Comments
I would love to have Logos on my iPad Pro. Unless there's something I can't think of, I don't know of any app really that I would need my iMac for if that happened. I can do nearly everything with my iOS devices... except Logos. The difference between the desktop and mobile is too great.
I hope to see some pencil integration this fall. Logos open on the left and Goodntoes on the right.
×
preachertony.com — appletech.tips — facebook.com/tonywalker23 — twitter.com/tonywalker23 — youtube.com/tonywalker23
I sure hope this means we could get the full version of Logos on the iPad.It works the other way - you can use your iOS and iPadOS apps on the Mac. Logos for Mac won't run on your iPad.
You're right, for the moment. But since the Mac will have the exact same processor as it does in the iPad (they did a demo of this) the same exact app will run on both devices.
Bring the full fledged Logos to the iPad with tight Pencil support and I can have my entire toolset wherever I go. PLEEEEASE Faithlife, make this happen.
I sure hope this means we could get the full version of Logos on the iPad.It works the other way - you can use your iOS and iPadOS apps on the Mac. Logos for Mac won't run on your iPad.
I never even thought about doing that. Does Logos mobile run on Catalina?
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
I never even thought about doing that. Does Logos mobile run on Catalina?
No...this will be possible on the next version of macOS (Big Sur) and only on Apple computers with ARM processors (not Intel).
I held off updating my Mac Mini, so now buying another Mac will probably go on ice indefinitely. It's going to make getting a new Intel Mac a liability right out of the box.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
I held off updating my Mac Mini, so now buying another Mac will probably go on ice indefinitely. It's going to make getting a new Intel Mac a liability right out of the box.
Yep. I had planned to finish up on MS, and convert Logos to a Mac as its sole app. This is all good news, long range. Probably sit out L9 in addition to L8. Will be interesting to watch Logosian squealing in the meantime.
Back in Apple's early days, my Apple Ii had a 3 digit serial. But switching to the Amiga since the Mac was already dated, it'll be nice to get a better designed Mac. Coming home (I hope).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
The outstanding questions are when will Logos run natively on MacOS 11 (Big Sur) with Apple Silicon, and pending that, will the Logos code for Intel run without issue or a big performance hit on Apple Silicon using Rosetta 2.
Running in Rosetta 2 its unlikely there would be a big performance hit except possibly while indexing but even then it will work very fast. (Even if there is an overhead it is unlikely to max out the processor load).
Faithlife will be native very close to launch day. Faithlife tend not to comment much on pre-released systems but they always get there.
גַּם־חֹשֶׁךְ֮ לֹֽא־יַחְשִׁ֪יךְ מִ֫מֶּ֥ךָ וְ֭לַיְלָה כַּיּ֣וֹם יָאִ֑יר כַּ֝חֲשֵׁיכָ֗ה כָּאוֹרָֽה
I don't know what languages, tools and libraries FaithLife used to create Logos on the Mac.
The best case would be that Logos was built in Objective C using Xcode and using mostly Apple frameworks. Then, it's simply a build option to chose the target platform.
The porting effort for Apple arm64 depends on how much they relied on hardware-specific features. If FaithLife relied mostly on Apple frameworks and technologies, their porting effort may be small.
If FaithLife tuned their code specifically for the Intel x86_64 architecture and hardware capabilities, porting to Apple arm64 may require additional effort. For example, if FaithLife interacts with the kernel, contains x86 assembly instructions, manages multiple threads or contains hardware-specific assumptions or performance optimizations, they may have a lot of work to do. Or, if they depend on many third-party libraries, they'll need to wait for those libraries to be converted to arm64 or switch to Apple frameworks.
FaithLife will need to build fat universal macOS binaries that contain both Intel x86-64 and Apple arm64 binaries, so Logos can be distributed in a way that will allow it to run on either an Intel-based Mac or an Apple Silicon Mac.
Until they do, in most cases the x86-64 binaries can run natively on the current Intel-based Macs, and translated by Rosetta 2 on the new Apple Silicon Macs starting to arrive by the end of the year. Of course, FaithLife will need to test Logos on both Intel-based and arm64-based Macs.
Eventually, FaithLife would drop support for Intel-based Macs.
I've read a bit more and apparently Apple isn't leaving Intel any time soon. It just makes a bit harder to determine if you should wait for an ARM machine based on your own usage if you need a new machine. My 2012 Mac Mini will still run Catalina and L8. Nearly eight years old is still amazing.
FL still has to support the existing user base and no one has ARM or Big Sur yet. So L9 still needs to be Intel compatible. Bob will probably need some more Mac coders and I am so glad this headache is not ours. Much ado is mostly not ours to do.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
I just had a chat with one of the Logos Reps who made it clear that they don't plan on supporting Apple Pencil anytime in the future. I doubt if they would recompile their current MacOS app to work with Arm as well in that case.
There are a bunch of different issues here.
I just had a chat with one of the Logos Reps who made it clear that they don't plan on supporting Apple Pencil anytime in the future.
As you mentioned in another thread, the mobile app development is tied to Android as well. BIG special features which are device specific are much less likely to occur than ones which could be more easily be ported across devices and operating systems.
I doubt if they would recompile their current MacOS app to work with Arm as well in that case.
As for the Mac app: Apple's announcement this week that they will be moving to ARM based chips instead of Intel means that FL will have to do something at some point, or drop support for Mac altogether.
To begin with, Logos might need to run on Rosetta 2, but eventually it will probably move over to being compiled for ARM. (Note: this is for Mac only... not for windows).
I sure hope this means we could get the full version of Logos on the iPad.
But since the Mac will have the exact same processor as it does in the iPad (they did a demo of this) the same exact app will run on both devices.
Well, the "same processor" is not the same thing as the "same operating system" or the "same device." Many have talked and dreamed about this and it may finally happen... but probably not on the device you are using today... I certainly don't see FL optimizing the desktop version for any current iPad.
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!
Realistically the best we could hope for is Logos 9 would be built from the ground up for Apple Silicon, which would mean maybe better iOS support too.
Realistically the best we could hope for is Logos 9 would be built from the ground up for Apple Silicon, which would mean maybe better iOS support too.
Somehow I doubt this is going to happen.
Logos on Windows and Logos on macOS are essentially the same application, making it easier to support and develop both. They are using the .NET framework from Microsoft.
In the first run, they will recompile the App, and all the code that is "native" x86-64 will be compiled into arm code, too. Most code however should be platform agnostic, anyway. So even those "fat" binaries (thats how they called them in transition times from PowerPC to x86 architechture) should not add too much weight.
That should be enough, I have seen complex software just recompiled with the new xcode toolset, and the resulting binaries working on macOS Big Sur.
If they would "dumb down" the macOS desktop App to have one consistent app shared between iPad, iOS and macOS, that would streamline their Apple device support, but might leave desktop users behind feature wise.
We'll see how it works out in the end. Interesting times.
user since Logos 4
I’m putting together a list of apps updated for Apple Silicon.
Found this site today: https://doesitarm.com/
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
I’m putting together a list of apps updated for Apple Silicon.Found this site today: https://doesitarm.com/
Great! Added it to my list. My list is here:
Dr. Nathan Parker
. My list is here:
Nathan, adding a space after a web address will make it active.
. My list is here:
Nathan, adding a space after a web address will make it active.
Thanks. I thought I did, but I guess I hit Post too quickly. :-)
Dr. Nathan Parker
A nice summary of the Apple M1 Macs (with several review videos and benchmarking) is available at:
I’d recommend https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/
in which it was said
The performance of the new M1 in this “maximum performance” design with a small fan is outstandingly good. The M1 undisputedly outperforms the core performance of everything Intel has to offer, and battles it with AMD’s new Zen3, winning some, losing some. And in the mobile space in particular, there doesn’t seem to be an equivalent in either ST or MT performance – at least within the same power budgets.
