M1 Mac Chip Compatibility
Comments
-
Any timeline for Logos to be made compatible without the use of Rosetta?
Many years ago Logos got burned by giving dates for the appearance of the first Mac version. Since then, the company has been reluctant to provide promised dates for major upgrades—or even minor ones.
0 -
With the amount of resources ($$$) that we have invested in this tool over a 20+ year period, that is really an unacceptable response. I do hope the company is a bit more responsive to their customers than that. No corporation today wants to promise something and then miss the target, I get that. But having spent over 30 years in the corporate world, that was never a luxury I could afford if I wanted to remain in business. We met deadlines that we set for ourselves. I am aware that software vendors do not want to promise and then underperform. No one does. But if you are going to do business at the level Logos is now at, get over it. Same question, any timeline for Logos to be made compatible with the M! Mac chip. Adobe thinks next year some time. So do several other much larger vendors. The only issue is I have invested many more $$$ in this package than those so that increases the vested interest in knowing how long a workaround has to be in place for my day to day work.
0 -
I get that, I really do. A non-answer answer though is unacceptable when you have as much $$$$ in the tool as many of us do. Many software vendors are struggling to catch up with Apple. Logos is not the only one. Much larger entities like Adobe are not there yet. Thus the work around using Rosetta. Other vendors have provided ballpark dates. Do not ever put out a date if you do not intend to keep it. 30 years in the corporate world taught me that. As a customer though, it is my expectation that the organization would have learned from past mistakes and failures and created processes to prevent them from happening in the future. As large as Logos as gotten over the years, I see that is indeed the case. Thus I suspect they may have a general idea as to when a solution may be available. I did not ask for a date, just a timeline.
0 -
Since L9 should run at least as well in Rosetta with an M1 as it does on Intel machines, we will likely have to endure the hardship of performance of about an i9 processor. Right now I am doing that on a Win machine and it's just so terrible hard...
Not.
Seriously, I expect FL will probably get this together in the next several months. L9 just came out. So let's cut them slack as they work on L9 to make it better for everyone. We will get there.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
0 -
I did not ask for a date, just a timeline.
https://community.logos.com/forums/p/196329/1135550.aspx#1135550
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
Thanks
0 -
Any timeline for Logos to be made compatible without the use of Rosetta?
No. We don't even have a production machine yet to do performance benchmarking. We have a pre-production development machine that may or may not reflect the production machine's performance. We should be getting one or more very soon, and we'll start to do more extensive compatibility testing, performance benchmarking, etc.
Based on some early indications that we're seeing among tech reviewers, there's a chance performance could be slightly improved even with the emulation layer. If that's the case, there won't be as much urgency to build a native solution. We're exploring different options for native, but that's still a research project.
So, we need more information before we can determine where to fit this in our priority queue:
- What is performance on M1? Slower, faster, about the same?
- How many of our users are migrating to Apple's new processors?
- What are the expected performance gains of being fully native?
- What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
Once we have more detail on these points, we're happy to come back and provide a relative priority and more in terms of expectation than "we're not sure yet."
I'm sorry we don't have more to share at this point.
0 -
Thank you for your response. I had to get a new machine and opted for one of the new Apples And am fully ok with using Rosetta. Your questions are the same as mine. I have some other questions as well and will learn answers going forward.
0 -
So, we need more information before we can determine where to fit this in our priority queue:
- How many of our users are migrating to Apple's new processors?
Within the next ten years [or less] all of your Apple users will migrate! When will Rosetta disappear?
0 -
When will Rosetta disappear?
Previously, Rosetta hadn't disappeared until five years after Apple had completed its transition to PowerPC.
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
Based on some early indications that we're seeing among tech reviewers, there's a chance performance could be slightly improved even with the emulation layer. If that's the case, there won't be as much urgency to build a native solution. We're exploring different options for native, but that's still a research project.
So, we need more information before we can determine where to fit this in our priority queue:
- What is performance on M1? Slower, faster, about the same?
- How many of our users are migrating to Apple's new processors?
- What are the expected performance gains of being fully native?
- What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
This seems very reasonable to me.
I'm looking forward to hearing confirmation but I would expect that performance on M1 would be at least on par with performance on Intel. That removes the urgency to upgrade.
I would rather Logos take their time to do a great job of integrating this transition into their existing development plans, so that in 5 years Logos has leaped forward... than them be pressured to rush a transition for (at first) a minority of customers and increase their maintenance load prematurely.
0 -
Some initial data running Logos on the M1 here:
https://community.logos.com/forums/p/196254/1136291.aspx#1136291
0 -
When will Rosetta disappear?
Previously, Rosetta hadn't disappeared until five years after Apple had completed its transition to PowerPC.
So two years to hire [if needed] expert programers specializing in the Apple Chips [may already be on board within the iOS group], One year to Plan, execute and test the Apple Chip programs [if Logos was written correctly may only need a recompile], one year for Beta, and release the Apple Chip version one year before Rosetta goes away. Not time to worry. We [and being a PC person I did say WE] will need periodic updates to the status.
0 -
What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
Apple's M1 announcement event => https://www.apple.com/mac/m1/ included several developers comment about quickly creating universal binaries in a day or two (so guessing anticipated costs being lower than previous Apple CPU migrations).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
Apple's M1 announcement event => https://www.apple.com/mac/m1/ included several developers comment about quickly creating universal binaries in a day or two (so guessing anticipated costs being lower than previous Apple CPU migrations).
Keep Smiling
I have heard similar comments from developers, though much of this depends on the application and how it was original written. It runs nicely in translation, but I imagine it would blaze as a native app.
0 -
Any timeline for Logos to be made compatible without the use of Rosetta?
- What are the expected performance gains of being fully native?
Fully native with Metal etc. should not be a question.
Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, ἡ ἐλπὶς τῆς δόξης·
0 -
In case you missed it: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/196476.aspx
0 -
Thank you, Phil for this response. I'm, also, very interested in seeing the transition to M1. I'd invite you to, also, consider the relative difference in battery life between emulation in Rosetta and native on M1. While I may not be doing a lot of untethered work at the moment, I hope that those opportunities will return in the next several months. The added battery life of the M1 laptops is great, and I suspect emulation will probably impact that even after translation on first launch.
I just purchased my Logos 9 update and am exploring it now. Thanks for a great advance!
0 -
- What is performance on M1? Slower, faster, about the same?
M1 is faster.
- How many of our users are migrating to Apple's new processors?
It seems several on the forum say they're migrating. Apple will have replaced their whole lineup in less than 2 years.
- What are the expected performance gains of being fully native?
Chrome ran 80% faster going Native vs. Rosetta2:
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/20/chrome-m1-macs-80-percent-faster/Logos probably wouldn't be 80% faster, but there should definitely be some improvement.
- What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
Good question. Another good question: How long will Rosetta 2 be around for?
0 -
Any timeline for Logos to be made compatible without the use of Rosetta?
No. We don't even have a production machine yet to do performance benchmarking. We have a pre-production development machine that may or may not reflect the production machine's performance. We should be getting one or more very soon, and we'll start to do more extensive compatibility testing, performance benchmarking, etc.
Based on some early indications that we're seeing among tech reviewers, there's a chance performance could be slightly improved even with the emulation layer. If that's the case, there won't be as much urgency to build a native solution. We're exploring different options for native, but that's still a research project.
So, we need more information before we can determine where to fit this in our priority queue:
- What is performance on M1? Slower, faster, about the same?
- How many of our users are migrating to Apple's new processors?
- What are the expected performance gains of being fully native?
- What are the anticipated costs of migrating to a native solution?
Once we have more detail on these points, we're happy to come back and provide a relative priority and more in terms of expectation than "we're not sure yet."
I'm sorry we don't have more to share at this point.
I am migrating to Apple's new processors. I plan to stay with Apple products
0 -
I hate to say this, and I'm not trying to be mean-spirited, but this answer shows that Logos has very few, if any, competitive concerns. I'm seeing other software publishers, some big, some very small - all with acute competitive concerns, already delivering universal or native M1 apps. I've enjoyed an outstanding experience with these apps on my new MacBook.
It's a little disheartening that Logos is still developing a criteria on whether they'll even begin M1 development. Logos understands many of their customers have invested thousands in their software and libraries so Logos has the luxury of not meeting the higher expectations that other software publishers are setting.
With this said, I have an M1 MacBook Air with 16GB RAM and 1TB SSDs and Logos is noticeably slower. I'm not enjoying the experience. I'm unsure if others with the new Macs are having similar issues. I'm not going anywhere anytime soon as it would be far too painful for me financially. So yes, Logos, you have little reason to be concerned about me jumping ship and I've set my expectations considerably lower based on this response. I do appreciate the candor though.
0 -
Matthew, thank you for sharing your observations about how Logos is running on your M1 MBA under Rosetta 2. This is the sort of user experience I’m keen to know more about from other users of Logos on Apple Silicon computers. And I concur that it is rather disconcerting that Logos has not even yet begun to port their product to run natively on Apple Silicon. To me, this corporate decision seems rather shortsighted.
