Is there a way to change the color/colors when using Sympathetic Highlighting?
The default Blue is fine in the primary text, but the light grey is hard for me to see in the secondary?
Thanks and Blessings,
Rusty+
Apologies: not know how to change Sympathetic Highlighting colors.
Option: can use visual filters to highlight words. For example, screen shot shows Sympathetic Highlighting of Rejoice in 3 resources (AV 1873 primary with NA27 Int and LEB) plus 4 of my Logos Greek Morphology visual filters in other Bibles:
Thankful Logos 4 can highlight words in English Reverse Interlinear to show Greek grammatical usage, especially verb moods and tenses. Philippians 4 has many imperatives. Wiki Extended Tips for Visual Filters => Examples of visual filters has Logos Greek Morphology visual filter definitions (plus 5 more).
Note: for screen capture, unchecked visual filters to show sympathetic highlighting. Thankful can choose when to show visual filter(s).
Keep Smiling [:)]
Hey KSFJ:
I was looking at Sympathetic Highlighting. In a fairly basic layout (Bibles, simplified PG & EG, couple of commentaries) with ESV being highlighter and Lexham Greek-English Interlinear NT being the 'highlightee' it takes fully two seconds for the Lexham to show the highlight. And this is on latest highest possible specced iMac with 8GB RAM (i.e. pls don't say it is the computer)
Do you find the same? Is this normal?
Thanks KSFJ.
Yes Patrick, same here.
In fact, so slow I did not think it was working, looked at all the forums, wiki and even asked tech support how to enable it-smile- it was working all the time, just so slow and subtle in color I never saw it! ( Embarrassing revelation when shown it was working ).
This does need to be fixed and it would be nice if one could just "hover" in the english or greek/hebrew and have your other text highlighted for identification, then one could decide if they wanted to click for further info. IMHO.
Thanks folks,
I was looking at Sympathetic Highlighting. In a fairly basic layout (Bibles, simplified PG & EG, couple of commentaries) with ESV being highlighter and Lexham Greek-English Interlinear NT being the 'highlightee' it takes fully two seconds for the Lexham to show the highlight. And this is on latest highest possible specced iMac with 8GB RAM (i.e. pls don't say it is the computer) Do you find the same? Is this normal?
Using Logos 4.3 SR-5 on a 2.0 GHz 2nd Generation Quad Core i7 running 64 bit Windows 7, can replicate some sympathetic highlighting lag between primary and secondary Bible when highlighting several words so could say it is the computer.
Apologies: personally use visual filters instead of sympathetic highlighting. Caveat: turning on visual filters can take several seconds. Scrolling and jumping to verses with visual filtering turned on works (lacks irritation). Thankful for visual filter usability on a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac. Visual filters allow focus on Bible Study since same grammatical usage is consistently highlighted, easy for eyes to jump back and forth between resources while pondering what was written.
Thankful can highlight words by grammatical usage (e.g. verb mood, verb tense, singular vis plural). Also Thankful visual filters can be combined so one word can show 5 (or more) highlights. With visual filters turned on, can quickly see range of verbal expression in a passage.
Thankful for Interlinear Greek New Testaments where can display manuscript and Louw-Nida numbers so hovering mouse over Louw-Nida #.# shows contextual range of meaning in a pop-up.
You mean logically, don't you, that if two high end machines exhibit the problem that the issue is with the software, not the computer.
Using Logos 4.3 SR-5 on a 2.0 GHz 2nd Generation Quad Core i7 running 64 bit Windows 7, can replicate some sympathetic highlighting lag between primary and secondary Bible when highlighting several words so could say it is the computer. You mean logically, don't you, that if two high end machines exhibit the problem that the issue is with the software, not the computer.
Logos 4 sympathetic highlighting and visual filter highlighting (on Mac & PC) have performance optimization opportunities for search then display. For sympathetic highlighting, ideally secondary resource should highlight simultaneously with primary (lag not detectable by humans). For visual filters, ideal response is instant on and off (under a second).
Alternative is waiting a year or so for faster, better, cheaper hardware so could say it is the computer [:P] ("could" has future potential). Dreaming of iMac with touch screen plus Siri so could ask computer questions and receive timely useful answers; wondering about Bible Study evolution.
Using Logos 4.3 SR-5 on a 2.0 GHz 2nd Generation Quad Core i7 running 64 bit Windows 7, can replicate some sympathetic highlighting lag between primary and secondary Bible when highlighting several words so could say it is the computer. You mean logically, don't you, that if two high end machines exhibit the problem that the issue is with the software, not the computer. Alternative is waiting a year or so for faster, better, cheaper hardware so could say it is the computer [...]
Alternative is waiting a year or so for faster, better, cheaper hardware so could say it is the computer [...]
C'mon... the next step above what I've got now would need to be nuclear powered, I just bought this beast. Other apps don't need it. I don't agree with logic of saying it is the computer.
Better, cheaper doesn't come into it.
Dreaming of iMac with touch screen plus Siri so could ask computer questions and receive timely useful answers; wondering about Bible Study evolution.
Ummm, you want to put yet more load on it?
I put performance as my highest vote on Logos UserVoice and I'll repeat it here. I really have trouble accepting that I am being advised to, and end up having to, selectively cut out functionality (discussion above + here) and reduce number of open books (your comment in other thread) to get workable performance. If Logos can't get those features to function (usably) then they shouldn't market them — or turn them on in the software.
Either way I get pretty disappointed. Logos 4 looks good and has promise, but keeps on falling short at present.
KSFJ: Thanks of answering my question.
As too the rest of it, well-smile- not helpful and not a good argument ( you should know better-smile)
The speed issues are COMPLETELY problems of coding and thus, no matter how fast computers get, Logos will still be dog slow compared to anything else on same computer.
Thats a code issue, I have programs with many more coded parts/assemblies that never give the problems Logos does. Logos is the ONLY program I own in which many different parts of the code do not even work.
I spent quite a bit of time with phone support this week, screen sharing, and, showed them several issues with the software they were unaware did not work, bugs they had not seen, functions they did not know were broken. All repeatable issues on Logos own machines. These are not problems with our computers, they are problems with unfinished and untested code.
I also own Accordance, I have many resources in Accordance, can do far more complex searches with no lag, almost instant ( if there is such a thing (, and, can search through literally all my resources in the time it takes Logos to recognize I have given it a command-literally. I have never had to wait for Accordance to index my library, it has never crashed and never had to wait for it to "do" anything.
I have need of many of Logos Titles and need them in digital domain that is searchable.
Otherwise I would not be using a software that is hard on my computers, slow as molasses and far, far behind the rest of the pack in code as far as Memory , GPU and processor management.
That said, there is a lot about Logos i could like, really like, there are some excellent ideas at play in this software, some really useful features if they ever get it going correctly.
My concern is that in the life cycle of software platforms in relation to operating systems, Logos4 should have been a mature product long ago and , by now, it's engineers well on their way to coding for Logos5 in relation to Lion, iOS and Windows8.
Pretty scary for us on this end to be investing in software that is so far behind the pac in 64bit, Gpu , Multithread, Multiple Core writing of Code.
Again, to be clear, there is much to like here ( huge Library available ) if they ever get it working correctly, but the fact is, they are way, way behind and not likely to catch up anytime soon.
Many Blessings and again, thanks so much for all the help.
Apologies [:$]
Until Logos 4 drop down menu response time is consistently sub-second, Logos 4 will feel slow to use since humans have to wait and lose thoughts, which can be irritating since need to rethink what to do (or what to study).
Logos User Voice suggestion => Improve Logos 4 Menu Responsiveness is currently ranked # 78 with 23 votes (my Top performance wish for Logos 4 on Mac and PC).
Caveat: upgrading iMac from 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo to 2.93 GHz Quad Core i7 noticeably improved Logos 4 Mac menu responsiveness. Concur Logos 4 needs more improvement on Mac and PC to feel faster; since use menus more often than launching program, would appreciate faster menu responses more than quicker launch.
Considering decades of computer speed improvements, anticipating Logos 4 (with current code base) to feel faster on future generations of computer hardware: 2nd Generation Core i5 & i7 (Sandy Bridge) were released on 2 Jan 2011, a long time ago for computers; anticipating faster Ivy Bridge hardware in March to April 2012, later followed by Haswell and Skylake. Also anticipating Ivy Bridge to consume less power. Current Logos 4 code does feel sluggish (or worse) on current computer hardware; hence learning speed tweaks to use Logos 4 now plus looking forward to many improvements.
Wonder what can be added to wiki Mac and PC User Interface Differences => Feature Parity – Mac needs many improvements ?
Option: could start threads with broken stuff (screen shots plus steps to replicate); personally willing to try replicating on Mac and PC, then update Feature Parity list. Thankful stable Logos 4.3 release provided reason to remove 6 items from feature parity list; removed another 1 after a service release. After further testing and forum discussions, expanded one item plus added 3 more (so list currently has 19 improvement opportunities).
Observation: Logos 4 Mac Enhancements (115 votes) is more desired by Logos Users than 3 feature parity user voice suggestions put together: Improve Logos 4 Mac Feature Parity with PC (55 votes), Improve Logos 4 Mac Note Positioning (25 votes), and Logos 4 Mac Program Scaling and Font Sliders (13 votes)
In 2009, Logos changed licensing to charge once for digital resources that can be used on many electronic devices. Logos software for individual library use is free (on Mac, PC, iOS, Android, plus http://biblia.com web portal). Compared to previous Logos 4 Mac releases and Logos for Mac v1, current stable Logos 4.3 SR-5 is the best software Logos has ever shipped for Mac, yet needs many improvements. Thankful for Logos 4 Mac usability; looking forward to public Logos 4.5 Beta testing in two to few weeks (with some known bug fixes).
For Logos 4 performance, concur with comments about effective hardware usage (or lack thereof, especially multi-core processors). Currently, the 32 bit Logos 4 application writes a lot of search temporary files to disk (a form of memory swapping that is slow); one performance code tweak would be not writing temporary files with 0 search results.
Apple is changing kernel default to 64 bit for newer hardware => http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3770 On iMac running Snow Leopard, enabling 64 bit kernel is noticeably faster in many applications, but does use more memory; wiki Mac Troubleshooting => Slow Performance includes 64 bit kernel tip. Looking at new hardware running Windows noticing 32 bit and 64 bit variants for sale, including a $ 2,087.99 HP laptop with Intel Core i7 and 32 bit Windows => http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834157622
For Mac OS X, Logos could migrate to 64 bit application since Leopard (10.5), Snow Leopard (10.6), and Lion (10.7) can run 64 bit applications. Windows is technically challenging for Logos applications because a 64 bit application cannot run on 32 bit Windows; hence need 32 bit and 64 bit application configurations (until Logos user community migrates to 64 bit Windows or Mac OS X).
By the way, Logos 4 uses .Net Framework 3.5 on Windows; upgrade to .Net Framework 4 is not technically feasible due to 18 month old unresolved font rendering bug in Microsoft code => https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/545921/old-style-numerals-are-not-rendered-for-runs-containing-only-numbers#details
Logos is hiring => http://www.logos.com/about/careers (programming positions have been open for long time).
Dreaming of iMac with touch screen plus Siri so could ask computer questions and receive timely useful answers; wondering about Bible Study evolution. Ummm, you want to put yet more load on it? I put performance as my highest vote on Logos UserVoice and I'll repeat it here. I really have trouble accepting that I am being advised to, and end up having to, selectively cut out functionality (discussion above + here) and reduce number of open books (your comment in other thread) to get workable performance. If Logos can't get those features to function (usably) then they shouldn't market them — or turn them on in the software. Either way I get pretty disappointed. Logos 4 looks good and has promise, but keeps on falling short at present.
Dream includes future generation hardware plus software improvements that could handle more load; like idea of pinch to zoom on a big screen. Also like idea of using finger to point at words to highlight (similar to iPad). No idea when dream may become viable (suspect manufacturing a 27" display with touch screen is a bit challenging). Also like idea of saying "open ESV to Philippians 4" (or saying "Close All"). Future dream: "What is significance of Greek middle voice in Ephesians 1:4 ?" that opens Logos resources to some relevant articles (no idea how far in future) or being able to ask Logos: "Did Queen Esther have any children ?" If so, who ?"
Idea for keeping less open in Logos 4 started with reading Camp Logos London follow-up => http://community.logos.com/forums/p/27593/223151.aspx#223151
Personally had a layout with 4 dozen open resources (variety of study opportunities), most not visible for reading. Simple trick for faster responsiveness is avoiding unneeded stuff. Experimented with opening Bibles and Commentaries vis linking them; personally found opening to current passage was fast enough for me, hence reduced number of open resources, now frequently use right click and "+" to open desired resources. Your mileage may vary.
Am aware Logos 4 has some default opportunities for awful responses (e.g. Text Comparison or Exegetical Word by Word for a Bible Book); many tips on wiki page => Getting Started with Logos
Thankful for many usable Logos 4 features on Mac and PC; looking forward to more improvements.
Thankful for many friendly forum discussions; have learned a lot and have a lot to learn. Few months ago, learned Logos development appreciates specific User Voice Suggestions (vis current top 2 with broad scope, wonder what items would benefit the most users soonest)
With performance your highest vote on Logos User Voice, curious about top specific items to improve ?
KSFJ: No apology needed. I was "smiling" when I said you should know better. ( can't un-open and opened can-smile ).
You are very helpful, and , quite kind in the face of a lot of frustrations, you are appreciated, appreciated indeed!
Yes, faster computers help-agreed.
Logos getting some code fixed helps more-smile.
I think the requests page for "what needs to be done" is fine , to a point.
The thing is this: Logos Programmers are the professionals, it is they who should know best what needs to be done and in what order. Leadership has to make some decisions on these things as well.
If it were me, first things would be first, and first would be: Lets fix what we have at the core level, build on that, get these foundation issues right, then build upwards, then dress it out.
We, the consumer, want everything and generally, want it now. No matter how good something is, we are going to want more, Leadership has to understand that and not get sucked into the trap of making decisions as reactions but, instead, make sure they are setting a course that is stable first, then adding features, dressing out.
Thats all I was pointing to.
Good thoughts all and again, thank you very much for all your helpfulness.
Grace and Peace,
Considering decades of computer speed improvements, anticipating Logos 4 (with current code base) to feel faster on future generations of computer hardware: 2nd Generation Core i5 & i7 (Sandy Bridge) were released on 2 Jan 2011, a long time ago for computers; anticipating faster Ivy Bridge hardware in March to April 2012, later followed by Haswell and Skylake. Also anticipating Ivy Bridge to consume less power. Current Logos 4 code does feel sluggish (or worse) on current computer hardware; hence learning speed tweaks to use Logos 4 now plus looking forward to many improvements. For Logos 4 performance, concur with comments about effective hardware usage (or lack thereof, especially multi-core processors).
For Logos 4 performance, concur with comments about effective hardware usage (or lack thereof, especially multi-core processors).
KSFJ I feel we are going to come into serious disagreement here. I do not accept your points which basically say "oh let's wait for next generation processor, then all will be OK with Logos 4". Also your point in your second paragraph "concur with comments about effective hardware usage (or lack thereof, especially multi-core processors)" contradicts your point in your first paragraph (that faster processors will basically fix everything).
Why dream about faster processors when Logos 4 is not at all effectively using existing (very capable) hardware — no hyper-threading; processes only use, and overload, one core when there are seven sitting idle. Therefore net effect is the application becomes processor bound and g r i n d s to a halt. You know this... I've shown and proved it on this forum.
Currently, the 32 bit Logos 4 application writes a lot of search temporary files to disk (a form of memory swapping that is slow); one performance code tweak would be not writing temporary files with 0 search results.
Why.... why not write this sort of stuff to a memory 'disk', RAM is so much faster than HDD. Sigh.
Apple is changing kernel default to 64 bit for newer hardware => http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3770 On iMac running Snow Leopard, enabling 64 bit kernel is noticeably faster in many applications, but does use more memory; wiki Mac Troubleshooting => Slow Performance includes 64 bit kernel tip.
Apple has been moving to 64 bit enabled hardware since 2008. All current Macs run 64 bit kernel by default, Lion is 64 bit only. Anyway 32/64 bit kernel does not affect applications because on Mac a 32 bit kernel can run a 64 bit application and a 64 bit kernel (Lion) can run a 32 bit application. As for Windows well.... I think the best that can be said is that it is "technically challenged".
Like I said, Windows is "technically challenged".
There is no reason, theoretically, why Logos could not build 32 bit & 64 bit versions of Logos 4. Microsoft does it for Office etc. Waiting for all Logos users to migrate to 64 bit OSes (well the limitation again is Windows) will take forever. Anyway before even talking about 32/64 bit application Logos 4 can improve performance already by implementing improvements noted in the first two points above. Use CPUs more effectively; don't write temporary files to HDD.
Once again Windows, and the Windows platform, holds back Mac users. This bug has been open for 18 months!?! And then, once Microsoft fixes it, what about the next hurdle holding back performance — Mono — is that 64 bit yet?
I also think that Logos has many good strengths and a great library — I just really wish they would rev up the software because it is giving a negative experience to people. Of course it is not in all areas with the software — specifically we are discussing performance.
KSFJ I feel we are going to come into serious disagreement here. I do not accept your points which basically say "oh let's wait for next generation processor, then all will be OK with Logos 4".
Seriously ? We may need to agree to disagree a bit. Newer, faster hardware would help Logos 4 feel faster; not know whether all will be OK. Do know like using Logos 4 Mac more on 2.93 GHz Quad Core i7 than 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. Thankful for many Logos 4 Mac improvements; looking forward to more.
Comparing hardware and software costs, software is now much more expensive than hardware; using development frameworks for faster software development may need better hardware for decent performance. Long gone are the days when highly optimized, efficient software was needed to run on very expensive hardware (with limited resources). Amazing to compare computer capabilities in a smart phone that fits in shirt pocket today vis teletype dial-up access decades ago (with an acoustic coupler for old fashioned phone hand set).
Changing software to effectively use multiple cores requires restructuring of code to divide and conquer (multi-thread) along with collaborating about which process does what. Hidden cost of multi-thread (or parallel) execution is coordination so using 2 cores vis 1 core yields ~ 170 % more done (vis 200 %). Also, divide and conquer needs tasks that can run in parallel, which do not depend on each other. Sympathetic Highlighting has some serialization points: as word(s) are highlighted in primary resource, need to look up corresponding lemma(s), then search for those lemma(s) in secondary resource (within context), followed by highlighting results. One possibility for using 2 cores is visual highlight feedback in primary resource could be done at same time as lemma lookup and search.
Yes, faster computers help-agreed. Logos getting some code fixed helps more-smile.
Likewise concur software improvements have greater potential to help more Logos users across variety of hardware. [8-|]
Thankful Logos 4 Mac is usable for Bible Study with a vast digital library (plus easy to switch platforms between Mac and PC; sync v1 usually worked). Looking forward to software and hardware improvements. For some performance items, not know which will ship first: faster hardware or better software.
KSFJ : Have to give opinion that some of thought is illogical.
1. in this field and with this company, software is cheap-free- does not cost more than hardware. We pay for library and tagging, thats where we incur cost.
2. Yes, to some extent faster system will run defective software faster, however, economy of scale will not prove effective, defect will plateau software to point of non existent improvement. Xp will run somewhat faster on your machine than one five years older, but will actually use older hardware more efficiently than new hardware.
2. A car accident at 100 miles per hour surely has events happening at faster scale than car accident at 20 miles an hour. Yet, it is still a wreck and, damage is greater at the higher speeds than at thew lower ones. This actually applies to this conversation. Overusing one core on multi-core system can do damage to core structure from heat. At some point, operating systems will address this issue as per specs coming from manufacturers.
3. Making excuses for Logos not being current with standard technology and , at this point, even old technology ( duoCore) does not make any of us feel more comfortable with the Company. If their position is: We will write poor code and people will just have to keep buying better machines to try and make it work, then, we have invested very, very poorly in a company that has no integrity. We are the People that allow them to be in business, we are the customer, either take care of us or, find yourself out of business.
Without us, there is no Logos, no salaries, no offices, we pay for everything logos has, we pay every salary, we pay for every inch of office, every book deal, thats correct, we do. The Consumer pays for everything.
I am not grateful to logos, they have done nothing for me to be grateful for. This is a business transaction, nothing more. They have done none of us any favors, they are not going to help pay our bills, walk our dogs, be there for the birth of our grandkids or, visit me in the hospital.
Logos is a business, in business to sell software. If we like it, we vote for it with our money. If we do not get value for our money, we will take our money someplace else.
Logos needs to be grateful for customers and their money, especially in this economy.
if Logos cannot give me value for my money, I will be asking for a refund, not out of anger, but because the product would not perform as advertised.
My computer is approx. 4 to 6 times more powerful than what is advertised as being needed.
Therefore, Logos needs to make their product perform decently according to what they have advertised. They make claim to something, money and product are exchanged based on that information, if their product will not perform as advertised, it is logos mistake, not the consumer.
As far as I know, none of the money we send in to logos , has performed poorly.
I have not had to tell logos they need a faster computer in order to spend/use/receive my money.
Blessings,
Just being picky but data structures also need to be considered as a possible cause of slow performance. This may have already mentioned later in the thread.
Thankful for peaceful opinion exchange, which is thought provoking.
As consumers, we pay for our library resource licenses. Logos business model funds software development from resource license sales. Logos software provides ways to access our digital library (albeit some response times vary depending on hardware and couple platforms currently have more features: PC and iOS). Thankful can run Logos 4 on Mac and PC (including virtual machine on Mac) with existing library license purchases plus mobile access to many library resources.
Concur. Related: know of one complex database server installation where installing faster hardware caused response time to get worse (faster hardware exacerbated underlying performance bottleneck, once that bottleneck was addressed, faster hardware was not needed for current database workload). So far my experience with Logos 4 has been faster hardware feels more usable on Mac and PC, yet recognize software has many opportunities to improvement. Logos User Voice has 404 active suggestions => Logos Bible Software 4 Forum
Overusing one core on multi-core system can do damage to core structure from heat. At some point, operating systems will address this issue as per specs coming from manufacturers.
Hot computer components do crazy things, including kernel panics and blue screens of death.
As a computer geek, can appreciate some thorny technical issues. Looking at a 3 year old article, noted programming paradigm shift to effectively use multi-core processors was daunting across computer industry => http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/13/technology/microchips_copeland.fortune/ (suspect still is an issue since humans have limited conscious parallel processing capabilities).
Logos Developer commented about multi-core usage on 30 Nov 2010 => http://community.logos.com/forums/p/26614/196656.aspx#196656 appears older Microsoft's Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is limited to one thread (core) for displaying Logos 4.
By the way, found a blog about WPF rendering => http://jeremiahmorrill.com/2011/02/14/a-critical-deep-dive-into-the-wpf-rendering-system/ that also has some Windows 8 concerns (especially for desktop applications) => http://jeremiahmorrill.com/2011/09/26/windows-8-dont-worry-nothing-has-changed-for-traditional-desktop-development-and-thats-the-problem/
Likewise learning about .Net Framework 4.5 Developer Preview => http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/netframework/aa496123.aspx noted WPF 4.5 new features include: Accessing collections on non-UI Threads that may be useful for effective multi-core usage (potentially one thread for each tab), but then share Patrick's cross platform concern about open source update for Logos 4 Mac. Not know if WPF 4.5 preview is usable for font rendering needed by Logos (for multi-lingual inline display with footnotes and various highlighting options).
Thankful for many forum posts by Logos employees, including Bob Pritchett's => What Logos development is doing
When Logos 4 development began, am certain developers made prudent choice. Now few years later (with industry changes), not know if developers would make same choices (based on some other forum discussions = doubtful).
True statement for many companies, including Logos.
I am not grateful to logos, they have done nothing for me to be grateful for. This is a business transaction, nothing more.
Years ago, my initial purchase was a business transaction too. More recently, my experience is bit different. Thankful for Logos 4 visual filter highlighting; have seen Greek verb usage in various passages that has enhanced my Bible Study. Likewise Thankful for interactions with several Logos employees. Already understand why Logos careers web page has some Best Places to work logos => http://www.logos.com/about/careers Also Thankful for Logos migrating from newsgroups to forum couple years ago plus wiki web site for user contributions.
My computer is approx. 4 to 6 times more powerful than what is advertised as being needed. Therefore, Logos needs to make their product perform decently according to what they have advertised. They make claim to something, money and product are exchanged based on that information, if their product will not perform as advertised, it is logos mistake, not the consumer.
Concur; unfortunately am aware of other companies with similar marketing discrepancy between recommended hardware and decent performance.
[8-|]
Observation: several forum threads have expressed frustration about syncing between Logos 4 on Mac and PC with mobile devices (with some Logos consumers choosing to cancel resource orders).
Looking forward to Logos sync v2, which needs to be a smooth transition for Logos users (hoping sync just works quickly) so notes, highlighting, etc are usable on any platform supported by Logos.
Thankful for Bob Pritchett's reply (on 30 May 2011) => Highlighting and notes a needed feature.
Bob Pritchett: Highlighting and notes are coming very soon for both the Logos and Vyrso mobile applications. We're presently behind the other mobile eBook readers in that area, but when we release we'll suddenly be miles ahead. :-) You'll have the power of Logos 4's highlighting and notes, including the graphical highlight styles and the ability to have multiple note files. And, soon, the ability to share your notes and highlights with groups, or the whole world.
Highlighting and notes are coming very soon for both the Logos and Vyrso mobile applications. We're presently behind the other mobile eBook readers in that area, but when we release we'll suddenly be miles ahead. :-)
You'll have the power of Logos 4's highlighting and notes, including the graphical highlight styles and the ability to have multiple note files. And, soon, the ability to share your notes and highlights with groups, or the whole world.
At times, wonder which dictionary to use for "soon" [:P] (do appreciate consumer disappointment while waiting for software improvements; currently anticipating Logos 4.5 Beta 1 on Mac and PC in two to few weeks plus mobile app updates when sync v2 ready for stable use).
Am thankful for good conversation, like stimulation of thinking on several levels.
Disagree about human brain-still best computer out there-smile- capable of many threads of thought, at many levels, while running basic living programs flawlessly.
Best hyper-threading known, automatic load switching, best energy usage , best temp. control, still have not completely used all functions of processor, no one knows limits of processor or memory storage. Fastest memory functions known so far, still beyond human measurement. Incredible System! Lasts a long time with basic care.
Also ( to be clear ) grateful for Biblical Software , use of said helps, been using different ones a long time, yet, advancement has been slow.
Seems biblical Software companies ( in general ) have problems:
Caring about customer base
Have problems in area of denominationalism ( generally only care about customers within their own theological background) This is a HUGE mistake.
Do not keep up with technological advances-stay current.
Again: Enjoy and Thankful for interesting and thought provoking conversation.
Logos does some things well, is better than many in offers that cross denominational lines ( thank you Logos-well done ), has some great ideas , some interesting use of tools.
It just needs to run better, more efficiently . If we looked at system use with a automobile analogy: Logos is a huge gas hog, not many can afford to drive.-smile
Appreciate conversation and- am Grateful "to and for you" and all your help.
I am going to comment, finally, on key points you responded on and that will be it (for me) as I see no benefit in rehashing over same points.
KSFJ I feel we are going to come into serious disagreement here. I do not accept your points which basically say "oh let's wait for next generation processor, then all will be OK with Logos 4". Seriously ? We may need to agree to disagree a bit. Newer, faster hardware would help Logos 4 feel faster; not know whether all will be OK. Do know like using Logos 4 Mac more on 2.93 GHz Quad Core i7 than 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.
Seriously ? We may need to agree to disagree a bit. Newer, faster hardware would help Logos 4 feel faster; not know whether all will be OK. Do know like using Logos 4 Mac more on 2.93 GHz Quad Core i7 than 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.
Well of course any software is going to run faster on newer hardware, but that's not what we are talking about. What we are talking about is Logos 4 not running adequately on a brand new 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 (you cannot get any higher specced iMac at this time). What we are talking about is users having to disable / not use certain functionality because if they use it the system basically bogs down — on a 3.4 GHz i7.
Comparing [..] hand set
All this is irrelevant to discussion.
Changing software to effectively use multiple cores [...] One possibility for using 2 cores
Again, getting to the point, multi-threading as a technology has been around for, what, six seven years. This is not new technology and other software companies seem to be able to manage using it. Including utilising hyper-threading virtual cores.
Well there we go... if we have a look at that post...
The Logos 4 Indexer is currently designed to use up to four cores when indexing; on my development Core i7-950 (hyperthreaded) and Xeon W3565 (basically an i7), it routinely achieves > 80% CPU usage (quad core) or > 40% (quad core, hyperthreaded) when indexing
I would agree - the indexer uses all cores (except virtual cores) when indexing.
Logos 4 itself has one dedicated UI thread (which has to perform all screen updates, user interaction, etc. due to the design of WPF);
If I could reword that to say "due to serious limitations of WPF" I think that is more to the point.
it will run as much non-UI work (searches, sync, DB queries) on as many background threads as your system can support.
This... I disagree with. Logos 4 does not appear to do this in all circumstances as I have shown.
(This only applies to the Windows version; some of the Mac threading code is written differently for the Mono platform.)
Ahhh... so as well as being limited by an old version of WPF that can't be updated because of an almost two year unsolved bug by Microsoft, Logos 4 Mac users may be/are further disadvantaged because our Logos 4 has to go through the (extra, not needed by Logos 4 Windows) Mono compatibility layer.
Like Rusty+ I believe that Logos has a responsibility to deliver a workable product, however I do appreciate the potential of the functionality in the software and the wide Logos library, I would just like to be able to realise that full potential in the use of the software.
And that, I think, is the key point.
Many of us have silently endured the miserable performance on the Mac without complaint, having paid out hundreds or even thousands of dollars for media. Perhaps Logos ought to have a skunkworks project to produce a Mac OS X version that discards all of the Windows legacy and give us an application that really shines head and shoulders above anything every done under windows? Or is there an open source alternative to give us access to the media that we have purchased? Even more disappointing, I had to purchase the Mac application whereas the Windows version has always been a free download. I'll continue to use it, and put up with the poor performance, but only because I have to.
Dear Ben:I understand and, have voiced my concerns more than once.
Perhaps tech support can help with some things, but the forums are not sympathetic to those of us who feel we are paying for a sub-standard product.
Welcome [:D]
Apologies about miserable performance, please elaborate, preferably in new thread(s) since would like to try replicating performance issue(s).
Curious about Mac application version since the original Libronix 3 port to Macintosh did require application purchase or base package purchase/upgrade (after waiting many months from announcement to initial delivery, including a tantalizing screen shot along the way).
In 2009, Logos changed their software to be free, every release of Logos 4 Mac has been available for free download. To effective use Logos 4, needed to purchase appropriate resources.
For Logos resources, only software options are one of six free Logos apps: Vryso (iOS and Android), Logos (iOS and Android), Logos 4 (Mac and PC) OR http://biblia.com web site.
By the way, trying to run Logos 4.3 SR-6 on a new Mac mini (2.3 GHz Intel Core i5 - 64 bit kernel) with 2 GB Ram and couple other applications (mail, safari) open can be a miserable experience; encountered spinning beach ball while OS X Lion was paging with some Logos 4 Mac menu response times in minutes. Thankful Logos Mac support page shows 4 GB Ram for recommended system requirements => http://www.logos.com/mac/support/systemrequirements (though wish recommended CPU was bit faster).
Is there a way to change the color/colors when using Sympathetic Highlighting? The default Blue is fine in the primary text, but the light grey is hard for me to see in the secondary?
Wonder if sympathetic highlighting is easier to read with different resource background(s) ? (option: change resource background in program settings)
Likewise noticed some Logos User Voice suggestions for color:
# 53 => Allow each pane to have an individual background color has 44 votes
# 130 => Text/background color options (like the Kindle app) for reading in the iPad app has 8 votes
# 194 => add option to change background color based on grouping such as bibles in blue, commentaries green.. has 4 votes
Yes Patrick, same here. In fact, so slow I did not think it was working
In fact, so slow I did not think it was working
Rusty & Patrick
Which version of L4 Mac are you using? Just tried sympathetic highlighting between ESV and BHS using 4.5 Beta 7, and the follow up was almost instantaneous. My Mac desktop is more than 4 years old, so hardly a state-of-the-art machine.
Could we have some unannounced optimization in B7?
Dear Jack : I hope so-smile.
I just have stable/recent, not brave enough to try anything else.
I have my install where it only crashes a couple times a session if I stay away from certain things so, not willing to experiment much past that.
I still use Accordance for greek/hebrew work and just use Logos for a reader as Logos has some library resources I need.
As long as I don't ask Logos to do much more than search for resources, we get along without too much difficulty.
Thanks and hope what you are seeing are indeed upcoming improvements.
Rusty
Noticed that holding down the mouse button after selecting a word of phrase seems to delay the sympathetic highlight momentarily.
Rusty,
Not to diminish your expectations of L4 Mac, there is a work around: use the word by word section of the exegetical guide. Hovering over a greek/hebrew or english word provides immediate identification of the corresponding word. I find this much more helpful than sympathetic highlighting.
Rusty & Patrick Which version of L4 Mac are you using? Just tried sympathetic highlighting between ESV and BHS using 4.5 Beta 7, and the follow up was almost instantaneous. My Mac desktop is more than 4 years old, so hardly a state-of-the-art machine. Could we have some unannounced optimization in B7?
Logos Bible Software 4.3 SR-6 (4.30.0.1613) for me.
Thank you Jack and John for the kind help with the work-arounds.
You are appreciated.
Blessings.