What’s really important for the general public and Apple’s success is the fact that the performance of the M1 doesn’t feel any different than if you were using a very high-end Intel or AMD CPU. Apple achieving this in-house with their own design is a paradigm shift, and in the future will allow them to achieve a certain level of software-hardware vertical integration that just hasn’t been seen before and isn’t achieved yet by anybody else.
My summary:
- M1 bare metal is very fast comparing to competition
- M1 running x86 (Rosetta 2) is in most cases beating all Apple Intel Macs. This is the kind of perf. you Should look at for Logos now as native doesn’t exist yet.
- if you just push raw power (ie FLOPS), M1 and competitions are more similar. But for mixed workload M1 is usually faster. My personal take is that it is due to the unified memory on the die itself. IIRC I have never seen anyone else in the industry outing 16 GB of memory on the die where the CPU, GPU, tensor cores etc resides. They all shared the same memory and with vertical integration they can avoid unnecessary copy between them. This is a huge performance booster. My bet is that it would benefits the kind of workload Logos does.
TL;DR: running Logos now (via Rosetta 2) should have not much worse experience from Intel Mac. If one day Logos for Apple Silicon is released natively it should have a noticeable boost.
My personal take is that it is due to the unified memory on the die itself.
Beginning to suspect this may be the single strongest move in what is looking to be a great design.
TL;DR: running Logos now (via Rosetta 2) should have not much worse experience from Intel Mac. If one day Logos for Apple Silicon is released natively it should have a noticeable boost.
Mostly agree, and that has been my experience so far (m1 mbair 16MB / 1TB, mbp 16 32 GB / 2TB, iMac 27, high specs).
However I'm tending to suspect that for an app like verbum/logos, the biggest gain from going native will be lower power consumption. YMMV though, especially if they implement significant machine learning / adaptive techniques.
My personal take is that it is due to the unified memory on the die itself.Beginning to suspect this may be the single strongest move in what is looking to be a great design.
TL;DR: running Logos now (via Rosetta 2) should have not much worse experience from Intel Mac. If one day Logos for Apple Silicon is released natively it should have a noticeable boost.Mostly agree, and that has been my experience so far (m1 mbair 16MB / 1TB, mbp 16 32 GB / 2TB, iMac 27, high specs).
However I'm tending to suspect that for an app like verbum/logos, the biggest gain from going native will be lower power consumption. YMMV though, especially if they implement significant machine learning / adaptive techniques.
memory on die is a compromise in another way. I wouldn’t be surprised in the future Mac Pro level Apple silicon to have another hierarchical memory, like a smaller 16GB on die and another 128GB out there. (Hard to imagine putting all 128GB or even 256 on it, or may be more clever interconnect, soldered memory on board.)
memory on die is a compromise in another way. I wouldn’t be surprised in the future Mac Pro level Apple silicon to have another hierarchical memory, like a smaller 16GB on die and another 128GB out there. (Hard to imagine putting all 128GB or even 256 on it, or may be more clever interconnect, soldered memory on board.)
But with Apple's new way of utilizing RAM, 128GB may never again be necessary. They might hit 32GB with the larger MacBook and Pro, and find that it's just not necessary to increase the amount.
For example, I'm on my 4th Subaru Outback. My first was a 4-cylinder, and it was really underpowered, so #2 and #3 were six-cylinder. When I bought my new one this past February I was told that Subaru doesn't have a 6-cylinder Outback any longer, BUT they have 4-cylinder turbo. I get better mileage than with the 6-cylinder, and when I put my foot down it jumps pretty quick.
But for Pro you can’t say it wont be needed. I have datasets that couldnt fit in 128GB memory.
for Pro, you could imagine someone processing gigapixel photos or larger, with multiple layers, etc. just for those to fit in memory could easily exhaust whatever amount of RAM you have. Basically if you give people enough amount of RAM, they can always has a problem that can exhaust it.
Unified memory allows you to avoid unnecessary copy. Say if you have a chunk of memory from the CPU, and you want to put them to the GPU for further processing, that memory is then needed to copy from your main memory to the GPU‘s memory. This not only is a waste of memory space, and is also a bottleneck for latency. Unified memory kills those 2 birds in 1 stone. (For non compute intensive program, like Logos most of the time, memory latency is the biggest bottleneck. Some you cannot avoid, but some others can be avoided by not having to copy.)
by the way, memory for CPU and for GPU has different requirements, one opt for random access another for throughput more. Having unified memory means you can’t choose the best RAM for the task needed. So there’s always Compromised.
also by the way, avoiding copy is not new either, famously some gaming console is doing it for years IIRC. but here Apple put them on die to lower the latency perhaps also power consumption.
or drop support for Mac altogether.
Kicking to the curb tens of thousands of lifelong costumers who have invested (and will continue to invest) millions of dollars into Logos software? I can't see that happening.
or drop support for Mac altogether.
Kicking to the curb tens of thousands of lifelong costumers who have invested (and will continue to invest) millions of dollars into Logos software? I can't see that happening.
No, I don't either. Out of context, it might seem like that is what I said. In context, I was replying to someone who said that he didn't think FL would develop the main Logos app for ARM. My answer was that they would have to do so... "or drop support for Mac altogether." And that is true.
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!
I have no idea if Apple Silicon will help make my dreams of running full Logos on my iPad a reality...iPad OS and MacOS will still be significantly different. That said...PLEASE, whatever it takes!
Full Logos on my iPad would be a dream come true.
Maybe Apple will someday make it so that MacOS apps can just run on the iPad(?)
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org
Full Logos on my iPad would be a dream come true.
I think there are many of us that would like to see that come to pass!
Maybe Apple will someday make it so that MacOS apps can just run on the iPad(?)
Possibly. Still, it's a whole lot easier to get iOS apps running on macOS, but a whole lot more complicated to get macOS apps running on iPadOS.
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
Doesn’t FL recommend some sort of graphics card for optimal performance on the desktop? Unless the iPad Pro has it and I missed it, I imagine there might be a performance decline if I’m not wrong (again)
Apple demonstrated macOS running on Apple silicon using their A12Z Bionic SoC, which is the same chip used in the current iPad Pro.
So, the iPad Pro has the performance to run a desktop-like version of Logos. It’s just that the frameworks and APIs are not identical.
+1 for Full Logos on iPad. Apple's continued iPadOS development has demonstrated that the iPad is able to be a true computer replacement. Running the iPhone app on the iPad is dated and insufficient for those who want to do meaningful sermon prep or academic work on the iPad.
I can't imagine FaithLife neglecting support for Apple Silicon with how many Mac users they have in their user base.
I hope Logos is ready to roll on Day 1 with Apple Silicon.
In response to the comments about using an iPad, but I find that the app.logos.com interface on my iPad Pro is very nice. I only use the app when I am downloading a book to read offline. If you want full Logos on your iPad and have not tried the web app lately, it has come a long way toward parity.
Using Logos as a pastor, seminary professor, and Tyndale author
It is very unlikely that Logos Bible Software will be running natively on Apple Silicon any time soon. And I speak here as an iOS developer who has been in the industry for 20 years. I am not a Logos developer (although I would love to be) so my answer here cannot be taken as definitive. Also, I am not Bob 
However, unless things have changed, Logos on both Mac and Windows is based on .NET code or Mono. Only the UI elements are native to each operating system. I have no idea (although I am sure I could find out) how well .NET code would run on ARM processors. The hope is that Rosetta 2 will allow any program to run on ARM without any performance issues but that is something I am sure Logos will be testing in the coming months.
Since Microsoft has no plans to move to ARM that we know of, making Mac Logos run natively on ARM would mean throwing away all the shared code they have now and rewriting everything for ARM. While that, in principle might allow full Logos on iPad (something I would LOVE) there might be issues that the mobile platform would have that are not relevant for a laptop or desktop. Pen support comes to mind but there are others.
The time and money investment to convert the Mac Logos codebase to ARM would be massive and the question that Faithlife would have to ask is whether there is enough income being made from Mac users to justify that significant cost. I suspect not.
At some point, having seen how Apple does business, Apple will drop all support for Rosetta 2 and Intel code on their devices. But that is unlikely to happen any time soon. Maybe in three or four years time perhaps. And at least for now, there are no plans to discontinue manufacturing or selling Intel-based Macs.
So I would NOT suggest you wait to buy Logos or Logos resources. The only person you would hurt in that case is yourself. It is likely that Logos will be around on Mac for many years to come, and I am sure if there are any performance issues with Rosetta 2 the team at Logos/Faithlife will fix them quickly!
The idea of eventually having full Logos on an iPad is a dream come true for me, but until that happens I fully intend to support the team at Logos with my purchases and my "evangelism" of the software as they have blessed me in innumerable ways!
The new era of Apple Silicon looks amazing and as an iOS developer, it makes me excited and as an avid Logos Bible Software user I see no reason to fret or be dismayed!
I am not a Logos developer (although I would love to be)
Faithlife is hiring! If you get a job, make sure to tell them JT (Alabama24) sent you. [;)]
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!
Interesting insights on ARM and software. So the future of Logos on Apple will probably depend on how easy or difficult Apple makes it for companies to develop both sides of the PC-Mac preference.
Hopefully it will go smoothly. While I jumped back to PC because a replacement Mac was too costly for the stats I needed, my 2013 rMBP was a solid machine, with only one kernel panic in the years I owned it.
WIN 11 i7 9750H, RTX 2060, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD | iPad Air 3
Verbum Max
However, unless things have changed, Logos on both Mac and Windows is based on .NET code or Mono. Only the UI elements are native to each operating system.
Since Mono already supports iOS on Apple Silicon (arm64), it shouldn't be that difficult for someone to have Mono support macOS 11 on arm64.
The time and money investment to convert the Mac Logos codebase to ARM would be massive and the question that Faithlife would have to ask is whether there is enough income being made from Mac users to justify that significant cost. I suspect not.
So I would NOT suggest you wait to buy Logos or Logos resources. The only person you would hurt in that case is yourself. It is likely that Logos will be around on Mac for many years to come, and I am sure if there are any performance issues with Rosetta 2 the team at Logos/Faithlife will fix them quickly!
If Faithlife has no plans to support native Apple Silicon on macOS 11 and beyond, it means there is only a limited time period of 3-4 years remaining until Logos won't run on my new Apple Silicon Mac that I will be buying. I've invested several thousands of dollars in Logos resources, and I'd hate it if I could no longer use Logos. Why should I buy more Logos resources if there is a possibility that I won't be able to use them on my Macs in 3-4 years?
Faithlife must support arm64 macOS 11. I'm sure they are already probably looking at the effort to migrate.
If Faithlife has no plans to support native Apple Silicon on macOS 11 and beyond, it means there is only a limited time period of 3-4 years remaining until Logos won't run on my new Apple Silicon Mac that I will be buying. I've invested several thousands of dollars in Logos resources, and I'd hate it if I could no longer use Logos. Why should I buy more Logos resources if there is a possibility that I won't be able to use them on my Macs in 3-4 years?
Currently Faithlife supports all Mac models that public can buy to run macOS 10.14 Mojave (OR newer). Currently Apple is not offering any Mac models with Apple Silicon primary processor for public purchase (only a development Mac Mini that has to be returned to Apple). Note: Touch Bar in recent MacBook Pro models is controlled by an Apple ARM processor (T1 & T2), which works fine. When Apple ships Apple Silicon Mac model(s) for public purchase, then hoping for public comment by Faithlife Corporation about natively supporting Logos & Verbum on Apple Silicon (anticipating applications being supported unless macOS on Apple Silicon causes crashes: e.g. a number of Logos & Verbum crashes on macOS 10.14.0 were fixed by macOS 10.14.1 release).
