Am I the Only One that Finds Logos 5 Looks Worse on Mac than Logos 4?
I hate to have such a negative title, but I'm just curious if I'm the only one noticing this. I used Logos 5 for a few minutes about two weeks ago on a Retina MBP and didn't think it looked that bad. I went ahead and did the crossgrade to Logos 5 a few days ago and now I'm honestly annoyed to look at it on my pre-retina MBP.
Logos 4 was always a little annoying because it never looked completely like a Mac app. It wasn't terrible, but you could always tell that it wasn't designed for a Mac. It reminds me of when Firefox used to stick out so badly on a Mac. Well, after several days of working with Logos 5, it looks even less like a Mac app than Logos 4. The more I try to work with it, the more I feel like I'm looking at a Windows app. This may seem like a small thing, but the inconsistency really stands out. The visual design of Mac is one reason many of us prefer it over PC's and it looks like Logos has taken a step further away from the app looking natural on a Mac and basically locking everyone on to the way a PC looks. Granted, Logos began as a PC app, but these little polish elements are important to many of us Mac owners.
I'm really not trying to sound negative or complain. Obivously I may be much more "right brain" than many people on this forum. I'm just being annoyed with how much Logos 5 sticks out on my computer and makes me feel like I'm switching back and forth between a PC and a Mac in the middle of my workflow. That's why I'm curious if I'm the only one noticing this. The design consistency between Logos and everything else on my Mac is so great that it's enough to make me want to work outside of Logos when I can with a certain other Bible software package.
No offense to all those at Logos who worked so hard on Logos 5. I do appreciate the increase in polish over Logos 4 
I'm also not trying to be negative. I plan to send this feedback as a suggestion to the appropriate channel at Logos but I'm wondering if I'm the only one affected by this.
Comments
-
Samuel Clough said:
Logos 4 was always a little annoying because it never looked completely like a Mac app.
It is interesting to hear this perspective from a Mac user.Many Windows users feel the same way.
One thing that always bugged me about Logos since version 4 is that it is so different from other Windows programs. You get used to it in time, but initially there is a significant learning curve, because so many things are done in a distinctive way. Little visual things look different from other Windows programs, such as the scroll bars, tiled windows (rather than overlapping windows), commands hidden under the panel icon, high reliance on icons for commands rather than menus, etc. Logos has neither a pure Windows interface nor a pure Macintosh interface -- it has a unique Logos look and feel.
0 -
Samuel Clough said:
I'm honestly annoyed to look at it on my pre-retina MBP.
I predicted this would happen when we first began beta testing, but soon decided that I was wrong. You are the very first to make this complaint
.Samuel Clough said:The design consistency between Logos and everything else on my Mac is so great that it's enough to make me want to work outside of Logos when I can with a certain other Bible software package.
You are aware that Logos has a 30 day, not questions asked return policy, aren't you?
Samuel Clough said:I'm also not trying to be negative. I plan to send this feedback as a suggestion to the appropriate channel at Logos but I'm wondering if I'm the only one affected by this.
I was the proud owner of one of the first Macs, so I have been using Macs almost exclusively for almost thirty years now, and the complaint that a certain application is unMac Like has always amused me. Interestingly enough, in the early days of L4, many Windows users complained that it did not look like a Windows application.
It is not Windows-like, it is not Mac-like, it is Logos Like, and I personally like it.
0 -
Personally I am one who doesn't want my OS of choice to be an "ecosystem" to such a level that it invades the scope of all the programs I run on it. I guess all operating systems have standards and baselines as to their aesthetics, menus and navigation but I'm all about function over form.
My preferred OS is Windows and I do not think that Logos is Windows-like nor do I want it to be. I run Win 7/8 because it offers me the smoothest operation, hardware choices and program compatibility for my needs but I do not want MS setting a hardcore standard for what developers of 3rd party software I want to run must fit into (as far as aesthetics etc.).
Logos has a pleasing aesthetic to my eye but more importantly it functions very well in most areas as far as being, in my opinion, the best overall Bible study software I have ever used.
There is room for improvement of course but I have never opened Logos (or any other software) and said to myself "this needs to be more Windows-like".
Just my two cents
Logos 5, Windows & Android perfect together....
0 -
If I was really being fussy about details I thought some things were better in L5, but some things were worse. We're not talking functionality mind you, but rather just micro tiny preferences. Some of it as well is just getting used to a different look.
