Is Logos becoming "bloated".....
Please select 1-3 relevant tags below once you're finished.
Keep in mind, I like Logos, I use it regularly, I'm a fan. And I'm not complaining… just wondering…
I am noticing that Logos is taking longer to load and I am wondering if it is because of all the "helps" that's being programmed into Logos. For example, Sermon Builder (SB), Workflows (WF), Passage Guide (PG), Bible Books Explorer (BBE), Bible Browser (BW), Bible Study Builder (BSB), Inductive Bible Study (IBS), Sermon Starter Guide (SSG), Bible Word Study (BWS).. to name some of them.
I realize that each one of them does something a bit different than the others… but by having all these plus the others, in the program… doesn't that at to the latency of the program loading and working?
And to tell the truth, couldn't some of them be combined and thus become more efficient themselves and to the whole of the program?
Logos is a great program… but it definitely is becoming slower to load… least on my computer, which is pretty fast…
What if some of these "functions" or "features" could be combined into one and still accomplish what the individual "function" or "feature" accomplished? I am thinking I would like to see some of these "functions" or "features" given more attention as to improving them, making them better, than to adding more "functions" or "features".
For example…. combine features in WF with SB and add some enhancements such as linking, better formatting and such… call it Sermon Builder or Workflows… name wouldn't matter.
Thanks. 😎
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
Comments
-
Interesting. I'm a new user, so I don't know how long it used to take to load. On my M2 MacBook Air it takes 8 seconds to load, exactly the same amount of time as Photoshop. On the other hand, Accordance only takes 2 seconds to load.
Since I usually launch it once a day and keep it running all day, the load time really doesn't bother me personally. But I can understand that it might be annoying if you launched it several times a day.1 -
In general, I expect your thoughts would receive much support. In fact, simplifying and consolidating has explicitly been stated is one of the goals going forward. I'm thinking Factbook. I see Factbook growing in significance while other features wane in significance. I'm not entirely sure about workflows, however. Imo it cannot be combined with sermon builder, because not everyone using workflows is preparing a sermon. They serve different audiences and purposes (yes, overlapping, but not entirely).
0 -
Seems perceptably slower … an M1 struggles a bit to load a right-click menu. Used to be an instant. I mentioned before, we're headed for L4-land.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
And if it takes that long to load, it may never land.
0 -
I have a fully stocked Logos with all the bells and whistles. It takes about 7 seconds on startup. I don't find that to be a long time. The only lag I notice once and a great while is when exporting a sermon to Power Point. I have responsibly new equipment and run an SSD.
1 -
I wonder how difficult it would be to make a "simplified" version of Logos that would use the same files on your hard drive as the main program, and it has no bells or whistles - simply for reading, maybe some simple highlighting and simple searches, maybe a few other things that don't require much in the way of resources.
Might help out those with older computers who can't afford to upgrade. Or those who just want a simple experience.
0 -
I see it more as a common state in software where as functions evolve some are still "old style" and some "new style." I suspect that Factbook will completely replace the Guides as we know them. The standalone/interactive functions will slowly be standardized into a more generic form to which new features can more easily be added. Workflows are not candidates for merging into editors but they are ripe for a more generic redesign.
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 -
FL sort of had that on the Mac M1/M2 … the mobile ran on the desktop. But they had the same names, so deleting one's data/resources, deleted the other's data/resources.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I wouldn't mind being able to turn off Logos features, like the stuff for sermons, when I don't use them. To ease the burden of running parts of the program I'm not gonna use until I'm ready to use them. Instead of a "slimmed Logos".
I bought all the features because they came bundled with feature sets I wanted. I don't always or sometimes ever use some of them, and I'm thinking they're probably like a plug-in that is turned on or off based on the account's license. So it shouldn't be too hard to do.
But then again, Logos requires a reboot to switch themes, so who knows.0 -
One operation I've found takes a few seconds is moving a bunch of notes to a folder, or from one folder to another. But I figure that's probably the time it takes to move the notes in Logos's cloud copy.
