Logos Staff: A Story to Give you something to think about

Two days ago I was at church having a meeting with two IT guys. They bought a new sound board, and while I'm not a sound techie person, I need to know how to use it on the most basic level since I use the computer, three screens, speakers, and a couple of microphones for my class.

Anyway, I was explaining to them something that I was trying to do through PowerPoint and I wanted to know if it was something I would be able to do through my ipad as I walk around my class and make annotations on the screen from anywhere in the room. They said yes but...blah blah blah...it would be better if you did it through ProPresenter because ...blah blah blah. They then said that our church is really giving a push to use ProPresenter but that the challenge is the learning curve. Off the top of my head I said, "Have you ever used Logos Bible Software?" They both said yes. I asked, "Is it as difficult to learn as that?" and without skipping a beat, they both commented, "Absolutely not! That software is so difficult I only use it to read some resources and that's it."

Okay, so I know I've spoken about this before and perhaps you're sick of hearing me say this, but when you've got two IT guys make a comment like that, you have GOT to do something to make your software more user friendly. Since it is BIBLE SOFTWARE, then just like the Bible, I'm assuming you want to make it accessible and usable for all Christians.

After my conversation with the IT guys, I realized that my first "go to" response was to contrast ProPresenter's software learning curve with Logos' learning curve. I feel like I've come far, thanks to help from the message boards and the tons of money I've spent on live classes and videos courses made available through Logos and other third parties. It just saddens me that most people won't have/don't have the time nor resources for that, and therefore Logos' reputation has become one where you need tons of both to use it.

I know that you have been working hard at dropping the prices on introductory materials and giving little videos to teach how to use various parts of the software, and I commend that. But I'm rallying again for the little guy. Great resources like Logos should not be for the spiritual elite, but like Scripture, for the common man who chooses to open it and read it.

Just my .02 for the month.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Small Heath

I agree with you Cynthia, but it's more than just Logos. Our whole society and culture, worldwide, is just too busy and trying to do too many things. I had a long career with IBM and know quite a bit about hardware, software, training, budgeting, teaching, etc. I thought when I retired, I'd have plenty of time to learn all this stuff and use it. I find that all my time is spent volunteering and helping others. I need to learn how to budget my time and juggle my priorities. I also need someone to keep me on track that I'm accountable to. It was easier when I was working. I've started many of the Logos courses, but have gotten sidetracked after just a day or two. I need to retire from my retirement volunteering activities. My age isn't helping, either.

And yes, Logos could and should be much easier to use. There is just way too much stuff on the homepage and it's not intuitive. Too many categories, windows, menus, submenus, and names I don't understand. Add my 1c to the pot.

DAL

I agree also! One thing, though, I’m not a power user, but learned enough to carry me through my studies just by playing with the software and watching mini videos made by FL. I’m still debating whether to sign up for MP’s all access subscription to learn more, but I feel I’m ok with what I know. However, I know Bob has said in the past that even Microsoft Word, Excell, etc. hires third party companies to help Microsoft learn to use their own software. My take on it is this, “It doesn’t have to be the same with Logos.” I think something different should be done, because, as Cynthia mentioned, it should be accessible to the common people, not just the elite. It’s a Bible study tool not some huge corporation making money machine. Yes, some are paid for full time ministry, but many of us are not because we are bi-vocational ministers or some are part time ministers that support themselves because the church can’t afford to help. So, a big yes to making learning Logos Bible Software more accessible for everyone.

I have spoken! 👍😁👌

DAL

Adam Borries (Logos)

Hi, Cynthia,

My name is Adam, and I'm the product manager for the Logos desktop app. We haven't met, but I've long since come to really appreciate your voice in the forums. Thank you for so diligently advocating for the everyday user. I for one am definitely not sick of hearing this chorus from you. [:D]

I asked, "Is [ProPresenter] as difficult to learn as [Logos]?"

Well, no, ProPresenter is easier. But so is Proclaim; presentation software is a simpler tool for a simpler task.

But I realize that's beside the point. Logos is incredibly complex program, and I agree we could do a lot more to guide the average user through their study. We already have some ideas on how to improve this, but I would love to hear your suggestions.

Mark

Adam

You now have Logos Fundamentals. It seems wise to channel efforts into making this package a user friendly package...

If new users can learn Logos Fundamentals and not be overwhelmed by all the bells and whistles, then they would be willing to put their feet deeper into more advanced features. This would be my suggestion.

MJ. Smith

I agree we could do a lot more to guide the average user through their study. We already have some ideas on how to improve this, but I would love to hear your suggestions.

The issues I run into most frequently:

People used to working only with a Study Bible who need a quick start layout with a study Bible and information panel striped down to Bible dictionary/Bible handbook level information
People get frustrated because they don't understand what they are looking at. A mouse-over or pointer type way to see (a) the definition of the data they are looking at and (b) where that data comes from [or would come from when there is no data]
Because it is difficult to create reading plans, standard reading plans such as the annual ISSL (International Standard Sunday-School Lessons) - see Standard Publishing, David Cook & Abingdon in Logos - should be provided in "lectionary" format.

Cynthia in Florida

Hi, Cynthia,

My name is Adam, and I'm the product manager for the Logos desktop app. We haven't met, but I've long since come to really appreciate your voice in the forums. Thank you for so diligently advocating for the everyday user. I for one am definitely not sick of hearing this chorus from you.

... but I would love to hear your suggestions.

Hello Adam: Thank you so much for your response and kind words. I do have some thoughts.

You know how Wordpress has a wordpress.com and a wordpress.org site? Basically, you can use wordpress.com for free and before you know it, you have a blog set up. It's easy to use and I don't need to know any code or fix any errors. It's all done through them. Mind you, I have limited functionality, but I have a pretty decent blog set up in a relatively short time.

Wordpress.org is an entirely different story. With that, depending on how much I want to do, I need some type of knowledge for setting up a blog from scratch. I need to know, at the very least, the basics of codes and errors, etc. Further, I can choose to start from blank or purchase a template and build from there. The more functionality I want, the more "bells and whistles I purchase." Year ago, I started with a free wordpress.com account. Now, I have a wordpress.org account, and I add functionality at my own pace, when I'm ready and want to spend the money.

I kinda think Logos needs something like that. I know that Logos "doesn't sell the program engine" but sells books. However, lately, all the purchasable (is that even a word?) functionality add-ins are designed and appealing because they make Logos EASIER, leaving individuals without them struggling to use Logos. I think Logos needs to make a few "level program packages NOT BASED ON BOOKS alone but based on functions that come with those resources. For instance, at the basic level, if you create a package that has really great standard resources everyone needs, in a base program that is easy to use, without all the bells and whistles, at a great price, I think that's the "wordpress.com" hook. When I first started REALLY using Logos, I watched Mark's Logos 4 videos, and the best thing I learned from him that made Logos usable for me immediately was layouts. He taught me how to build my own, which took a really long time. However, if Logos included things like layouts, reading plans, etc., in user friend screens with a link to videos that explain how to use them, that would be like Mark sitting right there next to you! Then, offer enticing additional functionality upgrade modules THAT COME WITH VIDEO LINKS embedded somehow next to the function key or whatever, so people don't have to look too far for help. My son's online high school course came with something like that, so certainly you all can do that too.

Anyway, that's what comes to the top of my mind, but trust me, I have other ideas...I just don't want to sound too pushy! LOL.

Small Heath

Cynthia, perhaps Logos training, helps, and tips could be more, what's the word I'm looking for? Inductive?[;)]

MJ. Smith

I have other ideas...I just don't want to sound too pushy!

Come on, sound pushy. I'd like to hear some of your other ideas.

Cynthia in Florida

Cynthia, perhaps Logos training, helps, and tips could be more, what's the word I'm looking for? Inductive?

Dale, thanks for the chuckle. I thought my wordpress.com and wordpress.org masked my inductive partiality.

Rosie Perera

I agree. Logos is too complex for newbie users. I know that some software (like Wondershare Video Editor, which I use) comes with a startup option to choose whether you want to start it in "Easy Mode" or "Full Feature Mode" or some such. Logos could do something like that. Provide a stripped-down bare-bones "Easy Mode" with just the bare minimum of features and menu options to get people started, and let them graduate to "Full Feature Mode" once they're more comfortable with it. It could be an option in the Login screen, set to Easy Mode by default.

In Wondershare, Easy Mode is a much simpler UI with a wizard-like approach that steps people through what they need to do to use it.

MJ. Smith

Good idea Rosie

Lee

Thanks Cynthia, for voicing out some of my thoughts.

I struggle most with the search functions. It's just cryptic. The B company nailed it.

Adam

Adam

You now have Logos Fundamentals. It seems wise to channel efforts into making this package a user friendly package...

If new users can learn Logos Fundamentals and not be overwhelmed by all the bells and whistles, then they would be willing to put their feet deeper into more advanced features. This would be my suggestion.

Totally agree. A great move by Logos on the Fundamentals but I'm also wondering, what about making how-to resources cheaper? I'm in Australia so certainly can't make an MP Seminar & a Camp 1 & 2 Video Collection is WAY out of reach price wise at $400US & yes there are manuals & so forth that are cheaper but it's money that could be spent on book resources to fill our libraries maybe? Yes, I am aware of the free videos & training material that appear in the blogs & value those highly, I just think they only scratch the very deep surface

I want to use Logos in all its glory but without solid instruction, I feel like a small fish in a deep pond & know I'm missing out on some amazing features partly through my own ignorance I guess. I love logos though & thank everyone on the team for the hard work they do

We just bought a new car 7 months ago & the instruction manual was free. Not as complex as Logos of course plus I already knew how to drive, but knowing how to turn the heater on in winter has made huge benefits [:P]

Cynthia in Florida

I agree. Logos is too complex for newbie users. I know that some software (like Wondershare Video Editor, which I use) comes with a startup option to choose whether you want to start it in "Easy Mode" or "Full Feature Mode" or some such. Logos could do something like that. Provide a stripped-down bare-bones "Easy Mode" with just the bare minimum of features and menu options to get people started, and let them graduate to "Full Feature Mode" once they're more comfortable with it. It could be an option in the Login screen, set to Easy Mode by default.

In Wondershare, Easy Mode is a much simpler UI with a wizard-like approach that steps people through what they need to do to use it.

Rosie! I haven’t been here in a while so it was a wonderful surprise to see you!

Your post is exactly what I was talking about. Easy mode would be “wordpress.com” and full feature mode would be “wordpress.org” in my analogy. Then, in the full feature mode, they could either offer add on features like they do now, or they could offer the full feature at a lump price or whatever. Also, I think it’s important that in easy mode and in full feature mode, support is available as a hotkey. In other words, I shouldn’t have to go hunting for support on a function. You can’t “google“ something that you’re not even sure what it’s called. They could even make an option “turn on/off tips” like I’ve seeen in other programs so that the user can grow into the program.

I recognize that I’m talking from a perspective where I have no idea whatsoever what it takes to make some of these options available. However, the great minds at Faithlife have proven they have the ability to create an incredibly powerful program. and so I have got to think that the elves who work so hard to make the magic happen “under the hood” can figure out a way to simplify it enough so that the average user can make the magic work on the screen.

JohnB

what about making how-to resources cheaper?

More resources do need to be employed at creating "How to" material. Different members of the Logos family travel at different speeds, some needing very detailed material whereas others flourish on much briefer material. The material needs to be easily accessible through a help menu system (quality fuzzy search?). Have past three score and ten I can sympathise more with my wife because I forget things more readily. I would love to be able just to click on a help menu and be able to remind myself of something I have not used for some time - for instance in creating a PB (although I have created hundreds)!

Yes I can get that from the Wiki pages but I need to know how to access them to be able to use them.
Creating clear simple instructions is a gift both spiritually and professionally. The materials need a panel of slow learners to test materials. Almost be definition these would have to be non-staff members.

There are plenty of examples for simple instructions for (say) MSWord tasks on the internet because MS dont provide the material. We do not have the number of users to provide that internet help system.

IF we had an on-going help menu system being created, virtually any and every question on the Forums could/should result in a new easily accessible entry on the help system for future users - possibly even based on the answers given by other users!

We need both a large number of answers prepared and an easy way to access them. Possibly produce a small number of questions and then build the help system and test, test, test. This should be done before creating too many answers to ensure the tow sides key into each other.

I like the idea of different views of Logos. Photoshop Elements has Beginner, Guided and Expert. accessed at a click of a button. Where Photoshop falls down is their help system. Although I work in Expert mode I don't find that their help system really helps me.

We all love Logos and want to be able to boast more about it and encourage everyone interested in the bible to be able to use it. My wife occasionally makes constructive comments on my attire, not because she hates me but because she wants to be proud of me.

Cynthia in Florida

Thanks Cynthia, for voicing out some of my thoughts.

I struggle most with the search functions. It's just cryptic. The B company nailed it.

Lee: You and me both! It is very frustrating...and as you said, cryptic. Of all my frustrations in learning Logos, this is at the top of the list.

(‾◡◝)

Hey! Maybe Cortana's distant relative could help ...

[;)]

Josh

Make this resource free:

Camp Logos 1 and 2 (Logos 7)

Mike Childs

I put my two cents on Cynthia's original comments.

Logos should be far, far more intuitive to use. There are some things that beginners need to do, and these things need to be more intuitive. The Library should be far simpler to manage and organize. Basic searches should be more intuitive. The reading experience should be better.

Logos is a great product. I have used practically since its beginning - every day. But Logos could be much better to use. In some ways, less would be more.

Jesse Blevins

I put my two cents on Cynthia's original comments.

Logos should be far, far more intuitive to use. There are some things that beginners need to do, and these things need to be more intuitive. The Library should be far simpler to manage and organize. Basic searches should be more intuitive. The reading experience should be better.

Logos is a great product. I have used practically since its beginning - every day. But Logos could be much better to use. In some ways, less would be more.

yes. I completely agree.

Cynthia in Florida

I put my two cents on Cynthia's original comments.

Logos should be far, far more intuitive to use. There are some things that beginners need to do, and these things need to be more intuitive. The Library should be far simpler to manage and organize. Basic searches should be more intuitive. The reading experience should be better.

Logos is a great product. I have used practically since its beginning - every day. But Logos could be much better to use. In some ways, less would be more.

yes. I completely agree.

YES! I think that is what my second response was about. There are basic functions an individual wants to be able to do when they purchase Bible software. If they could have enough of a functional basic program to make them excited about what they just learned and anticipating the treasure around the corner, I think more lay people would use it. (Which I think would be tons of cha-Ching for FaithlLife because that is currently an untapped market). Until that happens, I have stopped recommending Logos to my students, which upsets me. I want to recommend it, but I have some students who spent a good amount of money on Logos because of me, and then got so frustrated that they stopped using it, stating “google is easier.” Google is easier, but if they saw some solid benefit, they would have stuck with it. My students ask me all the time how I found information and to be honest with you, I tell them I use Logos but for the time being, refer them to another free program to get them started in electronic Bible software simply because I don’t want to feel bad that I recommended Logos and they ditched it after hundreds of dollars. Even with the $100 Logos Fundamentals, I’m not recommending it until something changes to make it more user friendly.

