Logos 4 running slow on mac...

Page 3 of 5 (96 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
This post has 95 Replies | 7 Followers

Posts 493
Mr. Simple | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 16 2011 8:58 PM

Darryl, 

That was me commenting on the architectural review. I read through you comments. I wonder what you think about the possibility of memory leaks with these libraries. Not sure what the memory managment routines are like to release unused memory. 

I've experienced several cases where my memory footprint just grew and grew to at one point 1.2 gig real memory accoridng to the Mac Activity monitor. It seemed the only sure way to claim back memory was to stop and restart Logos, at which point several issues seemed to go away. Basically the exact scenario you described down to the amount memory

I know this is not a precise statement of what occurred, it just makes me wonder how memory is managed with Logos. OS/X is pretty smart in the virtual memory management area.

Posts 493
Mr. Simple | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 16 2011 9:12 PM

Darryl,

I am a systems programmer who has coded cross-assmblers, operating system level exits, and worked extensivly with advanced file system architectures.

My hardware is Mac Pro Server with 4 Cores, 16 Gig RAM and fast I/O.

When I get around to it, I want to set up an Raid 0 SSD stripe with a bandwith of 560 megabytes a second.

That will eliminate any possible question of practical Hardware bottlenecks for this application.

If I still see slowdowns etc. I will be categorically convinced there are software issues that occur that cannot be worked around with hardware at this time.

Posts 109
Darryl Burling | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Mar 16 2011 10:14 PM

Larry,

As  you'll know there will be risks of memory leaks in any library.  The issue I see with using something like Mono is that it isn't developed by a commercial organization.  Now, many open source people will say that this means it is going to be better code, and while in some cases this will be true, it won't be true in all cases.  Groups of coders working together can establish code checks and reviews as they build software, and these help reduce the bugs and leaks.  

The problem comes when you get outside the core group of coders and contributions are made to the code base that doesn't go through the same checks and balances.  At this stage you end up with varying quality coders contributing to a single source base. While it is plausible to keep the quality up, many of these coders are more interested in adding features and functionality and moving the project forward or even putting their name into the contributors box than they are about "owning" that piece of functionality or that part of the product.  So once they write the code, they move on - and in many cases the code isn't rechecked.  

When it comes to using a framework, and you have libraries in the framework from a variety of sources of varying quality, the problem can be exacerbated.  

I wouldn't say that this is categorically the problem in this case, but certainly it could be part of the problem.  I'm sure the Logos coders have been through the third party source code where it has come from an open source project and that the commercial code they are using is of a standard that they can at least query ad ask questions about.

Will be keen to hear how your test goes.

Posts 493
Mr. Simple | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 17 2011 11:21 AM

Darryl,

Again thanks for the detailed response.  I will let you know if I add the SSD test and get back to this thread.

Logos integrates a hugh amount of software, so it is a big task to get some arms around all the pieces.

On net - I love the power of the tool. I know from experience that features have a higher priority than performance until a certain pain threshold is reached. Especially when the software is evolving so quickly. It's really a tough sell to "freeze" feature sets and then focus on this. Market pressure makes it tough. I've architected applications that involved many tiers. Mainframe OLTP transactional backend, Unix (File Servers, Database servers, Application Servers), end devices (PC's, Unix Workstations and X-Terminals). I had developed a complete lab with proper instrumentation at each point and at all the network connections. Then an overall performance scripting regime. It payed off when we had to scale it worldwide and everyone praised the effort . That was all after the fact, when it was first deployed it was almost unusable. When I got done everything was sub second on all the critical transactions, but it was a political wilderness for a while.

Posts 242
Nielsen Tomazini | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 17 2011 12:11 PM

The problem with Logos Company and what makes me frustrated with how they sell their product is:

Logos 4 PC = Over 14 month after L4 was released and they don't have all the features from the previous version done yet (I know things changed, but there are missing features that they have promised to implement and they did not yet). I have never seen a company selling a Beta program to its consumers claiming that it is a full version!

Logos 4 App for IPhone: Does not work properly. For instance, the Hebrew Text on the BHS is aligned from left to right and the Masoretic points and accents are messed up. Other resources have the same problem.

Logos 4 Mac = Quite slow, still missing features from the PC version that is also missing features (above). I have experienced several crashes. Now I am reading through many reports to figure out what I can do.

Additionally, the program does not have a Help that helps. It never had, Libronix 3 did not have a decent help as well. Would be better if the program would direct the users to the Logos Wiki site instead of using the pseudo "Help" on the program. However, the Wiki page is not a response from a software company, this should be an additional feature and not the only feature to really get help on understanding some features on the program. 

