Logos 4 Mac. . . VERY POOR PERFORMANCE
Ok, so I purchased Logos 4 Mac recently. I have a top model iMac (Core i7@2.93Ghz, 8GB RAM). There is nothing this machine can't run... except Logos. The performance of the program is substandard to say the least. Transitions between windows are choppy, menu pull downs are 1 - 3 secs delayed, and the program will occasionally force close. Try pulling up the right click menu and sometimes it will work, others it wont. Power look-up is slow and unreliable. Opening any reference books is slow and sometimes unresponsive. When I run the software on my Windows laptop, which is significantly less capable (Core i3@1.2Ghz, 4GB RAM), the programs blows the Mac out of the water. So, clearly, the problem is in the mac version of the software. I am running Logos Bible Software 4.0b SR-1 (4.10.4.8093).
I am wondering if there are any settings tweaks or other settings mods that need to be made to get this program to run correctly. I cannot accept that this is the best that Logos can put forth for Mac. Any insight would be appreciated.
Thanks & God bless,
Mike
Comments
-
Hi Michael. I have a quad-core i5, 4Gb RAM. I haven't experienced the problems you describe, at least not that I recognize. Are you running the beta or the stable version?
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."- G.K. Chesterton
0 -
Hi Ben, I do believe I am running the stable version (Logos Bible Software 4.0b SR-1 (4.10.4.8093)). I just purchased this machine and did a clean install from the Logos site a couple of weeks ago. I am not sure why this is happening, I do hope to find the solution.
0 -
Unfortunately I think this could be where Logos 4 Mac is right now performance wise. I am running the newest beta and when I try to run my mouse over the File, Guides, Tools.... tabs at the top of Logos there is at least a 1-2 second delay many times. Logos 4 Mac is just not exactly where I would like it speed wise. I went from an old Windows XP computer with 1GB RAM to a new MacBookPro with 4 GB RAM and I really can't tell much difference performance wise. I have heard that Logos is still working on performance upgrades, but this just might be where the we are at the moment. But I hope there is just some tweak that could fix things up for you.
0 -
If you haven't done so, go to Settings and under Energy Saver, at the top, select Higher Performance Graphics instead of Better Battery Life. Once I did that, Logos sped up considerably. I use a fair amount of visual filters and highlighting and without the higher performance graphics processor, the machine seems to spend a lot of regular processor cycles just trying to keep up with the graphics in the program, slowing down performance overall.
After that change, a few weeks ago I added an additional 2G of ram. That improved performance by about the same amount again. (Mine is an early 2008 unibody MacBook Pro. Apple doesn't acknowledge
that it will run with 6G, but it does quite well. Go to Other World
Computing and check their memory specs and pricing.)I wasn't happy when the 4.0 Gold was released—the program was sluggish, scrolling was slow and lagged, but now performance is very good and I'm quite happy.
Just a thot.
Seth
0 -
Have tried the settings you recommend to improve performance, since I've the same concerns and the initial post.
VERY disappointed by the issues I'm experiencing and wish that I had gone with Accordance.
0 -
I have to agree. I participated off and on during the beta phase and it wasn't as sluggish as it is now. Even the initial gold master was better. It takes ages to load one of my more complicated layouts and to be honest, even though I am not a super demanding user when it comes it speed, it's just too slow.
0 -
Same here... slooooooooow to the point of which I
have lost the joy of using Logos4 Mac. Still use it quite a bit each week for
word studies and such. Out of necessity though since I have no other
alternative at this point. So it’s a matter of trying to remain content and lumber through
the performance issues and trust that Logos will one day deliver a product that
is ready for prime time. Feel better now, been holding that in for some time. [:D]0 -
Seth Hewitt said:
go to Settings and under Energy Saver, at the top, select Higher Performance Graphics instead of Better Battery Life
Hi Seth, Michael wrote that he has an iMac and there is no such setting that I am aware of.
0 -
Ray D said:Seth Hewitt said:
go to Settings and under Energy Saver, at the top, select Higher Performance Graphics instead of Better Battery Life
Hi Seth, Michael wrote that he has an iMac and there is no such setting that I am aware of.
Plus I imagine that even on a laptop it would make no difference unless one were using a battery and then would only cause performance to equal the performance when plugged in.
0 -
Sorry, I missed that Michael said he had an iMac.
For the MacBook Pro—at least the early ones like I have—there are two different graphics processors, an NVIDIA GeForce 9400M and an NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT. You have to use the second one if you connect the laptop to a hi-res monitor alongside the laptop monitor. There is considerable difference in the performance of the two processors. I guess that Apple put the selection on the Energy Saver page because the higher performance processor uses up the battery much more quickly.
0 -
With 8 GB RAM installed, wonder about switching to 64 bit kernel ? Forum http://community.logos.com/forums/p/15647/119413.aspx#119413 may be helpful.
Wonder if iMac configured with SSD and hard disk ? (configure to order option)
Also wonder about resource contention with other programs, especially disk intensive ? (e.g. anti-virus, online backup)
Next year anticipating Logos 4 Mac feature parity with Windows along with more performance improvements.
Also dreaming of 3.4 GHz Quad Core i7 iMac with SSD and hard disk (anticipating Intel announcement during CES keynote on Jan 5, 2011)
On a 2.8 GHz Quad Core i7, most menus instant (Layouts bit slower - about a second).
Concur with occasional crash (or force close) - posting repeatable crashes to Beta forum.
Unable to replicate reference book slowness - wonder about some examples ?
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
I am also becoming very frustrated with the choppiness and very poor performance. I have waited patiently like most people but am getting a bit worried that it may not ever be as good as the PC side of things. What can we do but wait?
0 -
Are any of you running Parallels at the same time as L4 Mac? The do not play well together and will really slow down Logos.
0 -
I have read the post aboves and looks like different thoughts. i just bought a IMac i7 with 12G memory. I also have Logo4 on my PC laptop which I travel extensively with. Should I even bother install it on the Mac side or just do the PC install and eliminate any problems. I really did want to switch everthing to the MAC but not sure if I will be able to sync notes, highlights, etc effectively accross both platforms. Any ideas while you are all on this subject?
thanks...
0 -
I run the latest beta on a 2008 MBP 2.4Ghz with 4 GB of memory and a NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT video card with no problems, but I manage the program. I created my own PG and EG eliminating unused sections; I keep all sections collapsed and only open them when I need them (which is a good idea anyway); I do not run L4 Mac and Parallels at the same time; there are still a few areas that are slow and troublesome:
1. Parallel passages is slower
2. Word by Word section in the EG has some bugs and is slow if left expanded with a large pericope.
3. Syntax searches are slower
4. Morph search has a few bugs still
With the above tweaks I find it as fast as L4 Win.
Here is a brief video with my setup.. older and not my best.. but perhaps provides some tips on running L4 Mac better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeY_8f2oFYo
0 -
Michael Grange said:
I have read the post aboves and looks like different thoughts. i just bought a IMac i7 with 12G memory. I also have Logo4 on my PC laptop which I travel extensively with. Should I even bother install it on the Mac side or just do the PC install and eliminate any problems. I really did want to switch everthing to the MAC but not sure if I will be able to sync notes, highlights, etc effectively accross both platforms. Any ideas while you are all on this subject.
Configuration sounds familiar: iMac 2.8 GHz Quad Core i7 with 16 GB memory and 7200 RPM hard drive running Logos 4.2a Beta 2 for Mac along with 64 bit Windows 7 Professional in Oracle's VirtualBox (adequate memory for both) - learned 64 bit kernel faster for Snow Leopard and 64 bit Windows noticeably faster than 32 bit (indexing library completed an hour quicker). When indexing Logos 4, do 1 configuration at a time (avoid contention between Logos 4 indexers).
Laptop has 64 bit Windows 7 Ultimate with experience index 5.9 (processor, memory, and disk with 6.4 for graphics) - Core 2 Duo P8400 @ 2.27 GHz with 8 GB memory and 7200 RPM hard disk - likewise running Logos 4.2a Beta 2.
Technical note: with memory over 4 GB, choosing 64 bit operating systems (avoid address space memory mapping from 32 bit to 64 bit).
Sync is effective across platforms - in an earlier release, could not add reading plan shortcut in Logos 4 Mac - created shortcut in PC, synced to Mac - worked fine. Note: only named layouts are sync'd.
Currently, Logos 4.2a Beta 2 has the most feature parity between platforms - albeit Mac version bit more buggy.
By the way, both platforms have some issues (many posted to forums) - depends on configuration and usage for personal encounter(s).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
John Fidel said:
Are any of you running Parallels at the same time as L4 Mac? The do not play well together and will really slow down Logos.
John
I believe this depends upon the amount of installed RAM. I have 11GB, and Parallels does not affect L4 Mac. KS4J seems to have no interference, but he reported having 12GB.
0 -
Good point Jack... I am confused why there is such a diverse user experience with L4 Mac. I love it and have removed the L4 Win from Parallels. My analytical mind wants to know.
0 -
yep im stuck with it and it is very slow choppy and frustrating to work with, i have a brand new imac with maxed ram ed and it still is a prob to work with , its still the best out there but is a joyless wonder most days in performance. Hoping and praying for an improved product soon as i use it almost daily gritting my teeth.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:John Fidel said:
Are any of you running Parallels at the same time as L4 Mac? The do not play well together and will really slow down Logos.
John
I believe this depends upon the amount of installed RAM. I have 11GB, and Parallels does not affect L4 Mac. KS4J seems to have no interference, but he reported having 12GB.
Actually reported 16 GB (sometimes using 12 GB) - personally try to avoid running resource intensive items at same time (similar idea as avoiding brake lights in rush hour traffic).
Do monitor memory usage - lots of page outs => performance issue (everything slows down while memory is paged out to disk).
By the way, my performance tolerance bit more - have worked with databases that have millions of data rows - some actions take very long time.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
@Keep Smiling for Jesus
Well, I followed your advice, and verified that my iMac was booting into 32-bit mode by default (extremely odd choice by Apple). After following the guide you linked to, I booted into the 64-bit kernel and gave Logos a try.
The verdict: BIG IMPROVEMENT. It's still far from being where it needs to be, but the performance increase is very noticeable. THANKS FOR THE TIP!!!
Maybe some others could try and share their results!
GOD BLESS,
Mike
0 -
Actually reported 16 GB (sometimes using 12 GB)
That's what sometimes happens when I quote from memory. [:D]
personally try to avoid running resource intensive items at same time (similar idea as avoiding brake lights in rush hour traffic).
It has been many years since I regularly drove in rush hour to & from the Navy Annex (next door to the Pentagon), but I remember brakes and the accelerator being the most important parts of the vehicle.
0 -
Ray D said:
Same here... slooooooooow to the point of which I
have lost the joy of using Logos4 Mac. Still use it quite a bit each week for
word studies and such. Out of necessity though since I have no other
alternative at this point. So it’s a matter of trying to remain content and lumber through
the performance issues and trust that Logos will one day deliver a product that
is ready for prime time. Feel better now, been holding that in for some time.
I am a long time mac user, and have used accordance for years. Mac Logos may be slower but it is a good piece of software and I would be hard pressed if I could only have one. I am happier with accordances interface and performance but Logos has so many good reference works for it. I tend to start a passage guide off in Logos and then go do stuff in accordance till Logos is done it's thing.
-Dan
0 -
MikeV81 said:
@Keep Smiling for Jesus
Well, I followed your advice, and verified that my iMac was booting into 32-bit mode by default (extremely odd choice by Apple). After following the guide you linked to, I booted into the 64-bit kernel and gave Logos a try.
The verdict: BIG IMPROVEMENT. It's still far from being where it needs to be, but the performance increase is very noticeable. THANKS FOR THE TIP!!!
Maybe some others could try and share their results!