0 -
Matthew, thank you for sharing your observations about how Logos is running on your M1 MBA under Rosetta 2. This is the sort of user experience I’m keen to know more about from other users of Logos on Apple Silicon computers. And I concur that it is rather disconcerting that Logos has not even yet begun to port their product to run natively on Apple Silicon. To me, this corporate decision seems rather shortsighted.
It is not slower for me - it is noticeably faster than running natively on my 2015 Intel iMac. That said, I do think it would be in Faithlife's best interest to work on a native M1 version because all Macs will go that way over the next couple of years.
0 -
What did Faithlife do when Apple switched from PPC to Intel? How long was it before they announced a plan, etc? Obviously, they made the switch otherwise they wouldn't be here.
Im not a software developer, so I have no clue what goes into planning something like this. My claim to computer fame was working part-time at the Apple Store for about a year back in 2010.
That being said... I can't imagine any major software company (that already has a Mac user base) not thinking how to make the migration.
I look fwd to whatever Faithlife does to make use of the new chip and battery life the M1 offers. I have spent quite a bit in the last 6 years as a Logos user. It would be sad if "all" I got to do with it in the future is read on my iPad. The mobile experience just doesn't compare to the desktop one. I hope they don’t try to soup-up the iPad app and turn that into a desktop app—I hope that it will always be the true desktop experience.
preachertony.com — appletech.tips — facebook.com/tonywalker23 — twitter.com/tonywalker23 — youtube.com/tonywalker23
0 -
-
-
L4 Mac came out in November 2009. I don't know when the earlier "Logos for Mac" was released. The transition from Power PC to intel happened in 2006.
Logos for Mac Version 1 Alpha was released in March 2008, abut 2 years after it was first announced. This is the reason FL is now very, very reluctant to announce projected release dates.
Since I was running Logos via Virtual PC, I was ready for my Christmas present in 2006 (or was it 2007), but alas, there was no Logos in my stocking that Christmas [:'(]
0 -
So my original belief was correct: FL did not go through the last transition.
Unlike the previous transition, FL has a vested interest in making this move... but there is no hurry to make the app "native" until closer to the drop date for support of Rosetta 2.
It is my understanding that the biggest issue is support of the third party items.
0 -
Update:
I have the base M1 Mac Mini, and I've performed a series of benchmarks comparing it to my 2018 i9 MBP, my 2018 custom-built PC (with an Intel Optane drive), and my 2013 work Windows desktop.
The performance is mixed. In some cases, it's faster than all the others (e.g., subsequent opens of resources with lots of visual filters on and certain searches). In other cases, it's slower (e.g., startup, webviews). In most cases it's pretty comparable. On the whole, I'd say it's fairly comparable to a machine from a few years ago due to the emulation layer, with a few outliers in both directions.
The one place in my experience where it is clearly subpar is with webviews that leverage CEF (the Chromium Embedded Framework), especially if they demand a higher framerate. So, interactives and shared web components range from tolerable (Notes) to mostly unusable (Psalms Explorer). We're looking into this to see if there's anything we can do in the short term to improve performance. Perhaps a new version of CEF will be released that we could use.
Side note: I'm surprised I've not see others report this yet. Maybe I've just missed it. Is this others' experience, too?
The two mostly likely pathways to native support probably look like this:
- Mono adds support for Apple's M1 ARM processor, allowing us to generate and compile directly to ARM. Mono already supports other ARM platforms. I haven't seen any advertised time frames, but maybe this path could be 6–12 months out? That's a wild guess, so I wouldn't put much stock in it until we hear something official from Mono. But this path should be faster, since they already support other ARM platforms.
- We move to .NET 5 (planned to start in Q1 for other reasons) and then to .NET 6 a year later, which plans to add full support for Apple's Silicon: code generation, compiler support, official testing and support by Microsoft. .NET 6 is due in February of 2022, so this pathway puts us at least 15–18 months out, I'd guess.
We're watching this space closely (performance testing and reports from users, the release of more Macs with Apple's Silicon, the adoption rate by our users in particular and the market in general, and various technology paths for getting to native support). We'll keep you updated as we learn more and our plans solidify.
Update: See also the clarification below.
0 -
Well, a little disheartening, but based on the original FL message, not unexpected. I suppose the Faithlife starting point is different than many other software publishers. Apple is keeping a growing list of sw publishers who have already converted their Intel apps to Apple silicon native. Adobe, a big one for Mac users (including myself), is expected to release both Lightroom Classic and Photoshop Apple silicon native versions in the next few months. Adobe originally said December, but that may be ambitious on their part... Anyway, thanks for the update.
0
