---unless it's notes!

Page 2 of 2 (37 items) < Previous 1 2
This post has 36 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 9:24 AM

JamesHudson:
Perhaps Bob and co could consider making a free 'Lite' version and then a "pay for modules" professional version

I don't think Bob would go that route considering he has already stated he doesn't want a bunch of "add-ons" in Version 4's core program. Although I believe the Logos development team has extensive experience doing just that. The beauty of Logos is how the search engine is separate from the resources and an (albeit, long) indexing is all that is required to merge a bevy of resource "modules" to the core user interface for a seemless experience.

I'm a hypergraphic learner and still go through paper notebooks like chocolate bars. My notes are burned into my memory by the process of writing them down. I have used Evernote, Zotero, NotaBene and presently settled on OneNote. I agree the Academics need much more than OneNote provides but I don't see the other Bible software publishers providing as much usefullnes as Logos. You might get better note-taking capability but you sacrifice the researching power to have that. Are the Academics trying to learn something (research) or write their next book (composition?)

For the time being I will use detached OneNote alongside Logos and smile all the while. Big Smile

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 4508
Robert Pavich | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 10:28 AM

JamesHudson:

Robert,

You are correct - it is my impression, but based on at least 3 sources of evidence:

1.  Since the outset Notes and PBB ("Notes on steroids" as has been referred to in this thread) have consistently been in the top 3 places on Uservoice with many votes. I ask Why is that?

 

2.  Every thread mentioning notes in Logos 4 has always had many replies (they always seem - again my impression -  to attract the largest numbers of responses) much more than posts about most other subjects. I ask Why is that?

 

[Aside: they usually follow the same pattern - Lots (again my impression!) of people bemoaning the fact that although notes is seen by many to be a key "core" aspect of Bible study software, Logos notes are unusable. Then a few people say they use other software such as OneNote and that's fine for them and then it usually ends with someone reminding us that Bob has said he doesn't want to create a wordprocessor because it's too difficult - among other reasons. At which point the thread dies out because people realise that they can't change Bob's mind....all until a brand new customer who hasn't read the forums comes online and bemoans the note system once again!]

3. There used to be a Wiki page (can't seem to find it now) where people suggested alternative note-taking software - things that could get the job done better. Strange to find that on a Bible software wiki UNLESS it was something that lots (my impression again) of people were wanting -  thinking "Well if Logos doesn't provide it, we still need it so we'll have to look elsewhere). People such as LaRosa even create videos to show how to use alternatives and make them seem to fit into Logos window. I ask Why is that?

 

If it is a such a hot topic causing seemingly lots (my word) of people either complaining or giving up and trying alternatives, then that is something I think an MD of a company would be listening too. Bob's quote that I put in the opening post seems to say that he is listening to users (and I have to admit here, he does have such a fantastic record of doing so in every case except notes) - but I still don't think he has grasped the concept of notes (his mind now automatically says "I don't want to make a word-processor" so that's the end of it)  Users have been forced to try alternatives. My contention is that even the best alternatives (e.g. One Note) are not integrated enough with Logos. Little things (like I mentioned in the OP) such as I'd like to have a reference pop-up with the text from  within my notes, I'd like to do a Library lookup and search, etc etc.

 

So, YES - you are right. It IS my impression that many people are unhappy with notes and that may be changing (with Beta and PBB on the way etc) or even wrong. I think many people may have given up now and are getting used to doing things another way and aren't so bothered. But I like to think about what things CAN be rather than what they could have been.

Thank-you for the tone of your query - I too am not trying to pick a fight. But I do like to keep it high in the collective consciousness of users (and Logos employees) so we can make Logos better and better (not a 'what might have been'). I've invested far too much money and time in Logos software (right from the early days - thousands and thousands of dollars) to leave it now so I'm looking forward to what it can be - and I don't want to be embarassed when I show it to my pastor etc and they make the comment about notes being better in their free software.

 

Here's to healthy debate. Hopefully one day Logos will be the only Bible software people will have heard of and use.

 

Yours in Him,

 

James

 

James,

I understand where you are coming from...thanks for taking the time to answer me in such a detailed manner...