Also, thanks everyone for contributing to this plight. These are really great recommendations in this thread. I’m encouraged to see others express their views with such clarity and desire to make Logos a more user-friendly program for us all. Thank you.

Cynthia in Florida

So this is along the lines...but since I didn’t purchase any of these products this way, I’m curious if any of these fit into what we are all talking about.

Wouldn’t it be better and less confusing to sell this as Rosie showed? On an opening screen? Then, allow people to purchase unlock codes for features. But let’s not forget that this is not so much about the packaging of the sets but what help is available in each set.

PetahChristian

Here's another search question asking why search didn't produce the expected results. One would naturally expect that if you searched for "Psalms of Solomon," one of the results would be the actual text itself.

After being shown the proper search string, the OP made the comment that {Milestone <Pseudepigrapha = Psalms of Solomon 1.1>} "is not a very easy way to find "Psalms of Solomon" in my library." After being directed to the "Finding the right datatype" information at the wiki, the OP replied, "Well, that looks like something I don't want to have to learn."

I think we need to change our thinking that complexity like that is actually necessary to perform certain types of "Basic" searches.

Wild Eagle

Why do I have to pay so much money to get Adobe Photoshop and then find it so confusing. It is so much easier to get Instagram app or some other for free and get the work quicker. Plus after paying so much to Adobe, I have To pay much more money to get the training to use it. O, by the way, I almost forgot to mention that it requires even powerful computer to run it. i find those free programs much easier to understand and user friendly.

I hope you got my point

DAL

All the search “magic words” and “combinations“ you have to put together is too much work; not to mention all the key combinations you need to use to put together a special collection. The mystery is to know where to even go to find this information to get the search to work...And voila, you have to pay $100 bucks to get almost 3 hours worth of Verbum videos to learn how to do searches that most apply to Logos!

I’m thankful for MVPs and power users that give us the “codes” to work some of these, but I agree it should be less complex to find what we need. And it shouldn’t cost less than a $100 dollars (literally 1 cent short of $100; i.e. $99.99) to get access to this information.

DAL

Sean

Here's another search question asking why search didn't produce the expected results. One would naturally expect that if you searched for "Psalms of Solomon," one of the results would be the actual text itself.

Yeah I agree. Search is too difficult, and that thread is a good example of the problem.

I don't use very complicated searches, but usually I have to use a combination of Bible Browser and the Search box to find what I want. When Bible Browser first came out, I thought it would solve this problem, but it too has gotten too complicated, and often I can't get it to do what I need by itself.

It's ironic as there's an online training video that shows a much simpler form of Bible Browser with much fewer facets. That one I think I could use, but the actual one I have is too difficult to figure out.

MJ. Smith

I need to weigh in here before too much misleading information appears. Bible references, the basic function of the program,are much simpler. The access to the pseudepigrapha is more difficult partially because they are old resources, built back in the Logos on disks days. There are simpler ways of accessing what the OP requested as Bradley pointed out. However, because of an earlier exchange with the OP, I chose to show the general principle. In other words, I hoped to move the OP on the fast track to power user given the nature of his questions.

DMB

I thought Logos8 was the easy to use search engine, plus speed-uppers.

Rick's last-minute datasets were needed for the new easy-to-use search. I always wondered who in their wildest dreams needed those datasets, absent a good user interface,

At least, if my competition was now a fast-on-its-feet Floridian better-designed company, anyway.

OTOH, if the Now'ers (or the latest name) already have L8, this thread is interesting at least.

Cynthia in Florida

Here's another search question asking why search didn't produce the expected results. One would naturally expect that if you searched for "Psalms of Solomon," one of the results would be the actual text itself.

After being shown the proper search string, the OP made the comment that {Milestone <Pseudepigrapha = Psalms of Solomon 1.1>} "is not a very easy way to find "Psalms of Solomon" in my library." After being directed to the "Finding the right datatype" information at the wiki, the OP replied, "Well, that looks like something I don't want to have to learn."

I think we need to change our thinking that complexity like that is actually necessary to perform certain types of "Basic" searches.

Wonderful example!!!! TO HAVE to find “the right datatype“ is a ridiculous expection on the part of the user. Especially for those who have absolutely no idea what is a datatype, never mind having to KNOW that you need not only a datatype string, but the RIGHT datatype string AND the ability to know how to type out that datatype string.

Cynthia in Florida

I thought Logos8 was the easy to use search engine, plus speed-uppers.

Rick's last-minute datasets were needed for the new easy-to-use search. I always wondered who in their wildest dreams needed those datasets, absent a good user interface,

At least, if my competition was now a fast-on-its-feet Floridian better-designed company, anyway.

OTOH, if the Now'ers (or the latest name) already have L8, this thread is interesting at least.

Denise, can you explain for those of us who have no idea what you mean.

A. Is Logos8 out? I’m a ”Nower” (again, money spent to make this program easier to figure out) and I didn’t see an upgrade.

B. Who is Rick and what are you talking about with easy to use search datasets because of course, I would NEED that (not want...need).

C. Competition in Florida? Huh?

As always, wonderful trying to figure you out! LOL

DAL

Thanks Cynthia, for voicing out some of my thoughts.

I struggle most with the search functions. It's just cryptic. The B company nailed it.

Lee: You and me both! It is very frustrating...and as you said, cryptic. Of all my frustrations in learning Logos, this is at the top of the list.

I thought you purchased the Advance Search video: https://www.logos.com/product/51655/verbum-advanced-search-training which came out a good while ago.

Bottom line, my last two cents. FL could provide the training, but if people don’t put in the time to learn then it’s all for naught. The point, though, Logos needs to be simplified a bit more. Not dumbed down, but simplified. And we all need to keep in mind that there is a learning curve for everything — even the simple things.

DAL

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

Logos is too complex for newbie users.

Right Click contextual menu is a bit too complex for all users. Design decision for Right Click to always show all searchable items in Logos/Verbum can be more annoying than useful for work flow. After selecting a line on the right side of Right Click, the Left Side has many sections sorted in alphabetical order.

Example frustration: older Logos versions (with fewer datasets) had a quick option for opening a Commentary using Right Click: Reference => Top 5 Bibles (with Commentary in Top 5 prioritized list). As more sections were added for Bible Reference, quick option has become quite tedious due to scrolling need past uninteresting sections. Apologies since personally do not share Bible Reference using social media so having that section (and others) ABOVE Top 5 has resulted into finding a different way to open Commentary for a verse using Explorer.

My desktop application dreams => https://community.logos.com/forums/p/148421/923667.aspx#923667 include

Contextual pop-up customization of Right and Left Hand sides: similar to Guides that allows section order to be rearranged as desired so dreaming of "My Contextual Right" and "My Contextual Left" guides with templates that could be edited. Guide metaphor has sections that appear when appropriate. Currently contextual pop-up has applicable sections shown in alphabetical order all the time.

A quick way for improving performance is avoiding unneeded effort. For example, at times want to see everything that Contextual menu can show. At other times only desire useful subset. Most days do not have use for Literary Typing, Genre tagging, Send to Proclaim, Share, .. so would appreciate Guide like option to not show them (or place more useful sections above them). Guides have performance option of section being closed, which would be helpful for contextual sections too.

Until that happens, I have stopped recommending Logos to my students, which upsets me. I want to recommend it, but I have some students who spent a good amount of money on Logos because of me, and then got so frustrated that they stopped using it, stating “google is easier.”

Curious about frustration example(s) ? Usage scenarios about student desires with frustration comments should be helpful for interface improvement.

Irony is Faithlife trying to mimic Google search with false positive results while being annoying from time to populate search suggestions (or previous search, factbook, ...). Related thread is => FRUSTRATED with Logos wasting my computer cycles

Personally dreaming about automatic search suggestion customization: e.g. for Languages with lemmas, show Lemma and Root suggestions while not showing word variant spellings (tedious to scroll past word variants for Lemma/Root suggestions).

Design challenge is what's intuitive for one user can be counter intuitive to another user.

Keep Smiling [:)]

MJ. Smith

Design decision for Right Click to always show all searchable items in Logos/Verbum can be more annoying than useful for work flow.

What is interesting to me is that this is primary reason I use the Context Menu - I use it in lieu of an information panel because it takes no space and I can easily find the information I want on the right hand side. Most of the time, I don't need to go somewhere or do something once I have the information. The difference in our usage is exactly what makes Faithlife's job hellacious.

PetahChristian

A quick way for improving performance is avoiding unneeded effort. For example, at times want to see everything that Contextual menu can show. At other times only desire useful subset. Most days do not have use for Literary Typing, Genre tagging, Send to Proclaim, Share, .. so would appreciate Guide like option to not show them (or place more useful sections above them). Guides have performance option of section being closed, which would be helpful for contextual sections too.

Excellent suggestion!

Cynthia in Florida

Thanks Cynthia, for voicing out some of my thoughts.

I struggle most with the search functions. It's just cryptic. The B company nailed it.

Lee: You and me both! It is very frustrating...and as you said, cryptic. Of all my frustrations in learning Logos, this is at the top of the list.

I thought you purchased the Advance Search video: https://www.logos.com/product/51655/verbum-advanced-search-training which came out a good while ago.

Bottom line, my last two cents. FL could provide the training, but if people don’t put in the time to learn then it’s all for naught. The point, though, Logos needs to be simplified a bit more. Not dumbed down, but simplified. And we all need to keep in mind that there is a learning curve for everything — even the simple things.

DAL

DAL: I did purchase the training, along with MP’s manuals/videos and LearnLogos training as well. I watched Mark’s unofficial videos and have watched every single Logos training video. I have used the wiki site, screen shot and saved MP’s training snippets. You name it, it it’s out there, I’ve read it. I have spent COUNTLESS hours in “training.” So, to say that if people don’t put in the time to learn then it’s all for naught is a moot point, nor is it the main point of this thread, although it proves my point. The point here, as per my original post, is that while I personally have done that, most average users won’t nor can’t because of time/money, nor should they have to. While I understand that all software requires SOME training, it shouldn’t be SO MUCH TRAINING just to use the program for what should be (in the user’s mind) the most basic functions. The ease of use is not the responsibility of the user, but the developer. It shouldn’t fall on the user that they don’t know what is a dataset string, that they need a dataset string, that they need the correctly ordered dataset string, just to search something in their library. So in my mind, this isn’t about FL offering MORE training. It’s about FL making the software more intuitive and then offering short video snippets as hotkeys for those functions that need some explaining.

Dan Starcevich

Logos does themselves a disservice by not providing a comprehensive training manual or on-line training with the product. It is a robust, powerful product. I have been using it since 2009 and use it every day. The learning curve is steep and growing as new tagging, features, and resources are added. The way to address the learning curve is through training.

I have been in a position to not only invest in Logos and my Logos library, but also in training. Not everyone is so fortunate. I think most have to make choices between investing in Logos and investing in training. If the product came with a great user manual or video training they would address the learning curve, expand their market, and encourage current users to expand their libraries in order to take better advantage of the platform.

Just sayin,

Dan

MJ. Smith

on-line training with the produc

I assume you are aware of their training videos? Ask for videos in areas you think are lacking - there's a bunch of people who might have time to catch their breath it we don't keep requests coming.

Dan Starcevich

I am. they are definitely a step in the right direction. I think Faithlife needs to embrace this more and more. Particularly as the product grows in sophistication.

I spent thirty years developing software and systems and the key to a successful delivery and adoption was clear, comprehensive, task focused user training. If they want the market to expand they need to make it as easy as possible for users to get their money's worth out of the investment.

Scot Wright

This has been a needed discussion and I'm so thankful for all the wonderful insightful replies. I've been with Logos since the Oak Harbor days and have always marveled on how useful and powerful the Logos program is. Yet as the Logos program got more complicated and comprehensive I knew I wasn't using the program to it's full potential. Since there was limited documentation at the time for all the features, I felt I needed to attend a few Logos Camps to try to learn how to use the software I had owned for years. I wasn't disappointed but I did come away from those seminars saying to myself, "There was no way I could have found out how to use this program on my own." Even today I hardly do any searches because I just don't have the time to figure it all out. Fortunately I know my library well enough that I can get what I need but I do know I might be missing a few gems. The same with collections, I really couldn't figure out the code so I just grouped the resources manually according to my system. I know I'm missing many resources but I don't know how to find the rest.

I recommend Logos all the time and I'm hopeful that this tremendous tool can truly be discovered for the powerful ministry tool it is. A definite help with the learning curve would encourage even longtime users!

(‾◡◝)

The difference in our usage is exactly what makes Faithlife's job hellacious.

Bingo.

One-size-fits-all works for stretch clothing, but not so well for software trying to satisfy queries of such a huge and multi-faceted matrix of data to users of varying usage wants/needs. At one end of the usage spectrum are those who are trying to get just a sip from the high pressure gusher that is Logos, and at the other end are those who can't get enough. What a challenge!

I have always thought that Logos should incorporate more of a modular design that begins with the simplest of UIs and tools (i.e., keep all of the whiz-bang, advanced features out of sight). Then, if needed or wanted, more modules/tools of increasing complexity could be enabled by the user. Let the software "grow" to a level and at a pace as defined by the user.

Of course, I am not a developer and maybe what I envision is beyond economic and/or software reality.

[mo] <-- just my two cents

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

Logos does themselves a disservice by not providing a comprehensive training manual or on-line training with the product.

Curious about your opinion of => https://www.logos.com/bible-study-training that uses free Mobile Ed course => LT271: Study the Bible with Logos: Jonah 1

What on-line training content should be added to => https://www.logos.com/logos-pro ?

How could Help resource => https://ref.ly/logosres/logos4help?hw=Searching be helpfully improved ? e.g. include dataset resource documentation links. Update "How To" Question "How do I find my Logos Mac files in the Mavericks and Yosemite operating systems?" to "How do I find my Logos files using the Mac operating systems?" (Older Mavericks and Yosemite versions of OS X are no longer supported)

What additional "How To" questions would be appreciated ? (e.g. some tips from power users: MJ, Mark, Dave, ...)

Challenge for comprehensive training is including creative ways of using Logos/Verbum.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Beloved Amodeo

How could Help resource => https://ref.ly/logosres/logos4help?hw=Searching be helpfully improved ?

One suggestion. It would be instructive if the Help Resource would hyperlink to a ready-made example setup within Logos. This would be especially helpful for some of the more advanced searches.

Francis

Although I did push at some point for more documentation -- and indeed good documentation should always be a given -- I think the fundamental issue is not there. I don't think I am a newbie but my primary problem is that Logos is simply not easy to use. I use Logos every single day and I use it a lot. But there are stages in my research when I tend to use certain functionalities rather than others. I find that when I get back to doing a complex something I knew how to do before, I have forgotten the details that differentiate between working and not working. Sure, I can go and find out again whether in documentation or on the forum, but that's time-consuming and frustrating.

There have been talks for quite a while of a graphical build your search UI that would take the arcane out of complex searches. A number of tools have come out that go in that direction (concordance, browser, etc). However, these are more tools scattered all over the place, not a change in the way the software as a whole functions. There are still times when I go "Wait, is that the concordance or Bible browser I should use here? What's the difference already?"

So, the point I am making is that more and more and more in some ways adds to the problem. Documentation itself is scattered and finding what you need is hit and miss (help file, forums, wiki). I would compare using Logos to using Linux as opposed to the easier to get to what you want Operating Systems. I understand that Logos is complex and advanced. Invest in making the complex and advanced more accessible. Adding more of the same will not solve the problem. Stop adding and focus instead on improving what's there.

I have also advocated functionality similar to "tell me what you want to do" in Microsoft Office. Another type is the Siri/OK Google/Cortana approach (although I and I assume others would want text rather voice-based searches). I have not had much response to this suggestion. An example would be "I want to search for wisdom and folly in Wisdom of Solomon". Options presented could be: do you want to search for 'wisdom AND folly,' 'wisdom OR folly' or the phrase "wisdom and folly"? Pick, click, boom!

Now of course this would mean in the first instance that Logos would fix its crawling auto-populating functionality. A slow unresponsive interactive help would not be good.

Cynthia in Florida

Although I did push at some point for more documentation -- and indeed good documentation should always be a given -- I think the fundamental issue is not there. I don't think I am a newbie but my primary problem is that Logos is simply not easy to use. I use Logos every single day and I use it a lot. But there are stages in my research when I tend to use certain functionalities rather than others. I find that when I get back to doing a complex something I knew how to do before, I have forgotten the details that differentiate between working and not working. Sure, I can go and find out again whether in documentation or on the forum, but that's time-consuming and frustrating.

There have been talks for quite a while of a graphical build your search UI that would take the arcane out of complex searches. A number of tools have come out that go in that direction (concordance, browser, etc). However, these are more tools scattered all over the place, not a change in the way the software as a whole functions. There are still times when I go "Wait, is that the concordance or Bible browser I should use here? What's the difference already?"

So, the point I am making is that more and more and more in some ways adds to the problem. Documentation itself is scattered and finding what you need is hit and miss (help file, forums, wiki). I would compare using Logos to using Linux as opposed to the easier to get to what you want Operating Systems. I understand that Logos is complex and advanced. Invest in making the complex and advanced more accessible. Adding more of the same will not solve the problem. Stop adding and focus instead on improving what's there.

I have also advocated functionality similar to "tell me what you want to do" in Microsoft Office. Another type is the Siri/OK Google/Cortana approach (although I and I assume others would want text rather voice-based searches). I have not had much response to this suggestion. An example would be "I want to search for wisdom and folly in Wisdom of Solomon". Options presented could be: do you want to search for 'wisdom AND folly,' 'wisdom OR folly' or the phrase "wisdom and folly"? Pick, click, boom!

Now of course this would mean in the first instance that Logos would fix its crawling auto-populating functionality. A slow unresponsive interactive help would not be good.

Francis: I swear, I could have written this entire post. EVERYTHING you said applies to me. I do figure out (usually by asking on here or searching wiki or watching a video) how to do complex things with Logos, think how awesome it is, screen shot it, and tuck it away in a help file. But then I come back to it later and forget, because I don’t use it that often, so I have to start all over again. I could go on each point above and give examples of how this applies to me, but I’m thinking that if you use Logos regularly and I use Logos regularly and we both have the same experience, then there are plenty of those who are users (but not “power users” who have understanding of how operations work “under the hood”) who, like us, are in the same boat.

Beloved Amodeo

There have been talks for quite a while of a graphical build your search UI

I for one support this idea wholeheartedly. But, this too I think misses the point made by Cynthia. If I understand her correctly what she is asking for is an entirely different approach to the one Logos currently uses. One accessible to the average Bible student with no prior experience with the software. This to me argues for a two-tier approach to the software.

Although I did push at some point for more documentation -- and indeed good documentation should always be a given -- I think the fundamental issue is not there. I don't think I am a newbie but my primary problem is that Logos is simply not easy to use. I find that when I get back to doing a complex something I knew how to do before, I have forgotten the details that differentiate between working and not working. Sure, I can go and find out again whether in documentation or on the forum, but that's time-consuming and frustrating.

Your experience is probably common and certainly, I agree that Search is frustratingly difficult to recall and reproduce outcomes. Better documentation and approaches that streamline the building of Advanced Searches like the Context Menu. Better and more accessible documentation would improve the experience here. I don't know maybe what I'm saying is that I want a better system for the recording complex Searches. And this could be found in a better and more thorough documentation.

In a way, I believe we are being a little fickle when we ask for more powerful Searches but, we want a simple approach to get this information. The Morph Query is graphical but requires some knowledge to use effectively. No matter what approach is adopted there will be a learning curve.

Now of course this would mean in the first instance that Logos would fix its crawling auto-populating functionality. A slow unresponsive interactive help would not be good.

In the Make an L8 Wishlist thread I advocate early for a speeded-up Logos. I can do no less here. Agree, agree, agree.

JohnB

I find that when I get back to doing a complex something I knew how to do before, I have forgotten the details that differentiate between working and not working.

You mean it is not just me!! That is one reason why we need a superb help file system with fuzzy search leading to short help/teaching nuggets. However good the training is or even how intuitive Logos becomes, some of us (OK many of us) will still have a senior moment. and need access to a quick reminder.

Lee

Hello Cynthia

After reading your post my opinion about your two IT guys is first just because someone is an IT guy it doesn't mean that all software can be understood at the same level.

I studied computer systems as my major back in 94, I know I'm dating myself some but I also ran my own computer company I did networking and built hardware systems. And later worked as a networking operator in a big company overseeing four different networks every day. But I didn't understand all the software installed on every system.

Back to the two IT guys they have a connection with sound boards and music systems so that could be a reason that they think Logos is way harder, for me I would say ProPresenter would be way harder.

I have been using from Logos 4 about 10 years now, I don't think of myself as a power user, I use Logos to help me with my studies in Theology and my work in the mission field.

Because of the forums and the many videos, like DAL I have learned enough to carry me through my needs and studies.

In the end I think that any software system is only as good as the programers making it, but also it is the duty of the user to study the program they want to use.

Today I still don't use all that the program can offer me even though i use Logos everyday but I get around pretty good.

Simon’s Brother

After reading your post my opinion about your two IT guys is first just because someone is an IT guy it doesn't mean that all software can be understood at the same level.

I agree Lee, just because someone is an IT guy doesn't mean they understand software, they may as you have pointed out be a hardware and/or network person and not necessarily know a lot about software at all beyond the installation of it and the utilities used to monitor hardware and network performance. I most certainly would not expect them to know to be experts on bible software or be able to open up a bible software package and be able to use it any easier than the rest of us.

That of course is not to take away from the thrust of Cynthia's message. it just the story is not without flaws in its plot.

In the end I think that any software system is only as good as the programers making it, but also it is the duty of the user to study the program they want to use.

Agree on both points Lee. It's a two way street.

Cynthia in Florida

Hello Cynthia

In the end I think that any software system is only as good as the programers making it, but also it is the duty of the user to study the program they want to use.

In the end I think that any software system is only as good as the programers making it, but also it is the duty of the user to study the program they want to use.

Agree on both points Lee. It's a two way street.

Hello Lee and doc: I just want to make sure you read on this thread where I, as well as several others, shared the amount of time spent trying to use the program. For most of us, we HAVE invested much time and money on seeking to understand how to perform several functions in the program, and many on here talked about how they have just given up trying after countless hours of trying to make it work. Nevertheless, it is ultimately the job of the programmers to decide if that’s how they want their program to be known. However, (and this comes back to my original post), Logos’ motto is “Bible study has never been easier.” REALLY?

DMB

However, (and this comes back to my original post), Logos’ motto is “Bible study has never been easier.” REALLY?

Well, if you put your Logos computer in your lap, then put your Bible on top, it's great in class. Just open your Bible! It's so easy. Not being sarcastic, but one big reason I still use Laridian with a $30k Logos, is it's quick, and no muss, no fuss.

But I do now use Libby (of course), Logos, Bibleworks, Accordance, Laridian, Olivetree, and my own Bible software. My observation is each seems to assume a different customer. OT and Laridian (PC version) are militantly easy to use. I really can't imagine why 95% of Christians wouldn't select one of these two or even Gateway. These days, they have pretty broad libraries.

After that, the going gets rough. There's a time investment, whichever. My impression, 'time' is the main issue.

But why Logos doesn't GUI it's search, provide a free manual (to encourage), and 'com-mun-i-cate' is beyond me. They're smart, so I assume they want a specific customer ... like the comedy where the western town put a tollgate in the desert charging 10 cents. Worked!

Cynthia in Florida

However, (and this comes back to my original post), Logos’ motto is “Bible study has never been easier.” REALLY?

But why Logos doesn't GUI it's search, provide a free manual (to encourage), and 'com-mun-i-cate' is beyond me. They're smart, so I assume they want a specific customer ... like the comedy where the western town put a tollgate in the desert charging 10 cents. Worked!

You know Denise: You have given me something to really think about here (You often do).

Never ever have I once ever thought about this...that they want a specific customer. In my mind, I was assuming (maybe that was my naïveté) that FL wanted to reach everyone with their software. Perhaps that’s not the case. Hmmmm....