Linux version of Logos Bible Software

Yes, I agree 100%.  I LOVE the Linux operating system and there are some really hard working people writing Bible study software for Linux, but it's not Logos.  I have a lot of Logos unlocks and the ONLY reason I run any Windows at all is for Logos.  I really wish that Logos had a reader for Linux that worked just like the Windows version does.  I keep dumping Windows for months at a time or resort to running Windows 2000 under VirtualBox so I can run Logos.  If Logos had a Linux front end, then I could toss Windows forever.  I just bought a new XP license yesterday to run LOGOS on machine with no XP license.  That's loot that I could have spent on LOGOS BOOKS.  And I really oftentimes find myself in a position wherein I do NOT want to buy anymore Logos products because they won't run on MY operating system.  They run on Bill's operating system.

I sort of get the feeling that Logos, the company and it's personnel, either think Linux is some weird hacker OS where nobody buys anything or they're afraid that Linux users are too small in number to justify writing a front end just for them.  So, write one in Java.  It certainly can't be any slower than the Windows front end is already.  If they did it in Java, then they only need one front end for Mac, Linux, and Windows.  Uhhhh.?  It's not like they can't afford to write new code.  The reader can't be rocket science inside.

I think the next time I get ticked at WIndows for anything and flush the install, I'll probably join up with one of the opensource Linux Bible software groups and help them by doing what I can to get better Linux Bible software.  It seems like Logos has decided that Linux is not their market and Windows/Mac is.  What's crazy is that the Mac front end should probably be breeze-city to port to Linux unless they used assembler to code it.  Lol - I doubt it. [:D]

When the Linux Bible software gets "good enough", then Logos is going to see they waited too long.  Linux is FREE.  You don't have to enter codes to install it.  You can install it 10 times before lunch without having to call Bangladesh to get the OK to install it the 11th time because the video driver that you just downloaded from Windows update killed your install.  Just because the operating system is free doesn't mean you can't SELL software for it.  Nero sells burning software for Linux.

I need to finish this post so I can go buy some antivirus software for this new XP install.  That's MORE loot I can't use to unlock Logos books.  Then I'll need to buy a registry cleaner and a disk optimizer and various other doo-dads that WIndows requires to keep it all from coming unglued... but I won't be using that ca$h to buy LOGOS products.  I'd rather run Linux and send LOGOS all my money.

And they lived happily ever after.  The end.

Donovan R. Palmer said:

I have read in a number of places that Mac is about 10% of the market share and Linux is 1%.You can look at this website to dig around for what you want: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8  Of course this does not take into account demographics. For example, we know that amongst youth and students Macs are more common than opposed to enterprise situations.  I work with young people and it seems that they all have or want to have a Mac. I think Logos is very smart getting into the Mac market because tomorrow's Bible scholars are amongst today's young people.

After 12+ years of Windows, I moved to the Mac platform because it is based on BSD Unix.  The last thing I was holding out for was a Mac version of Logos, so I empathize with your comments.  So since I like BSD, for similar reasons I like Linux (though I prefer FreeBSD over Linux) I suspect the market gurus at Logos would do a Linux version if they could figure out how to make money at it. As a Mac user, it has taken forever to get the Mac version out and understandably so at version 1.1.x, it is nothing like the Windows version.  From a casual observation, it is hard to see how Logos is going to develop any time soon a Linux version unless they have a few secrets (and a truck load of cash) up their sleeves.

As far as using Java, I would have to say that I have yet to use a Java built application that I really, really liked. This is subjective, but it seems that by using Java there are certain compromises to really integrating into the host system.  I could be wrong about this, but that is my impression. So personally, I hope they don't turn to Java.

All this said, I do like Linux and have used it extensively.  My favourite distro is SUSE, but have many friends that swear by the Debian based ubuntu. If Windows 7 turns out to be another bomb, I kind of expect that we will see more users defect to Mac and Linux, and if that happens, the market share of Linux may get on the radar of the Logos business plan.

I ~almost~ bought a Mac, but if I had done that I'd have dumped Logos and bought Accordance... or at least I'd have shelved my Logos stuff until Logos had a way of using it on the Mac.

As far as Java goes, I feel as you do,  but I also feel that a Java front end beats trying WINE every time a new version of WINE comes out just to see if Logos finally works with it.  Maybe one of the folks at Logos could set up an Ubuntu box and try setting up Logos under WINE and see what is causing their software not to install and/or run correctly and CHANGE it.  It's not like they have to buy Linux or WINE or anything.

In actuality, I'd prefer a BSD front end as well.  I've been an active OpenBSD user for quite a few years now.  Theo is quite an interesting personality. [:D]

So one can only hope that WIndows 7 bombs and Steve Ballmer goes into a chair throwing tirade... then perhaps we can get our Linux version.  If the economy continues to stay in first gear Linux may get a boost as well.

I have my overbuilt XP box for the time being.  Vista Business didn't ever ring my bell, so XP is going to have to do for now.

Bob Pritchett said:

The decision is simply a business one; at this point we don't have any evidence that there's a significant market for a Linux version, which doesn't make the investment worth it. We don't have massive margins, and developing on a new platform costs a pretty large percentage of what developing on the first one costs; I imagine we'd need to see consumer (not server or business -- we don't sell there) marketshare for Linux reach 8% before we could justify the cost.

The easiest solution might be to get our software running through things like CrossOver:

http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/name/?app_id=321

 

 

And you have evidence that there are more Kindle users than Linux users?  What market share does the Kindle have?  What market share does the Kindle have amongst Logos employees?  Likely more than the Logos employee Linux share, I'll bet.

[:D]

I would love to see a secure online version. That would work on ANY OS, and could be hardened to protect the licenses of the unlocked resources, which is where Logos' legimate money is. Or even have a small, easily-ported agent that runs on various OSes to protect the licenses, if necessary. The world is moving to the cloud, and bible.logos.com is a step in the right direction. You've obviously got the talent for usable web apps.

Ubuntu is awesome.  The folks at Canonical make the folks at Microsoft look like newbies at tweaking an operating system.

Bob Pritchett said:

But isn't the beauty of open source the fact that many eyes make all bugs shallow? I'm surprised that the community hasn't risen up and gotten WINE/CodeWeavers working for everything! :-)

Sorry, I couldn't help it... I don't know that we actually have that much deep Linux programming experience inhouse, and I also suspect that the problems relate more to our use of IE as a report display engine than to code we wrote. Add on to that the fact that we're working on a completely new platform for the next release, and investing our time in getting 3.x to work on Linux doesn't seem like a good investment.

Yeah, but that only works if we have the source code.  But I know that you know that.  <SMILE>

I can appreciate your point on wanting to get the new platform done.  Perhaps after that settles down you all can take a look in house with WINE and your source code and see if you can figure out how to make it fly for us Linux users.  Hey, we LOVE Logos - we just don't care for Windows.

...Or, you can send me your source code and I'll take a look.  LOL.

I am a user using Windows 7 and Linux also I use to be a programmer for windows. 

I say this because I have to agree with BP here. They would have to hire more programmers who had the skills needed in Linux programming to take on this task of getting Libronix 3.x working. Also, Libronix utalizes the IE rendering engine, last I checked Linux does not support IE and neither do Linux users.

Now I love Linux and would love to see Libronix running on it, but lets not be selfish. Linux users will ALWAYS be the minority in the OS realm. That is just a fact of life. Logos is a company who has to make a return in with their product otherwise we would not get any more version updates.

So asking for Libronix on Linux right now is a bit absurd.

Christopher S Macy said:

I am a user using Windows 7 and Linux also I use to be a programmer for windows. 

I say this because I have to agree with BP here. They would have to hire more programmers who had the skills needed in Linux programming to take on this task of getting Libronix 3.x working. Also, Libronix utalizes the IE rendering engine, last I checked Linux does not support IE and neither do Linux users.

Now I love Linux and would love to see Libronix running on it, but lets not be selfish. Linux users will ALWAYS be the minority in the OS realm. That is just a fact of life. Logos is a company who has to make a return in with their product otherwise we would not get any more version updates.

So asking for Libronix on Linux right now is a bit absurd.

Ok.  BTW, your avatar is absurd.

I used to code assembler for applications that I sold to the Canadian government.  This project is not hard.  It may not be easy, but it's not that hard.  Logos is not too awfully far away from running under WINE and Logos could try it and see where it hiccups better than anybody else could.

Thanks for the wet blanket.

Lol, Mike, Bill the Cat is not absurd!

You are right, it would not be that hard to put logos onto Linux. However (in the voice of Snape), that would require programmers for Linux and as BP has pointed out they dont have them! So you want Logos to hire a few programers at about 50k per year each so 1% of their market can have Logos on Linux when we can use it via VMware?

Dont get me wrong, I would love it if Logos did put Libronix on Linux, but it just does not make sense for them to do that right now.

I dont want to discourge you all from advocating for this, but having both sides of the coin expressed is good.

BruceFraser said:

MikeM said:

So, write one in Java.  It certainly can't be any slower than the Windows front end is already.  If they did it in Java, then they only need one front end for Mac, Linux, and Windows.  Uhhhh.?  It's not like they can't afford to write new code.  The reader can't be rocket science inside.

I'm not a computer programmer, so take this with a grain of salt... Your comment about writing a Bible study program "can't be rocket science" shows an abysmal lack of awareness about what it takes to design and write computer code. Yes, I would venture to say that the craft which goes into Logos / WordSearch / Accordance / etc. would be about the equivalent of programming the navigation system for a rocket.

You're not a computer programmer, yet you're an expert.

You must be like the old guys that sit around at the park talking about how this ought to be done and how that ought to be done, yet none of these old guys has anything and never got anywhere in their life.  Or, you might be a consultant.

Take this with a grain of salt.... why would I bother to listen to someone's opinion when that someone has no idea of what they're talking about?  At least you're HONEST about it.

Thanks for the uninformed personal attack.  Now get off my lawn.

[:O]

Perhaps the Libronix folks would be willing to sign a non-disclosure with an experienced, trustworthy open source developer to do the Wine debugging with the Libronix source code. You retain the intellectual property, you don't incur extra expenses to Logos, and you get the Linux/Wine expertise.

I personally would be willing to join others in donating $50 each for the developer who gets Libronix 3.x to work well in Wine. I'd much rather put my money into that than in retaining a Windows license with every Linux installation. Libronix is the only reason I keep a Windows license, and in fact the only reason I run a VM.

Still more, I'd prefer a web-accessible way to access my Libronix resources.

I am reminded of a comment, years ago, by one of your competitors when asked why they didn't program for the Mac. His response was "we'd lose our shirts." When the next person asked why they didn't program for Linus, his response was "see above."

I have no desire for you to "lose your shirt" Bob, I'm too heavily invested in the Logos software to ever want to change to another program. I'm finally running a 64 bit Vista laptop with the LDLS installed (now that was a trick migrating over to that new OS).

As I'm also entrenched in the Windows arena and have no desire to move to another vehicle -- I would argue that you need to focus on 4.0, then bring the Mac version up to speed with that version.

Just my two cents from Eastern Oklahoma where I now make my home.

Dale