0 -
The Windows Setup has gotten bigger and my Logos has become more bloated with books and datasets.
Excluding Interactives, there are 9 Tools (from the menu) that I don't use; two of which are relatively new (before Subscription). I don't use Workflows, use only 2/7 Guides, and use only 7/14 of the Documents under New. So I would be howled down if I suggested which features could reduce the bloat.
But the load time is not significant because I restart only when required, and only when I'm ready. SSD's and faster CPU's together with a faster modem (recent) take care of the speed despite any "bloat".
My main concern is that Bible Study Builder is way short of its Lego potential as it cannot replace Clippings for my Bible Study.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
I suspect that any noticeable delays are not from the performance of locally executing code … but the amount of time the program takes to phone home. Try running it offline and see if it runs any faster …
FWIW version 36.1 still seems about the same to me.
1 -
Already offline.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I run an i5 with a SSD and normal start-up is under 10 seconds (typically between 5 and 8 seconds) - I do notice a longer start-up time when there are downloads or the "Preparing Library" sequence is initiated.
Logos 10 - OpenSuse Tumbleweed, Windows 11, Android 15 & Android 14
0 -
I am similar to Dave in terms of the tools and features I use, but my definition is bloatware is unrelated to my personal use. To me bloatware has features that have no common usecase for any of its intended audiences. I will admit that I divide the Logos functions into those I see as useful for Bible study and those I see as useful in making users feel like they've engaged in Bible study.
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."
1 -
There is: just use the mobile app. Or the web app.
And: why bother loading times…yes, it is a little longer now, but is it a real problem? As far as I can remember: over the many years now Logos alters between faster and slower and faster and slower again. And also these forum comments were altering between compliments and complaints for its speed. So, I do not bother..2 -
Good point about the web app.
I think we're all looking for Logos to have all the features we use, and none of the others. Which, of course, is different for everyone.3 -
@xnman said:
And to tell the truth, couldn't some of them be combined and thus become more efficient themselves and to the whole of the program?
I just posted this same sentiment yesterday (I believe yesterday, I've been having some memory problems as of late) in regard to BSB being merged into Sermon/Homily Builder. I would get a lot of value from BSB if the new questions sidebar was merged into Sermon Builder. As it stands now, I can't really see myself using BSB aside from copy pasting the questions into a Word doc. However, on a positive note, even having the ability to select the questions is a big value add in my opinion.
0 -
Well… I just feel it is odd indeed that Microsoft can make a "function" like MS Word that will be satisfactory for so many people. 😎
Edit: and someone like me has used MS Word for years…. lol
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
from Perplexity:
Estimating the cost to develop and maintain Microsoft Word is challenging due to the complexity and long history of the software. However, we can make some rough estimates based on available information:Development CostsThe initial development of Microsoft Word likely cost millions of dollars. Modern software development projects of similar scale can cost anywhere from $50 million to $500 million or more. For a flagship product like Word, the higher end of this range is more likely.Ongoing Maintenance and DevelopmentMicrosoft continues to invest heavily in maintaining and improving Word as part of the Microsoft 365 suite. Annual costs for this ongoing work could be estimated as follows:Engineering team: Assuming a team of 100-200 software engineers, designers, and product managers working full-time on Word, with an average fully-loaded cost of $200,000 per employee, this could amount to $20-40 million annually.Infrastructure and support: Costs for servers, cloud services, customer support, and other operational expenses could add another $10-20 million per year.Marketing and distribution: While not directly related to development, these costs are significant for a product like Word and could easily exceed $50 million annually.Total Estimated Annual CostAdding these components together, a rough estimate for the annual cost to maintain and continue developing Microsoft Word could be in the range of $80-110 million per year.It's important to note that this is a very rough estimate based on industry averages and assumptions. The actual costs are likely closely guarded by Microsoft and may vary significantly from these figures. Additionally, Word is deeply integrated with other Microsoft products, making it difficult to isolate its specific costs.ShareRewritefrom Gemini:
Estimating the cost to develop and maintain a complex software application like Microsoft Word is incredibly difficult, even for those within Microsoft. However, we can make some educated guesses based on industry knowledge and what we know about software development.
