes ago. I need to go re-install my BibleWorks 8 now that I have a working Windows environment. I may even try installing Linux on VirtualBox under this Vista install. I'm working on some add-ons for the Sword Project/Xiphos/BibleTime and it would be nice to not have to shut down the system to get into Linux.
Mike
0 -
Douglas Horst said:
I have had Logos4 running on a Virtualbox VM (guest XP - 32bit) hosted on a Ubuntu 9.04 machine for about 10 days now. I gave the machine a 3.2 gb of memory out of a total 6gb available on an older Intel quad-core and I haven't noticed much difference in responsiveness over a native boot of XP. It could be that running on a 64-bit os might make a difference.
Hi Douglas,
I'm an Ubuntu fan as well. It seems to "just work" better than any OS I've used.
Mike
0 -
I just looked here, and Windows is at 92%, OS X ~5%, Linux ~1%. There isn't that large of a difference difference between Linux users and Mac users. I also thought it was interesting that more people use Windows 7 than use OS X. Also interesting, more people use Linux than have iPhones. I can't tell you how many iPhones I see, and there are more Linux users than there are iPhones.
I would also like to comment on what I see as faulty logic. Most young people who will become tomorrow's Bible scholars are, clearly, using Ubuntu. :-)
0 -
Your "hunch" isn't logical. Most young people are less computer savvy than me, and will use the OS that comes on their computer. At the moment, that would be almost certainly Win, or OS X. In fact I would suggest that 92% of them use Win.StevenCuffle said:I would also like to comment on what I see as faulty logic. Most young people who will become tomorrow's Bible scholars are, clearly, using Ubuntu. :-)
Typically market research data is reasonably accurate.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
StevenCuffle said:
I would also like to comment on what I see as faulty logic.
Sorry, but that was too funny after you said this: [:D]
StevenCuffle said:Also interesting, more people use Linux than have iPhones. I can't tell you how many iPhones I see, and there are more Linux users than there are iPhones.
This site is a simple representation of market share by browsing statistics!!
0 -
StevenCuffle said:
I just looked here, and Windows is at 92%, OS X ~5%, Linux ~1%. There isn't that large of a difference difference between Linux users and Mac users. I also thought it was interesting that more people use Windows 7 than use OS X. Also interesting, more people use Linux than have iPhones. I can't tell you how many iPhones I see, and there are more Linux users than there are iPhones.
The trouble with these stats is that they are global. So for example, they would include enterprise computing where Windows is a very common machine, but would not be a market that would be generally attracted to Logos. The same goes for other languages/international markets.
So the correct question is, what is the market distribution of desktop operating systems in demographic groups that are potential Logos' customers?
1. For starters, we know that there are only certain languages at this time that would be potentially attracted to Logos and its resources. So probably the biggest market is English speaking countries where there would be a higher percentage of Macs than other countries where they are hard or impossible to buy.
2. Also what kind of ownership would be attracted to Logos and its resources? I would venture to guess in many of these cases the computers will be home, ministry and/or academically owned.
3. Lastly, which types of people? In this is religion, age, occupation, academic focus, inclination to use a computer, personal finances, etc.
When you all this together and can sort of define this group (and it will never be a perfect science), then you run the numbers on distribution of operating systems in this group. I am going to guess that use of OSX is higher due to seminary and theology students who would be potential buyers. I saw some stats run by someone who said the market was hovering around 10% when you take out enterprise computing, but I am not sure how good the science was behind it. Also, it would be interesting to know what the percentage of Linux users look like within Logo's potential customer base. Perhaps it might increase.
One thing is for sure that we can all bet on. Windows is still the dominate operating system no matter how you define the potential customer base!
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
For example, if you looked at market share of home users, the Apple and Linux users might be higher, because in enterprise Windows is generally a more commonly deployed solution.
How many people am i aquainted with who own computers?
roughly 30 (not including this forum)
How many use Mac?
4
How many use some Linux OS flavor?
1 (he's the IT guy at work)
I'm going to guess and say that these numbers are representative (within reason) across the computing landscape... [:D]
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
There is a misconception that Windows is easier to use. Anyone that says that has not run into certain problems that occassionally crop up (such as Windows update refusing to run and then refusing to install the fix because Windows is convinced that that administrator does not have privliges to do so). One obvious advantage of Windows, however, is that everyone seems to know someone that knows something about Windows and can help you out in a jam (or at least you can pay someone to fix it). The last Linux computer that I setup and gave away (yes, free, as in at my expense), came back because there was this one game that they really wanted to run that is Windows only. Most of the people that I know that use Linux are either very close friends with a "super geek" that handles Linux well, or is that super geek.
Another road block, besides raw numbers, is that the ideology of many of the Linux users is that they will only use free software. I was presenting at a Linux conference and I recommended a set of commercial (costs money) drivers that allow Linux to use otherwise unsupported printers, and provides extra features (such as color profiles) for some printers that are supported. I caught some flak because the obvious solution is that you only purchase a printer that is fully supported on Linux. This same group would likely never pay for Logos, but I will concede that this is speculation.
My primary interest at this point is "how difficult is it to make the new c# version run under Linux. If this is really done with Mono, it should mostly function. I have not seen people jumping up and down cheering, so I suppose that this is not the case. Historically, there has been a free download of the base product and then you pay for books. Is this still the case? If so, then I will try it out. If it works I will be spending some money updating things...
Someone mentioned (in this thread) that the books were used a type of DRM. This is true enough. On the other hand, I can say that the Logos people have worked very hard to make certain that if you purchased a book in the past, that it continues to work with the newest versions (even if you have issues with your unlock files and such). I can attest to this fact based on the amount of time that they have worked with my Mother; crashed hard drives, updated O/S, etc. So, although I agree that this is annoying, given their level of service I will begrudingly accept it. Stated another way, they offer great support that projects the principles that you expect from a company selling Bible software.
0 -
Robert Pavich said:
How many people am i aquainted with who own computers?
roughly 30 (not including this forum)
How many use Mac?
4
That's 13%. I work with young people and I'd venture to guess that the percentage must be pushing past 30% now... and that would be pretty conservative on some accounts.
0 -
I guess this thread is a little too serious for me, so here's my second attempt at humor...
All future Bible scholars (pronounced "me") are using Ubuntu.
Ah, I kill me.
I've recently started using Ubuntu, but I don't see MS or Mac in danger of losing out to any distro any time soon. So, I'll just keep doing what I've always done, use MS where I must and then use whatever I like for anything else.
Has anyone had any success getting version 4 to work in a linux distro yet? If so, which one and how?
0