If Logos could, as a serious software company, deliver at least one software completely done, ready to be used, and then start venturing in other platforms, I believe it would be quite better. It is good to see that Logos wants to have their software in all platforms (Mac, Smartphones, PC, etc...), that is really good to see their willingness, however, first they should have the software done. 

It is sad that maybe the best Bible Software today is way behind any standards of any serious software. Releasing a software as if it was done (as they did with the PC and later with the Mac) when it was not, is not part of a professional company. 

Just for the record: I like Logos 4, although I am still using Libronix 3 for some works I believe that Logos 4 is a very good program, but only for PC at this point, not for Mac.

My hope is that when Logos 5 come out, it will be a full version program like a professional company does.

www.aprendalogos.com 
Youtube: AprendaLogos

Posts 2691
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Mar 17 2011 10:06 PM

I am beginning to see a pattern regarding L4 that I believe has less to do with the state of the current release than it does the hardware. If you walk into the Apple Store or most stores selling computers, you do not find the majority of them have sufficient RAM. More than that, machines under about $1200 mostly do not have good discrete graphics cards. The RAM gets siphoned from the main memory. Quite typical is the MacMini and many laptops as well as  baseline desktop models. Add to that Windows 7 and Vista need at least twice as much memory as XP. 

The latest and greatest 13" Macbook is a case in point. No discrete graphics. On a $1200 machine.  I suspect the integrated graphics are good, but that's an issue for L4M. The problem of slow scrolling cited originally is normally not a problem for someone with sufficient RAM and a good graphics card.

 

 

 

 

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

Posts 208
Aaron Knotts | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 1:51 AM

Darryl Burling:
Larry,...Will be keen to hear how your test goes.

ditto Yes

here's hoping its a case of SSD to the rescue Big Smile

MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015), 2.5 GHz Intel Core i7

16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3, AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2048 MB

 

 

Posts 757
Fr. Charles R. Matheny | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 5:32 AM

It is not a hardware problem, it's a software problem, It's a coding issue.

If Logos can only be used properly with ssd's, 8 to 18 gigs of ram, 1 gig video cards, then you have moved completely away for a consumer product, and, far removed it from what it is advertised as.

In my life, I have never seen a forum, concerning a particular software, with as many threads about having to modify brand new computers.

 

The result of all these modifications is "not" a better software product, it is just a really fast computer that has one software product on it that runs dog slow compared to every other program on said computer.

 

As far as built in graphics are concerned.

Todays "system on a chip" w/graphics is now faster than the "super computers" for consumers of just 4 or 5 years ago.

Again, if Logos can only be run properly with separate graphics, huge amounts of ram, ssd drives, then Logos need to change the advertising. If Apple had a program running like this, they would get sued to kingdom come!

The point is simply this: You can modify the hardware all you want to, customize the computer "just to run Logos", and it will get a bit faster, but this is not fixing what is wrong.

The software has problems, it is not a hardware issue.

To say one has to have ssd, discreet graphics, 8 gigs of ram, means the cost of ownership for Logos is completely out of reach for anyone but the wealthy and the techy.

 

Most people who use this "type" of software, just want to study the Bible, prepare lessons and do their part in expanding the Kingdom of God.

It's hard to justify continually spending money to modify computers just to run one software, while asking people for money to feed the poor and hungry, treat the addict, find homes for the homeless, clothing and school supplies for needy children.

I buy Macs because they make financial sense, they last longer, do more, work more efficiently and have a lower cost of total ownership over time

I won't be forced into modifications (which are very expensive) just to run one program.

That would make no ministerial sense to me, at all.

 

Posts 759
Tobias Lampert | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 6:10 AM

@Fr. Charles R. Matheny:

I prefer L4 over Accordance when it comes to functionality, but I agree with you on every single word of your previous entry.

Logos 4 Mac has been nothing but a disaster from the very beginning. Not that it hasn't a lot to offer as a Bible program (it definitely has!), but when it comes to performance, bugs and so on, it is simply a slap in the face for every average user when comparing it to other programs for Mac. There have been times when I was thinking Logos should pay L4Mac users money for using their software instead of charging them. Even as L4 (PC) user I sometimes feel as if I were a beta tester, which I'm not.

In my opinion, Logos really needs to rethink their development strategy - it's too late now when it comes to L4, but I guess no one wants to experience this with L5 all over again. Users may tolerate this once, but the second time they will look for an alternative - and Accordance will be right there then.

"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de

Posts 242
Nielsen Tomazini | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 6:19 AM

Dear Charles,

I agree with every single word you wrote. Thanks for the clear and profound post.

Blessings!

www.aprendalogos.com 
Youtube: AprendaLogos

Posts 2964
tom | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 7:57 AM

When L4 first came out, It was compared to Window's Vista.

Here is its thread: V4 is to Logos what Vista is to Windows

In this thread, you will read a lot of the same things that has been written here in the Mac threads (both pro and con).

Posts 190
EmileB | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 8:07 AM

Charles and Nielsen, I agree completely with your posts. A user of a software product not in Beta should not have to be the ones to "fix" what ails the program. It's ridiculous that one has to jump through so many hoops (searching through forums, going to the wiki, etc.) to tweak the software sufficiently just to get basic acceptable performance (and I'm not talking about trying to make it a speed demon... I'm patient enough to wait for a screen to display. I'm talking about more serious issues) . I do NOT believe anyone would put up with this from any other software, nor know of any that would survive in the marketplace.

It IS a software problem, not a hardware problem, and its become increasingly irritating that the default response always seems to be "gee, what's wrong with your machine?" Between the resources I've purchased and the hardware I've had to buy just to get Logos to run properly (and will soon be purchasing), I've invested more in Logos than the last house I purchased. And you guys are right... its really hard to justify the use of so many financial resources for "ministry" in this day in age. As a missionary, its become an embarrassment trying to justify raising enough funds to buy a computer that's "good enough" to run Logos, when a computer that costs a fraction of that amount can run anything else out there. Logos is quickly becoming an elite software platform, and I for one, despite all I've invested, am having a really hard time keeping up, and an even harder time justifying doing so to my supporters. I'm sure it's not going to be very popular for me to say this on the forums, but I wonder if we all need to step back and question if this is really good stewardship and whether this is really how Jesus would want us to be using our financial resources. How much are we all starting to deceive ourselves and have lost our perspective on our priorities? I confess that I've really been struggling with this.

And I REALLY don't get why Logos feels they need to concentrate on so many projects at once when they haven't fixed what's wrong with the first. An L4 that's incomplete, an L4Mac that doesn't work, incomplete iPhone and iPad apps, Android in the wings, (how many now???) websites for services/new approaches... none of which are up and running properly... continual delays and postponements on releases (does it REALLY take a year for a book to be "Under Development"?)... and now an EEC project they've already been working on for 5 years and won't be ready for another 10 (anyone REALLY believe that it will be ready by then?).  Although I understand and appreciate Logos' desire to diversify and help the world transition to a new publishing paradigm, it is trying to do way too much, way too fast, dedicating and diluting too many company resources to too many projects and therefore not completing anything properly (kind of like my dad, who perpetually started projects that ended up languishing for years and which were never really finished). It really seems like all of Logos is now become just one big Beta project.

Logos' customer service is second to none. Their hearts are unquestionably in the right place. Obviously we all love the resources that Logos provides. It's a fantastic company. But one that has seriously gone off in the wrong direction from a customer viewpoint and which can't seem to see that.

I have watched myself over the past couple of weeks changing from a truly ardent Logos fan to becoming a really disgruntled customer. I don't like to see that in myself, and am profoundly troubled about the spiritual implications that may indicate in myself. I'm genuinely trying to work on that, and on the stewardship/priorities issues, and take a sincere hard look and reevaluation of all of this in terms of my own spirit. If in the process, I've offended any of you, please accept my truly sincere apologies. And I am genuinely happy if your Logos experience has been positive for you. It's been less and less so for me. But I don't know if I'm speaking for any sizable percentage of the Logos customer base, or simply for myself. Sad

Posts 5166
Forum MVP
Mike Binks | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 8:12 AM

Fr. Charles R. Matheny:
If Logos can only be used properly with ssd's, 8 to 18 gigs of ram, 1 gig video cards, then you have moved completely away for a consumer product, and, far removed it from what it is advertised as.

Sorry Charles but I have to disagree with you. I know that I am not a power user but I do use Logos everyday and prepare my weekly teaching (and gain much learning) using it facilities.

I have a 3 year old imac and a 4 year old mac book. On neither of these is Logos particularly slow. Not as snappy as some programs but not desperately slow either.

I know there are some that have real problems with the program but there are many who have a good experience of running Logos on their Macs.

As the program has developed there have been many threads that have helped deal with the issue of slowness. I seem to recall one thread that dropped a lot of people out of the 'Logos is Dog Slow' party when it was advised to check for corrupted Fonts. Admittedly this did slow the whole computer.

Again on the Font side one of the Font handling utilities did not sit well with Logos and removing that left a few less with problems.

More recently the 'Animated Icon' was found to be cause 'some' people to have slow start ups.

Logos is not Dog Slow for everyone it is Dog Slow for some. That is very annoying for them - and eventually Logos will get to the bottom of the problem.

On some computers with 4 gig of ram and a bog standard disc drive Logos does just fine - what we have to do is track down what is causing the problem with some on which it doesn't.

Also we must acknowledge that some who have swapped disc drives, bought SSDs etc are hobby enthusiasts who haven't had a problem but just wanted to see what the effect might be.

tootle pip

Mike

How to get logs and post them. (now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs)

Posts 1246
David Mitchell | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 10:18 AM

Mike Binks:
Logos is not Dog Slow for everyone; it is Dog Slow for some. That is very annoying for them - and eventually Logos will get to the bottom of the problem.

Working on performance issues is a high priority issue for everyone working on the Mac product (and for me, in particular). As many users have observed, version 4.2a had a number of improvements in this area; the next version will have even more.

I'd also like to take a moment to thank all of our forum users who jump into threads like these with useful tips for improving the experience in the meantime. I know that for some people, your help has been indispensable while we work on much-needed improvement. Your aid is very much appreciated.

David Mitchell
Development Lead
Faithlife

Posts 2691
mab | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 10:34 AM

I think the Vista to L4 comparison is hobbled. Vista put gingerbread over that of the user by default. Now if you open up L4 and elect to get all the standard panels to display information on a given text at once, you have agreed and chosen to do so. People assume that you should use Logos this way. And since this takes much longer, therefore L4 is slow.

This is madness!

You decide which panels should open. Make your own layout. For nearly a week I had just a couple of Bible texts and a commentary and BDAG. Can you say FAST? It surely was so.

Just because you are invited to the world's largest buffet doesn't mean you have to eat some of everything at one sitting. At the moment it's layed out.  A sports car can only run its fastest if it travels one road. If it circles every block along the way it's not going to appear to be so quick.

Even if all the panels instantly loaded, are you really going to read them all the moment that they finish?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Posts 759
Tobias Lampert | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 10:58 AM

I have to disagree, Michael.

Logos 4 Mac is taking up to 30 seconds just to open, and even on advanced systems and with all the right settings it is easily taking 15 seconds. That's just ridiculous, everyone knows that, and that's just a very basic example (!) of what is going on with L4Mac when comparing it to other Mac software. Even the PC version is considerably slower than other complex software.

Of course, it would be much slower to do all the work with print books. That's not the point. No one's complaining about L4 having a hard time to open up 30 panels at once - the point is that, when it comes to performance, L4 is miles behind what other software is supposed and able to do given the current state of technology.

"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de

Posts 2964
tom | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 11:19 AM

Michael Ballai:
therefore L4 is slow.

L4 is not slow on my machine (that has double the requirements), it is painfully slow.  L4 is the only program that goes black and states "Not Responding."  When do I get this message, when I start L4 to a blank layout.  When I click on search, when I delete a note, when I open the NRSV, when I run any of the reports, when I ...

You are correct when you say,

Michael Ballai:
This is madness!
it is madness!

Posts 386
Clinton Thomas | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 12:29 PM

David Mitchell:
Working on performance issues is a high priority issue for everyone working on the Mac product

David Mitchell:
...while we work on much-needed improvement

I hope this is not just for the Mac product as I agree with Logos that there is "much needed improvement".

Regards,

Clinton

Posts 5166
Forum MVP
Mike Binks | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 1:37 PM

Theolobias:
Logos 4 Mac is taking up to 30 seconds just to open, and even on advanced systems and with all the right settings it is easily taking 15 seconds. That's just ridiculous, everyone knows that,

That is strange Theolobias.

Just having run a test on my imac starting Garage Band and iphoto from Spotlight - I find that Logos takes just a few seconds more to open to the home page and most of those seconds are used up with the log on process necessary to populate the home page.

It does take a few seconds longer but it is far from being 'ridiculous'.

 

tootle pip

Mike

How to get logs and post them. (now tagging post-apocalyptic fiction as current affairs)

Posts 759
Tobias Lampert | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Mar 18 2011 1:55 PM

Mike Binks:
It does take a few seconds longer but it is far from being 'ridiculous'.

Mike, actually there might have been some improvements with the last updates, I was referring to L4Mac when I was using it some months ago. Anyway, this was nothing else than a beta test with paying customers back then. I just hope Logos will do things differently in the future. But reading the forums on a regular basis, I get the impression that there are still major issues with L4Mac.

"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de

Page 3 of 5 (96 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS