Logos 4
Comments
-
Does anyone know how to access the resources from the new V4 Alpha release for use in Logos 3 Mac (v 1.2.2) ? I want to use some of the new books in the old version of Logos Mac. It appears that most of them have a new file extension of (.logos4). I am not sure if there is a way to transfer those resources to my old resource folder and have V 1.2.2 recognize them. If not, I will just patiently wait for Logos 4 Mac to push toward Beta stability and then the official release.
0 -
Jerry,
The features you list will be present in version 4. I do not know if pronunciation will require additional resources to work, but notes and highlighting will work for everyone that uses the Logos 4 engine for Mac.
But where were we promised that all of these features would someday be present in the Libronix 1 engine? The promise was that the feature set would catch up when Logos released the future version for Mac that matched the future version for Windows. That is happening now.
Bryan,
At present at least it seems the books formatted for Logos 4 cannot be opened in older versions. I haven't seen anything saying whether or not Logos plans to release an update to Libronix 3 for pc or 1 for Mac enabling them to open the new book format, we will just have to wait and see.
0 -
Thanks Chris!!!! What part of the Country do you live? (were do you live)?
0 -
Chris Roberts said:
Mac users are not going to suddenly get favored treatment and receive lots of free stuff everyone else has to pay for.
As a Mac user I am not expecting favored treatment and lots of free stuff that PC users pay for. In fact, as Mac users, we paid for what PC users never had to, knowingly and willingly. I have used a PC for years, long before series X was even started, and all version changes were free until I switched to Mac. And I was happy to do it. But... I must admit that I had expected that eventually that investment would have brought forth more features than it did, probably because I read more into Logos comments than were promised. You know how it is when you tell a child that it would be cool to go fishing on Saturday, and if you don't do it, they feel like you let them down... But if I had to do it over again, I would, because I think that had I and others not invested, it would have become vaporware that never moved forward.
“... every day in which I do not
penetrate more deeply into the knowledge of God’s Word in Holy Scripture
is a lost day for me. I can only move forward with certainty upon the
firm ground of the Word of God.”0 -
I think this is a very legitimate complaint.Br. Raymond Minot said:The promise was when the software was purchased. Well, the discussions leading up to it. And, perhaps also what was available on the web. These features are available in the Windows version. From what I can tell by the Windows installation I did, it's version 3.0e and you can find Biblical People under Tools->Bible Data-> Biblical People.
Granted, some of the details may be incorrect, but the complaint is real.
Those of us who purchased Mac 1.0 were led to believe this version would be brought up to speed with Windows 3.0. Now, development is in Alpha for the L4mac version which means this is going to replace development for mac1.0. So, it seems that people have already paid once for a Mac version and asking them to pay another &70 for the "new" engine is not right when the promise was never fuflilled (and I assume never will be) that Mac 1.0 will reach parity with Win 3.0 version.
The water is mirky here, so let me ask, am I stating this fairly?
0 -
Joe, you're right on! Exactly. At long last, I've succeeded in being clear about what the issue is. Thank you for understanding.
As Chris pointed out, I too have difficulty with so many people not understanding the limited functionality of the Mac 1.2.2. There were no misleading details about how limited it was. And, in response to Chris, I have no desire to obtain something for free... just looking to get what I paid for.
Plus, I think it is important to be clear that any further development (so far as I can see) on v.1.2.2 is pointless. From all that I've been able to understand, Logos has poured its limited Mac resources into getting Logos 4 out... that's happening. It certainly doesn't seem feasible that they can also make updates to 1.2.2 at the same time.
So now Joe... if I remember, you're in some testing group right? Does this mean you've got some "inside" pull regardless how small? If so, do you think it's possible to funnel this issue where it needs to go? Then again, perhaps you're already doing so!
God bless!
0 -
Joe Miller said:
Now, development is in Alpha for the L4mac version which means this is going to replace development for mac1.0. So, it seems that people have already paid once for a Mac version and asking them to pay another &70 for the "new" engine is not right when the promise was never fuflilled (and I assume never will be) that Mac 1.0 will reach parity with Win 3.0 version.
So, are these true statements?
I guess that was the crux of what I was asking...are these "fears of what may happen" or did Logos say; "..we are abandoning Mac v1 and Mac v4 is going to replace it"
?
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Joe Miller said:
I think this is a very legitimate complaint.Br. Raymond Minot said:The promise was when the software was purchased. Well, the discussions leading up to it. And, perhaps also what was available on the web. These features are available in the Windows version. From what I can tell by the Windows installation I did, it's version 3.0e and you can find Biblical People under Tools->Bible Data-> Biblical People.
Granted, some of the details may be incorrect, but the complaint is real.
Those of us who purchased Mac 1.0 were led to believe this version would be brought up to speed with Windows 3.0. Now, development is in Alpha for the L4mac version which means this is going to replace development for mac1.0. So, it seems that people have already paid once for a Mac version and asking them to pay another &70 for the "new" engine is not right when the promise was never fuflilled (and I assume never will be) that Mac 1.0 will reach parity with Win 3.0 version.
The water is mirky here, so let me ask, am I stating this fairly?
I should have had a v8. This is my original complaint! You articulated it much better, but this is it.
0 -
Robert,
I think my summary is accurate, but I am willing to be persuaded by Logos that I have misunderstood something.
We,
Yep... we are on the same page. Like I said above, if we are wrong, it would be nice to get an official correction rather than let the confusion fester.
0 -
It would be nice if someone would clarify this...it's a widely held understanding as far as I can see..
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Yeah try this one out:
A few months ago I was at a conference and I discussed Logos for Mac 1.2 with a sales representative. He guaranteed me that in a few short months my Mac version would equal that of the Windows 3 version. So I have been patiently waiting for the updates to make the Mac version work the same way the windows version already works.
Imagine my surprise when I find out that my Mac version will never equal that of the windows version. In fact there is a new Version 4 that is replacing both.
I am excited about the new version but I pretty much feel like I got shafted since I paid a great deal of money for the Silver Library with the promise that the Mac version would be improved and now I find out I am out of luck. I should not have to pay for another product because a good sales person would have told me "Wait it out a few months and get Version 4 for your Mac..."
This is false advertising at its best (or worst)...
MB
0 -
Joseph, although we need to hear from Logos, I doubt there was any sinister intent to mislead just to make a sale. Mistakes? Yes. But once Bob P has time to digest this news, I am confident he will make this right for you and all other users.
I am disappointed, but hopeful brother :-)
0 -
Joe Miller said:
So, it seems that people have already paid once for a Mac version and asking them to pay another &70 for the "new" engine is not right when the promise was never fuflilled
To harp again on what I keep harping on, the price paid is not for the engine. The engine is free. You can use the version 4 engine, even after it is out of beta and the finished product is released, without paying a dime. However, some of the new features will not work without the associated resources. You will be paying for the resources, not the engine.
Biblical People is probably the only thing that was in v3 that will not work in v4 without paying something. The other things that will be missing if you do not pay for the new resources are things that were not in v3 anyway.
0 -
Hi Bob, I've been using it a little...it's def. still an alpha-version. It shows a lot of promise. It still crashes quite a bit, so I'm still using 1.2.2. most of the time.
0 -
doesn't work for me at all. i've tried and it crashes constantly.
River of Life Church: http://LifeOverflowing.org
Visit my blog: http://LifeOverflowing.org/pastor0 -
Chris Roberts said:
Biblical People is probably the only thing that was in v3 that will not work in v4 without paying something. The other things that will be missing if you do not pay for the new resources are things that were not in v3 anyway.
You know guys, this is a good point. When all is said and done, we will have a better product if it follows L4 as opposed to L3. We paid 70 bucks because we wanted a mac version. We are getting that. In fact, things are going so well for the project that those who are coming on board to the Mac version now won't even have to pay the 70. Now it is free. I'm thinking that our early support played a big factor in their decision to continue this direction.
“... every day in which I do not
penetrate more deeply into the knowledge of God’s Word in Holy Scripture
is a lost day for me. I can only move forward with certainty upon the
firm ground of the Word of God.”0 -
Dewayne Davis said:
You know guys, this is a good point. When all is said and done, we will have a better product if it follows L4 as opposed to L3. We paid 70 bucks because we wanted a mac version. We are getting that. In fact, things are going so well for the project that those who are coming on board to the Mac version now won't even have to pay the 70. Now it is free. I'm thinking that our early support played a big factor in their decision to continue this direction.
yeah but lets not give away any Nobel Peace Prizes away until after we have seen all of this done first. [:)]
River of Life Church: http://LifeOverflowing.org
Visit my blog: http://LifeOverflowing.org/pastor0 -
Hi Chris, while that is true for Windows users, there is a unique situation here that Logos needs to address. L1mac will never be a fully functioning piece of software like L3windows. People paid to get the Mac engine that will not be finished. That creates an odd circumstance then that is different from what the users of L3win to L4win will experience.Chris Roberts said:To harp again on what I keep harping on, the price paid is not for the engine. The engine is free. You can use the version 4 engine, even after it is out of beta and the finished product is released, without paying a dime.
0 -
Chris,
To add to what Joe just said, he's right. Those of us who bought the original Mac version did so under the guise that it was going to be brought up to speed. This is NOT a simple situation of paying to receive the Mac engine; at least certainly not in my case. I bought this software instead of another because it ran on a Mac, as I'm sure many others did. So I did not pay $70, I paid hundreds... the same exact price that a Windows user paid, and did so because eventually it was supposed to work the same way.
That eventual time has now arrived with version 4. So, if you think about it, a Mac user has already paid for what version 4 is, just never had. Now, had the Mac version been cheaper, I would not say anything.
Putting in Windows terms... let's reverse the roles here. Image that Logos was essentially Mac based. You've never used it before because it didn't exist on Windows. Logos makes a Windows version, but it's not up to speed; it's limited. However, they promise that it will be. So you go ahead and make a $700 purchase (seven hundred). You wait patiently... finally the day arrives when you have a fully functional version... only you have to pay more to get it. Doesn't make sense.
0 -
Br. Raymond Minot said:
So I did not pay $70, I paid hundreds... the same exact price that a Windows user paid, and did so because eventually it was supposed to work the same way.
Raymond,
If you paid hundreds then you bought a package right?
The resources you bought in that package are yours...even if you just get the free engine...you are out nothing. Your resources are yours.
If you now want MORE RESOURCES that enhance the v4 engine...then that's 70 dollars.
But those resources are yours.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Yes and no. This is what Windows users don't seem to understand. At least as far as what I've seen here. Yes the resources purchased in the package are mine. The books don't change and work with the new version 4. This is all good. No one is looking for more. It's the "no" part that makes all the difference.
In the Windows version, things like pronunciation, hymns, Biblical people (which is really cool), Timelines (excellent for the historically challenged), etc. work. They are called add-ons. They are called so because they are not (as far as I've been able to tell) part of the engine itself. Can I use them? Sure. Why? Because somehow I figured out how to install the Mac package that I bought on a Windows machine. This works. These add-ons were supposed to be incorporated into the Mac version.
The Mac version 1 cannot make use of those add-ons and does not have them incorporated into the engine. This was supposed to be happening. Instead, version 4 has come out. So having to pay something means paying for the same thing twice.
0 -
Ray,
I think I get what you're saying now...whew...it was a long haul...
I agree...there are elements that cross over and you'd be "in effect" paying twice for the same elements....
I would hope Logos would waive the 70 dollars for those who went to v4 for this reason...(that is unless I as a windows users still don't understand)
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Alleluia! You've got it.
0 -
Bob,
I puchased the Logos4Mac and now I find that it will not work on PowerPC machines.
Is there plan to offer a PowerPC version?
Paul Wright MD
wrightpa@suddenlink.net
0 -
from everything I have been reading they have no plans on offering the program for PPC. I have been told that they have a 30 day refund policy so if you are going to be running PPC might want to check into that. Have a great day and God bless.
0 -
I can say I feel exactly the same way. I changed from Windows to MAC platform about a year ago BUT was never told at the time that not all of the functions I had previously purchased would work. At the time - I swore I'd never repeat that mistake. WELL - never say never. I stupidly bit the same hook!
This new MAC version of Logos 4 is barely functional. I understand the disclaimer and all - - but this thing works totally different on two different machines - - and both exhibit constant hangups and shutdowns of the program without any reason.
Total frustration with LOGOS right now. Trying to remain a Christian in my thoughts and attitude realm!
0 -
I downloaded the link and it did alot more , I had to go to the librairy and I selected NIV bible but I couldn't type in the passage I had to use the contents pane. It also gave me some media to look at on the passage guide. Every little bit helps.[:D]
0 -
I completely agree with Colin and Mark. We were promised a Mac version for years before it materialized. When it was finally made available I was disappointed by the quality and the high price to crossgrade, and it sounds like others were too. Needless to say, that did not help endear Logos to the Mac community. I found it was better to use Parallels or Fusion and run the Windows version of Logos, even when I hate using Windows. In fact, I installed Windows on my Mac solely to run Logos. The same was true for the pastor who first recommended Logos to me.
I have watched the Logos 4 video and it looks terrific, but upgrades are so confusing I am not really sure what I am buying. The video does not say that many of the highlighted features may only be available on upgraded versions; it sounded like those are basic functions. Looking at the comparison chart it looks like it will actually cost hundreds of dollars to buy what is presented in the video. In addition, the Mac beta (or alpha) page sounds a lot like the promises made before and it makes me wonder if Logos will live up to those promises. In my opinion, Mac users have been buying nothing but promises since Logos first mentioned a Mac version was forthcoming many years ago.
I too have a considerable investment in my Logos library and have not been eager to switch to another program, but I am looking. The irony for me is that Logos seems to have adopted the Microsoft "vision" for pricing its products - overcharging and under-delivering - and those are some of the reasons I quit being a Windows customer and switched to the Mac. As loyal as I have been to Logos, I feel insulted and frustrated.
Sorry if this sounds harsh, I do consider Logos to be a quality company, but they have enough quirks and inconsistencies that I am reluctant to keep investing in their Mac products or recommend them to others.
0 -
KevinBrown01 said:
The irony for me is that Logos seems to have adopted the Microsoft "vision" for pricing its products - overcharging and under-delivering - and those are some of the reasons I quit being a Windows customer and switched to the Mac. As loyal as I have been to Logos, I feel insulted and frustrated
As one who has in the past been one of Logos' most harsh Mac critics, I must say that I have learned to disagree with this statement. The underlying code for L4 is identical on both Mac and Windows versions. What is being developed through the Alpha program is the interface. It made good business sense for Logos to develop L4 on Windows first. The Alpha phase for L4 Mac had progressed nicely. Some will disagree with the decision to release an Alpha version, but I am not one of them. Had Logos waited another six months to release a fully functional Mac version of L4, Mac users would have screamed even more loudly. Logos has posted an apology to Mac users and a explanation of the process on their web page. Bob P has explained it in detail on these forums.
It is interesting to me that most—not all—of the most bitter Mac posters have extremely low post counts. It appears that many come here vent their frustration without asking for help or an explanation and then disappear. I don't know that this is your intention, and I hope that it is not. If you want to see a quality Mac version of Logos 4, join the Alpha process, submit bug reports, and post logs. That way, you can have the satisfaction that you have made a positive contribution.
Sorry to have vented on you, but maybe I'm just attempting to atone for my previous harsh and frequently unjustified criticism. Hopefully, I am now a reformed malcontent who would like to help the process.
0 -
JackCaviness said:
It is interesting to me that most—not all—of the most bitter Mac posters have extremely low post counts. It appears that many come here vent their frustration without asking for help or an explanation and then disappear. I don't know that this is your intention, and I hope that it is not. If you want to see a quality Mac version of Logos 4, join the Alpha process, submit bug reports, and post logs. That way, you can have the satisfaction that you have made a positive contribution.
Hello Jack.
I'm perhaps one of the people who might be grouped into the 'bitter Mac posters' cohort - though I don't believe that to be an accurate summary of my position or posts. I certainly have a low post count - the reasons for which are below. I did want to respond to your message, though.
For myself, I would be much more active on these forums, much more willing to participate in the Alpha process, submit bug reports and post logs if two things hadn't happened:
- Dan's inflammatory posting, which was very hurtful. I know he apologised for this, but for me the damage is done and I mostly now opt out.
- The tendency on these forums to flame users. This is unhelpful and, in my opinion, not Christ like. Again - I find it unedifying, and now mostly opt out.
In the end, my contribution, or lack of it, matters little. Because I try to model the behaviour I teach, I have not made criticisms outside of Logos, the forums, or the product anywhere but here. I still recommend the product (though not to Mac users - I can't do that in all honesty, though I may be able to when it reaches a stable, useable version).
Colin
0 -
Colin Thornby said:
- Dan's inflammatory posting, which was very hurtful. I know he apologised for this, but for me the damage is done and I mostly now opt out.
- The tendency on these forums to flame users. This is unhelpful and, in my opinion, not Christ like. Again - I find it unedifying, and now mostly opt out.
Colin
I'm not sure whether you are accusing me of unchristian behavior in #2 or not, but does your reason #1 reflect a lack of forgiveness? I had no intention of "flaming" the original poster. Rather, as one who would have previously been at the head of bitter Mac posters, I wanted to offer an alternative view. By "low post count", I was referring to those with less than 10 posts, almost all of which are nothing but continuous complaints, most of which have been repeated over and over.
0 -
JackCaviness said:Colin Thornby said:
- Dan's inflammatory posting, which was very hurtful. I know he apologised for this, but for me the damage is done and I mostly now opt out.
- The tendency on these forums to flame users. This is unhelpful and, in my opinion, not Christ like. Again - I find it unedifying, and now mostly opt out.
Colin
I'm not sure whether you are accusing me of unchristian behavior in #2 or not, but does your reason #1 reflect a lack of forgiveness? I had no intention of "flaming" the original poster. Rather, as one who would have previously been at the head of bitter Mac posters, I wanted to offer an alternative view. By "low post count", I was referring to those with less than 10 posts, almost all of which are nothing but continuous complaints, most of which have been repeated over and over.
Dear Jack
No, I'm not accusing you of un Christian behaviour. I was simply, as a low-post user who was quoted in the message you responded to and who has posted critical comments of Logos' communications particularly, clarifying why I'm a low-post user.
I don't believe my reaction to #1 reflects a lack of forgiveness - I did and do forgive Dan. It just reflects a decision to put energy and care somewhere more useful, really. I don't really feel a need to justify my public withdrawal from this Alpha process on an internet post, but it is something I did pray about and consider.
Colin
0 -
I think in the beginning information was very slow in coming especially for mac users who had been expecting Logos for Mac to be finalised as a product. Having said that, I never had a problem with having to upgrade once I understood the whole process. In fact I love Logos 4 so much I simply reverted to suing a PC!
My extreme frustration was an early unwillingness to answer my questions. However, I made enough noise and eventually got answers to my questions. My major complaint was Mac for Logos 1.2.2 was not working with Snow Leopard thus rendering the product I paid for partly useless. As I have posted recently Phil Gons has been very helpful and gracious and the issue has now been resolved.
Like Colin, I think Dan's post was inflammatory and unhelpful and made matter worse...having said that, totally understandable given his workload and stress. I hope he is doing better now.
Lack of information is in my opinion what has frustrated Mac users most!
0 -
Colin Thornby said:
I don't believe my reaction to #1 reflects a lack of forgiveness - I did and do forgive Dan. It just reflects a decision to put energy and care somewhere more useful, really. I don't really feel a need to justify my public withdrawal from this Alpha process on an internet post, but it is something I did pray about and consider
Just thought I would ask, hopefully in a non-accusatory manner. Sometimes, I need someone to jar my consciousness. I admit I was also jolted by Dan's post, but I would have continued anyway. After all, I am addicted.
0 -
MarkStevens said:
I simply reverted to suing a PC!
I have always felt that way. Did you hire a good lawyer ?[:D]. I know what you meant, but sometimes our typos can be amusing.
