********** 10 released
Comments
-
Phew!! Appreciate that a lot. Thank you!
0 -
Dennis Miller said:
I guess I just don't like investing in a promise that never gets fulfilled. How many years has it been now and we still don't have the full product we were sold?
Given that 30th October will be the third anniversary of my upgrade to Version 4 it would be nice to see:
- As many of the as yet missing features completed by that date as possible.
- A commitment from Logos with dates for any features they cannot deliver by that date.
Personally I think that three years of waiting is long enough.
Once all of the features are completed, I personally would like to see some significant investement in improving performance because SSD and 8GB of RAM seems a bit excessive to me. Areas that need focus are:
- Notes, is it really all down to WPF?
- Displaying search results - forget the search complete in .nn seconds for me it is not over until the results are displayed.
Until this is all done I don't really care about what the competitors are offering because the reality is I will not be changing from Logos because I have too much invested to start over with another product. My concern is that with the recent announcement from a major competitor Logos will now focus on a raft of new and/or enhanced features to compete for new customers leaving the existing customer base waiting for the missing features. I guess the good news is that if the competitor really is a lot faster then Logos will have to do something to improve performance.
The days when I could consider taking my business elsewhere are long gone so, for better or worse, I'll be using Logos for the foreseeable future and continuing to invest. Somewhere on this journey I hope that I will once again be a happy Logos user rather than one who is becoming increasingly disgruntled and resigned to being 'locked in'.
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
Dear Graham: Well said and I agree with you. I have both, one for Library and one for search, original language work.
I have no plan of giving up on Logos at this point , however, I have an honest expectation for them to deliver to me the product I bought. At this point, they have failed to do so. Speed and Stability are the two things highest on my list of Logos "needs to do" lists.
If they could get those two areas up to decent functionality, I would be a very happy camper.-smile
0 -
Dennis Miller said:
So, I wonder Jack, why would I be so critical, because I like to or is it because I'm tired of all the unfulfilled promises from a company and product that was once great?
I refuse to become engaged in a debate with you. <Deleted>
Accordance is good, as far as it goes<Deleted> I will use Accordance for language study, the Atlas, and the Timelines—<deleted>
Dennis Miller said:Would you be so content if you bought a car based upon advertising hype
<Deleted>
Had a change of heart [8-|]
0 -
I do like Accordance. There's much that I could say that I like about this new version and in fact there's little I would fault so far... but this is a Logos forum.
I do agree with Graham Owen, we are heading towards the three year mark of L4. I can't say that I feel like we are there yet in terms of a mature product. The concept is great, but I am tracking seven issues that I am hoping is fixed in a future release. (all are reported and others have noted them on this forum) The trouble is over the past nearly three years my list has never gone away... even if I use a very liberal view and look to heavily discount issues, I still have never been able to make my list go away.
0 -
I think some of the disconnect is that some of us see the resource issues and the programming issues as entirely separate issues. I have original languages plus additional resources. I want the program to work, whether or not I ever buy another library resource (a.k.a books). For me having more resources is not a feature of the program. Interface, executed actions, speed, foolproof links to other programs; these are programming features. Programming features are expected. New resources are gravy.
0 -
Robert C. Beckman Jr. said:
I think some of the disconnect is that some of us see the resource issues and the programming issues as entirely separate issues. I have original languages plus additional resources. I want the program to work, whether or not I ever buy another library resource (a.k.a books). For me having more resources is not a feature of the program. Interface, executed actions, speed, foolproof links to other programs; these are programming features. Programming features are expected. New resources are gravy.
Nicely stated Robert!![:D] Exactly!! I love the resources and still purchase many but the program speed and execution is lacking significantly.
0 -
Robert C. Beckman Jr. said:
I think some of the disconnect is that some of us see the resource issues and the programming issues as entirely separate issues.
Robert C. Beckman Jr. said:Programming features are expected. New resources are gravy.
I think that it is difficult to separate the two even though I would like to because:
- Our investment in resources is what ties us to Logos and prevents us walking away...
- The programming issues are what frustrate us and make us consider walking away...
- The regular introduction of new resources simply adds fuel to this fire, I buy them:
- On pre-pub to get the best price
- In Logos because I like having a single system
- They are not always available in other formats
- Even though I know it further increases my commitment to Logos
They are also linked because the core engine is free which means that the development costs come out of the revenue generated by additional resources purchased by existing customers and sales to new users. Ironically this means that to get the software fixed I need to fund additional development resources for Logos by buying more books.
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
Does anyone think that there is a conceivable time in the future where the advantages of the competition outweigh the investment in Logos?
Makes me think about Pradis...
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Why pick between them. Use both. Call up the other company and tell them what you already own in Logos and they will give nice discounts for the same products in theirs. I use them both with Logos serving primarily as a Book reader while I use the other for note taking and languages study.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0 -
Yes,Paul Golder said:Does anyone think that there is a conceivable time in the future where the advantages of the competition outweigh the investment in Logos?
Makes me think about Pradis...
IMHO, it is not now, and we are a ways from it. If Logos continues on this same road, it can be a different story four or five years from now.
0 -
Paul Golder said:
Does anyone think that there is a conceivable time in the future where the advantages of the competition outweigh the investment in Logos?
I think there is always a risk. Hard to tell... Apple Macs were almost relegated to a minority specialty market and now walk into any university and see how many macbooks you see. Things change.
The announcement of version 10 that they have been in development of a Windows version for the last year and plan to release it in 2013, is a good sign that the company is becoming multi-platform.
I love the Apple Mac platform, but I would never rule out going to Windows or any other future OS that may be around in 20 years particularly if Apple went downhill. As far as Pradis goes, that was tied to a single publisher, Zondervan who never attracted other publishers and of course was only for Windows. I think the model of a third party like Logos or Accordance that publishes resources for multiple publishing sources is a bit more diversified.
0 -
Kevin A. Purcell said:
Why pick between them. Use both. Call up the other company and tell them what you already own in Logos and they will give nice discounts for the same products in theirs. I use them both with Logos serving primarily as a Book reader while I use the other for note taking and languages study.
Yup, same here.
0 -
I have no reason to use anything BUT Logos, but in fairness I have not tried Accordance.
I think the language tools are great in Logos, but I am not much of an original language guy in the first place. Maybe I should just go back to my corner.Jerry
iMac (2019 model), 3Ghz 6 Core Intel i5, 16gb Ram, Radeon Pro Graphics. 500GB SSD.
0 -
Just can't agree with this.
1. Having paid good money for ostensibly the best program, I want the best program. That means continuing development.
2. I am happy with the resources I have and take a very conservative approach to adding more. The idea that more resources is a "feature" baffles me. Great marketing but not a feature.
3. We need to assured that new resources are fully taking advantage of the capacities of the program. Some resources will need features all their own. The Oxryncuss (sp?) Papyri are on pre-pub. Knowing something about these volumes makes me a little leery. For them to be usable I can envision several search parameters which would be valuable. (search for word x by date, provenance of document, genre, etc.) In this sense features and resources are synergistic. Having the resource without powerful searching makes it hard to use.
4. There are some Logos 4 features which make me tingle every time I use them. The analysis tab in Search which allows you to turn you search into a pivot table; WOW. But you can't graph the resulting table, nor can you print it.
5. Marketing and Development need to be hand in glove. It seems that right now the fall-back position to development questions is "features, we have more resources."
0 -
Me too.
Rich+
0 -
Can you give one or two examples where you find another Bible software does something better than Logos in original language search. Please outline the steps in Logos, especially if it involves syntax searching. Then post your time that it takes in Logos, the other program, and the specs of the machine the test was carried out on.
It might help if the package you possess was known.
I use Logos daily, and aside from an occasional spinning beach ball, I have no problems with its speed.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Is anyone drafting up a set of objective tests that we can use to give some needed feedback to Logos? To say that it is slow without giving objective tests is not helping Logos to see where the bottlenecks are.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Lynden, I long to see your objective tests.
I choose not to create such as I don't have time and I'm a tech and Bible software journalist. I just write about what I feel as I use the software as a pastor and Logos often feels slow especially at launch. It does some things really fast, like simple searches thanks to indexing. And it does something really well and others really poorly (the guides are great but notes performances is laggy).
But I do look forward to seeing your objective tests.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0 -
Kevin A. Purcell said:
But I do look forward to seeing your objective tests.
I will try to come up with one, but generally I am a happy camper with L4. As for slow startups, it may be more dependent on what is going on with the computer, and how you open up Logos. If you open it up to the home screen, what you have checked to display there will make a difference.
If it opens up to the last layout, that can make a difference. One layout (NT layout) has 51 tabs. It took 63 seconds online, and 23 seconds when I opened L4 offline. I wonder if most people use such complicate layouts.
I closed L4, and started it up offline. This layout took about 4-5 seconds to open. I am on Windows Beta.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
From the last layout posted, I opened the NT layout 51 tabs while offline (It may have been opened earlier cannot say) it took 35 seconds.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Shut down the computer, allowed it to sit for a few minutes to let windows finish its background work.
Started Logos and it took 40 seconds for it to bring up the syncing box.
It took another 14 seconds to bring up a blank space.
It then took 1:19 seconds to load the current layout. A total of 50 tabs.
Closed all tabs, and opened passage guide from the guie menu, took about 2 seconds. Exegetical guide took about 4 seconds.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Closed the software and opened it to a blank layout while online: 12.6 seconds.
Selected everything that I could on the home screen and closed the software.
It took 17 seconds to open and populate the home screen including the ribbon.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
As for slow startups, it may be more dependent on what is going on with the computer, and how you open up Logos. If you open it up to the home screen, what you have checked to display there will make a difference.
If it opens up to the last layout, that can make a difference.
Lynden, this is probably staring me in the face, but I don't see it in the preferences. How do you get Logos/Mac to open to the last layout rather than the home screen?
Never mind. I found it.
0 -
Dear Lynden: I don't think giving times for your windows set-up has any bearing over here in Mac-world.
Logos is sloooowww over here.
I always close most everything other than my basic layout, opening program is slow, it opens in a small box half the time and never in the same part of the Screen twice, been this was for well over a year. It is slow to do all of this. Accordance on this same machine opens very quickly, with an incredibly more complex layout consisting of many open resources, two or three full screen layouts and at least ten of fifteen tabs in each one, not to mentions word counts, etc.
If I do a Bible word search, in any language, in Accordance, for the whole bible, the results are displayed faster than I get hit "on and stop" on a stop watch. Logos CANNOT do that.
I can do a search in "all resources" in Accordance for any word, literally, and have the results displayed in well under 1 sec.
Logos CANNOT do that. I do that type of search on Logos, I have time to refill my coffee.
I have almost the same number of resources in both, though they are different "types" of resources.
Unless one has used both programs, there is just no way to explain and communicate with each other the difference.
In my younger days, I raced Cars, real race cars, track only cars.
There is a huge difference between "fast" with a nice , well set-up and tuned street car and FAST with a well set up and tuned Racecar.
I can try to explain the difference , but it will not be sufficient. IF I put you in a Race Car with me for a quick lap, you would quickly know the difference , if you drove it , even lightly, for a few min, you would then know the difference to another level completely .
Logos does some thing well, there are some things I like well enough to tolerate the really bad engine in this vehicle.
Mainly, I just need the resources and so tolerate the fact the software for using those resources is sub-standard.
Accordance does some things really well, it is incredibly fast- Race Car fast! It displays search query's ( no matter the language or word/phrase count) with incredible speed and accuracy. Complex morphology at upper end academic levels is a snap .
Where Accordance is weak is in resources such as Commentaries and resources across denominational Lines. Accordance has very Little in the way of Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican resources, it has no Liturgical Works , no Lectionaries. They do have the Church Fathers and a Catholic collection, but the Catholic Collection is basically just the Catechism of the Catholic Church and a few other common titles.
Accordance is great for Original Language work and many of the Modern Original Language tools we all use, no matter the platform, we researched using Accordance.
Logos is a "Library system" .
Logos and Accordance are different, they are not the same, they both have some similar features , but they are not the same thing. Cars and Trucks are both vehicles, Yet created for different functions. Cars and Trucks have a lot of features in common, a lot of resources in common, Yet it's really hard to load your furniture into your car and carry it effectively .
Logos is a Library reader for books and gives you the ability to do searches and word study. It has some cool tools for doing some things-ok.
Accordance is Professional Original Language "software" with a library that is limited primarily to those functions.
I do wish Logos would fix the things that are broken, improve the software's ability to use the computers we own. I do not expect Logos to do what Accordance does because, Logos does not specialize in that field or function.
IMHO.
0 -
BTW , Accordance with two full screens, 12 zones and 22 tabs opens first time ( after reboot of computer) in less than 1 sec.
Closing and re-opening is less than 1/2 sec.
This is primarily the difference between a Software Company and a Library Company ( as someone else made such a good post about ).
Both are needed.
0 -
Goodness ... this looks like a great advert for A-Company. I thought Libronix was a bit of a speed demon (compared to L4), but looks like L3's going to be a bit molassas-y when the Windows version of A-Company comes out. Not good (especially since Libronix is the best software ever written).
Reading about the race cars, it struck me that Logos4 is a whole lot like those really neato new models that car companies roll out, only to find they had to compromise on the engine. I still think L4 will eventually be viewed as a 'good idea at the time'.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Was not trying to advertise. Just think Logos needs to fix Logos to do "rightly" what Logos is designed to do.
One can compare "feature to feature" between the two and that's fine.
But they are still two different platforms with two different primary functions. Both are for Biblical studies, just specialized in different areas.
Logo's-Mac biggest drawback right now is not about comparing features with Accordance or Logos-Windows, but the fact it just does not use computer resources well and is inconsistent in some areas.
I love the library.
0 -
Lynden Williams said:
especially if it involves syntax searching.
Wanted to find all appearances of παρὰ with an accusative object in NA-27. I don't even know how to do that in Logos, but it took less than 30 seconds to set it up in Accordance and the results—all 59 of them—were on my screen instantly.
If I can do that, do I really need to go to the trouble of learning to build syntax searches in Logos?
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Wanted to find all appearances of παρὰ with an accusative object in NA-27
Logos Morph Search can find παρὰ before accusative words; albeit initial setup took longer than 30 seconds while waiting for a pop-up menu for g:para (seems many words begin with παρὰ). Syntax search can find παρὰ before accusative words in the same phrase.
Personally wonder if ********** 10 can visually combine search results of Greek Morphology in English and Greek resources:
Logos 4 can visually combine over a hundred searches at one time; albeit does take many seconds for combined result to appear (overall less than 1 second for each search item).
Also wonder if ********** 10 can group a set of searches so can turn on or off, similar to visual filter menu in Logos 4 ?
Keep Smiling [:)]
0
