********** 10 released

Page 5 of 5 (99 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5
This post has 98 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 6:42 AM

Bob,

This is a well reasoned reply and thank you for taking the time to write this response. As a user of both products, each has its merits and deficiencies. Having recently upgraded to Accordance 10, and to make an impolite quote, v10 is "lipstick on the pig." 

Similar to Logos poor choice in development technologies, OakTree continues to develop a carbon App with an inefficient cocoa wrapper to make it look a little nicer (customizable toolbar and the new integrated window). There are other examples I could cite, although what is important here to note is that as long as the users are happy and the respective company can deliver on the product goals/user needs, then everyone wins.

As a former software product manager, I applaud Logos for continuing to develop new ways to further their business and offer value to their users. Each of these new venues is in its infancy, and with the right nurturing will make them worthwhile in the long term. Taking the chance is what makes entrepreneurs great. Making mistakes is what makes us learn. Living in fear is not an option and I applaud you and your team for having the courage to move the needle forward.

Please keep making great software, even though it might have imperfections (performance being a key item whereby I agree with this constituency), so that we can continue to learn and grow in our respective faiths.

Cordially,

Matthew

 

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 7:01 AM

Okie, dokie, Matthew. 'Lipstick on a pig.' Of course you're referring to a Mac, but hopefully next year I'll be investing in the Windows version. I don't know if you want to expand on that comment?

But I'd say your last paragraph kind of over-writes your second paragraph. Kind of like complementing Volkswagon for great new features on the under-powered microbuses  Maybe an improved engine might be a good thing?

The only reason I 'whine' so much about Logos is they forget that book-software users don't really have a choice; they're 'married' to the software. And when Bob and Co progressively move along platforms, but can't seem to produce efficient software (though they used to), then all the cutsy falls on deaf ears.

 

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 7:54 AM

DMB,

Yes, I was referring to the Mac version. I can't comment on a product (Accordance for Windows) that has only been announced and isn't in any level of public availability.

To expand upon my statement from the original post (lipstick…), since moving to OS X, Accordance has been a Carbon-based App. Accordance wasn't rewritten for Cocoa, so it can't support the following:

  • 64bit
  • New OS X Technologies (OpenCL, GCD, Gestures, fullscreen, notifications, etc.)

If you look at the rest of the Accordance v10 UI, (outside of the primary window), the rest is still rooted in Aqua/Carbon. 

To your point about complementing (my last paragraph), it isn't orthogonal to my post as the facts are stated (and I was replying to Bob - whom i agree with on when it comes to software development methodology and business development). Logos (the business) has diversified. What some view as bad choices, others view as prosperous.

As I mentioned in my previous post, the performance of Logos is lacking. I have a fast MacBook Air (SSD, 4GB RAM, 1.8Ghz Core i7) and still see some beach-balls when performing minor tasks (viewing preferences, for example). Yes, this lack of performance is disappointing. However, I make the trade-off of some performance for the overall usefulness of the App.

Next, I disagree about product choice. On the Mac, there are many products available for biblical study (Accordance, BibleReader, Glo, Logos, Sword and more). Windows also has a plethora of Apps that provide choice and as Mac users, we can run these Apps in virtualization if we so choose. In the Mobile space, there are even more choices that are faith specific as well as staking new ground in how we interact with scripture.

Further, let me expand upon the auto analogy. Once one has purchased a VW with a four cylinder, it's unreasonable to expect that over the course of ownership, it will become a Ferrari. It's always going to be a VW. When a new VW (same model, new model year) is released, you have the choice to purchase it, not purchase it (and keep the one you have), or switch to another brand. Again, you have choice.

For those who own the product, what benefits have you had as well as what utility have you received vs. the problems you've uncovered? If the former is more prevalent than the latter, then consider how we can provide meaningful feedback to Logos so that they can prioritize their development schedule. We can always vote with our pocketbooks by not supporting Logos or any other bible software developer. Once again, we have freedom of choice.

I hope that this message doesn't come across condescending as that isn't the intent. I am merely conveying what this mere mortal has experienced over 20 years of software development as someone who has sat on both sides of the spectrum.

Cordially,

Matthew

 

Posts 757
Fr. Charles R. Matheny | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:02 AM

Dear Matthew: So your saying: Accordance, which is very fast, efficiant and does the very best searches in Ancient languages ( not to mention complex and "search all searches in a blink) is inferior technology to Logos using Mono and other windows frameworks to produce a Mac product that is slow, clunky, prone to crashes and strange openings? While I love my Logos Library and Own a lot of Biblical Software on Two Platforms ( Windows and Mac) I cannot understand your thinking on this, other than personal preference. Personal Preference has nothing to do with Objective Truth.

When it comes to resources, Objective Truth is : Logos is far and away the leader of everyone in this field no matter the Platform.

When it comes to Macs and performance: Accordance leads the field , no contest.

When it comes to complex searching on the Mac: Again, Accordance leads the field.

When we get to personal preferences, then we get into subjective responses. Some people like all kinds of "bells and whistles" colorful results and all kinds of social connections, other people want more of a "just the facts " response from the software. This has always been the case in this field of software. Thus you find many/most Academics have been drawn to Bibleworks, Accordance etc, and a huge "other" market to which Logos, Biblesoft etc. have appealed.

 

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:12 AM

Fr. Charles.

I am sorry if what I wrote implied that I thought Mono/WPF was a better platform than Carbon. In fact, neither are ideal, especially on the Mac. And yes, Accordance is much faster than Logos - I never stated otherwise. My comments were on the GUI, not the overall user experience (which does include software performance).

I also agree with you in what users desire/personal preferences. As I mentioned, I own both products (and use them differently). In fact OakTree is practically a stone's through from my home and I have met with their team on a few occasions (they are wonderful people).

As I stated, it's about choice. We all can choose to use whichever package we want to suit whatever purpose. However, once the choice is made, I believe it is more prosperous to focus on providing productive feedback rather than devolving into negative discussions.

I hope this helps.

Matthew

Posts 757
Fr. Charles R. Matheny | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:16 AM

BTW I personally don't care what code the software is written in, what I care about is pretty simple: Does it work?

This is a Mac principle, a Steve Jobs thought process. For instance, there are a lot of computer "specs" on the market that do not result in good computers because build quality is poor.

There are many software examples that are, have been, built with the very best and most cutting edge code, that were/are absolutely horrible ( speaking of many types of software, not those of this thread). 

What "matters" is if a tool does the job it was designed to do and does it do that job well, this is what matters at the end of the day. 

Example: Steve Jobs made a point that the average person picking up an iPad at the counter to see what it is, does not care about processor and all the specs. What matters is the experience they have holding that device and, does it enhance their life in ways that matter to them. About the only "spec" that matters is storage capacity. This has proven, over and over, to be true. Only we somewhat "geeky types" and, people like yourself that write code, really have any interest in specs. The spec that matters the most, to everyone though is simply: How well does it work, how is the product experienced. 

Posts 757
Fr. Charles R. Matheny | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:17 AM

Sorry, we posted at the same time.

Agreed.

 

Posts 12078
Forum MVP
NB.Mick | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:24 AM

Matthew,

completely OT & unrelated, but as I am not a native speaker and read into a document just yesterday that was recommended here in the forum and makes a lot out of typos in ancient documents to re-establish an alleged Koine pronunciation: I assume you meant "stone's throw" above when you wrote "stone's through" - do you pronounce throw and through alike?

I'd have thought that "throw" rhymes with "plow" or even "go", whereas "through" rhymes with "blue". Not to pick on a typo, but sometimes I find out things about pronunciation of English I never would have dreamed of...  

Mick

Running Logos 9 latest (beta) version on Win 10

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:35 AM

Mick,

I am laughing now due to the lovely autocorrect feature on the iPad. Thank you for pointing out the error, as I did mean to say "throw."

Matthew

Posts 12078
Forum MVP
NB.Mick | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 8:42 AM

Thanks!

Running Logos 9 latest (beta) version on Win 10

Posts 8899
fgh | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 9:00 AM

NB.Mick:
I'd have thought that "throw" rhymes with "plow"

I don't think it does, but that's because plow is pronounced plau. At least according to what I've learnt and what my dictionary says.

But I know what article you read.Smile

"The Christian way of life isn't so much an assignment to be performed, as a gift to be received."  Wilfrid Stinissen

Mac Pro OS 10.9.

Posts 12078
Forum MVP
NB.Mick | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 9:20 AM

fgh:

NB.Mick:
I'd have thought that "throw" rhymes with "plow"

I don't think it does, but that's because plow is pronounced plau. At least according to what I've learnt and what my dictionary says.

Ah - now that you say so, I think I should have known that...... Ha, learnt something newagain today!

Running Logos 9 latest (beta) version on Win 10

Posts 492
R. Mansfield | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 11:34 AM

Matthew Bookspan:

since moving to OS X, Accordance has been a Carbon-based App. Accordance wasn't rewritten for Cocoa, so it can't support the following:

 

  • 64bit
  • New OS X Technologies (OpenCL, GCD, Gestures, fullscreen, notifications, etc.)

 

To me this really doesn't matter one way or another (I believe Fr. Charles is right when he says all that matters is what works), but from what I can tell, Logos is not running as a 64 bit app either (and neither is MS Word 2011):

Again, I don't feel it matters in the end result. I just find it odd that this would be offered as a criticism of Accordance in comparison to Logos when the latter does not seem to be any different. 

RMansfield@mac.com
http://thislamp.com 
youtube.com/user/rfmansfield
twitter/thislamp
facebook.com/rmansfield

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 1:39 PM

Sadly, my comparison wasn't that Logos had these capabilities (64bit, OpenCL, GCD) and Accordance didn't. Logos 4 certainly doesn't or might not support these capabilities given the Mono (.NET port) based architecture on the Mac. The comparison was directed to the folks at Accordance who still aren't writing a modern Mac App (and OS X is their primary platform).

It would be a nice win for all users if both Apps supported these base OS X technologies as we would see increased performance, better memory management/usage and improved graphics performance.

Thanks -M

 

Posts 757
Fr. Charles R. Matheny | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 2:27 PM

I think Bob has indicated that will happen with Logos when Pigs fly, Lipstick or not.

I think I just successfully made a joke.

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 2:29 PM

Obviously I'm not a Mac person, but I'd assume if Accordance can run on an older Mac emunlator for Windows, that they're likely waiting for a Windows-specific offering before letting go of the older environment?

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 492
R. Mansfield | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 2:42 PM

DMB:

Obviously I'm not a Mac person, but I'd assume if Accordance can run on an older Mac emunlator for Windows, that they're likely waiting for a Windows-specific offering before letting go of the older environment?

That has been much of the reasoning in the past, but v. 10 is the first version of Accordance that will not run in the emulator (it requires 10.6/Snow Leopard or higher). I've heard nothing specific, but I would guess that it is clearly an application in transition.

RMansfield@mac.com
http://thislamp.com 
youtube.com/user/rfmansfield
twitter/thislamp
facebook.com/rmansfield

Posts 492
R. Mansfield | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 2:44 PM

Matthew Bookspan:

It would be a nice win for all users if both Apps supported these base OS X technologies as we would see increased performance, better memory management/usage and improved graphics performance.

In regard to memory management, it's pretty interesting to compare the two products in the screen capture of Activity Monitor that I posted earlier. 

RMansfield@mac.com
http://thislamp.com 
youtube.com/user/rfmansfield
twitter/thislamp
facebook.com/rmansfield

Posts 29
Matthew Bookspan | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 3 2012 6:14 PM

Memory usage/consumption and management are two different things. Nevertheless, Accordance's memory requirements are lower than Logos, even on my Mac.

Page 5 of 5 (99 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 | RSS