PDA

View Full Version : BibleWorks for Mac



JAMiller
08-22-2012, 12:15 PM
IIRC, in the past BW has stated that it has not developed its software for Mac because of a non-compete clause with other Bible software makers (I assumed this meant Oak Tree Software, i.e., Accordance Bible Software). However, in light of Accordance now bringing its software to Windows in 2013, is it possible/probable that BibleWorks will develop its software for Macs?

Soxfan23
08-22-2012, 03:32 PM
Interesting. I wasn't aware of this until just now. I find it odd that such a "Macintosh purist" company would do this, but I suppose profit is more important than platform loyalty. Why now? Macintosh market share is higher than ever, and Windows has been in a slow decline or plateau for a few years. I'm assuming it has something to do with Windows 8.

To my understanding, Bibleworks has never developed a Mac version of their software because Macintosh already has good companies that develop legitimate and quality Bible software. Accordance coming to the PC doesn't change that fact. Bibleworks has never been a super competitive company that plays the same marketing and business tricks typical American companies do. So, I wouldn't get your hopes up about it. Bibleworks is a small company and does not have the staff to take on such a large project. It makes more sense to have their staff making their Windows product even better. Since Accordance is coming to the PC, Bibleworks will now need to work that much harder to set their software apart from the rest in terms of features, affordability, and ease of use. It has always excelled in these, but there's always room for improvement. Bibleworks is the primary reason I have not moved from Windows to Mac. I have held out for a while and hope Bibleworks on Windows 8 does not disappoint. Consistent with Windows 8 in general, Bibleworks needs to work on becoming more mobile so people can use it easily on laptops, desktops, tablets, and phones. It would be nice to see a Windows Phone 8 app for Bibleworks.

MBushell
08-22-2012, 04:28 PM
Interesting. I wasn't aware of this until just now. I find it odd that such a "Macintosh purist" company would do this, but I suppose profit is more important than platform loyalty. Why now? Macintosh market share is higher than ever, and Windows has been in a slow decline or plateau for a few years. I'm assuming it has something to do with Windows 8.

To my understanding, Bibleworks has never developed a Mac version of their software because Macintosh already has good companies that develop legitimate and quality Bible software. Accordance coming to the PC doesn't change that fact. Bibleworks has never been a super competitive company that plays the same marketing and business tricks typical American companies do. So, I wouldn't get your hopes up about it. Bibleworks is a small company and does not have the staff to take on such a large project. It makes more sense to have their staff making their Windows product even better. Since Accordance is coming to the PC, Bibleworks will now need to work that much harder to set their software apart from the rest in terms of features, affordability, and ease of use. It has always excelled in these, but there's always room for improvement. Bibleworks is the primary reason I have not moved from Windows to Mac. I have held out for a while and hope Bibleworks on Windows 8 does not disappoint. Consistent with Windows 8 in general, Bibleworks needs to work on becoming more mobile so people can use it easily on laptops, desktops, tablets, and phones. It would be nice to see a Windows Phone 8 app for Bibleworks.

You got it pretty much correct. We entered the Windows market purely because we felt that there was a need to be met there. We saw no need to go to the Mac platform because the needs were being met nicely on that platform by another company. And we had no desire to hurt brothers who were doing a good job and serving the church. We have never had much of a desire to build a software empire. We saw a need for professional quality Bible software offered at an affordable price. We also saw a need for a product that provides a complete solution for exegetical software needs without trying to drag people into the electronic book frenzy. The electronic book industry is largely a scam, in my opinion at least. The entrance of more companies into the PC market is a direct result of one large company trying to dominate every corner of the Bible Software market. It has ultimately driven other companies to try to become like that big company. This is not large market and in the end many of these companies will go under. That is part of the plan. But what happens to the DRM protected, non-transferrable electronic libraries that users have built? In my opinion the industry as a whole does not have the interests of the end-user in mind. We are trying very hard to stay out of the battle. We believe that we offer the best value and the best exegetical software available anywhere and we will try to keep producing that for as long as enough users want it to keep us in business. Lord willing.

With regard to the Mac market, we have been working with CodeWeavers to produce a new version of Crossover for BibleWorks that will solve most of the problems associated with that solution. It should be released soon. We have no current plans to produce a native Mac version of BibleWorks, though the recent announcement that prompted this thread frees us up from any qualms that we formerly had about doing so. We will continue to consider the possibility and it is not off the table by any means.

We are very excited about recent moves by Microsoft revolving around the release of Windows 8. BibleWorks runs very well on the Samsung Windows 8 pad, which is sort of a prototype of things to come. The ARM tablets don't excite me very much. They have limited capabilities and are burdened by the same proprietary constraints as all the Apple stuff. Apps have to be purchased directly from Microsoft. I hope it fails. But the intel based pads are really cool. We are working now on making BibleWorks work well on the intel touch pads and it all looks very good. I can't wait to get my hands on a Microsoft Surface pad (in the intel flavor). I believe they will be available in November.

God bless and thanks to all our faithful users,
Mike

bkMitchell
08-22-2012, 07:55 PM
Since Accordance is coming to the PC, Bibleworks will now need to work that much harder to set their software apart from the rest in terms of features, affordability, and ease of use. It has always excelled in these, but there's always room for improvement.

I agree with you Soxfan,

In terms of affordability, BibleWorks is still far ahead of the other big two. Yes, you can get the other two programs in cheaper versions but they come with far less in the way of original language tagged texts and exegetical tools than BibleWorks does. You, can purchase texts sepeartly for the other two, but that soon get's to be more expensive than BibleWorks base price. So, I am not sure that BibleWorks can improve in regards to affordability, I can't even imagine how they included all that they do for such a low price!

Yeah, BibleWorks focus, integrity, reliable e-texts, and it's price alone is enough to convince and lure scholars, exegetes, and any-other kind of Students of God's word but then again those types are probably already using BibleWorks!


However, I would like see BibleWorks improve in terms of it's GUI and aesthetics. Although, BibleWorks is highly configurable it's windows aren't completely flexible. I'd like to be able to move the search window to another location or even close it all together. For, readability, it would be nice to be able to change the background of the browse window and minimize the vertical scroll bars on the windows or least give them a different look. I think I heard or read somewhere that the GSE was going to be given a new look?

Anyway all of that is superficial I know and function is more important than form, and in terms of function I'm really fond of BibleWorks.

Grace and Peace and Keep up the Good Work BibleWorks!

Michael Hanel
08-22-2012, 10:40 PM
BibleWorks has not yet been surpassed in the "more for less" market of Bible software. Comparing BW with the comparable "original language" packages in any of the competitors will show you exactly why BibleWorks has a winning future. The other companies do a good job of filling the "We want more resources" itch, but they can only sustain that at a high cost. I'm not sure BibleWorks has ever seen itself as competing in that market, even though many might want them to. I consider it amazing that BibleWorks is able to put just about every English version of the Bible I could want, a vast number of Greek versions, the Hebrew and Aramaic texts, Josephus, Philo and the Apostolic Fathers, Pseudepigrapha and still manage to charge less than $500. If BibleWorks were not around I would be a much poorer student.

Donald Cobb
08-23-2012, 03:18 AM
Just my two cents worth.

Personally, I greatly appreciate the marketing integrity BibleWorks has shown throughout the years, especially when compared with it's biggest competitor ('nuff said). I can also understand that, up to the recent past, BibleWorks has not wanted to impinge on Mac territory. However, given the fact that the other major Bible works programs are now usable on the two platforms, I certainly don't think BibleWorks should (or can) any longer make that an ethical argument for remaining "loyal" to a PC-only platform. Dare I say that it is more akin to something like, "We don't want to switch our loading format from floppy disks to DVDs, because other people are already doing that."?

I've been using and appreciating BibleWorks for over 16 years now, but have had increasing frustrations with it since moving over to Mac, 2-3 years ago. (something I absolutely do not regret!) I WON'T change over to another Bible program, mainly because the choice, as I see it, is between 1) paying the equivalent of another Mac to get (more or less) what you need, and 2) buying into a company that drowns you with advertising for a ton of material you don't really need and for which they themselves don't really believe the usefulness (and, in the end, paying almost as much as you would if you bought that other companies product!).

Having said that, though, the solutions on offer for using BW on Mac are very far from perfect. I'm currently using BW9 with Parallel and Crossover. BW in Parallels remains significantly slower than in a native PC environment. Crossover is incomparably more rapid, BUT it's only about 80% functional for the moment. It's certainly not seamless, that's the least one can say. In addition to functionality, the esthetics remain pretty amateurish. There has been the promise of tweaking things to make it completely compatible, but I bought Crossover back in March and there have been absolutely no improvements since (despite suggestions sent both to BW and Crossover). I relish the hope that there will be significant changes for the better in the coming months, as mentioned in the last post.

It has been said that one of the reasons for not wanting to make a Mac-compatible version is that it would increase prices. Quite honestly, I would not cringe at paying $50 to $75 more for a native Mac version. I've already invested more than that in trying to get a satisfying setup on my Mac. Just to buy Crossover costs around $50, so why not consider making a native version of BW for Mac with a lightly higher price tag? I personally think it would be the long-term solution for the many Mac users out there, and a wise move for BibleWorks, especially in the rapidly evolving world of technology.

Once again, I remain deeply appreciative of BibleWorks. BW9, in particular, is a wonderful tool and, quite frankly, a gift to Christ's Church. There's scarcely a day I don't use it. May it continue to be a blessing in service to God's Kingdom for many, many years to come.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France

MBushell
08-23-2012, 12:48 PM
Just my two cents worth.

Personally, I greatly appreciate the marketing integrity BibleWorks has shown throughout the years, especially when compared with it's biggest competitor ('nuff said). I can also understand that, up to the recent past, BibleWorks has not wanted to impinge on Mac territory. However, given the fact that the other major Bible works programs are now usable on the two platforms, I certainly don't think BibleWorks should (or can) any longer make that an ethical argument for remaining "loyal" to a PC-only platform. Dare I say that it is more akin to something like, "We don't want to switch our loading format from floppy disks to DVDs, because other people are already doing that."?

I've been using and appreciating BibleWorks for over 16 years now, but have had increasing frustrations with it since moving over to Mac, 2-3 years ago. (something I absolutely do not regret!) I WON'T change over to another Bible program, mainly because the choice, as I see it, is between 1) paying the equivalent of another Mac to get (more or less) what you need, and 2) buying into a company that drowns you with advertising for a ton of material you don't really need and for which they themselves don't really believe the usefulness (and, in the end, paying almost as much as you would if you bought that other companies product!).

Having said that, though, the solutions on offer for using BW on Mac are very far from perfect. I'm currently using BW9 with Parallel and Crossover. BW in Parallels remains significantly slower than in a native PC environment. Crossover is incomparably more rapid, BUT it's only about 80% functional for the moment. It's certainly not seamless, that's the least one can say. In addition to functionality, the esthetics remain pretty amateurish. There has been the promise of tweaking things to make it completely compatible, but I bought Crossover back in March and there have been absolutely no improvements since (despite suggestions sent both to BW and Crossover). I relish the hope that there will be significant changes for the better in the coming months, as mentioned in the last post.

It has been said that one of the reasons for not wanting to make a Mac-compatible version is that it would increase prices. Quite honestly, I would not cringe at paying $50 to $75 more for a native Mac version. I've already invested more than that in trying to get a satisfying setup on my Mac. Just to buy Crossover costs around $50, so why not consider making a native version of BW for Mac with a lightly higher price tag? I personally think it would be the long-term solution for the many Mac users out there, and a wise move for BibleWorks, especially in the rapidly evolving world of technology.

Once again, I remain deeply appreciative of BibleWorks. BW9, in particular, is a wonderful tool and, quite frankly, a gift to Christ's Church. There's scarcely a day I don't use it. May it continue to be a blessing in service to God's Kingdom for many, many years to come.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France

Donald,

We appreciate the input and take it seriously. The decision about whether or not to port to Mac is on the table and being considered. It is not a small undertaking. BibleWorks has more than a million lines of code and we have a small staff. We want to see how a few things pan out before taking such a large step. We want to see how Windows 8 is received and if it reverses the tide of people moving to Macs. We have been working with Windows 8 for a while and I personally love it, both on the desktop and the touch enabled pads. The only thing I would change for desktop use is the missing Start button, but there is a freeware open source option that puts it back. So we are happy campers.

We also want to see what impact increased competition has on us. We know it will hurt. We just don't know how much. And thirdly we want to give the emulator option a bit more time. We have paid the Crossover people to address most of the functionality problems with BibleWorks and those changes should be available very soon. We are committed to making this work and we will support other options for people who require more than 99% functionality. When the new Crossover release is available please let us know what you think.

We appreciate everyone's patience. These are hard times for all of us economically and there are huge changes afoot in the computer software industry. The number of things in flux is bewildering. The best we can do is to pray for wisdom as we decide which things to do and which to pass by.

God bless,
Mike

Nick Laurence
08-23-2012, 01:39 PM
I use Bibleworks on a Mac and I have recently bought Accordance for the greater range of resources it offers. I love both, although Iím more used to Bibleworks, so Iíve struggled a bit to get to know Accordance (when I already know how to do something in Bibleworks, itís a little frustrating to put in the effort to find out how to do it in Accordance).

I use Bibleworks on Mac with Fusion emulator. I find it runs (even) faster than it does on my PC. I have only ever had one problem (inserting a ď*Ē character whilst using vowel point sensitive searching in Hebrew Ė Macs donít have an insert key; I found a ďwork aroundĒ after a while and Iíve now forgotten it again).

Iím not drowned with advertising (perhaps Donald was thinking of Logos where I would recognise this complaint) and I find support teams of both companies very helpful and friendly indeed. I know that Accordance is the bigger company amongst the 2, but they do remain responsive. Personally Iím put off Logos, because they do seem too big to me and quite pushy in their marketing strategy.

It would be nice if Bibleworks went native to Mac, but I wouldnít see it as a priority. Under Fusion it works almost as if it were native already.

I think priorities should lie elsewhere for Bibleworks Ė get more original language resources like tagged Dead Sea Scrolls, Samaritan Pentateuch, Elephantine Papyrii, BHS critical apparatus etc. (I do feel a bit let down that the BW vs 8 Ė 9 upgrade really only improved things for New Testament resources, not for Hebrew Bible), clean up the electronic HALOT (the use of bold and paragraphing is inconsistent and it is sometimes hard to pick out the important info), correct the errors in Futato etc. To be honest Iím sure Iíll stick with Bibleworks for the foreseeable future (but continue with Accordance in a divided loyalty kind of way) despite these shortcomings, but it would be nice to improve these things to add to the overall image of Bibleworks as an original-text-oriented programme.

Overall, Iím really happy with both products.

dinosaur
08-23-2012, 01:49 PM
I just want to say thank you to Bibleworks. The program is more than I will ever be able to use. I recently made the switch from a PC to a Mac about 2 months ago.....the only thing holding me back for a long time was leaving Bibleworks. After looking at the Mac solutions, I decided to go with Parallels 7 and to upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7 (64 bit). I'm now running Bibleworks 9 on Windows 7 using Parallels 7 and things are amazing! I'm working on a MacBook Pro 15" (Retina) with 8 GB Ram, 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7. Bibleworks is performing flawlessly and some of the display glitches are gone, either due to software or hardware upgrades. I should also mention that I am running on the latest version of Mac OS X (Mountain Lion). All I need now is more screen real estate so that I can display more Bibleworks content. If anyone has doubts about switching over to a Mac I can endorse Parallels as a trouble free solution. If Bibleworks does enter the Mac platform....you can count me in.
Doug

Ben Spackman
08-23-2012, 03:20 PM
Very interesting happenings.

I'm also running BW 8 on Parallels 7, fast iMac running Mt. Lion. BW works very well for me, with odd exceptions (like holding shift doesn't prevent the Analysis window from changing.)

As someone who works primarily with Old Testament, I'd echo what Nick Laurence said.

Perhaps one day, BW can be marketed to the Mac community with a .dmg with Crossover license/install built in.

Ben

JAMiller
08-23-2012, 10:19 PM
I would just like to echo the sentiments of Nick Laurence and Ben Spackman above.

I use Accordance on my Mac and BW (8 for the moment but plan to upgrade to 9 very soon--almost have enough money saved) with Fusion and it is plenty fast, and in fact I prefer the layout for search results (Verse List) in BW over Accordance. Like Nick, I have only purchased Accordance and certain modules to complement BW and would like to see a Mac version with a greater range of modules. I also would be willing to pay a little more for a Mac version of BW, because honestly, I only emulate Windows in Fusion for BW. :)

That aside, I also watch tech trends carefully and Mike is wise to be cautious. As much as I prefer OS X and various Mac-only programs over Windows for general production, there is a trend toward tablets (and unfortunately for programmers), specifically toward the ARM tablets. We will see if MS's Surface changes any of that; however, it is worth noting that Apple has notified resellers to increase space for displaying the iPad because it currently comprises "55% of dollar share and 61% of unit share among sales at [Apple] resellers but only [represents] 15% of display space." If the iPad mini which is rumored for a September introduction hits the right price point, MS may struggle to gain any significant share of the market.

Also, Mike, I think I read somewhere else that you had new features planned for BW on Win 8--why? Is it possible only because of the new OS architecture? You apparently really appreciate the operating system and I am going to play with the RTM, but I find Win 8 jarring when it switches from the (formerly known-as) Metro UI to the Desktop space. Even with the replacement of the Start button, not ALL Win 7 Start Button functionality is being restored. Perhaps I will look into Crossover....

Donald Cobb
08-24-2012, 02:50 AM
Donald,

We appreciate the input and take it seriously. The decision about whether or not to port to Mac is on the table and being considered. It is not a small undertaking. BibleWorks has more than a million lines of code and we have a small staff. We want to see how a few things pan out before taking such a large step. We want to see how Windows 8 is received and if it reverses the tide of people moving to Macs. We have been working with Windows 8 for a while and I personally love it, both on the desktop and the touch enabled pads. The only thing I would change for desktop use is the missing Start button, but there is a freeware open source option that puts it back. So we are happy campers.

We also want to see what impact increased competition has on us. We know it will hurt. We just don't know how much. And thirdly we want to give the emulator option a bit more time. We have paid the Crossover people to address most of the functionality problems with BibleWorks and those changes should be available very soon. We are committed to making this work and we will support other options for people who require more than 99% functionality. When the new Crossover release is available please let us know what you think.

We appreciate everyone's patience. These are hard times for all of us economically and there are huge changes afoot in the computer software industry. The number of things in flux is bewildering. The best we can do is to pray for wisdom as we decide which things to do and which to pass by.

God bless,
Mike

Mike,

Thanks for your response. It's good to know that there is a specific contract with Crossover. As I said previously, I haven't seen any changes since buying Crossover in March, so I was beginning to wonder if they were not for the eschaton. Is Crossover working with actual BW users? I often come across small problems that would especially catch the eye of someone who's used to the program and has some knowledge of Biblical languages.

It's interesting to read the replies from some of the others on this thread. I've been using BW with Parallels on XP. As long as I was using BW7, I was pretty much fully satisfied. It's been much more frustrating using BW9; that may be because the heavier demands on memory make for much slower results (I have installed and use all the ms images--which I'm very fond of--but that means BW9 takes up practically 14G of space). It could well be that installing Windows7 with more memory would clear things up... But that means money and hassle, buying a new hard drive, repartitioning it, reinstalling Windows and the programs I use with it, etc., etc., which brings me back to my original thought: I would happily pay $50 to $75 (let's even say $100) for a native Mac version of BW.

Thanks again for your work and your desire to make your business ethics reflect Biblical obedience.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France

MBushell
08-24-2012, 10:34 AM
I would just like to echo the sentiments of Nick Laurence and Ben Spackman above.

I use Accordance on my Mac and BW (8 for the moment but plan to upgrade to 9 very soon--almost have enough money saved) with Fusion and it is plenty fast, and in fact I prefer the layout for search results (Verse List) in BW over Accordance. Like Nick, I have only purchased Accordance and certain modules to complement BW and would like to see a Mac version with a greater range of modules. I also would be willing to pay a little more for a Mac version of BW, because honestly, I only emulate Windows in Fusion for BW. :)

That aside, I also watch tech trends carefully and Mike is wise to be cautious. As much as I prefer OS X and various Mac-only programs over Windows for general production, there is a trend toward tablets (and unfortunately for programmers), specifically toward the ARM tablets. We will see if MS's Surface changes any of that; however, it is worth noting that Apple has notified resellers to increase space for displaying the iPad because it currently comprises "55% of dollar share and 61% of unit share among sales at [Apple] resellers but only [represents] 15% of display space." If the iPad mini which is rumored for a September introduction hits the right price point, MS may struggle to gain any significant share of the market.

Also, Mike, I think I read somewhere else that you had new features planned for BW on Win 8--why? Is it possible only because of the new OS architecture? You apparently really appreciate the operating system and I am going to play with the RTM, but I find Win 8 jarring when it switches from the (formerly known-as) Metro UI to the Desktop space. Even with the replacement of the Start button, not ALL Win 7 Start Button functionality is being restored. Perhaps I will look into Crossover....

I am a little suspicious of the ARM tablets and I actually hope they fail miserable. They are a direct mimic of the iPad, including the limitation of each app being full screen and requiring that all apps be purchased from Microsoft. I hope the industry does not go that way. We probably won't buy or support ARM, though that decision has not been made yet. The intel pads are another story entirely and I cannot wait to get my hands on the intel Microsoft Surface. I could be wrong but I think that is where the future is. It has none of the limitations of the ARM version of Windows 8. You can run anything that you can run on a desktop. And BibleWorks runs well in an intel pad. I find it amusing that Windows 8 on ARM is still called windows, because there are no windows. There is just one window (with a very limited desktop option). The way to go is full windows on a pad.

Don't sell Windows 8 short. Microsoft is not doing a good marketing job. And they have implemented some annoying features - which fortunately can be dispensed with. There is an open source free app called "Classic Windows" which puts the Start Button back and you can get rid of the logon screen and have the system boot directly to the desktop. So it can be set up to look and feel just like Windows 7. But it boots faster, has a much cleaner interface and a lot of enhancements to the desktop. I don't like Metro on a desktop either, but it can be easily dispensed with AND Metro on a small intel pad computer is really cool. After I have gotten used to it I think Microsoft was right to try to cover the pad and the traditional desktop with one interface. In the long run that will be easier for everyone because most power users (and I think most BW users are in that category) will have both a desktop and a pad.

With regard to Apple, we have to think very carefully before porting. We don't want to waste the Lord's resources. Virtual technology is progressing very rapidly and running Windows apps on a Mac is getting better and better and easier and easier.

Mike

MBushell
08-24-2012, 10:40 AM
Mike,

Thanks for your response. It's good to know that there is a specific contract with Crossover. As I said previously, I haven't seen any changes since buying Crossover in March, so I was beginning to wonder if they were not for the eschaton. Is Crossover working with actual BW users? I often come across small problems that would especially catch the eye of someone who's used to the program and has some knowledge of Biblical languages.

It's interesting to read the replies from some of the others on this thread. I've been using BW with Parallels on XP. As long as I was using BW7, I was pretty much fully satisfied. It's been much more frustrating using BW9; that may be because the heavier demands on memory make for much slower results (I have installed and use all the ms images--which I'm very fond of--but that means BW9 takes up practically 14G of space). It could well be that installing Windows7 with more memory would clear things up... But that means money and hassle, buying a new hard drive, repartitioning it, reinstalling Windows and the programs I use with it, etc., etc., which brings me back to my original thought: I would happily pay $50 to $75 (let's even say $100) for a native Mac version of BW.

Thanks again for your work and your desire to make your business ethics reflect Biblical obedience.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France
Crossover isn't actually working directly with BW users. What happens is that we identify a list of incompatibilities and submit it to them. They come back with a cost estimate for each one and we pay for the ones we think are most important. Eventually we would like to have full compatibility under Crossover. But it does cost money and we have lots of things to juggle. When you get the new release let us know what problems you encounter and we will add them to the list for the next iteration. The main outstanding problem right now is support for double byte languages like Chinese and Japanese. That will not be an easy fix for them.

Donald Cobb
08-24-2012, 11:11 AM
Crossover isn't actually working directly with BW users. What happens is that we identify a list of incompatibilities and submit it to them. They come back with a cost estimate for each one and we pay for the ones we think are most important. Eventually we would like to have full compatibility under Crossover. But it does cost money and we have lots of things to juggle. When you get the new release let us know what problems you encounter and we will add them to the list for the next iteration. The main outstanding problem right now is support for double byte languages like Chinese and Japanese. That will not be an easy fix for them.

Will definitely do so. Is it worthwhile submitting current problems to whomever? (And if so, to whom?)

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence

Soxfan23
08-24-2012, 05:45 PM
I am a little suspicious of the ARM tablets and I actually hope they fail miserable. They are a direct mimic of the iPad, including the limitation of each app being full screen and requiring that all apps be purchased from Microsoft. I hope the industry does not go that way. We probably won't buy or support ARM, though that decision has not been made yet. The intel pads are another story entirely and I cannot wait to get my hands on the intel Microsoft Surface. I could be wrong but I think that is where the future is. It has none of the limitations of the ARM version of Windows 8. You can run anything that you can run on a desktop. And BibleWorks runs well in an intel pad. I find it amusing that Windows 8 on ARM is still called windows, because there are no windows. There is just one window (with a very limited desktop option). The way to go is full windows on a pad.

Don't sell Windows 8 short. Microsoft is not doing a good marketing job. And they have implemented some annoying features - which fortunately can be dispensed with. There is an open source free app called "Classic Windows" which puts the Start Button back and you can get rid of the logon screen and have the system boot directly to the desktop. So it can be set up to look and feel just like Windows 7. But it boots faster, has a much cleaner interface and a lot of enhancements to the desktop. I don't like Metro on a desktop either, but it can be easily dispensed with AND Metro on a small intel pad computer is really cool. After I have gotten used to it I think Microsoft was right to try to cover the pad and the traditional desktop with one interface. In the long run that will be easier for everyone because most power users (and I think most BW users are in that category) will have both a desktop and a pad.

With regard to Apple, we have to think very carefully before porting. We don't want to waste the Lord's resources. Virtual technology is progressing very rapidly and running Windows apps on a Mac is getting better and better and easier and easier.

Mike


No arguments from me on the limitations of the ARM tablets. I will say that the average, entry-level consumer would probably be more attracted to this model due to it being stripped down & easy to use though. I personally prefer the intel pad. So it all depends on the goals of the company I guess. Increase access to the program or stick with a smaller, more advanced user-base.

However, the new Windows Phone 8 OS has gotten my attention, particularly given the ecosystem Microsoft is building (XBOX & its services, Windows 8, Windows Phone 8, etc.) and the "unification across all platforms" model they are trying to build. Given that they said the code for developers for WP8 would be similar to the code for Windows 8, has Bibleworks considered developing an app for the platform? A stripped-down Bibleworks that would run on a smartphone and give the customer easy access at church & on the go? I would personally find this very helpful, and since it's Windows I can't imagine it would be that difficult since you have been working with the platform for so long. It would also expose more customers to Bibleworks and would be a good business decision. I don't even know that Logos has a Windows Phone app yet, so there's definitely a need. Please consider this, even though you're not an ARM fan, there is a need, and I personally believe WP8 will get more of a following and gain market share for those who don't like Android & haven't bought into the Apple craze (I count myself among this lot)

MGVH
09-11-2012, 01:09 AM
Just pointing you to another post I just made on installing and customizing BW9 HERE (http://www.bibleworks.com/forums/showthread.php?5397-BW-Installation-and-Customization-Guide&p=28419#post28419). There is a link there to some specific information about installing BW8/9 on a Mac using CrossOver.

Heinz
10-03-2012, 05:13 PM
Greetings,

Thank you BW for your diligence to provide excellence and a product that is useful for so many pastors, teachers and students of the Word. I completely understand the economics of producing a Mac version of BW and have no problem with your decision to stay on the Windows platform as there are alternatives for Mac users.

That being said, as a Mac user, I had been using an older BW version with Crossover without any problems. That is, until I upgraded to Apple's Mountain Lion OS. Since that time, I have not been able to utilize my BW program. I have resisted using a virtual software or partitioning the hard drive b/c it exposes your computer to all the same problems that plague Windows based computers, i.e. viruses, updates, etc. It is one of the main reasons I purchased a Macbook. Crossover was an elegant solution that wrapped the BW windows program in a Mac wrapper. Are there any plans to debug the BW-Crossover program so it is compatible with Mountain Lion?

If anyone has any other solutions, I am open to hearing them.

Thanks!

MTan
10-03-2012, 05:48 PM
Heinz, from what I read, Apple released an update that broke CrossOver last month, but it has since been fixed:

http://www.codeweavers.com/support/forums/general/?t=27;msg=131580

Note, however, that our new Mac Public Preview release doesn't use CrossOver. It uses CodeWeaver technology, but CrossOver is not installed or required.

Hope that helps!
Michael

MBushell
10-03-2012, 05:59 PM
Greetings,

Thank you BW for your diligence to provide excellence and a product that is useful for so many pastors, teachers and students of the Word. I completely understand the economics of producing a Mac version of BW and have no problem with your decision to stay on the Windows platform as there are alternatives for Mac users.

That being said, as a Mac user, I had been using an older BW version with Crossover without any problems. That is, until I upgraded to Apple's Mountain Lion OS. Since that time, I have not been able to utilize my BW program. I have resisted using a virtual software or partitioning the hard drive b/c it exposes your computer to all the same problems that plague Windows based computers, i.e. viruses, updates, etc. It is one of the main reasons I purchased a Macbook. Crossover was an elegant solution that wrapped the BW windows program in a Mac wrapper. Are there any plans to debug the BW-Crossover program so it is compatible with Mountain Lion?

If anyone has any other solutions, I am open to hearing them.

Thanks!

Just today we released a pre-release version of BbleWorks 9 that runs on a Mac. It installs like any other Mac app and does not require Windows or any emulator package. We contracted with CodeWeavers to fix a lot of the outstanding Crossover problems specific to BibleWorks and to package their libraries with BibleWorks in a standalone native application. This is a native Mac app that uses their libraries to provide an interface to Mac OS. So it runs the same executable that runs on PCs. This has advantages and disadvantages. It saves us a lot of work and allows us to provide new tools for our users without having to reinvent the wheel in a very volatile market full of new operating systems and platforms. For people in an academic setting it has the advantage of students on a Mac and PC using the same interface, which in turn makes collaboration and classroom instruction a lot easier.

What has changed is that we now support Mac installations officially. Before it was just a favor done for people who wanted to switch to a Mac but just couldn't live without their BibleWorks. BibleWorks now works on Macs via several different mechanisms, including emulators, environments like Crossover and now through a native, library supported, native port. The emulators are pretty much 100% problem free. The native soulution which was just released in prerelease form handles 95% of all BibleWorks functionality. We will gather reports from this release and send another set of problems to CodeWeavers . Over time it will get better and better. It does require a Rev 3 set of BibleWorks 9 disks though.

Mike

bkMitchell
10-03-2012, 08:00 PM
Just today we released a pre-release version of BbleWorks 9 that runs on a Mac. It installs like any other Mac app and does not require Windows or any emulator package...
...What has changed is that we now support Mac installations officially. Before it was just a favor done for people who wanted to switch to a Mac but just couldn't live without their BibleWorks...

Please, allow me to be the first to say, "WOW!"
Although, I am not a Mac user this is terrific news. I will now recommend BibleWorks9 to all my Mac friend users and should I ever decided to switch to Apple I am happy to know I will be able to use BibleWorks!

I also love the changes made to the BIBLEWORKS' website!

Grace and Peace,
Brian

MBushell
10-05-2012, 01:20 AM
Will definitely do so. Is it worthwhile submitting current problems to whomever? (And if so, to whom?)

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence

I should correct everything that I have said on this subject. The new Mac installation of BW does not run on Crossover and Crossover does not have to be installed. It is a nativeMac app that uses modified Wine libraries which we commissioned CodeWeavers (the creaters of CrossOver) to produce for use with BibleWorks. It is a native Mac application but not one produced by a complete code rewrite. Even BibleWorks on a PC (an any other program for that matter) uses libraries of subroutines to interface with the OS. The Mac version of BW just uses a different set of libraries to enable it to run on a Mac.

This is proving to be confusing for some people (me included). But I hope this helps.

Mike