Performance reduction of Rosetta 2 can be guessed by looking at Geekbench benchmarks => https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks that shows native ARM benchmark is 1118 (single core) on A12Z while Intel benchmark running in Rosetta 2 is 811 (single core) => https://www.macrumors.com/guide/apple-silicon/ so emulation appears to reduce CPU performance by 28 % (humanly noticeable). Geekbench => https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks shows a number of usable Mac models having single core benchmark near 811 (so running Logos & Verbum on new Apple Silicon could feel like an older Mac model is being used until Faithlife can provide a fat binary application bundle, which includes code compilation for native ARM execution). The iOS benchmarks for A13 shows 18 % faster single core than A12Z (and 7 % faster than an Intel Core i9-9900K in a 27" iMac).
Keep Smiling [:)]
Keep in mind that the processor in question is an iPad processor. I have one in my iPad Pro. It is likely the processor in a Macbook Pro would be much better even if based on the same tech as the A12Z processor. The Mac Mini they are currently "selling" to devs is a little underpowered. It is likely Apple created a quick and dirty system that can get developers up and running quickly. One should not take it as gospel (see what I did there) that Apple Silicon will not perform well running x86 code. If the old Rosetta is anything to go by, it should run great!
I guess it all depends on what you have and when you decide to upgrade I am running a 2014 Macbook Pro and Logos still runs great. I also have a Lenovo 12 inch machine with an i7 processor specifically for portability and it runs Logos very well. It's kind of the reason I would love to have desktop Logos running on an iPad. I love the portability of the Lenovo. And when I travel its much lighter. But only having 1 device is the ultimate! But one would have at 5 years to upgrade and if one buys the last Intel Mac that Apple sells in two years time you could probably extend that to seven years.
Rosetta (the original one) was supporting in Mac operating systems for five years. If the same or better holds true, that's a fair amount of time for either a change in OS for us (going to Windows) or for Logos to support Arm64 natively. At the end of the day, its just speculation on our part until Faithlife and/or Bob gives us the official word! As a developer, I suspect it would be a fascinating project.
So I think one should not get too crazy and abandon ship JUST yet. Even if worst comes to worst and Faithlife sunsets Mac support, there is still that other operating system. I know it borders on sacrilege to even think about it (I am a huge Mac fan and earn my bread and butter by it!) but if worst comes to worst we still have options! And you have 5 years to cushion the blow and save up for your wonderful new Windows laptop! 😲
But let's just wait for the official word and in the meantime keep using the software we love to minister to the saints and grow as believers!
Regarding the concern over what happens to intel Macs after the shift to ARM, I thought this article makes a good point: Bootcamp still works and the Mac hardware is likely to last a long time. Yes it’s not ideal for those who don’t want to shift from the macOS, but it’s a possibility. Thoughts?
edit and it would help if I added the link 🤦♂️ https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-life-for-obsolete-intel-macs-great-windows-or-linux-machines-for-years-to-come/
WIN 11 i7 9750H, RTX 2060, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD | iPad Air 3
Verbum Max
Apple's Press Release:
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/06/apple-announces-mac-transition-to-apple-silicon/
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
Since I’m not too clear on how the new chips are going to work, I’m wondering if that’s a two-year warning to rewrite software from scratch for macOS Big Sur.
WIN 11 i7 9750H, RTX 2060, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD | iPad Air 3
Verbum Max
There's a Rosetta update to run Intel-based software.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
I see. I guess I misunderstood the significance of that.
WIN 11 i7 9750H, RTX 2060, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD | iPad Air 3
Verbum Max
I still have a couple of perfectly good macs that were left behind when they abandoned Apple Silicon the first time.
Yea, me too.
I have a really nice G5 Quad maxed out at 16 gig. It still runs!
Now I have a Mac Pro 2010 that I can't update past Mojave.(without playing with the install. No thanks.)
As long as Logos supports WinTel I can always run in a VM on the Mac at least.