 

God bless brother...

bob

 

Robert Pavich

For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__

Posts 611
Graham Owen | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 10:54 AM

JamesHudson:
It's an amazing fact that the Logos engine is free. This is often forgotten by users

Whilst we as users do not directly pay for the engine itself we do fund the development costs through the purchase of resources so it is not actually free we just pay for it a different way. This is reflected in the Logos business model meaning we pay more for new resources, a common source of user complaints, but we seem to get better value upgrades than users of other products.

With regards to the functionality of Notes another important factor is their commitment to Logos 4 being multi platform meaning that Notes created on a Windows PC must be edited and managed on an iPhone! The multi platform strategy has a big implication for the development of features because some code will inevitably need to be developed for each specific target system multiplying the development costs. Tables are a good example, Bob has already indicated that these are a challenge on the iPhone and other smaller devices.

Hopefully the introduction of Logos 4 on the iPhone will generate lots of additional resource sales to fund lots and lots of development.

God Bless

Graham

Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke

Posts 197
James Hudson | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 11:13 AM

Yes Graham, you are right about development costs being spread through resources - after all without resources the engine would be useless!!

 

As to the format of notes, I agree multi-platform needs to be considered. About the only universal format available for all platforms seems to be XHTML with CSS.

Surely everything wanted for notes can be based on that - you want tables, no problem; coloured text and bullet points, variety of fonts for quotes, how about images, no problem, even attachments, audio, powerpoints. Just think how rich the Internet is (even withouf Flash - but HTML5 has that covered!)

Also it's text based so can be easily searched, compressed, whatever. Internally Logos books use tagging similar to XHTML and these could serve as a kind of "Superset" of tags (with the appropriate DTD)

Nearly every SDK for these platforms (Windows, Mac, Iphone, Android, Win Mobile, Linux etc) will have the ability to handle (X)HTML.

 

To me, who was an IT professional before changing roles, it seems to be a no-brainer. 

Like I mentioned in the OP, RTF (which I believe it's what is used in Logos 4) has had its day - it's very old technology and has been superseded - which is the resason multi-platform problems exist! Even a competing software company (whose name can't be mentioned Big Smile ) moved on from it years ago.

 

James

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 11:42 AM

JamesHudson:
Like I mentioned in the OP, RTF (which I believe it's what is used in Logos 4) has had its day - it's very old technology and has been superseded

Bob said Logos 4 switched to OpenText. That would make it very versatile across many platforms.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 1
Phil Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 1:09 PM

Folks

I fear that I may be about to drag quite a deep and expert discussion back to what American friends might refer to as kindergarden levels, but having followed the debate above with some interest, I would like to pose three questions to a group who are obviously seriously tuned into what the notes facility might be capable of delivering. Here is what gives rise to my questions:

I still find myself puzzling over why the decision was taken to release L4 without the ability to even export a notes file into something else that could do whatever else the user would want. As a long-time user of Logos and many other PC based systems, I have been (and still am) worried that I must be missing something whenever I come to think about this subject. Even at their most basic (and I would love more sophisticated facilities built into the native notes editor, but let's leave that aside just for a moment), the notes facility seems to me to be THE best way of capturing the development of one's thinking on a subject that one is likely to return to at some point, given that it sits inside the library of resources itself. It presents a perfectly usable, albeit basic, framework to capture the outline of an argument or - and here's the bit that has me frustrated - a SERMON. The one application of Logos that seems to me to be badly impaired by the decision to provide no facility to take notes into anything outside the screen of the PC in use, is the timeless (and vital) ministry of publicly declaring God's Word in the form of preaching. All that is missing, it seems to me, is the ability to get the material out (either directly, or better still into another application that can allow other edits to added before turning it) into a form that one is able to fold in two, slip inside the front cover of one's bible and take to a service to use as preaching notes.

Even without the great ideas that you brothers are kicking around the forum on what notes may be able to do if someone would make it a high enough priority, I would greatly welcome the ability to fire up my Logos, delight in surfing through a library more extensive than I could never have hoped to build such a thing when I started out studying the bible 25 years ago, explore timeless truths guided by the works of spiritual giants, and capture the ideas and thoughts that He stimulates in me in a reasonably simple outline, with some major points, some subsidiary points and the underlying detail all organised in a manner that I can then squirt into some other application to finalise before I try to give it to people, either by speaking to them or letting them have them as notes.