GOD BLESS,
Mike
Likewise Thankful for noticeable improvement [H]
Concur with odd choice when Mac OS X would benefit from 64 bit kernel (over 4 GB memory).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Here's a link to a performance update guide by a photographer who pushes Macs more than Logos 4.
Seth
http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html#OptimizingYourMac
0 -
COMMENT:
Thanks for the link re: "Mac
OS X v10.6: Starting up with the 32-bit or 64-bit kernel." Did not even
realize my kernel was booting with the 32-bit kernel by default.ACTION:
Needed to set the system configuration kernel setting, Method 2 in the article, to boot with the 64-bit kernel. The startup hotkey option, Method 1 in the article, didn't work for me on my early 2009 MacBook Pro ruunning OS X 10.6.5.
RESULT:
Noticed overall speed improvements in OS X but nothing eye catching with Logos4Mac. Still runs like an ant swimming in custard. Or something vaguely to that effect. ;-)
0 -
I have an earlier MBP than you, late 2008 (MacBookPro5,1) 2.53 Ghz 2 core intel processor with 6G RAM. Mine was like you described, with processors pegging everytime I scrolled anything until I changed the graphics processor setting. It's System Preferences > Energy Saver, then select higher performance instead of better battery life in the upper left corner. You'll have to reboot to have it take effect, but when I did that it speeded mine up immensely. It uses the more robust graphics chip which takes a load of the main processor. Adding the additional 2G RAM helped as well, but the performance spike was with the graphics processor change.
Seth
0 -
Switching to the MBP's higher performance graphics chip set was one of the first things I did to improve Logos4Mac performance. That and killing all other running apps. Still not impressed and sympathize with others experiencing (very) poor performance. I reiterate the "ant swimming in custard" analogy.
0 -
S Mack said:
I reiterate the "ant swimming in custard" analogy
Please elaborate custard flavors and consistencies => help Logos developers know what performance improvements would be most helpful and appreciated - repeatable steps worthwhile.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Certainly happy to add detail where possible but as has already been discussed in this posting the user interface response time of Logos4Mac is and has always been sluggish. This is my view and perception. Note: I'm discussing the user interface.
I find myself thinking I've got 4Gig of RAM, a 2.53GHz dual core intel processor running a 64-bit kernel under OS X 10.6.5 with the high end graphics chip enabled and this app still lacks the crispness I see in other apps for the Mac.
Click, pause, click, wait, click, take and take a coffee break.
This sort of experience really hampers my desire to use this app and I note others here have mentioned having the same or similar experiences with Logos4Mac.
0 -
Yeah, me too. fairly new iMac with 4GB Ram. Performance of Logos is just plain pathetic. I have accordance (not to mention many other Mac programs i.e. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, which are all fairly big programs) and it is as snappy as snappy can get. Quite amazing in fact. Not sure what Logos' problem is, but I sure hope they decide to hire a good Mac programmer (and fire their current ones. Sorry but business is business. If you can't do the job go find one you can do) and get this thing fixed pronto. Outside its performance, I love Logos and don't think any other Bible software package can touch it. But, the performance! sheeeesh, I almost can't stand to sit and use it.
-Rich
0 -
Rich said:
I sure hope they decide to hire a good Mac programmer (and fire their current ones.
Are you an employed Mac programmer that makes you the kind of expert who is qualified to make such an insulting declaration? Having used Macs since June 1984, I am impressed with the current Mac Dev Team.
Rich said:I have accordance (not to mention many other Mac programs i.e. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, which are all fairly big programs)
Not one of these applications—including Accordance—is anywhere near as complex as L4.
0 -
I am really upset with the whole logos 4 mac progress. Im to the point where i use the libronix engine for mac rather than using logos 4, despite the libronix does not have notes and highlighting it surely moves a whole lot faster and in my mind is a lot more stable. I feel like i have a program that just does not deliver the anticipation that is comes across as nothing is wrong with my mac the program is just not where it should be at this point......
0 -
Chuckk Gerwig said:
yep im stuck with it and it is very slow choppy and frustrating to work with,
Is that a general statement, or is the app slow and choppy in some specific areas? If you can give details of your problems, perhaps forum members can help you improve your experience.
0 -
Rich,
First of all welcome to the forums.
How long have all these programs had Mac versions? Accordance has been Mac forever. How about softening your tone as the Mac Dev Team have done remarkably well in the year or so of getting L4 to this point. I disagree with your conclusion regarding the speed of the program as well, but that is subjective.
Vent if you need to, but don't insult the team.. that's not called for.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:Rich said:
I have accordance (not to mention many other Mac programs i.e. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, which are all fairly big programs)
Not one of these applications—including Accordance—is anywhere near as complex as L4.
Take a look at this post and the next one by the same user for the impressions of an experienced Mac programmer 202345.aspx
0 -
Rich said:
Yeah, me too. fairly new iMac with 4GB Ram. Performance of Logos is just plain pathetic. I have accordance (not to mention many other Mac programs i.e. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, which are all fairly big programs) and it is as snappy as snappy can get. Quite amazing in fact. Not sure what Logos' problem is, but I sure hope they decide to hire a good Mac programmer (and fire their current ones. Sorry but business is business. If you can't do the job go find one you can do) and get this thing fixed pronto. Outside its performance, I love Logos and don't think any other Bible software package can touch it. But, the performance! sheeeesh, I almost can't stand to sit and use it.
-Rich
I fully understand our frustration and share much of it, but firing the staff for better programmers would be very short sighted. The programers are doing their best and are quite handicapped by Logos4. The code is roughly the same for both platforms, Logos wants this, by doing this everything will have a bit a uniform feeling even if that means feelings windowish to us mac users (but seeing the windows product I think the mac programers have given us a fair mac interface). The mac product is far from done, when everything is working bug free the programs probably can work on optimizing the APP. For Logos and the programers it has been a real catch 22, Logos has a long history of disappointing mac users from pulling the 90s release due to platform changes, to the Libronix 1 product being delayed from the reported 2005 release date to 2008 or was it 2009 (I know the alphas were out in 2008 anyway). A goal of getting the mac version released to public by the holiday season seems to me a very logical thing, and with the program being fairly stable I honestly do not mind the premature (all features not functioning properly) release. A poor running program is still better than no program. While there are a fair amount of us beta testers out there, all the bugs and glitches are not going to show up till you get a whole lot of people using it. In someways I would say development has sometimes felt slower sine the official release, but I have little doubt that this is because getting the final few features working plus squashing all the bugs, PLUS integrating new code being put into the windows side is a very big task. This task will be put back to square one if all new programers were brought in. Now that is not to say a mac programmer specializing in optimization wouldn't be nice but with the mac being almost caught up, performance can be focused on. I LOVE ACCORDANCE, but i was using version 2.0 and it had it's issues and wasn't nearly as fast or as user friendly as the freeware Online Bible Mac, after many years they have refined a power and fast program, their programers have had years of experience working on it. If Logos could have hired the original programers of Libronix 1 for the mac things might have gone faster but maybe not. I did think the Libronix mac interface while a bit limited felt very mac like. Once all the programming is caught up I am sure the mac programmers can refine the interface and optimize the program but until then it seems a bit premature to pay the queen of hearts and shout out OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!! (I will keep my queen of hearts outfit on stand by for later this spring though... ;-) ).
-Dan
0 -
Hmmm — there are different areas that people are referring to which make this thread a bit like lumpy custard in its consistency.
There are a number of factors to consider and also re: different peoples machines will have different performance, so there perhaps should be more quantitative investigation then subjective reaction.
Firstly (and some of you may remember my early postings about this) it has to be understood that due to business requirements (as they saw them) Logos made certain technical architectural decisions with Logos 4 Mac. The major one being that, to reduce time to market, they re-used code developed for the Windows version in Logos 4 Mac. Meaning, to utilise .NET programming they used the Mono cross platform layer. How much code (book engine, user interface etc.) was reused is not clear (and Logos are not saying) but what is definitely the case is that Logos 4 Mac is not a 'pure' Mac application. If you look inside the Mac app bundle you will see dozens of .DLLs.
Does this matter? Well that depends. The purist in me objects to having Windoze (ugh) code on my Mac, and the Logos 4 Mac interface is very much like the Windows app stuck in a Mac app container — but one can come to terms with all that when the result of having the Logos platform available is considered.
A concern I voiced back in Jan when I started posting to the forum was — would there be a performance hit resulting from having an intermediate runtime layer (Mono) used, and Jack C. in reply to your comment back then — this is no longer alpha software [;)]
Anyway I see a few things:
- I don't believe the Mac version will ever reach the performance of the Windows version — not lumbered with the extra baggage of the Mono cross platform layer. Macs on average are better and faster machines than Windows, and that will offset things somewhat but there will always be the Mono (monkey) on its back. Again, one has to come to terms with that, keeping an eye on the benefit of having Logos available on Mac.
- We need to look at where Logos 4 Mac can be helped to improve performance. I have said in another post that as Logos (both Win & Mac) can tend to be HDD bound, putting the whole Logos 4 Mac installation onto an SSD drive should help it a lot. One of the developers agrees.
- When people say the interface is slow they have to realise that the app often can't draw the screen until it has got the data (from the HDD) that it needs to place on the screen — see point 2.
Looking to improve performance, and being a realist, I'm very close to deciding to get a 60GB model of these SSD drives. 60GB would be enough to comfortably put Logos onto. Here's another website (http://www.ssd-for-mac.com/) with info for Macs. If Santa (my better half) is nice to me and I get one I'll report results.
It would be good for people to have a quantitative basis for comparison of their Macs — the Geekbench utility is not bad (only doesn't do HDD performance) and there is a free version — http://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/
Here's the main info from my machine, and BTW I don't find Logos 4 Mac that bad. Sure it won't start any performance fires but it also depends on what you ask it to do — a full Bible chapter Passage Guide is a guarantee of a long coffee break, but do you need to work that way?
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
0 -
I have similar problem and feel that I should have stayed with Logos 3. I believe it is a waste of money and logos should probably give discount to Mac users for such an unfinished product. I had talked to a tech support person about getting similar interface for passage which also give illustration and they told me this is also another feature we are working on. Another means there are other numerous reports of other missing features. This all come down to the fact that it is an unfinished.
0 -
Jack Caviness said:Rich said:
I have accordance (not to mention many other Mac programs i.e. Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, which are all fairly big programs)
Not one of these applications—including Accordance—is anywhere near as complex as L4.
Hmmm — think you're on shaky ground there with that statement Jack. I think some of those apps will definitely be (much) more complex — programming wise — than L4. What L4M is doing with reading data and indexing multiple resources is difficult, but we can't make blanket statements that it's more sophisticated than something like Final Cut Pro.
I do agree with you though that Rich does appear to be speaking out of frustration.
"I want to know all God's thoughts; the rest are just details." - Albert Einstein
0 -
Patrick S. said:
It would be good for people to have a quantitative basis for comparison of their Macs — the Geekbench utility is not bad (only doesn't do HDD performance) and there is a free version
Personally Thankful for usable, unfinished software with impressive improvements over past year [:D]
Also cognizant faster hardware improves Logos 4 performance - reading rumors about iMac and MacBook Pro updates in 1st half of 2011 (along with iPad 2).
OWC benchmark shows SSD transfer speed improvements => http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/benchmarks/
Likewise Thankful for many usage tips from Wiki, forum posts and blogs - e.g. closing some sections in Passage Guide (or creating custom guide without some sections).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
My two cents worth...
This is getting ridiculous. I loaded up L4M and twice in 2 minutes had to "force quit" the app because it went into no-user land. CPU usage out the roof.
Right now I feel ANY sort of performance would be good. Best of luck to the rest of you but I need to get real work done and L4M is NOT cutting it. Waste of time, waste of money...
Are my emotions running high, you bet. In hind sight I should have stuck with my hard copy library. Actually cheaper, more reliable, no software bugs in the user interface, no false ongoing promises or apologies, no document conversion errors or entire missing pages etc. etc. and the constant list of people running to defend the actions of LOGOS itself has me puzzled. Why is this? Business is business and those companies that can't cut it in a competitive world die out.
I really do want LOGOS to succeed! The concept is great! But it's not original and Amazon, Sony and a host of other companies are out there right now at the door when in comes to the types of things LOGOS is attempting to do in the very competitive book reading market. If LOGOS can't get these stability issues sorted out real quickly, my guess is in the next 6-18 months, they will be taken out of the game by the competition due to a long list of disgruntled customers and new more stable competing products from said companies appearing in the market place.
Blessings to you all for this festive Christian season. I'm forever grateful Christ was born, suffered, died and rose again for me but the import of it all will take me all of eternity to appreciate.
0 -
S Mack said:
...no-user land. CPU usage out the roof.
Apologies - months ago experienced issues opening last used layout - personally choose to open Home Page then select layout from menu (if click Layouts menu before closing, last layout snapshot updated).
Wonder about usability if launch to blank layout => http://wiki.logos.com/Mac_Troubleshooting#Launch_to_Home_Page_or_Layout_not_working
Likewise wonder if logs have any intriguing messages => http://wiki.logos.com/Mac_Troubleshooting#How_to_Report_Bugs_in_Logos_4_Mac
S Mack said:...Waste of time, waste of money...
Suggest contacting Logos customer support - ask for a refund.
Other possibility is using Logos 4 in Windows - Thankful for licensing that allows a library use on many electronic devices.
S Mack said:... very competitive book reading market.
Pondering Logos 4 capabilities vis book readers - looking forward to expanding digital library with lemma study across languages (especially greek, hebrew, and aramaic), parallel resources, and linked scrolling of commentaries & bibles. Currently not anticipating greek septuagint with hebrew reverse interlinear from book reader competition (especially with grammatical parsing and pop-up dictionary meanings). Logos 4 is much more than a book reader.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
I'm with you. I looked at Accordance again the other day and to make the jump now would just be to expensive to equal the investment and resources I already have in Logos. This is my second go around trying to use a logos Mac product and after a year of Alpha development patience and then hoping everything would be fixed at the gold release launch date only to find out it's still in development is getting a little frustrating. I have to say I would hope Accordance is a great product for what they charge to own it. It appears to me to be an outrageously expensive program to purchase add-on's for also.
0 -
I actually own both.I purchased Logos years ago as a PC user and used it extensively. I still like Logos but after a year of beta's and half cooked releases I must report that I am very disappointed. I tried Accordance less than a year ago and although it took a while to "warm up" to its interface it is an excellent product. It is fast and stable and you can try it free for a short time to check it out. They also have ways to switch at a reduced rate and minsters discounts. As I said, I have BOTH and I like BOTH but when I begin to study I do not have time to work around numerous issues. I am sure in time Logos will regain its footing but for now it does not compare with the speed and stability of Accordance.
Bob Deacon
Ipad Air 2 (ios 9.7 (0014)
Windows 11 inside edition
Samsung S23
0 -
Jack,
I'm not sure what you are getting all emotional about. Logos is a business out to make money. Their product (Mac version) is in pretty bad shape. Have you read the posts on this thread? Everyone knows it and has stated so. It is a fact beyond dispute. As a customer I'm not interested in excuses. I want and expect a good product. If the product is that bad, it shouldn't have been put up for sale.
I'm not sure what being a programmer has to do with it. If you buy a car, and it runs like a big piece of junk, can you not say it's a piece of junk and whoever designed and produced it did a horrible job without being a mechanical design engineer who designs cars? Every customer of a product is the judge of a product. The customer is the only one qualified to judge whether or not a product is good or bad. But to ease your mind, I'm am a Mechanical Engineer who designs fuel systems (Injectors to be specific) for diesel engines. The company I work for is multi-billion dollar company, and I can tell you know if I could not do the job then I would be fired and they would hire someone who could. That is how business works. Are you telling me if you owned a company and the employee you hired to do a specific job couldn't do it you would just keep paying him for producing bad product costing the company money out of some sense of sympathy? And to ease your mind a bit further, as an engineer, I do perform my good share of programming. Not for the Mac, as I'm forced to use Windoze because my main pieces of software that I use daily (Pro/Engineer [now called Creo], Ansys Workbench, and some proprietary software developed by my company only run on Windoze), but mostly just VBA to create macros to analyze data in Excel.
I also hate to inform you but Logos is nowhere near the complexity of programs such as Motion, which is part of an entire suite of pretty hefty programs. Maybe you should spend some time here http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/motion/ and get informed before making such a declaration (excuse for Logos).
It is possible to program programs that run fast on the Mac. There are hundreds of them out there. You sound as if to expect a program to run fast is not reasonable. Do you really want to pay a bunch of money for a product that runs the way Logos does? Are you really happy with its performance?
With all that aside, as I stated, I like Logos. I think it's the best approach to Bible Software on the market. But, the performance is killing it. Logos needs to hire some Mac programmers (perhaps they should make some offers to some from Accordance's) who know how to develop for the Mac. Just about anyone can learn to program, but to program in a manner that produces "clean" code that runs efficiently is a different story (this is half of Microsoft's problem). I have the feeling, based on using their product, their programmers are not the type who excel at producing/designing efficient code, or designing the proper method of implementation. Or, maybe they do, and the program just wasn't ready for sale. As a design engineer, I understand development time. We (a team of about 50 engineers) spend upwards of 4 years and several millions of dollars tuning a fuel system before we put it on the market (thank's to the EPA and the emission levels they dictate). We redesign and tweak all the time to fix issues. but until it is ready, we certainly are not going to put in on engines an sell it. Beside the reputation damage it would do, it would end up costing millions in warranty claims. To bad software companies don't have to pay warranty claims, it just might force to them to produce a better product.
Anyway, that is my opinion. It's nothing personal. Like I said, it's a business (otherwise they would be a non for profit company) who is out to make money, and as such they should be held accountable for their product.
-Rich
0 -
I do hope that Bob is reading this. I love Logos for the resources it offers, but it is getting increasingly frustrating to work with the program itself. I know that they have been reticent about giving us a roadmap for the program, but we want to know how the optimization is progressing.
What bone can you give us as a customer? A full refund? An upgrade to a better library? A guarantee of a fix?
We wonder if we are being heard as customers of this product. Without feedback and concrete solutions (i.e an optimized program) we feel left behind. I will not switch platforms and I really don't want to go back to Accordance (its interface is frustratingly old and their prices exorbitant). However, if Logos does not fix this soon I am going to have to switch in order to be functional. I don't have the money to upgrade to an SSD, purchase a screaming desktop, or add another 4gb of RAM.
0 -
Jumping in myself.
I used the wndows version last week and was in love with the speed.
But the MAC version??? HORRIBLE!!!!! Scrolling like a snail. The major features are in here. Stop adding features and tune for speed. I do a search on windows version INSIDE parallels and it is lickity split. I do it on mac and the program hangs for 1 or 2 minutes then has the audacity to give me so LYIGN time saying it took 10 seconds to do the search. PLEASE!!!!!!
Time to speed up this app.
Like the one user siad. FCP or Motion (which mainly requires a fast video card) are FAST apps. FileMaker DATABASE program which is what Logos is, is uber fast...
FIX THE SPEED then add new features.
No excuse for this snail speed MONTHS after you went Release....
0 -
Mike,
I agree with you on the poor performance, I wish I had never purchased this expensive non-functioning product. I am going to encourage everyone I can to not buy it. It is a frustrating mess. Give me a book any day over this!!!
0 -
Man, I'm starting to feel sorry for all those Logos Mac programmers because I know they're working their tail off to get this up to par with it's windows sister but I hope they understand the frustration of us users who have been very patient and waiting for all the promises to come true.
0
said:
