No NEW Journals - why not?

Page 9 of 37 (736 items) « First ... < Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next > ... Last »
This post has 735 Replies | 25 Followers

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 3:19 PM

Beloved:
What I think that is missing in this plan is a focused commitment to adding value to our libraries by adding journals that are most frequently cited by our resources as David Paul has advocated for. I emphasize this as I have moved my journals to a competitor and if I can't have my favorite journal JETS on Logos the only thing that would entice me back is something akin to what I have outlined.

I agree. That's also important, but the sense I get from this thread is that the majority of people are more interested in our solving (1) updating existing journals and (2) adding the missing TJL journals first. So those are the two priorities we're aiming to address first. We're also looking into some of the major journals we've never had before, but that effort won't get as much attention until we've addressed the other issues. I'm happy to adjust these priorities if I've misunderstood what the majority of users want us to focus on.

Beloved:
Thanks for your update and the details you offer it is a necessary effort in repairing the breach of past failings please continue until you roll out your new package of resources. 

Thanks for your feedback and patience.

Posts 1945
Mark | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 3:43 PM

Phil Gons (Faithlife):
the sense I get from this thread is that the majority of people are more interested in our solving (1) updating existing journals and (2) adding the missing TJL journals first. So those are the two priorities we're aiming to address first.

Phil

The sense you should get from this thread is that there is frustration that nothing has been done for quite a long time.  Why wait?  Continue pursuing licensing that you do not have.  But while doing that, put out updated packages.  If there is too much in a package, it will be too expensive in the first place.  That is one of the problems that should be addressed.  We went from $50 to hundreds of dollars.  While the packages were great, and very low cost for what we received, it was too much for many.  So why not have smaller packages.  Why not have updated packages that do not include what you do not yet have licensed?  What if it takes another year to get JETS?  Does that mean this thread needs to continue for another year?  Why not put something up...a package or several with some updates to the original 4 that is already offered?

Posts 516
Bobby Terhune | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 3:44 PM

Phil,

Thank you for all the clarification and updates. I think you have the priorities in the proper order right now.

Question, are we having rights issues for so many journals because Logos users are not willing to fund them at the appropriate price the publisher wants? Or is it because the rights of distribution have already been committed elsewhere and cannot easily be undone to allow licensing for Logos?

It's had to wrap my mind over why there has seemingly been so much resistance to allowing the journals we all want to be licensed.

Posts 3236
Mattillo | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 4:53 PM

Phil Gons (Faithlife):

Mattillo:
1) Will you be able to get JETS back?

It's at the top of our list of TJL journals to get.

Mattillo:
2) Masters Seminary Journal is not even close to being up to date.  You sell up to volume 18 and they are currently on volume 28

"Up to date" in my notes meant compared to Galaxie, not compared to the available issues.

Thank you Mr Gons.  Is there a way to get MSJ into logos even if it is carried by Galaxie?  You carry a lot of other MacArthur resources like sermons and books so I would think getting the ones online and converting them into logos functionality wouldn't be too difficult.  Either way thank you for the reply sir

Posts 2305
Beloved | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 5:00 PM

Bobby Terhune:
I think you have the priorities in the proper order right now.

I disagree.

Phil Gons (Faithlife):
the sense I get from this thread is that the majority of people are more interested in our solving (1) updating existing journals and (2) adding the missing TJL journals first.

Phil, Thanks for your reply you are being very generous with your time and attention. My reply is addressed at both yours and Bobby's comments. A simple analogy should suffice here. Consider that you've bought a house. You have a limited budget. Your kitchen and bathrooms are out dated. Where would you focus your limited budget. The analogy is served by considering that your item (2) is the bathrooms and your unnumbered, but  important item (X) = journals that will bring most value to your library (the house) the kitchen is further down the list. 

Which of these two options would you choose to undertake first. I understand that since there are many varied opinions represented here on the forums that a consensus must be reached and this for me is the critical issue here. Bobby is happy with going for option (2), and not alter the established priorities, but David and Beloved and would I be presuming, Phil? Would choose (X) as this increases the overall value of the house.

Please let's have a discussion on the plan as it will most certainly effect FL interests as well.

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

Posts 2829
Don Awalt | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 5:45 PM

I am sure this idea won't fly and is no longer considered viable, but is it completely out of the question to go back to a relationship with Galaxie? The negatives were that the quality was not always up to Logos' ideal, but the same can be said for other Logos produced resources that don't have comprehensive tagging etc. The advantages of the Galaxie approach:

1) Regularity - didn't we get updates annually, like clockwork? 

2) Logos resources freed up - Logos must be sweating this one big time, it is taking resources that could be used for other efforts. Many comment Logos is stretched thin. Is it really worth, in hindsight, bringing this project in house? 

3) GREATLY IMPROVED customer satisfaction. Look at the complaints Logos has endured since this in-house project was first announced!

Galaxie works with other vendors, so this must have been an issue that stopped Logos from working with them that has not affected other relationships. How come? We can only guess, as Logos is not sharing, but Logos must be expecting/asking something that others are not. Given how the last few years have gone, and given customer dissatisfaction with this effort, is it really worth the effort? And how much complaining did Logos hear about the Galaxie offering compared to the dissatisfaction of the last 2-3 years, from when Logos first announced they were taking this in-house? 

Despite it not being a perfect solution, I long for the Galaxie days. I think Logos would hear an overwhelming cheer to go back to Galaxie and put the resources to other efforts. Does anyone really think Logos will get to anywhere near the regularity of Galaxie in keeping journals updated, or will this be some herculean effort to get 2.2 out and we will not hear anything more for another 2 years? (TJL 1.2 come out July 1 2016, almost 15 months ago).

Come on Logos, please stop being stubborn. Stop thinking perfect world and think about your customers. Solve this problem once and for all through Galaxie and move the in-house effort to other well-deserved projects.

Posts 2305
Beloved | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 5:56 PM

Don Awalt:
go back to a relationship with Galaxie

+1Yes

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

Posts 1751
Nathan Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 6:01 PM

Israel my Glory isn't in my Galaxie subscription, plus I have both the old TJL 1-15 and the original Master Journal Bundle 2.1. Israel my Glory isn't in my Logos library at all. So to my knowledge, it hasn't been offered yet.

For those who need JETS but not all the Galaxie journals, I'd recommend a JETS subscription ($15/year for students, $30/year for everyone else). http://www.etsjets.org It's a cost-effective way to have up-to-date access to JETS until it is back available in Logos (and more up-to-date).

Basically, I mostly use the Galaxie journals (as those are the ones my seminary required), although I have consulted regularly enough the journals offered in the Master Journal Bundle. I'd basically be interested in an "automatic purchase program". It'd be similar to a subscription, but if I ever had to cancel it, I wouldn't lose my existing journals I purchased. I'd only not get access to the new ones. I'd pay a decent fee each year to have access to frequently updated journals.

Nathan Parker

Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com

Posts 1751
Nathan Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 6:06 PM

Don Awalt:

I am sure this idea won't fly and is no longer considered viable, but is it completely out of the question to go back to a relationship with Galaxie? The negatives were that the quality was not always up to Logos' ideal, but the same can be said for other Logos produced resources that don't have comprehensive tagging etc. The advantages of the Galaxie approach:

1) Regularity - didn't we get updates annually, like clockwork? 

2) Logos resources freed up - Logos must be sweating this one big time, it is taking resources that could be used for other efforts. Many comment Logos is stretched thin. Is it really worth, in hindsight, bringing this project in house? 

3) GREATLY IMPROVED customer satisfaction. Look at the complaints Logos has endured since this in-house project was first announced!

Galaxie works with other vendors, so this must have been an issue that stopped Logos from working with them that has not affected other relationships. How come? We can only guess, as Logos is not sharing, but Logos must be expecting/asking something that others are not. Given how the last few years have gone, and given customer dissatisfaction with this effort, is it really worth the effort? And how much complaining did Logos hear about the Galaxie offering compared to the dissatisfaction of the last 2-3 years, from when Logos first announced they were taking this in-house? 

Despite it not being a perfect solution, I long for the Galaxie days. I think Logos would hear an overwhelming cheer to go back to Galaxie and put the resources to other efforts. Does anyone really think Logos will get to anywhere near the regularity of Galaxie in keeping journals updated, or will this be some herculean effort to get 2.2 out and we will not hear anything more for another 2 years? (TJL 1.2 come out July 1 2016, almost 15 months ago).

Come on Logos, please stop being stubborn. Stop thinking perfect world and think about your customers. Solve this problem once and for all through Galaxie and move the in-house effort to other well-deserved projects.

From Galaxie's standpoint, the bridge has not been burned. They'd be happy to offer TJL 16-20 and ongoing updates.

Nathan Parker

Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com

Posts 620
Jonathan | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 6:26 PM

Don Awalt:

I am sure this idea won't fly and is no longer considered viable, but is it completely out of the question to go back to a relationship with Galaxie? The negatives were that the quality was not always up to Logos' ideal, but the same can be said for other Logos produced resources that don't have comprehensive tagging etc. The advantages of the Galaxie approach:

1) Regularity - didn't we get updates annually, like clockwork? 

2) Logos resources freed up - Logos must be sweating this one big time, it is taking resources that could be used for other efforts. Many comment Logos is stretched thin. Is it really worth, in hindsight, bringing this project in house? 

3) GREATLY IMPROVED customer satisfaction. Look at the complaints Logos has endured since this in-house project was first announced!

Galaxie works with other vendors, so this must have been an issue that stopped Logos from working with them that has not affected other relationships. How come? We can only guess, as Logos is not sharing, but Logos must be expecting/asking something that others are not. Given how the last few years have gone, and given customer dissatisfaction with this effort, is it really worth the effort? And how much complaining did Logos hear about the Galaxie offering compared to the dissatisfaction of the last 2-3 years, from when Logos first announced they were taking this in-house? 

Despite it not being a perfect solution, I long for the Galaxie days. I think Logos would hear an overwhelming cheer to go back to Galaxie and put the resources to other efforts. Does anyone really think Logos will get to anywhere near the regularity of Galaxie in keeping journals updated, or will this be some herculean effort to get 2.2 out and we will not hear anything more for another 2 years? (TJL 1.2 come out July 1 2016, almost 15 months ago).

Come on Logos, please stop being stubborn. Stop thinking perfect world and think about your customers. Solve this problem once and for all through Galaxie and move the in-house effort to other well-deserved projects.

I absolutely and entirely agree with this sentiment, and have felt this way since day one of the transition away from Galaxie.

Syntax Searching Group | Michigan Logos Users | L5 FAQ | OSX 10.10 | 2.4 GHz i5 | 8 GB Ram

Posts 5
Jeremy Terhune | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 6:49 PM

Nathan,

I for one don't think it is in our best interest to go backwards. Galaxie had a limited number of journals that they offered, we have already exceeded in quantity what Galaxie offered. We need to fix what is broken and go forward. Under Type:Journal I have right now 2479 resources not counting "Israel My Glory". I believe Logos will turn this around.

I too loved Galaxie and they are the ones who paved the way and I'm grateful. But to get what we want, I believe the future is with Logos who has the power to pull it off.

I don't just want JETS and some updates, I want a broad theological spectrum of new journals available to me. I want sophisticated tagging to help me find what I need. I would like Logos to enhance and build upon the tagging they have already done. It seems we just got started and then we were derailed, but I'm hopeful for the future.

Posts 1751
Nathan Parker | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 6:58 PM

Jeremy Terhune:

Nathan,

I for one don't think it is in our best interest to go backwards. Galaxie had a limited number of journals that they offered, we have already exceeded in quantity what Galaxie offered. We need to fix what is broken and go forward. Under Type:Journal I have right now 2479 resources not counting "Israel My Glory". I believe Logos will turn this around.

I too loved Galaxie and they are the ones who paved the way and I'm grateful. But to get what we want, I believe the future is with Logos who has the power to pull it off.

I don't just want JETS and some updates, I want a broad theological spectrum of new journals available to me. I want sophisticated tagging to help me find what I need. I would like Logos to enhance and build upon the tagging they have already done. It seems we just got started and then we were derailed, but I'm hopeful for the future.

I'm not 100% suggesting going back to Galaxie, as the other journals offered in Logos in the Master Journal Bundle, etc., that are outside of Galaxie are beneficial as well.

However, there are some of us that are required to use the specific range of journals as offered by Galaxie (JETS, Bib Sac, etc.). Having access to TJL in Logos to get those specific journals back would be great, plus Logos continuing to work on other journal offerings in addition to TJL would be the icing on the cake as well.

Nathan Parker

Visit my blog at http://focusingonthemarkministries.com

Posts 2305
Beloved | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 7:45 PM

Nathan Parker:

I'm not 100% suggesting going back to Galaxie, as the other journals offered in Logos in the Master Journal Bundle, etc., that are outside of Galaxie are beneficial as well.

However, there are some of us that are required to use the specific range of journals as offered by Galaxie (JETS, Bib Sac, etc.). Having access to TJL in Logos to get those specific journals back would be great, plus Logos continuing to work on other journal offerings in addition to TJL would be the icing on the cake as well.

  1. FL should revisit its relationship with Galaxie so that we have access to all the TJL resources
  2. Personally the Master Journal Bundle Titles don't interest me.
  3. I was unaware of Israel My Glory. I would pay to have it.
  4. If FL released a Bundle that focused on frequently cited journals I would pay to have it. Call it what ever you want.

Meanwhile, Jesus kept on growing wiser and more mature, and in favor with God and his fellow man.

International Standard Version. (2011). (Lk 2:52). Yorba Linda, CA: ISV Foundation.

Posts 1945
Mark | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 8:26 PM

Nathan Parker:
Israel my Glory isn't in my Galaxie subscription, plus I have both the old TJL 1-15 and the original Master Journal Bundle 2.1. Israel my Glory isn't in my Logos library at all.

Thanks Nathan.  I do have "Israel my Glory" in Logos...vol 47-59.  It is really awesome to have them. I wish I could get them all.

I do not remember how I got them.  I thought it was through Galaxie, but it must have been in the Libronix days.  Not sure.  I would love to get them back in Logos. 

Phil, while many are frustrated, I am hoping this thread has been helpful.  As someone mentioned, many of us have invested a lot and we want to see FL succeed and grow. 

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 8:46 PM

Mark:
I am fuzzy on "Israel my glory" as well.  I thought it was sold part of Galaxie package.  I see they do not have it right now.  Is there a chance of getting that in Logos?

Perhaps. We'll look into it as well.

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 8:50 PM

Mark:
Why wait?  Continue pursuing licensing that you do not have.  But while doing that, put out updated packages.

Mark:
Why not have updated packages that do not include what you do not yet have licensed?  What if it takes another year to get JETS?  Does that mean this thread needs to continue for another year?  Why not put something up...a package or several with some updates to the original 4 that is already offered?

That's the plan. We're moving ahead with building and posting updated bundles while exploring securing licenses for missing and new journals.

Mark:
If there is too much in a package, it will be too expensive in the first place.  That is one of the problems that should be addressed.  We went from $50 to hundreds of dollars.  While the packages were great, and very low cost for what we received, it was too much for many.  So why not have smaller packages.

Having four different bundles is one way of addressing this. It was a problem before only because we had a lot of catching up to do. It shouldn't be an issue this time, but we'll definitely give the pricing careful consideration before posting the collections.

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 8:54 PM

Bobby Terhune:

Question, are we having rights issues for so many journals because Logos users are not willing to fund them at the appropriate price the publisher wants? Or is it because the rights of distribution have already been committed elsewhere and cannot easily be undone to allow licensing for Logos?

It's had to wrap my mind over why there has seemingly been so much resistance to allowing the journals we all want to be licensed.

There's no one explanation. Sometimes there's an exclusive agreement. Other times we can't find the right person, or there isn't someone who has the time to invest into the process of licensing, locating files or print, etc. In some cases there are no source files available. It's a variety of reasons. We'll keep working to get the journals you all want to see.

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 8:56 PM

Mattillo:
Is there a way to get MSJ into logos even if it is carried by Galaxie?

We have it available already, distributed from Galaxie. It's up to date with what Galaxie offers.

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 9:28 PM

Beloved:

I disagree.

I don't think we fundamentally disagree. We're working on all three in parallel. We'll just be working to ship updates first, while securing rights to missing TJL journals and going after popular new journals. We won't hold this next round of updates for the journals we need to license. Those will come with the next round or two of updates as we secure the licenses and get the files.

Posts 1827
LogosEmployee
Phil Gons (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 28 2017 9:35 PM

Don Awalt:
is it completely out of the question to go back to a relationship with Galaxie?

No. We already sell all the Galaxie journals that were included in TJL when we carried it (except for JETS and Southeastern Theological Review). (Since then they've added Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal, Journal of the Institute of Reformed Baptist Studies, and Journal for Baptist Theology & Ministry.) We don't have bundling rights, and we're not getting updates. It's possible that we could secure bundling rights and resume getting updates for the journals we're missing. We'd have to explore that.

Page 9 of 37 (736 items) « First ... < Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next > ... Last » | RSS