Development Costs:
Initial Development: This would have been astronomical, spanning many years and involving hundreds (if not thousands) of developers, designers, testers, and project managers. It's impossible to put an exact figure on it, but it would easily be in the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars.
Ongoing Development: Word is constantly being updated with new features, bug fixes, and compatibility improvements. This requires a large team of developers working continuously. Considering the size and complexity of the codebase, this ongoing development likely costs tens of millions of dollars annually.
Maintenance Costs:
Bug Fixes and Security Updates: A significant portion of maintenance involves addressing bugs and security vulnerabilities. This requires dedicated teams constantly monitoring and patching the software.
Compatibility and Platform Support: Maintaining compatibility with different operating systems (Windows, macOS, mobile platforms) and hardware configurations adds to the maintenance burden.
Customer Support: Providing customer support through various channels (online help, documentation, support staff) is also a significant cost.
Factors that make it difficult to estimate:
Legacy Code: Word has been in development for decades, meaning it has a large amount of legacy code that can be complex and expensive to maintain.
Integration with other Microsoft Products: Word is tightly integrated with other Microsoft products like Office, OneDrive, and SharePoint, which adds to the complexity of development and maintenance.
Global Reach: Supporting multiple languages and regional requirements adds to the development and testing effort.
Rough Estimate:
Considering all these factors, a very rough estimate of the annual cost to develop and maintain Microsoft Word could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. This includes salaries for developers, testers, designers, project managers, customer support staff, infrastructure costs, and other related expenses.
It's important to remember that this is just a rough estimate. The actual cost could be higher or lower depending on various factors. However, it's safe to say that developing and maintaining a software application as complex as Microsoft Word is a very expensive undertaking.
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."
1 -
My old laptop, my good one, finally gave up the ghost. Started crashing. Had to be held together with duct tape. So, I bit the bullet, had some credit card points, and got me a Dell XPS 16 9640 OLED UHD 4K TouchScreen. Intel Core Ultra 9 185H. 64GB RAM 2TB SSD. RTX 4070. With mag wheels and fully illuminated genuine accessory chrome exhaust pipes.
Logos screams. Nothing can slow it down. But now I open the old beater and Logos slogs along as if stuck in a marsh. And that computer was no slouch.
So that is another solution.0 -
I can see where you're coming from.
I'd assume it's even more expensive for Logos to add some of the Word features into existing Logos features considering the developers of Word are solely developing for word processing, whereas Logos developers are working on other areas as well. The Word developers live and breathe word processing while the Logos developers are working on a wider focus of development.
However, I wouldn't suggest that Logos implement all the features of Word (some of them the juice wouldn't be worth the squeeze, I can only imagine the nightmare that would come with developing a macro creator function within Logos).
My short wish list of features I'd like to see incorporated one way or another into Logos (fitting that it's Christmas Eve, or at least Advent season for our Eastern friends):
1) Outline function similar to Word
2) Functional heading and subheading styles in the same way Word does (expanding and whatnot)
3) Citation functionality and the ability to attach a bibliography
4) Printer friendly functions like margins etc.
I know that the focus for Sermon Builder is to build sermons, so I can see why Logos wouldn't necessarily want many of those features within SB, but the Paper Builder feature has got a lot of support on the feedback site.
Personally, a decent word processor is one feature I'd like to see most within the Logos ecosystem. I know it'd take a lot of development, but many of these features can be found in competitors' software (in many cases even free software), so I know it's possible.0 -
The free version or the Web App would work for this purpose.
Maybe they could add a Simplified Mode setting in the desktop app that turns off all the bells and whistles. This way you'd have faster performance when you just need to read, do simple searches, and highlight/take notes, but still have access to your full library. They would need to make sure the Read Aloud feature is available to Simplified Mode.
EDIT: You could have the installation screen allow users to select Simplified or Full mode during the installation process so that if they had a slower performing computer they wouldn't have to install it and run it in Full mode first before they could switch to Full mode.
0