MarkStevens said:I think in the beginning information was very slow in coming especially for mac users who had been expecting Logos for Mac to be finalised as a product
Perhaps I complained about that so much in the days before the release of version 1 that I wore myself out. My post was the ramblings of a reformed (hopefully) malcontent who wanted to present an alternate viewpoint.
MarkStevens said:Lack of information is in my opinion what has frustrated Mac users most!
Agreed. Lack of communication has always been a sore spot. Hopefully, Logos will do a better job in the future. If we didn't care, we would probably not get so upset. [H]
0 -
I appreciate your post, but I stand by my statement. If I were to moderate what I wrote a bit I would add that I do see progress in how Logos is integrating Mac, and the path that Logos 4 is on seems ideal. I have been a loyal Logos customer since 2002 and still consider it the best Bible program on the market - for Windows. I initially switched to a Mac in 2006 because of frustrations with the reliability of Windows and Microsoft's apparent indifference to the needs / wants of their customers; in other words I stopped being a Microsoft customer because of high cost, confusing product structure, poor quality control and mismanagement of expectations. Perhaps I am just sensitive to the Microsoft business model and see some similarities in how Logos handles things.JackCaviness said:KevinBrown01 said:The irony for me is that Logos seems to have adopted the Microsoft "vision" for pricing its products - overcharging and under-delivering - and those are some of the reasons I quit being a Windows customer and switched to the Mac. As loyal as I have been to Logos, I feel insulted and frustrated
As one who has in the past been one of Logos' most harsh Mac critics, I must say that I have learned to disagree with this statement. The underlying code for L4 is identical on both Mac and Windows versions. What is being developed through the Alpha program is the interface. It made good business sense for Logos to develop L4 on Windows first. The Alpha phase for L4 Mac had progressed nicely. Some will disagree with the decision to release an Alpha version, but I am not one of them. Had Logos waited another six months to release a fully functional Mac version of L4, Mac users would have screamed even more loudly. Logos has posted an apology to Mac users and a explanation of the process on their web page. Bob P has explained it in detail on these forums.
It is interesting to me that most—not all—of the most bitter Mac posters have extremely low post counts. It appears that many come here vent their frustration without asking for help or an explanation and then disappear. I don't know that this is your intention, and I hope that it is not. If you want to see a quality Mac version of Logos 4, join the Alpha process, submit bug reports, and post logs. That way, you can have the satisfaction that you have made a positive contribution.
Sorry to have vented on you, but maybe I'm just attempting to atone for my previous harsh and frequently unjustified criticism. Hopefully, I am now a reformed malcontent who would like to help the process.
I am not sure I would consider myself a "bitter Mac poster" though, skeptical perhaps, but not bitter. I expressed an opinion because I thought that is the purpose of these forums. I wasn't "flamed" into posting, I had been forming my opinion over many years and finally took the time to express it, that's all, although I do appreciate the fact that there are "like minds" out there. Keep in mind that in the early days of Logos for Mac development we were kept largely in the dark and perhaps that conditioned some of us into passively awaiting crumbs to drop rather than actively providing constructive input. I don't even remember an alpha or beta program then. Now there is one and I give Logos credit for putting it out there so we can participate. Low post counts doesn't mean I don't care or haven't been paying attention.
To reiterate, we have been promised a Mac equivalent for years. My expectation has been to see a Mac version that had all of the functionality of the Windows version and in my opinion we have yet to see those promises fully realized; my original Logos Series X for Windows is still the most functionally complete version I have. I readily admit that I see Logos 4 as a fulfillment of the promises, when it actually happens. Given the years of unmet promises I think it is understandable that there may be some, like me, who lack confidence and are holding back until they see a delivered product. I just don't have the money to keep investing in promises.
Still, let me stress again that I do see progress. For me it is not a matter of which platform "got it first" and the fact that it will take more time for the Mac version is perfectly understandable and acceptable. My issues are with longstanding unmet expectations and the confusion around the cross-grade / upgrade. Other than these forums I see very little information to help Mac users fully switch their Windows versions to Mac, it looks to me that we are still working in half-measures with integration of a true Mac platform. I realize Logos 4 for Mac is not there yet, but I mean integration of Macs in general. Logos Mac 1.2.2 certainly didn't do it. I would predict that if Logos 4 for Mac does deliver as promised a lot of the pent up frustration by Mac users feeling like unwanted step children may dissipate fairly quickly.
0 -
KevinBrown01 said:
I realize Logos 4 for Mac is not there yet, but I mean integration of Macs in general.
Kevin,
Can I ask; what specifically are you referring to here when you say "integration of Macs in general" what do you have in mind?
I'm not asking to slam you; in fact I see your point and your post came across to this user as well spoken and calm.
I ask because I'm a curious windows user and just wanted to know.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Robert Pavich said:KevinBrown01 said:
I realize Logos 4 for Mac is not there yet, but I mean integration of Macs in general.
Kevin,
Can I ask; what specifically are you referring to here when you say "integration of Macs in general" what do you have in mind?
I'm not asking to slam you; in fact I see your point and your post came across to this user as well spoken and calm.
I ask because I'm a curious windows user and just wanted to know.
I mean that Logos has been mainly a Windows program/company. The company started out in Windows and to this day Macs have been more or less a subsidiary. That reflects the market; there are a lot more Windows users than Mac users so I understand how business priorities play a role in product development and I understand that Windows was the environment that was most comfortable for the developers early on. It has been encouraging to see how Macs have gained in prominence at Logos and I suspect that Mac users are not an insignificant percentage of Logos customers or they wouldn't bother, but they still are not up to the level of the Windows version.
This is far from unprecedented. Intuit has done something similar with its Quicken products (and make lousy Mac products, BTW). Microsoft, not surprising, favors its Windows versions (although Microsoft's Mac Business Unit seems to have been re-awakened in its development of its Office suite). Both Intuit and Microsoft have run their Windows and Mac product lines on independent timetables. Adobe has done a pretty good job of producing for both Mac and Windows concurrently, but their customer base is probably fairly evenly balanced between the two platforms.
I just think many Mac users are hopeful that Logos will become more of a Bible software company catering to both rather than perceived as primarily a Windows software development company. It appears they are well on their way to achieving that with Logos 4. We Mac users are just waiting for a Mac version that really is on par with the Windows version and we have waited a long time. That is where the rub has been for me; we haven't seen a true Mac equivalent, we have just been promised one. The "integration" would be more of a seamlessness between platforms.
0 -
Kevin,
thanks for the detailed explaination...
I have no idea what it's like to be a Mac user in this situation...although I must say that reading the threads, and the responses over these last few months has made me more sensitive to the issue....
God bless,
bob
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
A lot has gone on with this thread.
Just because someone like myself has a low post count does not mean my original question is not worthy. I find that silly. I am a busy person who only came to the forums to look for answers on a specific issue.
Secondly, instead of continuing down the path of frustration and finally went and purchased Accordance. I will use Accordance for Bible study and logos 1.1 as a reference library. Maybe I will upgrade to 4.0 one day since it will be free but for the time being I have made the switch and will use Accordance as my primary Bible Software.
I know I can't be the only one who has a bitter taste in their mouth about the whole Mac thing/cross grade/ upgrade or whatever you want to call it.
I am only providing this feedback that logos has lost 1 customer over this. If they come out with a viable mac product then maybe I will look at it again someday but for the time being my money will be going to the competition.
I hope nobody finds this post offensive but more informational. I will do my apologies upfront if this offends anybody or it doesn't seem appropriate. Thanks!
Wes
0 -
I dont have a problem at all with your post.
If everyone owned and used the same piece of software it would tend to imply we are all clones.
The fact that you use a different piece just shows you are not exactly like others, having different needs and different things are more important to you. God created a diverse array of people and thats something to be celebrated. Some are frustrated with Logos as you are no doubt. I am not one of them. I am enjoying the Alpha. I can wait. No doubt I have different needs and priorities with my Bible software which is fine. One product will never satisfy every person or their style of doing things.
I never particularly liked Mac 1.x and went back to Quickverse for Mac till Logos 4 came out. I applaud Logos for bringing out a public Alpha but as you have found ti is not exactly up to speed yet and frustrating you. Do come and check it out when it is further down the track. I like to revisit competing software at regular occasions and see what has changed. If I hadn't kept an open mind I would of never come back to Logos. But I have but who knows what the next year will bring and I may discover something more suited or my needs may change.
0 -
KevinBrown01 said:
Low post counts doesn't mean I don't care or haven't been paying attention
Perhaps I should have been more clear as to what I meant by low post count, since some seem to have taken exception to that particular statement. Some—from subsequent posts, not you—come to the forum simply to complain. They do not seek help; they simply want to attack Logos. After 2 or 3 posts, they disappear forever.
KevinBrown01 said:Keep in mind that in the early days of Logos for Mac development we were kept largely in the dark and perhaps that conditioned some of us into passively awaiting crumbs to drop rather than actively providing constructive input.
In the days before the release of L1 for Mac, I complained loudly and frequently about the lack of communication. I also expressed my disappointment with 1.2. However, with L4—even in the Alpha stage—I now have an expectation of full parity between the Windows and Mac versions. Posting bug reports and logs are probably the best way to provide constructive input, although constructive criticism is also necessary.
KevinBrown01 said:I would predict that if Logos 4 for Mac does deliver as promised a lot of the pent up frustration by Mac users feeling like unwanted step children may dissipate fairly quickly.
Agreed.
0 -
Your response is still vague. The question remains when can we expect a fully functional version.
If you read these posts there is a lot of frustration trying to use the Alpha version. The Libronix version for the Mac works but without many of the PC version features. I started out using the PC version of the Libronix software and liked it a lot. I purchased a Mac a few months ago. I quickly realized that the MAC version had not had the development that the PC version had. It does not have many of the features that I had come to enjoy on the PC. I downloaded the MAC version of the Logos 4.0 and have been frustrated ever since. I have felt tied to this program because of my investment but at some point that may not make a difference. I read many posts where people are asking the same question, how long before we have a complete version. I don't see anyone giving a direct answer. So here we sit trying to use something that is not really functional without any idea of when it will be functional.
Please tell us more than you are updating the program every couple of weeks. Are we looking at a fully functioning version with support this year? Are we looking at a fully functioning version by second quarter, third quarter?
0 -
Hi John, it appears you replied to my post from November 4th 2009, so I will do my best to respond to your question.
There was nothing vague in my answer from 5 months ago John, I answered the specific question from Br Raymond with every detail known at the time. Please keep in mind John that when you reference a post out of context from 5 months ago, it may not give you the information you need today.JohnCurry said:Your response is still vague. The question remains when can we expect a fully functional version.
More info has been given John and you may learn more if you read the correct forum and more current threads. FYI, the forum we are now posting in is for version 1.x of the mac and since you are wanting to know more specifics about 4.x for Mac, you will find it more helpful to search in the correct place.JohnCurry said:Please tell us more than you are updating the program every couple of weeks.
However, to your question. It has been stated since November 4th that we hope to be in Beta (which in this case means fully featured) sometime in the 2nd Quarter. But that is not a promise, it is a guesstimate from our Logos President Bob Pritchett. The reason no one can be more precise and give you an exact date, is because there are too many variables in the equation (for example, we have doubled our Mac team since January).
Again, the above is the short version, but if you search the correct Mac forum, you will find more discussion and info on this topic. Also, if you try to read more current posts, you will also get better information than reading posts that are almost a half a year old. You can find the date of each post here...
One other bit of context that is important to know. I have only been working for Logos since February 2010. I am not a developer, but work in Ministry Development. So the post of mine you are quoting is from when I was a Logos "civilian" who participated in the Windows Beta program. Prior to February, I am a Logos user of 14 years, Mac user for 3 years and full time pastor at a church plant.
Blessings
0 -
JohnCurry said:
So here we sit trying to use something that is not really functional without any idea of when it will be functional.
Of course this is all moot. A17 is extremely functional. I hope by now you are enjoying using L4.
Blessings,
Roger
Elder/Pastor, Hope Now Bible Church, Fresno CA
0
