An Open Letter to Bob Pritchett
Comments
-
I feel bad about notes performance, and we're trying to address that and add some functionality.
But I'm still reluctant to take on everything you ask for, because, as you all know by now, I don't want to write a word processor.
To the best of my knowledge, no competitor does everything you're asking for. The ones that even come close use a third-party component.
I'm guessing they use the TX Text Control, which we first evaluated (and decided not to use) in 1992. It's essentially an embeddable version of a small Microsoft Word clone, but I don't believe there's any equivalent on any other platform. (Windows only.) And it isn't available for WPF. (And WPF applications are not interoperable with non WPF components. Well, technically they are, but only with constraints we couldn't live with. I just read, though that they're working on a WPF version, which might be available this summer.)
You can check it out at: http://www.textcontrol.com
The other alternative is: http://wpftexteditor.com
(Note that TX Text Control is faster because it's NOT WPF yet, but it may have to slow down a bit when it is. WPFTextEditor.com is WPF now, and a good example of what's possible speed-wise, I believe. If you visit the site in IE you can even try it live.)
A key thing to note about both of these solutions is that while they're components, they seem to be geared towards creating separate documents. It would take more work to integrate them "note by note" instead of as a letter-size page editor. And neither is available for the Mac.
Among our concerns:
Cross platform support: We need something that will perform exactly the same on Windows and Mac. I don't know of any truly rich editing component that does; conceivably RTF or HTML allows for that, but the RTF in Word and WordPerfect causes us lots of headaches, and is incompatible in subtle and frustrating ways. I can't imagine it'll be better between Windows and Mac. And I imagine that our dual platform users would be upset to lose of have formatting messed up when they work on two different systems.
Hebrew support: Last time we looked at this, none of the third-party components were Hebrew aware. Even if we build "typing helpers", we need an editing component that wraps Hebrew text correctly.
Mobile and web delivery: We plan to deliver your notes to the iPhone, mobile web browsers, and over the web (on IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, etc.). There aren't many text formats that truly render the same on all those platforms. And there is no table and image aware editing component on the iPhone, and I don't want to write one. We can barely (we hope!) let you edit text on the iPhone and preserve adjacent simple formatting; I shudder to think of what it would look like to try to edit a note full of tables and images on a phone.
File size (with sync): If you take a screen capture of a modern, 32-bit color wide screen display, you get...well, a really big image. Paste that into notes, and you're using lots of storage, which we're then syncing over the Internet. And then to an iPhone. Do we shrink it? What if you edit the note on the version that has the shrunken image. Do we have to parse the note, realize that the image wasn't edited, but store the new text and keep the old large image? Etc. etc. etc.
Expectations: You want tables. Can you edit the column width? Row height? Merge adjacent rows and columns? Paste plain text with tabs or commas and "split into columns"? Is all your table editing in dialog boxes, or do you expect to drag column and row splitters? When we print can we break pages on row boundaries? What about rows taller than the page? Images. You paste them. Can you resize them? Crop them? Do we store the original, or store the shrunken version? Can you adjust the color? Make the white area transparent? Wrap text around the image? Send an image behind text?
Third-party controls: We've been bitten many times by using third-party controls, whether for our toolbar management or IE for report rendering. We're scared of having something as important as your notes managed through code we don't control. (Not an obstacle, just a concern.)
All of these problems are solvable. Companies that write word processors (or word processor components) have solved them. But they have teams of many programmers working for many years. It just doesn't seem like a good investment of our resources, or a good utilization of our skills.
I don't want to ignore my customers, or blow off your concerns. But I just don't think we can afford to do this.
Are there any compromise solutions? Could we index your Word documents from a particular directory and return them as part of search results? Write a feature that inserts a note header into a Word document, and another that sorts and organizes the Word document through scripting?
Or should we offer a "at your own risk" solution where we embed an off the shelf RTF editing component just on the Windows (and maybe Mac) platform and then give you lower-fidelity views of your content on the iPhone, web, etc. and make it your responsibility to not edit your complicated table-filled note on the iPhone, thereby wiping out the complicated formatting? (This is the most likely scenario to me -- I just don't like it because I want to offer the same features as much as possible on each platform, and this won't allow it. It also takes much of the UI control away from us, and creates a separate "editor look" and UI inside the app. But it takes all the responsibility for the editing and puts it on another company, and gives you their years of work without us having to reproduce it.)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Are there any compromise solutions?
I think there are if we step outside the box of "notes". For example, if tables, chiasms and outlines were supported within the Sentence Diagrammer and the diagrams were text searchable, I could work with it. If media files could be organized in Favorites and links to open them in the appropriate software could be embedded in Notes (the note would contain the searchable text). I could create a reasonable work flow and presentation flow. This approach is a little extra work on my part but should at least sidestep the technical issues you raise. I would not expect all the functions of word processor tables and outlines - just some basics.
This leaves for me one issue. Graphic organizers / study templates would be the only remaining problem but the PBB's or sermons might be able to handle these.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Don said:
Loosing = to unbind or release, etc.
Losing = misplacing or not being able to find something.
Sorry, but this error has popped up in the forums several times now.did your mom make you look things up in the dictionary, too? [:P]
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
did your mom make you look things up in the dictionary, too?
We always had dictionary, atlas and encyclopedia within reach of the dinner table. Didn't everyone?
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Are there any compromise solutions? Could we index your Word documents from a particular directory and return them as part of search results? Write a feature that inserts a note header into a Word document, and another that sorts and organizes the Word document through scripting?
I like these ideas.
I would hope that any indexing would go beyond simply using Word files. You've probably noticed it, but I made a similar suggestion (regarding indexing) here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/12865.aspx. The discussion was interesting and echoes many of the points made in this thread.
I appreciate the detail in which you address your customers. Please keep focusing on making Logos the best at what it does. I am glad to use other programs to complement Logos 4 in areas like notes.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
Thanks Bob for your reply, it did a great job of sharing the complexity of the issues.
I had one point to throw in - I sure hope care is taken when looking for solutions that support all platforms - PC/desktop, Mac/desktop, mobile, etc. If this is done to excess, it becomes a least common denominator solution that is not good anywhere.
The reality is there are HUGE differences in functionality between the platforms, especially when you throw the cloud in because it's a platform too, from the perspective it influences design decisions. As an example, to think for even the next 5 years that anyone is doing extensive editing on a phone is unrealistic IMHO.
But integrity of data is critical. So maybe certain editing features are turned off on the mobile devices, so to allow viewing but not corrupt data originating from the desktop? What's the paradigm of mobile device usage with Logos, is it sitting on a train reading/browsing on the phone, or doing a thesis at a library using Logos on a phone? The latter won't work for a very very long time.
I mention this only because as I read your response, I saw images of a product that one day is grossly limited on the desktop because it has to support syncing to the cloud for people with 100KB speeds up to 100MB speeds, and being used on a mobile device that has 1/100th the capability of a networked desktop computer. A scary thought indeed, and if that happens Logos will no longer be the premier software for the high end user, and the justification of the fairly high cost of resources will no longer exist.
0 -
Okay, I'll chime in too.
I for one would very much like to have a robust NOTES feature in L4. But one problem I'm seeing here, is that "robust" means different things to different people.
It seems to me that many want some kind of multimedia capable, word processing wonder that can just about write a sermon by itself, and create a presentation for that sermon (also by itself) - and do it within L4's Notes feature. That seems to be some peoples definition of robust.
Me, on the other hand, I just want to be able to do (in L4 Notes) what I can do in the Notes feature in Logos 3 - plus maybe be able to add pictures and web links that work.
I have a lot of notes in L3 that are for sermons and Bible studies, and they're linked to the passages or verses that they pertain to.
- They are text based
- They are for the purpose of gathering my research information (i.e.; text)
- They are searchable
- They are printable
- They can be easily backed up and easily shared with other Logos users
- They are therefore, very useful to me
That's basically all I really need in a "robust" Notes feature. If I want to do more in the way of formatting my "notes", I will export them to Word and make the changes I want to make.
That's my 2 cents worth.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I feel bad about notes performance, and we're trying to address that and add some functionality. But I'm still reluctant to take on everything you ask for, because, as you all know by now, I don't want to write a word processor.
Yes I see those steps already filtering through on the beta, and actually agree with you about the whole WP thing
Bob Pritchett said:To the best of my knowledge, no competitor does everything you're asking for. The ones that even come close use a third-party component.... .... We've been bitten many times by using third-party controls, whether for our toolbar management or IE for report rendering. We're scared of having something as important as your notes managed through code we don't control.
Yes me too, I agree with the logic of not using components that you havent got source code for, it is risky, and agree with your decision not to
Bob Pritchett said:conceivably RTF or HTML
As you know, from our previous discussions over the years, I have always favored the HTML route, as not only is it a universal standard, its cross-platform/browser too... and being user customisable,takes most of the weight of these expectation issues and puts it back into the hands of the power user who wants to tweak stuff, as well as the simple note taking for the nonpower users
Responsibilty for any linked files would be up to the user to copy to additional machines/store remotely, I would not expect Logos to store any pictures/music/or other files on its server, just notes.
I agree this is a case for basic notes only, if there was a flag to say this was a mobile type note file, any enhanced formatting menus in main program could be hidden, and the note saved free of any formatting for easy compatability (only mobile notes then get syned to mobile.logos.com or iphone) none of others.Bob Pritchett said:Mobile and web delivery
Bob Pritchett said:All of these problems are solvable... I don't want to ignore my customers, or blow off your concerns. But I just don't think we can afford to do this.
I agree concentrate where your skills lie, and don't get sidetracked onto issues/areas where you not eduipped, there are other areas that we need before a Word Processor..
Bob Pritchett said:Are there any compromise solutions? Could we index your Word documents from a particular directory and return them as part of search results? Write a feature that inserts a note header into a Word document, and another that sorts and organizes the Word document through scripting?
I beliive PBB will fix most if not all of my issues, the whole external files thing IMO is a nightmare waiting to happen for you. You run into reindexing, how often.. issues. and which formats, word/pdf/html/txt/works not only which program but also which version, etc, where does it stop?
Bob, I will be praying for you, for wisdom to know when/where/what to implement, as I said in an earlier post, I see the leap forward that has already been made with notes, and I thank you for responding
Never Deprive Anyone of Hope.. It Might Be ALL They Have
0 -
Wow. Thanks again, Bob. And a note to the Wiki-keepers: ever thought about collating Bob's responses on these issues and archiving them?
I appreciate the complexity of the problem/obstacles. It is always nice to have them defined.
One thing I am not sure you addressed, Bob, is expansion of the ability to send info into other, non-Logos, software. I am pretty content to take most of my notes in Logos--especially initial note-taking. But there are times when I want those notes in other programs, for building sermons, research that is more manipulatable, (holy cow, how does one SPELL that word? anybody got a dictionary?). I am among several (relatively speaking) here who are using OneNote and mindmapping software (I use MindManager). I suppose it could be nuts writing a copy and paste feature for every conceivable software people use. But . . . could more be added? I don't know what goes into making such a feature possible. All i know is, that I LOVE CBV feature for Word and Powerpoint. So slick. If that feature could be expanded to what some consider industry leading software and applications like OneNote and MindManager, software that has proven helpful to Logos uses, making our study results more rich and powerful, even enhancing Logos, because presentation and teaching results would be that much better---that would seem like a good thing for both Logos and its customer base.
Just a thought I keep having. Like I said, I don't know what goes into that kind of stuff. I just know I see some of its potential, based on what Logos has done already, and wondered how far it could be taken. (something similar for "regular" books would be nice too (e.g., building a sermon with a mind map, wanting to insert an illustration into the map). Mindmaps may be more complex to deal with , I dunno. But that seems like a way to use the basic structure of notes and clippings that Logos has now, yet makes it easier to do more stuff "outside of" Logos.
Is it hard to add copy/paste features to other non-Logos programs? I really don't know.
Anyway, in spite of my own wishes and "worries" that I have mentioned, I really really like Logos, and am soooo glad I don't have to lug around my boxes of books to study different places (and ALWAYS forgetting "that one" book!).
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
And a note to the Wiki-keepers: ever thought about collating Bob's responses on these issues and archiving them?
Dan,
You can click on the number under Bob's picture. It will take you to a complete list of all posts that he has replied to. It seems like this would be redundant to the forums tool if a wiki page was built. Perhaps others might want to take this on???
My main work on the wiki has been to aid users in learning how to use L4.
0 -
steve clark said:Dan DeVilder said:
And a note to the Wiki-keepers: ever thought about collating Bob's responses on these issues and archiving them?
Dan,
You can click on the number under Bob's picture. It will take you to a complete list of all posts that he has replied to. It seems like this would be redundant to the forums tool if a wiki page was built. Perhaps others might want to take this on???
My main work on the wiki has been to aid users in learning how to use L4.
oh heck yeah, you are totally right. I never knew you could do what you described. that would work for the most part.
What would be fun is putting together the 'Quotable Bob.' [:D] or maybe not.
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
What would be fun is putting together the 'Quotable Bob.'
or maybe not.Yes, i learn new things around here too [:)] (even tho i'm an old dog now)
i kinda hesitate thinking about this. Bob is a brave soul. Our words just come and go. But user might try to use Bob's words against him (e.g. hold his feet to the fire on something perceived as a promised feature). Guess he is much better with his words than i.
0 -
steve clark said:Dan DeVilder said:
What would be fun is putting together the 'Quotable Bob.'
or maybe not.Yes, i learn new things around here too
(even tho i'm an old dog now)i kinda hesitate thinking about this. Bob is a brave soul. Our words just come and go. But user might try to use Bob's words against him (e.g. hold his feet to the fire on something perceived as a promised feature). Guess he is much better with his words than i.
yeah, if I were him, ---well, if I were him, Logos would suck, but other than that . . . i wouldn't want my quotes collated either. wait, but if they are searchable? Maybe they could add a CBV (copy bob . . . ) Okay. Time for bed. DST catching up with me.[|-)]
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Bob, Let's say for the sake of argument that you implemented 100% of Word 2010 as the note facility in Logos. That would not answer my olesire for better notes. What I want is not fancy formatting and authoring tools. The thing I'm wanting is something that lets me organize and analyze large amounts of data.
The ideal solution for me would be integration with One Note (I use a tablet, so inking is a critical capability). Integration wouldn't even be that complicated. It basically involves four enhancements. (1) One Note has the ability to create URLs into the notes. We should be able to insert annotations into resources so that clicking on the note icon takes us directly to One Note. (2) We need better support for creating-links into Logos so that we can paste a link into One Note in one step. Currently we have to type or paste a title, copy the URL and then create a link in One Note. (3) Copy and Paste needs to work. Currently, the formatting gets stripped or screwed up.Since a lot of content is expressed through format, this is simply unacceptable. Further, the bibliographic reference pasted with the text should include a proper link back to Logos. (4) Finally searching should be integrated between the two applications.
Now what is so great about One Note? I can't begin to list everything here. Some highlights are: (1) Hierarchical organization. (2) Ease of moving clips around in two dimensions and annotate them with highlighting, colored text, drawing lines, etc. (3) Ability to incorporate clips from other sources, as well as pictures. (4) Inking.
0 -
But there's no version of OneNote on the Mac (outside of Mac Word's notebook layout which is much less capable than OneNote). Thus, the idea of OneNote integration becomes a violation of Logos' desire for feature parity across platforms.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Could we index your Word documents from a particular directory and return them as part of search results? Write a feature that inserts a note header into a Word document, and another that sorts and organizes the Word document through scripting?
Make it indexing of OneNote documents instead of Word and I'd be very happy with that solution...but I'm not one of the ones asking for more robust note-taking features, so I'm not sure how much my opinion counts for. [:P]
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
Now what is so great about One Note?
What's so wrong with One Note for some of us (and I do use a similar product for web management)? No canonical order, no search to appear in "My Content", ... you get the picture. As for your positives:
- hierarchical organization is not something I need; to the extent I need it Logos suffices
- moving clips around in two dimensions; Logos allows me to move them around in a multi-dimensional web
- highlighting, colored text, drawing lines; these are functions I can easily live without if I can link a note to a graphic
- ability to include clips from other sources - this I do in Logos; pictures as well until L4 - a working link to graphics would be acceptable
- linking - Logos should be doing this well; there are still some rough spots but it is clear that general linkage is intended
So why do I need One Note? I shouldn't and I don't when Logos has the links working. So why is Logos so unworkable for me in this one area? [Note: In general I'm a strong supporter of L4 which has greatly enhanced usefulness to me most notably because of my use of multiple canons in my basic translations]
- personal frustration at loss of note files from L3 that have embedded graphics
- the inability to collapse notes
- the lack of a TOC
- not knowing if the Sentence Diagrammer can compensate for some of Note's lost capabilities
- not knowing when and how the linkage will work ... some is in 4.0b ... some appears to still be in the "its coming category"
- bugs in the highlighting/positioning for a search
- bugs in formatting that doesn't work (subscript/superscript)
- bugs in certain copy & pastes that lose formatting
Translation: I believe that a major difficulty in finding a workable solution comes out of the frustration of nearly half a year with L4's original limitations on notes. Frustration, at least for me, can inhibit my ability to find workable alternatives.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
My question is, if you already have all these features with a competing product, Does Logos really need to divert programming resources to duplicate that capability? Or should Logos keep doing what only Logos can do?
Matthew, maybe yes, maybe no...
I'd settle for some kind of integration between L4 and the major word processors...instead of changing the notes...if I could tag a passage with a marker that pointed to a note in OneNote, hyperlinked and fully integrated...I'd be happy.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Robert,
Your suggestion of a link btwn L4 and a word processor (as long as it was not limited to MS word) is a good idea. I personally would love creating a note that loaded my Word processor (OpenOffice.org) with the current reference as the document title.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
I would like to see the Mac version support Linkbacks in notes (http://www.linkbackproject.org/).
This would allow some integration with a wide variety of note taking software available on the Mac (Devonthink, Circus Ponies Notebook, VoodooPad, OmniOutliner, Bookends, Scrivener, etc.).
That way you could take advantage of all of the functionality of a dedicated note taking system and still link the notes to references in Logos.
Is there something similar to Linkbacks for Windows?
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
a little S. Illinois shout out, Jerry! Home of the white squirrels! Been there a few times, my mother in law was raised there. My wife is from Mt. Carmel. I grew up as a pk further south, in Hurst (can you locate it??).
Hi Dan -
Yes, I know about where Hurst is. I went to school in Carbondale, and I think Hurst is near Marion, sort of. Northeast, I think. I know it is a very small town.
Yup, this is where we have the white squirrels; our only claim to fame. I have several friends in Mt. Carmel. There is a Great Banquet located there. Very similar to Walk To Emmaus, Cursillo, and others.
Blessings to ya!
Jerry
Macbook Air (2024), Apple M2, 16gb Ram, Mac Sequoia, 1TB storage
0 -
Jerry Bush said:
There is a Great Banquet located there. Very similar to Walk To Emmaus, Cursillo, and others.
i don't want to hijack this thread, but I would like to find out more about the GB you mentioned. I have never heard of it, but I have the other two. if you don't mind, my email is dustandbreath (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net
Yup, Carbondale is really close to Hurst, just a few miles from "DeSoto" Strip-mining country.
Thank you, and blessings back to you!
DanI like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
I would bet that if the notes feature behaved exactly as it does now, just more efficiently (faster) then it would be OK for the vast majority of Logos users. For those who want/need more, the PBB will be an answer I suspect.
For the DominicM who posted the screen shot of the free Bible app, would you mind contacting me off list to tell me what software that is? k a p u r c e l l AT gmail.com without the spaces.
To respond to Bob's comments about the platforms for notes ...
1. I appreciate that you have a difficult task making things work/look the same on Mac and Windows. I selfishly wish you wouldn't bother, but I understand the desire to do so. So your reply helped me get why you are making some of the choices I saw as foolish. One example is the use of WPF. If that is really the only way to make a cross platform interface on the Windows side, then I understand.
2. I am glad you are not trying to recreate a Word Processor. If you could simply give those who want that much formatting power some insight as to whether this will be possible with the promised new version of PBB that might go a long way towards easing concerns.
I would suggest that if #2 is not going to happen, that you do look at interfacing with something like Word or OneNote or both.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0 -
Hello,
I figured I would jump in and give my 2 cents. As an employee, of a major software company for the last 12 years where I worked in support, wrote code and managed, I can say that the job Logos is doing is very good. Although I do feel the product seems to be lacking expected functionality that is being requested in this thread.
in reading through this thread, I can say the feature list requested is a VERY long and expensive list. In today's economy, I feel confident in sharing that in just reading over the list, all I could see was "multiple" millions of dollars given how I suspect this product is architect ed. End users rarely understand how much it costs to design, build, test, deploy and maintain software.
On the other hand, I can say that Mr Pritchett's goal of interoperability and software coding is most likely costing his company a lot of money and generating a lot of frustration. At best Macs represent 12 percent of the computer population. Baring their being some sort of odd anomaly in the Logo's population where Mac has a greater than 12 percent penetration, this is a costly decision. From a purely business perspective, it is hard to justify making decisions for 12 percent of the user base. For that matter, it is hard to even justify a product for a 12 percent need even if you were to go all grandiose and suggest Mac could increase its penetration to 20 percent.
Another interesting thing I saw in the response was concern about relying on 3rd party software. My response would be to ask what is Logos business. Is it writing code or making Bible Library software. I would think the answer would be the latter. In using Logos, I imagine that you are by far writing more code than what you should be doing. It is shocking that you would be concerned about writing textbox control code.
I would suggest migrating to a single platform on .NET using C# where you can focus on your business rather than writing control code. By doing this, you could focus upon building a product that allows you to focus more on the customer need rather than being challenged and hung up by portability and core coding of controls. In doing this you could take Logos in sorts of directions from being just a library product to being a Theologians Desktop.
While Logos is without doubt the best product on the market today, it is very easy and realistic that an existing competitor or startup could write a new product quickly. After all, the amount of functionality actually given in the current product is pretty small consisting of Search API, Windows API, SmartHost, and DB operations. Furthermore, as the industry progresses and customers use other software that provides better interoperability (eg. Cut & Paste) and nice rich text functionality it is going to be expected that Logos provide this functionality as well. At present, just simple cut and paste is a struggle if you want formatting to not be affected. I can't imagine the cost of adding all the rich functionality given by .NET manually to your existing code base. Talk about some real $$$$. Finally, .NET would allow for easier add in functionality that could be used to generate new functionality and product interest.
That said, this product is still the best on the block at this time.
Thats just my 2 cents . . .
0 -
Gregory S. MacBeth said:
migrating to a single platform on .NET
Good synopsis. But I think the .NET zombies are already roaming the halls at Logos HQ. [:|]
I say this with no disrespect. (I jumped ship when Microsoft went .NET) For whatever reason, that hasn't been revealed to me, BobP believes he needs to address the Mac market. If it were me, I'd just put the Macs out of their misery.
(Uh oh, Gotta run. I see a crowd of surfer dudes picking up rocks.)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I say this with no disrespect. (I jumped ship when Microsoft went .NET) For whatever reason, that hasn't been revealed to me, BobP believes he needs to address the Mac market. If it were me, I'd just put the Macs out of their misery.
I agree. Most Mac users already run (what is it called?) parallels(?), that virtual machine thing with Windows installed. So supporting Mac natively just seems mostly a waste of time and effort to me.
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
So supporting Mac natively just seems mostly a waste of time and effort to me.
Once the Logos engine is available natively on a Mac, there's a whole bunch of extra people to buy resources who wouldn't before (so more prepubs will get through the door, and Community Pricing will be lower). Because Logos makes its money on resources (which are by definition cross-platform), I think there's a stronger case for developing a cross-platform solution than there would be for other applications. And don't forget that PDFs became standard at least in part because they could be read on any platform. Publishers worth their salt will not be willing to sign exclusive contracts with software that is only available on one platform. So having a Mac option could be advantageous to us all.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
I agree. Most Mac users already run (what is it called?) parallels(?), that virtual machine thing with Windows installed. So supporting Mac natively just seems mostly a waste of time and effort to me.
Hmmm.....Good thing these types of decisions aren't up to you, based on reasoning like this, Logos would be in a world of hurt. Trouble is, I can't tell if your comment had it's genesis out of humor or ignorance, so I will leave it there.
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
Most Mac users already run (what is it called?) parallels(?), that virtual machine thing with Windows installed. So supporting Mac natively just seems mostly a waste of time and effort to me.
Most, if not all, Mac users who are running Windows under a virtual machine do not see that as a long term solution. There are also a high percentage of Mac users who are using L4 Mac Alpha who have no intention of ever using Windows.
It amazes me how many Windows bigots think that Bob Pritchett is such a poor business man that he would undertake development of a Mac version of Logos without researching the potential market. By your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, Intuit and a host of other companies are also courting bankruptcy by continuing to develop products for the Mac.
I don't mind a few friendly platform jabs, but people who pontificate from ignorance irritate me.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
I don't mind a few friendly platform jabs, but people who pontificate from ignorance irritate me.
[Y]
0 -
Terry Poperszky said:
Hmmm.....Good thing these types of decisions aren't up to you, based on reasoning like this, Logos would be in a world of hurt. Trouble is, I can't tell if your comment had it's genesis out of humor or ignorance, so I will leave it there.
Jeffrey's comment was in agreement with my post. His reply was probably based in humor while mine was probably based in ignorance.
I was in MicroSoft Developer's Network, Apple Developer Connection, and IBM Developer Connection for OS/2 longer than I want to admit. I got into a habit of using the right tool for the job. To me personally, choosing a Mac to run Bible Software is starting with a handicap and playing catch-up. I am happy Logos is working toward providing Mac users with the same experience but Logos programmers did not invent the peculiarities the Mac programming envirorment presents. Some issues are problematic to each platform. Apple realized this and abandoned MacOS. Similarily, I would not recommend a PC for Music or Graphics production I purchased CS4 for Mac after I already got it in Windows. Some things are best on Mac, some on PCs. If you can't have both, choose one and live with it. I still have 5x as many PCs as Macs so I'm biased. [co] [co] [co] [co] [co] [6] [co]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
ffery's comment was in agreement with my post. His reply was probably based in humor while mine was probably based in ignorance.
Yes, I know he was responding to you. I actually judged yours be humor, his I couldn't tell so I chose to not make the judgement.
Matthew C Jones said:To me personally, choosing a Mac to run Bible Software is starting with a handicap and playing catch-up.
Please forgive me, what is inherent in the OSX platform that trying to run "Bible Software" on it is a handicap? As an IT professional that also chooses the best OS for the job, I am having a hard time understanding this statement.
If you are basing your argument on the MacOS we can stop the discussion right here, since I wouldn't want to use DOS either. But neither is pertinent to the discussion.Matthew C Jones said:Some issues are problematic to each platform. Apple realized this and abandoned MacOS
Feel free to make that decision for your own life, Logos develops for the Mac, I will use logos 4 until Logos 4 Mac is ready. I will still use Windows 7 in a VM after that. Just not for Bible Study.Matthew C Jones said:If you can't have both, choose one and live with it.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:
It amazes me how many Windows bigots think that Bob Pritchett is such a poor business man that he would undertake development of a Mac version of Logos without researching the potential market
I prerfer to think BobP is developing Logos for the Mac because he wants Mac users to have it, not because he wants to raid their pocketbooks. Back in the 1960's my missionary father was asked by a church, "How many Japanese souls can you win for $1000? We can get __# if we invest in Africa, so we must be good stewards and invest there instead of Japan." Sometimes it is not about the money but the coverage.
Jack Caviness said:I don't mind a few friendly platform jabs, but people who pontificate from ignorance irritate me.
Is pontificating from experience allowed? I've still got my Zondervan MacBible Version 3 (System 7 floppies) and I have the original Logos for Mac CD (with no install codes needed.) I've got the "Ol've Chree" folk's stuff too. I just don't use any Mac based programs for Bible study. I do use Mac programs for home studio production, graphics production and some educational stuff. Just not Bible. btw: Generic mp3 based music libraries are head & shoulders above the proprietary iTunes model.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Jeffery's [sic] comment was in agreement with my post. His reply was probably based in humor while mine was probably based in ignorance.
Actually, my response was more from my antipathy towards all things Apple. They're pushing the whole industry towards managed apps for not just phones, but now, more computer-like devices. This is dangerous for our very freedom. Sooner or later, they are going to decide that the content available under Logos4 is too controversial or even offensive and pull the Logos4 app from the iTunes store. Apple's business practices just plain scare me.
0 -
Terry Poperszky said:
his I couldn't tell so I chose to not make the judgement.
[:#] Ooops. I'll let his last post speak for his first post.
I have no quarrels with OSX,. My point was Apple did not design MacOs with foresight to handle future apps any better than Gates did when he pawned off CP/M as "DOS" to IBM. When Logos started development it was on the PC. I think they have done a marvelous job casting a wider net to include the Mac users. But like Gentiles who have been grafted into the vine (after the fact) maybe Mac users should quit bashing the PC origins of Logos and be thankful the revival tent is now bigger. If Logos had started on the Mac I would be tickled to be included today. In fact I am tickled to have it. [:P]Terry Poperszky said:Please forgive me, what is inherent in the OSX platform that trying to run "Bible Software" on it is a handicap?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
Apple's business practices just plain scare me.
This has got to be humor, please tell me it is.Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:his is dangerous for our very freedom.
Yes, I can see your point, Gates and Balmer are a much better choice as far as ethical business practices.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
ut like Gentiles who have been grafted into the vine (after the fact) maybe Mac users should quit bashing the PC origins of Logos and be thankful the revival tent is now bigger.
Matt, we may be speaking past each other. I have no quarrel with the PC roots of Logos. I am thankful that they have chosen the path that brings Mac on equal footing with what i feel is an excellent product in L4.
I used to be an OS bigot, but not in the way you might think. I was a MS fanboy from the word go! Up to and including my MCSE cert. Then MS got greedy and I started working with Linux and discovered the wonderful world of Open Source. Now, I work with three different flavors of Linux, MS from NT 4.0 through Server 2008 and a couple of flavors of Exchange. Then there are the Solaris boxes and the AIX system in the rack.
I have an Ubuntu desktop, a OSX laptop with a MS Win7 VM. Each one has it's uses.
0 -
[:D] This is so far off the original topic (which itself was so far off the purpose of the forums) that I have just got to laugh along with everybody. [:S]
I thank Bob Pritchett & all the Logos programmers for the hard work & money invested towards delivering Logos for Mac. I pray they see quick and spectacular success. I am also still praying they get that newer Czech Bible for our dear friend Bohuslav. And for better notes functions for everybody who needs them.
I'm happy we have Macs & PCs. The world would be boring with only my Linux machines. (I want a BeBox!)
EDIT: Yes, we're two ships passing in the night. I never wanna see OS/400 or Oracle7 again. I like small stuff nowadays. My server rack has been repopulated with home studio equipment. I'd like to spend my time studying the Bible with Logos 4 instead of maintaining hardware.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Are you guys kidding me??
What a bunch of whinners or weiners. Sure there's some problems, but every business owner knows that these problems will take care of themselves. Let's get back to making this thing the best thing on the market.
Bob? You and your team have got something a lot of us like. We know that you're working on improving the product and we're with you.
0 -
Milkman said:
Are you guys kidding me??
What a bunch of whinners or weiners. Sure there's some problems, but every business owner knows that these problems will take care of themselves. Let's get back to making this thing the best thing on the market.
Bob? You and your team have got something a lot of us like. We know that you're working on improving the product and we're with you.
I don't recall anyone claiming BobP is off-course. I'm very happy with my Logos. Just because we don't know the rationale behind Logo's direction does not mean we disapprove. They only need to consult me when I become CEO....
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I don't recall anyone claiming BobP is off-course
That's not true, the Android owners have. I assumed that was who he was talking about [:P]
0 -
[:'(]
Terry Poperszky said:Matthew C Jones said:I don't recall anyone claiming BobP is off-course
That's not true, the Android owners have. I assumed that was who he was talking about
They DID, didn't they! [&] I had forgotten that. Those crybabies! [:'(]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Terry Poperszky said:
That's not true, the Android owners have. I assumed that was who he was talking about
I thought it was CP/M-80; it's getting real hard to find good S-100 bus apps anymore. ... <<insert dog smiley face>>
0 -
Ward Walker said:
I thought it was CP/M-80; it's getting real hard to find good S-100 bus apps anymore. ... <<insert dog smiley face>>
You're correct Ward. Bill was just that Harvard dropout that capitalized on everybody else's creativity. I was a bigger fan of Blair Newman and his venture with Fujitsu. My first programming friend used a Timex Sinclair with Beta video tape for magnetic media storage. (Gimme back my MicroChannel Architecture!)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
I figured I would give it a few hours to see what the follow up comments are on my post. I have to say they are interesting. Everyone seemed to key into the OS war subject matter.
Here is the deal folks. Its not the OS that is the problem! Its the coding. First and foremost, why would a Bible Library software vendor write its own controls when perfectly good full feature controls already exist. I have seen a lot of companies go down this path and the results are always problems. Just do a cut and paste in Logos and you will need no further evidence. My point was that instead of spending all your time writing your own controls, Logos should be using vendor controls such as .Net or Java. It really doesn't matter which platform as much as by using these controls you are free to write amazing software without the burden of owning the cost and feature burden of owning your own controls. This is the real issue.
Now as for the subject of OS. Knowing that Macs make up 12 percent of the market in general of deployed desktops, baring some odd anomaly where the Logos user base is not consistent with the general population, it makes little to no sense to even consider any OS other than Windows. As a general rule, your ROI is not going to break even at best until you reach 25 percent. So by holding your product back for OS portability seems to be very cost ineffective and in denial of your larger distribution base of windows.
Furthermore, after reading this thread, I would say that many of the folks in favor of running Logos on Macs are missing the point. Companies exist to make money. They exist for no other reason than that. No matter what company it is, the sales have to warrant the costs. I find it very hard to imagine that portability of Logos, again baring some weird anomaly where Logos customers are out of sync with the rest of the world, has a good payoff at the end of the fiscal year. I would also reiterate the point that if Logos is denying its Windows base a better product that has more feature and a more consistent user experience than it is open to being surpassed by an existing or new competitor. At the end of the day, Logos is really about providing content and making as much profit as it can because it is a business.
I will end on these thoughts:
1. Its all about the money, which is all about selling content.
2. It is never, never, NEVER, NEVER more cost effective to write your own code when you can purchase it or use existing code from a trusted software partner. Logos sells content, it is not in the business of selling software controls. Therefore it should be focused upon making content and using the best software development environment it can without requiring it to write its own controls. It costs major bucks to own core code at all levels of the software life cycle.
3. The cost of portability to Mac environment comes at a cost of functionality, consistent user experience, and satisfaction. Does it really make business sense to deny 88 percent of users for 12 percent of Mac owners that can use virtualization and access the product anyway.
4. Crazy religious OS wars, and coding bigotry costs money. Decisions should never be made on the basis of these zealot like arguments as seen in this thread. Now that doesn't mean these do or do not exist within Logos as I don't know. They do exist in this thread.
At the end of the day, Logos owns its own future. I like the product that exists today, but I am sure it suffers from requirements of portability and not using libraries such as .NET or Java. However, I am in no way saying that Logos is at risk as a business as it is clearly the leader at present, but in the software business a product lead can be lost in one generation and given the investment I have made in Logos I would not to see it lose its place of status because it would decrease the value of my investment.
So there you have my buck fifty worth of opinion. Feel free to tear it apart. I wish Logos the best and hope my investment continues to maintain and increase in value through more content and a better user experience that is more consistent with other Windows applications.
0 -
Gregory S. MacBeth said:
I will end on these thoughts:
It never ceases to amaze me how Bob does all these things wrong and yet I end up with such and amazing progress. [:P]
0 -
Gregory S. MacBeth said:
1. Its all about the money, which is all about selling content.
Unless you are a man on a mission. [A]
\
Gregory S. MacBeth said:2. It is never, never, NEVER, NEVER more cost effective to write your own code when you can purchase it or use existing code from a trusted software partner. Logos sells content, it is not in the business of selling software controls.
When I worked for General Motors, any solutions I came up with became the property of GM. I suspect BobP has similar claim on his coders' work. Usually the person who owns the code reaps the profits. Logos has expanded their vision beyond just being a reading library.
Gregory S. MacBeth said:Does it really make business sense to deny 88 percent of users for 12 percent of Mac owners
I don't feel neglected.I feel like a kid rolling in a pile of leaves.
Gregory S. MacBeth said:4. Crazy religious OS wars, and coding bigotry costs money. Decisions should never be made on the basis of these zealot like arguments
They aren't. BobP has stated Linux will likely never see Logos because the numbers just don't compute. The user base is the driving force. And that user base is Windows & Mac. Betamax was a better technology than VHS but the consumers decide what prevails. You gotta give them what they want.
Gregory S. MacBeth said:I wish Logos the best and hope my investment continues to maintain and increase in value through more content and a better user experience that is more consistent with other Windows applications.
I think 99.99% of the forum readers agree with your wish here. I certainly do. And I can think of no family better suited to take us there than the Pritchetts.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:Gregory S. MacBeth said:
Does it really make business sense to deny 88 percent of users for 12 percent of Mac owners
I don't feel neglected.I feel like a kid rolling in a pile of leaves.
I like that analogy [Y]
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Are there any compromise solutions? Could we index your Word documents from a particular directory and return them as part of search results? Write a feature that inserts a note header into a Word document, and another that sorts and organizes the Word document through scripting?
How would this work with Logos installed on two or more computers?
0 -
Jack Caviness said:Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
Most Mac users already run (what is it called?) parallels(?), that virtual machine thing with Windows installed. So supporting Mac natively just seems mostly a waste of time and effort to me.
Most, if not all, Mac users who are running Windows under a virtual machine do not see that as a long term solution. There are also a high percentage of Mac users who are using L4 Mac Alpha who have no intention of ever using Windows.
I suggested to two MacAddicts that they run Parallels and they looked at me like I was suggesting they divorce their wives. Some will not do it no matter what. And for people like Accordance or WordSearch looks a lot better. While I wish they wouldn't, I understand why Logos is going after MacAddicts.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0