For example, at first I didn't like the new default resource font. Yet now that I have become used to it, I will not go back. Just last night I experimented with the old L4 font and very quickly went back to L5's default font. The new font, though I didn't like it at first, is easier on my eyes and helps my work flow.
Probably my biggest fuss, and we are again talking something that has no functional value, is the tab area at the top of each panel. I don't like the big bold blue line at the top of the active tab. I would prefer it to be shades of grey like other mac apps. I would prefer that the 'X' to close the tab would be more like Safari and disappear when not being selected. In an ideal world, I would like for it to follow the way Safari does it by putting the 'X' on the left side of the tab. This is not a big deal, just preference. I have another bible program that I love the way it handles this stuff and it just seems elegant, but beauty is often in the eye of the beholder and it certainly doesn't help you be a better student of the word!
In general I think Logos has come a long way in adding polish to the interface. It was not uncommon to find text on buttons that wasn't centred or parts of the UI that needed tweaked. I also think that bringing 'Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts' onto the main title bar along with their display enhancements is an improvement. In general I give it the thumbs up and I expect there are more refinements which we will see in the future.
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
I also think that bringing 'Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts' onto the main title bar along with their display enhancements is an improvement. In general I give it the thumbs up and I expect there are more refinements which we will see in the future.
This is the part that I first warned would cause complaints from Mac purists [8-|]. It only took two days of using the beta for me to see the error of my prediction. Pages is an Apple-produced application. Is that annoying formatting pallet Mac-like? [:D]
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
Probably my biggest fuss, and we are again talking something that has no functional value, is the tab area at the top of each panel. I don't like the big bold blue line at the top of the active tab. I would prefer it to be shades of grey like other mac apps. I would prefer that the 'X' to close the tab would be more like Safari and disappear when not being selected. In an ideal world, I would like for it to follow the way Safari does it by putting the 'X' on the left side of the tab. This is not a big deal, just preference. I have another bible program that I love the way it handles this stuff and it just seems elegant, but beauty is often in the eye of the beholder and it certainly doesn't help you be a better student of the word!
I think you've nailed what is probably one of my biggest complaints. The little blur bar one the active tab, the "square" tabs that don't have a tab look and feel to them, but rather just look like lines, the big "X" just sitting there, the default font used on the tabs, and the big icons in the left top of every tab are really are probably my biggest complaints. It would be really nice to have controls like the tabs and close that look native to the Mac and the option to set the application font (not just the resource font). Maybe one day Logos will oblige us there
Of course, all of that's just my opinion, and being an artist I'm probably more sensitive to aesthetics than others. I agree none of this is related to functionality. Of course that is better than Logos 4.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Pages is an Apple-produced application. Is that annoying formatting pallet Mac-like?
As someone who has used other computers for the last 40 years and has just switched to Macs about a year ago I would love to ask one of the original mac users what exactly constitutes "Mac-like" but that would be off topic and outside of forum guidelines. To an outsider like me it seems that prior to OSX application interfaces for Mac programs (especially graphic programs) could be almost anything. I do agree with the other poster who noted that little details like the rounded corners on tabs make a difference (one of the things that make using a Mac like driving a BMW compared to Windows being like driving a Yugo Ford [:P]).
0 -
Mike W said:
To an outsider like me it seems that prior to OSX application interfaces for Mac programs (especially graphic programs) could be almost anything.
OS X 10.7 Lion was the first Macintosh operating system that allows the menu bar along the top to be hidden when using an application in full screen.
Apple (Steve Jobs, et al) established Human Interface Guidelines (HIG) before the original Macintosh ever shipped, which also included the first commercially viable mouse. Apple has a HIG for iOS, which is highly recommended reading before beginning app development.
Amazon has Mac HIG from 1993 available => http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-Computer/dp/0201622165
One lasting change at Microsoft after being sued by Apple => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation in intentionally changing the user interface experience with every release. For example, Windows 8 no longer has the Start button, which had been introduced in Windows 95.
In contrast, the Apple menu is still in the same place as the original Macintosh: upper left corner of the screen.
Personally like using Logos 5 in full screen mode on OS X 10.8.2; dreaming of colorful themes for Logos 5 on Windows and OS X since would like to customize many Logos colors.
Mike W said:I do agree with the other poster who noted that little details like the rounded corners on tabs make a difference
+1 [Y] for visual appearance; personally prefer minimal differences in Logos between Windows and OS X.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
I think the appearance of L5 on the Mac still falls far short of L5 on PC, the same as L4 did, but L5 Mac is still a bit of a visual improvement over L4. It isn't a great improvement, but it's moving in the right direction. For instance, I like the places where the UI is brought more in line with the PC version (one place where I disagree with hardcore Mac users: if using a multi-platform software, I prefer the UI to be the same, regardless of platform) particularly with the toolbar items. But the UI is still not quite as sharp and clean as the PC version.
0 -
Chris Roberts said:
I think the appearance of L5 on the Mac still falls far short of L5 on PC, the same as L4 did, but L5 Mac is still a bit of a visual improvement over L4. It isn't a great improvement, but it's moving in the right direction. For instance, I like the places where the UI is brought more in line with the PC version (one place where I disagree with hardcore Mac users: if using a multi-platform software, I prefer the UI to be the same, regardless of platform) particularly with the toolbar items. But the UI is still not quite as sharp and clean as the PC version.
Chris, my curiosity is killing me over here. What are some examples of how L5 Mac falls "far" short of the PC version as far as UI? Now, I am a PC user and do not care the least for Macs but I run L5 on PC and have watched videos of L5 on Mac and outside of the slight Mac border UI they look virtually the same....
Again I say this as a person who does not favor Apple's visual scheme and UI approach but I think Logos has made both versions look like.... well, Logos.
Logos 5, Windows & Android perfect together....
0 -
Kevin Taylor said:
What are some examples of how L5 Mac falls "far" short of the PC version as far as UI?
I realized I overstated things in my initial response, but evidently I missed the removal of one of my superlatives. I should have said that it falls short, not far short. And the differences may simply be due to places where the Mac scheme differs from the PC. In general, PC apps look brighter and sharper, which is sometimes a blessing, sometimes a curse. In the case of Logos, I prefer the PC appearance.
Below is a screenshot of Logos 5 on the PC and Mac. Mac image is always first, followed by the PC. First, some comments on the differences:
On the toolbar, left tools (the buttons and text) are clear yet more subtle on the PC. The text is a bit more in-your-face on the Mac. Partly due to the Logos skin. The skin makes sense for the Mac, but the result is text that stands out more than on the Mac. Also on the toolbar, all the button graphics appear cleaner and crisper on the PC. I don't know why, perhaps again due to the skin, but they render better on the PC.
Moving down to my snippet from the Bible toolbar, some similar issues. Text stands out more on the Mac than on the PC; I prefer the subtle look on the PC. On the Mac it's a bit too jarring. This is especially true for the buttons. Note the buttons for the Bible toolbar area and the Clippings toolbar area. I'm sure Logos chose this approach due to the typical "Mac" way - buttons clearly set apart - but while this approach works great in an app like Apple Pages, I don't like it in Logos. I don't want the buttons to be boxy or stand out. Again, I much prefer the clean, subtle look on the PC. It doesn't help that the Mac version is slightly schizophrenic about this; note again the Bible toolbar: some of the buttons are set apart in boxes ("Display", "Verse", the back/forward button, etc) while others aren't (parallel resources, etc). If it looks a little clunky with the distinct buttons, it looks even moreso with these buttons presented in different ways.
Again, I know these are likely due to the way things are normally done on the Mac, and may even be hard to avoid in Cocoa, but I think things could be improved to make the Mac version share a bit more of the clean, subtle look of the PC version. Either way, it notes some areas where I prefer the look of the PC version over the Mac version.
0 -
Nice screen shots Chris ... I had not looked at them side by side before.
I use Mac and W7. I find that it is now easier to move between my two computers because of the position of the layouts menu being similar.
Graphically, I always find it worse switching to windows when I have been using mac for a while. I like the higher contrast text on the bars ... I want to read black text, not grey on grey ... an eyesight / preference issue ...
I also like the round lozenge on the command bar of the mac (and the circular close buttons etc.) rather than the boxy windows elements.
I often find myself thinking how the radical change from L3 to L4 graphics, the 'missing' scroll bars, the grey scheme etc. pre-dated even OS X in their attempts to remove scroll bars and colour (and left W7 standing in the dust) ... Bob and the team did well there I think. Even the new font, disliked at first, proving to be the correct one now ... I am beginning to trust Bob's designs, and learning to trust their ideas and change my paradigms.
Having said that, there are bigger issues, for both W and M, than these ... such as the library where the text box does not expand even when there is real estate available ... so that you cannot even see the search terms; or the lack of control that we have over opening windows, and their destination tabs etc.
2017 15" MBP, iPad Pro
0 -
Martin, I agree with you in full on the library window. It has been a total chore for me to work with in L4 & L5. Doing anything more than a basic resource find feels clunky. I have not gone in and updated my prioritized resources for quite a while due to this very reason.
I was hoping for better window management with L5 and also better drag & drop and column controls.
Logos 5, Windows & Android perfect together....
0 -
I add one example I consider the real fault, especially for eye-disabled people like me. When you sort books in Library in any way but titles the category names are on shadow bacckground. I saw some videos from L4 Win and there the text is on white background. And even graphically It looks beter on L4 Win.
0 -
Mike W said:
I would love to ask one of the original mac users what exactly constitutes "Mac-like" but that would be off topic and outside of forum guidelines.
Have only been using Macs for 28+ years. Not sure what "Mac-like" is supposed to mean. Think it is mostly a fantasy [8-|]
0 -
Donovan R. Palmer said:
I don't like the big bold blue line at the top of the active tab.
Let's see now. for the last 3 years people complained about closing the wrong window pane because the active pane did not have a distinctive indicator. Now we have a distinctive indicator, and Logos receives complaints that it is there. Hard for me to imagine how a 2mm bar can be so disconcerting. Personally, I find it to be a welcome addition.
Chris Roberts said:Again, I know these are likely due to the way things are normally done on the Mac, and may even be hard to avoid in Cocoa, but I think things could be improved to make the Mac version share a bit more of the clean, subtle look of the PC version. Either way, it notes some areas where I prefer the look of the PC version over the Mac version.
Do you really prefer that faded washed-out appearance to the more readable?
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Personally, I find it to be a welcome addition.
I agree with you on that one, the heavier bar is a good thing.
Jack Caviness said:Do you really prefer that faded washed-out appearance to the more readable?
Yesish.
I need to be able to find the buttons and such when I want them, but otherwise want them out of the way since my focus is on the text. After all, it's not about reading buttons but reading content. The PC version does this well.0 -
Jack Caviness said:Donovan R. Palmer said:
I also think that bringing 'Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts' onto the main title bar along with their display enhancements is an improvement. In general I give it the thumbs up and I expect there are more refinements which we will see in the future.
This is the part that I first warned would cause complaints from Mac purists
. It only took two days of using the beta for me to see the error of my prediction. Pages is an Apple-produced application. Is that annoying formatting pallet Mac-like? Jack, this is the only part of L5 that I dislike, I break my resources into different windows and I always seem to be in the one that doesn't have the main title bar when I want to access those functions. I don't care about "Mac Like", but this breaks my work flow big time.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Let's see now. for the last 3 years people complained about closing the wrong window pane because the active pane did not have a distinctive indicator. Now we have a distinctive indicator, and Logos receives complaints that it is there. Hard for me to imagine how a 2mm bar can be so disconcerting. Personally, I find it to be a welcome addition.
I think I qualified my input, but it's far from disconcerting for me regardless. There have been other things which have been disconcerting about Logos and usually I submit logs when I am in that state! [;)]
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Let's see now. for the last 3 years people complained about closing the wrong window pane because the active pane did not have a distinctive indicator. Now we have a distinctive indicator, and Logos receives complaints that it is there. Hard for me to imagine how a 2mm bar can be so disconcerting. Personally, I find it to be a welcome addition.
I think I qualified my input, but it's far from disconcerting for me regardless. There have been other things which have been disconcerting about Logos and usually I submit logs when I am in that state! [;)]
0 -
For example, Windows 8 no longer has the Start button, which had been introduced in Windows 95.
I know they have an HIG but I also understand that apple doesn't always follow it. I'm glad the decided to add a tabbed interface in addition to separate window. I hear that the 13' macbook and the airs are currently the best selling apple computers and tabs really helps with a smaller screen.
Over the last year or so a number of people I work with have bought their first Mac (Air and iMac mostly) and everyone comments about how nice they are compared to the windows machines they previously had. Windows 8 is going to be a very difficult move for most users and the application store is a bad joke (the apps are terrible and you can't even search the store). It seems Microsoft is trying to leverage their dominance on industry desktops to get into the tablet market and smartphone sales. This may backfire as it makes the desktop much more difficult to use and there are no visual clues for tasks (for example, opening and viewing multiple tabs in internet explorer is not intuitive and it is not even obvious that it is possible).
I do like the full screen mode in Logos. While the new interface for Accordance is very nice they still don't have full screen mode so Logos is ahead in this regard. I also like the appearance of L5 on Mac better than on Windows. Consistency between platforms is good but I have to say I preferred having the menu choices in the menu bar like L4 over the current in window menus. It seems that L5 is not really Mac-like or Windows Like[;)].
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Do you really prefer that faded washed-out appearance to the more readable?
I'm with you on this one. The small font in regular typeface (not grayed out) for the menus and focus tabs work really well for some of us who are north of 50 (especially in full screen mode). The other Mac bible software program has the slightly grayed fonts on gray tabs and I find that a little harder to read and distracting.
0 -
I realize this is a Mac discussion for the most part and I don't use Mac. Don't want to. Have a friend who uses Mac and iPhone and AppleTV or MacTV or whatever it's called. I think it's nifty enough...and don't have any desire to switch or use any of it. But I thought I would chime in since part of the discussion is about appearance. One of the main things I disliked about L4 was the appearance. For me it looked too Mac-ish. Kinda ironic that some Mac folks think it looks too PC-ish, but doesn't change how I feel about L4. Another issue was the fact that the screen looked fuzzy...considerably fuzzy. I had to switch from a white background to a light gray background to mitigate the fuzz. I found it very interesting when I was at Camp Logos that the guy next to me, using Windows, had a super sharp looking screen. Didn't make me feel much better, but I knew it wasn't "only" Logos's fault. Plus, since I still used L3 regularly, I could take comfort in the fact that it was crystal clear on my laptop...and still is.
Anyway, I find that L5 has a slightly different look than L4 had, and for whatever reason the screen is much sharper...thankfully! So that's good. Still, and I guess I'm in the minority here, but I prefer the look of L3 to the look of L5. L3 has a simpler and more bold appearance. L5 is much more subtle...too subtle for my taste. However, it isn't just L3's appearance but design that I prefer. Every single aspect of Notes is better, from the color and design of the icons, to the text input window, to the adjustable size of the note pop-up window. L4, and now L5, fails in all of these areas. It's like going back to hammer and chisel. There are fewer visual mark-up options in L3, but they render better than L5 does.
Anyway, I am happy that L5 is sharper than L4 was. I even like the new white icon, since it represents the death of L4. I may use L5 more than I used L4, but the few things about L3 that Logos easily could but obstinately refuses to import into L5 will keep me using L3 as far as I can tell. I wish I felt otherwise...if certain features were included in L5, I would ignore the subtle appearance thing. But L5...like L4...simply refuses to do what I need it to do.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:
I don't use Mac. Don't want to.
Your loss, but be careful what you say about Macs around here, there are some Mac users lurking with pretty strong opinions about the whole Mac/Windows topic. I wouldn't go there. [:|]
David Paul said:One of the main things I disliked about L4 was the appearance. For me it looked too Mac-ish.
Your joking... right? Logos 4/5 does not look/act like a Mac application. It looks like Logos 4/5 which can be said to be unique. And if we're going to be saying that Logos 4/5 looks Mac like then we Mac users might start demanding that the 'X' be moved to the left of the tab/pane/window whatever.
David Paul said:Another issue was the fact that the screen looked fuzzy...considerably fuzzy.
What part of the screen?
David Paul said:But L5...like L4...simply refuses to do what I need it to do.
That's a shame — works for me, but then I have never used Logos 3 so can't compare. Anyway don't really have any desire to go backwards.
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
0 -
Patrick S. said:David Paul said:
Another issue was the fact that the screen looked fuzzy...considerably fuzzy.
What part of the screen?
The words...looked like a 9-pin dot matrix.
Patrick S. said:David Paul said:But L5...like L4...simply refuses to do what I need it to do.
That's a shame — works for me, but then I have never used Logos 3 so can't compare. Anyway don't really have any desire to go backwards.
LOL...that's the point of my post. Whether you realize it or not...L5 (just like L4 before it) IS GOING BACKWARDS!!
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:
I have a reasonable font, this is what text in books looks like on my iMac
David Paul said:Patrick S. said:David Paul said:But L5...like L4...simply refuses to do what I need it to do.
That's a shame — works for me, but then I have never used Logos 3 so can't compare. Anyway don't really have any desire to go backwards.
LOL...that's the point of my post. Whether you realize it or not...L5 (just like L4 before it) IS GOING BACKWARDS!!
Ah well.... blissful ignorance [H]
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
0 -
Terry Poperszky said:Jack Caviness said:Donovan R. Palmer said:
I also think that bringing 'Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts' onto the main title bar along with their display enhancements is an improvement. In general I give it the thumbs up and I expect there are more refinements which we will see in the future.
This is the part that I first warned would cause complaints from Mac purists
. It only took two days of using the beta for me to see the error of my prediction. Pages is an Apple-produced application. Is that annoying formatting pallet Mac-like? Jack, this is the only part of L5 that I dislike, I break my resources into different windows and I always seem to be in the one that doesn't have the main title bar when I want to access those functions. I don't care about "Mac Like", but this breaks my work flow big time.
Terry, forgive me that I am confused. I do not understand what you do not like. [^o)]
0 -
Mike W said:
Consistency between platforms is good but I have to say I preferred having the menu choices in the menu bar like L4 over the current in window menus.
That was my first reaction when I saw the beta, but it soon became welcome.
Mike W said:It seems that L5 is not really Mac-like or Windows Like
Agreed, it is actually Logos-like [8-|]
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Agreed, it is actually Logos-like
Mmmmm - are those [8-|] the special Logos glasses you need to wear while using Logos 5 not these [H]
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Terry, forgive me that I am confused. I do not understand what you do not like.
Moving the "Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts" off of the menu bar
0 -
Patrick S. said:Jack Caviness said:
Agreed, it is actually Logos-like
Mmmmm - are those
the special Logos glasses you need to wear while using Logos 5 not these 
Actually, that is the smilie that looks most like me—a self-portrait if you will [8-)]
0 -
Terry Poperszky said:
Moving the "Documents, Guides, Tools and Layouts" off of the menu bar
I just realized that this change makes a lot of sense with the full screen option, Now the tools are available in fullscreen without needing to go the the sliding main menu. [:O]
0 -
Only if you are unfortunate enough to be saddled with a mac. [:|]Patrick S. said:Mmmmm - are those
the special Logos glasses you need to wear while using Logos 5 not these 0 -
Chris Roberts said:
Below is a screenshot of Logos 5 on the PC and Mac. Mac image is always first, followed by the PC. First, some comments on the differences:
Moving down to my snippet from the Bible toolbar, some similar issues. Text stands out more on the Mac than on the PC; I prefer the subtle look on the PC. On the Mac it's a bit too jarring. This is especially true for the buttons. Note the buttons for the Bible toolbar area and the Clippings toolbar area. I'm sure Logos chose this approach due to the typical "Mac" way - buttons clearly set apart - but while this approach works great in an app like Apple Pages, I don't like it in Logos. I don't want the buttons to be boxy or stand out. Again, I much prefer the clean, subtle look on the PC. It doesn't help that the Mac version is slightly schizophrenic about this; note again the Bible toolbar: some of the buttons are set apart in boxes ("Display", "Verse", the back/forward button, etc) while others aren't (parallel resources, etc). If it looks a little clunky with the distinct buttons, it looks even moreso with these buttons presented in different ways.
Again, I know these are likely due to the way things are normally done on the Mac, and may even be hard to avoid in Cocoa, but I think things could be improved to make the Mac version share a bit more of the clean, subtle look of the PC version. Either way, it notes some areas where I prefer the look of the PC version over the Mac version
It's funny how different we all are. I can see how you like the subtle look of the PC version, but for daily use I find it washed out and prefer the contrast on the Mac version. To each his own, I suppose
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
Let's see now. for the last 3 years people complained about closing the wrong window pane because the active pane did not have a distinctive indicator. Now we have a distinctive indicator, and Logos receives complaints that it is there. Hard for me to imagine how a 2mm bar can be so disconcerting. Personally, I find it to be a welcome addition.
I think some of us complain because it just sticks out so badly. The tabs look like someone just drew boxes - they don't have any shape or feel and the blue bar really sticks out of place. While I prefer the look of L4's tabs, I can see how people could sometimes wonder which one was active. However, there are more elegant ways to do this. I've used plenty of "tabbed" apps on my Mac other than Logos that had attractive tab designs and I never had a problem wondering which one was active [;)]
0 -
I wonder if the 10 commandments had a way to show which tablet was ACTIVE. [^o)]Samuel Clough said:I never had a problem wondering which one was active
0 -
Yup ! Because of the intended users' refusal to follow directions. Not a fault of the design. [;)] Possibly the Golden Calf was more pleasing to the eye. More what they were accustomed to. [:)]
0