It still seems like a huge oversight to have built a commercial product that cannot do this basic task. So here are my questions:

 

1. Am I missing something?

2. Is there a decent explanation anywhere on these forums, or something else, about why the facility was deemed unnecessary?

3. What is the party line from the development team at Logos on when they are going to at least liberate the material in the notes files so that they can be worked into other applications and ultimately printed out?

Every blessing

PHIL

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 1:25 PM

One of the joys of L4 notes is that one can search one's note, something we urgently wished for in L3.

I've search my notes many, many times since L4!                       *smile*

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 1697
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 2:44 PM

JamesHudson:
PS  For the record I think RTF has had it's day - it's an old format that hasn't moved on. The way to go is XHTML (with CSS) - it's changing and moved on, but I think it'll be around for a while yet. In a previous post Bob mentioned tables needing to be resized as an example of how difficult note-making can become. Simple if you use HTML & CSS!

Alas, nothing is really simple.

In 1995 we had a notes system built using our book display engine. In theory a note could do anything a book could do, if we wrote user interface for it. But that UI was difficult and complex (table editing is quite complex), and we were -- literally -- writing a word processor. It had bugs, subtle inconsistencies with user expectations, etc.

In 2001 we switched to HTML, as you suggest now. We used Microsoft's HTML editing component. But we had lots of frustrations there, again where it wasn't similar to a word processor: HTML didn't (and still really doesn't) format text the same way, since it tries to maintain this strange "content separate from style" idea. Word processors (and users) tend to mix content/style freely. Users want to make some text "16pt" and bold, not "H2", which has a style that happens to be 16pt and bold.

As discussed in detail in other posts, the only competitors I know of with anything near a decent notes editor are using a third party control. Our investigation of third-party controls shows them to be inadequate in technology match (we're now WPF, which doesn't have as rich a third-party infrastructure yet), Hebrew typing support (I don't know any third party control that has it), and cross platform support.

I don't know any control that's WPF and Mac; we could theoretically use two different controls, but the more formatting options we require the harder it is to make sure that we can edit notes on both platforms without messing up your data.

We are improving our notes editor, and it's already much better in 4.0d than in 4.0. But the "simple" things people want -- tables, outlining, etc. -- aren't really simple. They're major features with lots of code behind them. 

And when you say you want "a Logos integrated version of One-Note!" ... really? That's where you're voting we put our time? The Microsoft One-Note team is probably larger than all of Logos -- developers, sales people, and marketing combined!

To make sure I'm not missing something (with no sarcasm), please let me know which competitors have notes systems you like, with table and outline editing. I'll see if they're using third-party components I'm not aware of.

Posts 197
James Hudson | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 6 2010 5:32 PM

First of all, may I say thank you once again for replying - especially during the weekend. I feel humbled and really do appreciate your dedication and your love of your product and desire to do the best by your users.

 

I find it easier to work logically through a post - it helps me clarify my own thoughts and ideas. So here goes - taking your points in order:

Bob Pritchett:

Alas, nothing is really simple.

I agree. Even what seems simple and sounds simple in programming terms rarely is. I apologise for my flippant use of the word "simple", although I must say that some things can be made "simpler".

 

Bob Pritchett:

In 1995 we had a notes system built using our book display engine. In theory a note could do anything a book could do, if we wrote user interface for it. But that UI was difficult and complex (table editing is quite complex), and we were -- literally -- writing a word processor. It had bugs, subtle inconsistencies with user expectations, etc.

Ahh - the 'good ole days' - I remember my first experience with the old software - it really outstripped the competition, It's when I made my decision to switch to Logos as my main software. Anyway, nostalgia apart, I think this is where PBB fits in - if I am right "doing anything a book could do". And yes, I believe writing a true note system would be writing something akin to a word-processor  (I know you don't like that word!) - but different - one with specialist 'Bible related', Logos-powered functions and less of the specialist "Office" related functions such as Mail-merge! Think of it as a customised text-editor.

The fact it had bugs shouldn't put off a developer - all programs have bugs (more to start with). If something is quit because it has bugs then you would have quit Logos 4 by now!!

The fact it had "subtle inconsistencies with user expectations" depends on your philosophy - if it is "the customer is right and the user has a voice", then developers would work to help 'iron out' those inconsistencies.

 

Bob Pritchett:

In 2001 we switched to HTML, as you suggest now. We used Microsoft's HTML editing component. But we had lots of frustrations there, again where it wasn't similar to a word processor: HTML didn't (and still really doesn't) format text the same way, since it tries to maintain this strange "content separate from style" idea. Word processors (and users) tend to mix content/style freely. Users want to make some text "16pt" and bold, not "H2", which has a style that happens to be 16pt and bold.

A great move, in my opinion, for a note format - it's just about universal, supports tables, fonts. colour, images, audio, video, hyperlinks (by definition!) etc etc. It's text only thus easier to code a search engine, compression etc. It's DOM compliant so that sections can be added anywhere or re-ordered. It uses a tagging system similar to your internal coding  (which I discovered when writing stuff for Libronix using the API). It's also flexible and unlikely to go out of date any-time soon.

I agree about the style v content separation - that's where CSS comes into play.

I understand about using MS HTML component and users not understanding "Heading 2" etc - but this is where I would have become radical - I would have suggested coding Logos' own customised HTML reader and editor - using perhaps the DOM API. Similar work-load to the "text editor" idea above, and definitely not beyond your coders.

 

Bob Pritchett:

As discussed in detail in other posts, the only competitors I know of with anything near a decent notes editor are using a third party control. Our investigation of third-party controls shows them to be inadequate in technology match (we're now WPF, which doesn't have as rich a third-party infrastructure yet), Hebrew typing support (I don't know any third party control that has it), and cross platform support.

I don't know any control that's WPF and Mac; we could theoretically use two different controls, but the more formatting options we require the harder it is to make sure that we can edit notes on both platforms without messing up your data.

I'm afraid I can't speak with any knowledge of the controls that your competitors use. However, the mind-set of "it's got to be third party" is where you and I would differ!

It's such a specialist control that is required that trying to 'shoe-horn' and squeeze Logos Bible-based requirements into a third-party control not designed for Bible-related stuff (e.g. Hebrew), will cause problems. An in-house solution, long-term, seems the best alternative and will give you exactly what is required and control over it. Yes, it's a lot of work but the pay-off will be immense. (You could probably even sell it to other companies!)

 

Bob Pritchett:

We are improving our notes editor, and it's already much better in 4.0d than in 4.0. But the "simple" things people want -- tables, outlining, etc. -- aren't really simple. They're major features with lots of code behind them. 

It's great to hear - I haven't tried the Beta (since I don't think I can really give it the time that participating in a beta programme really requires). First I'm glad you acknowledge that people "want" and improved note system. Second, I agree programming such things is not simple. But that doesn't invalidate the need, requirement or necessity of something. All the best innovations, inventions, breakthroughs in history have not been easy or simple. It's not simple designing a Bible software program like you have, but you did it! :) Yes, it's a lot of work - but so are the other features of the program.

 

Bob Pritchett:

And when you say you want "a Logos integrated version of One-Note!" ... really? That's where you're voting we put our time? The Microsoft One-Note team is probably larger than all of Logos -- developers, sales people, and marketing combined!

I don't know what other great new features (other than the ones you have mentioned you are working on e.g. optimisation, printing, PBB etc) are in your 5-year vision. But as a Bible-study software I can't think of anything missing from Logos as much as effective note-taking features (Yes, there was that great thread about searching, and I'd also like searching and tagging of audio, video, Powerpoint etc).

So to answer personally, yes I'd like to see you put your time into a note-taking system that can harness the full power of the Logos engine. I know from the wording of your post you disagree, but like I said I don't know what is 'up your sleeve'.

Let me return the question to you -  with no user "interference" where would YOU vote you spend your development time (I'm not talking about marketing, resource scanning etc) over the next year? 5 years? 10 years?

[ I suppose to be fair to our Mac/iPad friends, you should spend this year achieving parity with the different formats]

PS - I can't say for certain, but the "feel" from the One-Note developer's blog is that they are a relatively small development team.

 

Bob Pritchett:

To make sure I'm not missing something (with no sarcasm), please let me know which competitors have notes systems you like, with table and outline editing. I'll see if they're using third-party components I'm not aware of.

To answer this, no competitor (and I think I own most of them!) has a perfect system - I like bits of each. If I am allowed to mention names (which I assume other forum posters will allow me, seeing as it's you who asked me Wink) then probably WordSearch has the best system (i can produce notes with outline, hebrew fonts. images, tables - but admitedly I can't do all that from the GUI - I have at times had to edit the file - it's a simple HTML - to put in <table> tags etc). (In my opinion their note taking in version 7 was slightly better!)

But try not to think "third-party"!

 

And finally...

Thanks for taking the time for commenting on this thread and reading this post. Thank you for allowing me to be frank and please forgive me if there is any sarcasm and flippancy in this post - it is genuinely not intended.

I know you will disagree with things I have said, not see them as a priority and think "He's crazy - he doesn't know how much time, energy and dedication that would take" - but I don't think time or level of difficultly should be the reasons to say "no" to a good idea!

I prefer to think more along the lines of "What CAN it be" rather than "It can't be because...",  and to ask the question "Why shouldn't it be done?" rather than "Why should it be done?"

 

I hope you understand my desire is, and always has been, to have Logos as the best and only one-stop Bible study software - so that the Word can be studied more, understood more, preached better and applied more - so that all the glory goes to where it belongs - to our Lord Jesus.

 

Yours in Him,

James

Posts 2964
tom | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 7 2010 5:27 AM

Bob Pritchett:
third-party controls shows them to be inadequate in technology match (we're now WPF, which doesn't have as rich a third-party infrastructure yet), Hebrew typing support (I don't know any third party control that has it), and cross platform support. ... To make sure I'm not missing something (with no sarcasm), please let me know which competitors have notes systems you like, with table and outline editing. I'll see if they're using third-party components I'm not aware of.

Bob, I do admit that I am out of my league here, and that I do not know what all is involved.  Still, if I can type in Hebrew in my browser when I am using gmail, why is it so hard to find a "control" that has Hebrew typing support.? 

My other question is, if you are looking at a third party control, why not use OpenOffice's word processor.  Not only is it free, it has both a windows and mac version.  

Posts 232
AndyTheGreek | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 7 2010 5:46 AM

tom collinge:
Bob, I do admit that I am out of my league here, and that I do not know what all is involved.  Still, if I can type in Hebrew in my browser when I am using gmail, why is it so hard to find a "control" that has Hebrew typing support.? 

Most producers of 3rd party controls provide what they think the average user would want. I think it's fair to say that no 3rd party controls are designed with Bible study in mind and none anticipate their being used for 'unusual' languages like Hebrew. Not that I know anything much about Hebrew but looking at the Hebrew language resources I have I can see that there is a complicated system of accents and markings around the characters. (I'm sure other users could explain this in the correct terms - my Hebrew is pre-kindergarten at best).

When I was designed a Greek study system, using far older technology than WPF (Delphi V2007, which has oodles of 3rd party controls available) I still had to hunt high and low to find a non RTF edit control that allowed Greek Unicode characters to be typed in. Maybe I looked in the wrong palces, but it took a long search to find one.

So what Bob says does not surprise me at all. And he's absolutely right that designing one from the ground up is incredibly complicated. I wouldn't relish doing one.

Posts 856
Michael McLane | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 7 2010 8:22 AM

For me, outlining would be super, linking to resources in and out of Logos seems a must, tables ... I don't really care. Above all, however, I cannot use the internal Logos note system, which I would love to use, until I can print and export. I simply cannot have my notes locked in a place where I cannot do other things with them.

I am not a "power" user, so maybe I am missing something. If so please let me know.

Posts 579
Jim VanSchoonhoven | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 7 2010 9:28 AM

Bob, take a look at the free The Word program, make sure you get all the information on how to use it, and use their forum site for the latest information, it is constantly improving, but updates are small and take seconds to install.

In Christ,

Jim

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 7 2010 11:21 AM

Bob Pritchett:

JamesHudson:
PS  For the record I think RTF has had it's day - it's an old format that hasn't moved on. The way to go is XHTML (with CSS) - it's changing and moved on, but I think it'll be around for a while yet. In a previous post Bob mentioned tables needing to be resized as an example of how difficult note-making can become. Simple if you use HTML & CSS!

Alas, nothing is really simple.

In 1995 we had a notes system built using our book display engine. In theory a note could do anything a book could do, if we wrote user interface for it. But that UI was difficult and complex (table editing is quite complex), and we were -- literally -- writing a word processor. It had bugs, subtle inconsistencies with user expectations, etc.

In 2001 we switched to HTML, as you suggest now. We used Microsoft's HTML editing component. But we had lots of frustrations there, again where it wasn't similar to a word processor: HTML didn't (and still really doesn't) format text the same way, since it tries to maintain this strange "content separate from style" idea. Word processors (and users) tend to mix content/style freely. Users want to make some text "16pt" and bold, not "H2", which has a style that happens to be 16pt and bold.

As discussed in detail in other posts, the only competitors I know of with anything near a decent notes editor are using a third party control. Our investigation of third-party controls shows them to be inadequate in technology match (we're now WPF, which doesn't have as rich a third-party infrastructure yet), Hebrew typing support (I don't know any third party control that has it), and cross platform support.

I don't know any control that's WPF and Mac; we could theoretically use two different controls, but the more formatting options we require the harder it is to make sure that we can edit notes on both platforms without messing up your data.

We are improving our notes editor, and it's already much better in 4.0d than in 4.0. But the "simple" things people want -- tables, outlining, etc. -- aren't really simple. They're major features with lots of code behind them. 

And when you say you want "a Logos integrated version of One-Note!" ... really? That's where you're voting we put our time? The Microsoft One-Note team is probably larger than all of Logos -- developers, sales people, and marketing combined!

To make sure I'm not missing something (with no sarcasm), please let me know which competitors have notes systems you like, with table and outline editing. I'll see if they're using third-party components I'm not aware of.

I don't want a third-party editor.  The complaints I had with notes in L3 were that the fonts were not stable and that one could not link inside a note to precise locations in some resources (notably the Church Fathers) but had to link to the beginning of the chapter.  Other than those two points I was, and am, relatively satisfied with L3 notes.  I am not at all satisfied with notes in L4.  If Logos were simply to reproduce the functions of L3 in L4 (I think they've fixed the font stability problem), I would be satisfied.  As it is, I only use L4 for reading and use L3 for study.  Logos has ensured a longer life for L3 by not implementing adequate notes functions in L4.  Another drawback to L4 is its clunky morph search function which needs considerable improvement.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 8602
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 8 2010 5:24 AM

Bob Pritchett:
To make sure I'm not missing something (with no sarcasm), please let me know which competitors have notes systems you like, with table and outline editing. I'll see if they're using third-party components I'm not aware of.

Since you asked,

I use the Bibleworks 8  program for verse by verse and chapter by chapter note taking.  They use a modified RTF component which is very robust with separated storage for Chapter and Verse notes, interlinking, outlining the whole ball of wax.  Complete with a reporting feature that pulls the pericope range of notes into a single report for printing.  It handles Hebrew, Greek English and German (the only languages I know enough to try and type anything in.) It is incredibly fast and loads in a separate window the milisecond I hover on a given verse, and then saves, unloads and loads the next verse the second I move my mouse.

The only function they don't handle is footnoting.

It's what I wish I could do in Logos.

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 1135
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 8 2010 5:41 AM

Thomas Black:

I use the Bibleworks 8  program for verse by verse and chapter by chapter note taking.  They use a modified RTF component which is very robust with separated storage for Chapter and Verse notes, interlinking, outlining the whole ball of wax.  Complete with a reporting feature that pulls the pericope range of notes into a single report for printing.  It handles Hebrew, Greek English and German (the only languages I know enough to try and type anything in.) It is incredibly fast and loads in a separate window the milisecond I hover on a given verse, and then saves, unloads and loads the next verse the second I move my mouse.

The only function they don't handle is footnoting.

It's what I wish I could do in Logos.

Jawohl, Thomas!  Yes

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jun 8 2010 5:46 AM

Thomas Black:

I use the Bibleworks 8  program for verse by verse and chapter by chapter note taking.... The only function they don't handle is footnoting.

Footnoting would be a real bonus ! 

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Page 2 of 2 (37 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS