The future of Logos and Faithlife: Help us make the right decisions!
Comments
-
Andrew:
I do appreciate the prayers. However, please do not misinterpret "frustration" over things as being equal to not loving God.
The desire or lack thereof is due to the over complicated system, which is due to it's complex nature. For about 8 years I had an over-priced Logos system that did me no good at all. The simplest of tasks (looking up a verse by keyword or location) was far easier and quicker to do in a hard copy Bible or a google search. The load times alone was ridiculous. Fortunately, this has been improved upon with Logos 8. What used to take 3-5 minutes to load now take 30-60 seconds. Then there was the constant updates, rendering the software completely useless. (Yes, I know you can turn off updates, but, that is NOT an answer, because the updates are STILL there to be updated).
It's now just a matter of getting the desire to use this software that has cost me thousands of dollars over the past 9-10 years. Remember each jump is about $400, plus any additionals. I started at 3, was told there were no plans for L4, and within several months, there it was. Fortunately, Logos has since allowed for major discounts for jumping to the next version, that I do not recall before L7, if you had just purchased the previous.
So, again, people who have frustrations and even anger issues with even "Christian" organizations have good reason to. But, does not mean they do not love God.Andrew Biddinger said:Batman said:Sadly there's not much that can be done to regain my desire (that i am aware of) to get back to the Bible Study I once loved. That will take God to move me back.
I need Jesus every day. Praying that he renews your heart to love him.
“Taste and see that the Lord is good; blessed is the one who takes refuge in him.” (Psalm 34:8, NIV)
“Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation, now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.” (1 Peter 2:2–3, NIV)
0 -
DAL, Sorry, but, your response is about as confused a response as I have seen, in a long while.
First, you are off base on what God does: "I have chosen you", "No man comes to the Father unless I draw them to him". Yes, God wants us to diligently seek him, and rewards those who do. But, even that is the gift of God. So, no, you are completely off base Scripturally in saying "To expect a miracle or God to come and fetch you is to believe the devil’s lies."
Second, I stated that I have lost my desire to study the Bible as I once did, because this software has been a sore spot to me for so long. It was everything I expected, but, nothing of what I had hoped. I had hoped it would be as simple to use as the previous software I had used, except thanks to MS upgrading to XP, none of my old software worked. I was told this was awesome software, would be fabulous for research. I just didn't expect to have to go to school to learn how to use it, or, for it to have been slower than opening the hard copy Bible to find a passage. Or to google a passage.
As a side note, I generally use commentaries to ensure I am following inline Biblical interpretation, as opposed to "private interpretation", although I do my own work. I do have a working knowledge of how the Hebrew language works, while my actual language skills are not yet complete.
But, Bible Study and whatever you are talking about are two different things.
And, I will accept the prayers from any who profess to be Christians, for my spiritual well being; and, I do appreciate that.DAL said:Batman said:Sadly there's not much that can be done to regain my desire (that i am aware of) to get back to the Bible Study I once loved. That will take God to move me back.
Actually, God has already given you the knowledge to realize you can’t be in your current state. It’s your choice to go back to your Father just like it was the prodigal son’s choice to come to his senses.
You cannot expect God to be behind you begging you to come back or to convince you to come back. To expect a miracle or God to come and fetch you is to believe the devil’s lies.
Praying and hoping you repent and turn back to God!
DAL
0 -
Hi Denise. Been a while seeing you here. (I best be careful, or else maybe my spiritual destination may be on the line for not posting regularly. lol).
Yep, I think pastors get caught up in a conflict where they think Bible study for sermon prep and personal time with God are the same. They can be; but, they can also get in the way of each other, if we are not careful.
Thanks for understanding the difference. And, I always hope I am where I need to be. But, I also understand I am a long way from where I should be. But, at the same time, I also understand that I need to go through many of these journeys to get where I need to be.
Appreciate you.
Thanks, sis.Denise said:Guys, for goodness sakes. Casting 'Bible Study' as theological is the first mistake. Timothy, where art thou? And treating Logos as 'Bible Study' is the second. Sermon prep, yes. Research, yes. Batman is where he needs to be.
0 -
Well Batman, You’re a calvinist...that explains everything. Well, continue in your lost state. According to Calvin maybe you weren’t a real Christian to begin with and that’s why you’re not in the mood for God anymore.
Don’t worry about obedience (Hebrews 5:8-9; Matthew 7:21; Luke 6:46; John 13:17), you have not been chosen, so no need to vent with a pity party in the forum about how you don’t have the desire anymore.
👍😁👌 Cheers to confusion! (Irony o ironies) 😂
DAL
0 -
A gentle reminder that the forum isn’t the place to argue about (or mock) different theological viewpoints. Let’s please be respectful of one another.
Thanks to FL for including Carta and a Hebrew audio bible in Logos 9!
0 -
Batman said:
Andrew:
I do appreciate the prayers. However, please do not misinterpret "frustration" over things as being equal to not loving God.Ah, I am glad for that! I was misunderstanding what you were saying then. I'm glad that your desire for God and knowing him through his word doesn't hinge on being happy with your Logos purchase.
This might not be you, but one thing I've found in me is that often when I find myself getting upset or disappointment in something, it can often be because I have made myself or an object an idol of my affections. That can be a good heart/motivation check. But, only you and the Lord know your own heart.
On a practical level, I'm sure we also agree together that we want Logos to improve.- Don't miss a FREE Book, COUPON, or OFFER! Join the Free Faithlife Books Group
0 -
What I am is annoyed that you do not understand the difference between being a Christian and frustrated with expensive software that has not worked,
But, apparently you are what Solomon has described in Proverbs 26.
If we have an ignore button, please add me to yours, as I will add you to mine.DAL said:Well Batman, You’re a calvinist...that explains everything. Well, continue in your lost state. According to Calvin maybe you weren’t a real Christian to begin with and that’s why you’re not in the mood for God anymore.
Don’t worry about obedience (Hebrews 5:8-9; Matthew 7:21; Luke 6:46; John 13:17), you have not been chosen, so no need to vent with a pity party in the forum about how you don’t have the desire anymore.
👍😁👌 Cheers to confusion! (Irony o ironies) 😂
DAL
0 -
ROFLOL no, my happiness and state of eternal security and my standing before God is not dependency on my Logos purchase; that is solely based on God's mercy, and his choice to have accepted me, or to not have accepted me. (Eph. 2:8-10)
And, yes, I do want Logos to constantly improve, and fortunately, so does Bob, and the company (hence this entire thread, he created). And, fortunately, L8 has made HUGE strides in the improvement category, in my opinion. It is extremely expensive (to me) as I have decided to go with the annual membership; but, IF i can get motivated to learn this software (which I still have a huge distaste for, and will be a while before I can erase the bad taste left behind, for quite some time), I will rejoice that I am able to and willing to use all the money I have forked over to this software and make good use of it. In the meantime, I have an overpriced software that I just do not have the motivation and desire to learn; other than to read as a Bible. (Which again, makes this a several thousand dollar Bible; rather than the resource it was intended to be. And at THAT point, once i get to that point, I will be happy with the purchase(s). Until then, I am still blah about it)> However, on the plus side, I have seen Bob and his desire to be more honorable than I initially perceived; and am happy that I am (hopefully) incorrect on his motivations.
Once I can get past the lack of motivation to learn the software, I can begin to appreciate it, and the improvements that came along with 8, and I am sure will come with 9.Andrew Biddinger said:Batman said:Andrew:
I do appreciate the prayers. However, please do not misinterpret "frustration" over things as being equal to not loving God.Ah, I am glad for that! I was misunderstanding what you were saying then. I'm glad that your desire for God and knowing him through his word doesn't hinge on being happy with your Logos purchase.
This might not be you, but one thing I've found in me is that often when I find myself getting upset or disappointment in something, it can often be because I have made myself or an object an idol of my affections. That can be a good heart/motivation check. But, only you and the Lord know your own heart.
On a practical level, I'm sure we also agree together that we want Logos to improve.0 -
I felt the way I left you, was no more appropriate than the way you left me. Therefore, I thought I would share an example of why I am frustrated with the entire Logos software. and why I do not think my eternal security is dependent upon my loving Logos.
Thanks to John Falahee, I am getting some training. He has proven to me he is about seeing people are comfortable and understand Logos. Noqw, despite the lessons I have gone through, and the personal time he has made, what happened today furthers my exasperation of the entire Logos package.
I was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
Now, i am sorry you think my eternal security is dependent upon my loving Logos; and that it is frustrating, because I can do what I need for free from Google, and can't get this massive and powerful and extremely expensive software to do a simple task.
Anyway, I thought maybe this example might give an insight as to why 10 years of this type of thing has me irritated frustrated and not Mr. Happy with a several thousand dollar software that has done less for me than a secular Google search engine, that I get for free (save the personal info associated with google).DAL said:Well Batman, You’re a calvinist...that explains everything. Well, continue in your lost state. According to Calvin maybe you weren’t a real Christian to begin with and that’s why you’re not in the mood for God anymore.
Don’t worry about obedience (Hebrews 5:8-9; Matthew 7:21; Luke 6:46; John 13:17), you have not been chosen, so no need to vent with a pity party in the forum about how you don’t have the desire anymore.
👍😁👌 Cheers to confusion! (Irony o ironies) 😂
DAL
0 -
Batman said:
I was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
It's a fascinating example - thanks for sharing.
I assume that you were looking for hoping to find where Jesus calls disciples to deny themselves (in Mark 8:34 and parallels) - and the issue seems to be related to the fact that the verses don't have "deny yourself" but "deny themselves".
Google seems - although I don't know what algorithm they use - seem to be picking up on sermons etc that use the phrase "deny yourself" and link back to the appropriate verses. Whereas Logos - because the actual phrase doesn't occur - doesn't find any relevant results.
Is this a fair summary of the situation?
If so - and with the very different approach to searching between the two engines - its not at all clear to me how Logos would need to be changed to support the sort of search you are hoping for. You would need some form of "fuzzy matching" where the fuzziness was not about rendering in different translations but more about different expressions that point to the same meaning.
0 -
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+16%3A24-26&version=DLNT
Batman was using the wrong version (smiling). BTW, DLNT is from someone from Logos Bible Institute. That makes it ok.
Actually, DuckDuck did well. And even ignoring DLNT, BibleGateway still found it.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Batman said:
I was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
Replicated one fuzzy Bible result in Leviticus. Google understands yourself being synonymous with self so changing Bible search to deny self included Luke 9:23 in fuzzy results so modified Bible search to deny (self,himself) that includes Mark 8:34 in results
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Graham,
Your assumptions are spot on.
I was indeed intending to hunt down "Deny themselves" as opposed to "Deny yourself".
n
This has been the frustration I have had with Logos for over a decade. Upon my next correspondence with John., I will ask again, why or how the verses came up out of Bible-book order. He told me last week, but, I do forget his response. I typed in "deny" and perhaps after clicking 3-4 "More results", it finally showed up.
You are correct that using Google, it linked into sermons, more so than Bible references, which of course then tied into online Bibles. So, for whatever reason, the "fuzzy search" on Google brought me to where I wanted to be, and in a split second.
Once again, I will be relying on my own "fuzzy search" in my memory banks. But, I do recall seeing a video that explained how Logos' "Fuzzy search" <should> brings up results that aren't word perfect. Unfortunately, over the years I have had Logos, I have found it so much more simple to Google or even scan a physical Bible than to rely on Logos.
I have no doubt Logos is an awesome resource. A powerful tool. But, at the same time, I keep getting kicked in the face with an analogy that seems to fit: I can do more more quickly scanning through scrolls than using powerful tools like Logos. I am left baffled, wondering if this is a lack of extensive (or even free) training or if this is a situation where paper and pen is much more efficient than a super computer? Before Windows XP, I had about 5 Bible software titles that I could slither through with a simple search. Thanks to these other companies NOT being like Logos, and working very hard to ensure Logos stays up to date (and I do mean working hard, as the same day Vista, 7, 8 and 10 came out, Logos was ready to roll), they became useless.
So, at this point, every time I think I see a light at the end of the proverbial tunnel, it seems like I find it to be a Logomotive (:D locomotive) coming head on and not the hopeful results I, well, hope for. So dang derned frustrating.
To answer your question, I have no clue how Logos would need to be changed. But, am I wrong and expecting more from Logos' "fuzzy search"?Graham Criddle said:Batman said:I was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
It's a fascinating example - thanks for sharing.
I assume that you were looking for hoping to find where Jesus calls disciples to deny themselves (in Mark 8:34 and parallels) - and the issue seems to be related to the fact that the verses don't have "deny yourself" but "deny themselves".
Google seems - although I don't know what algorithm they use - seem to be picking up on sermons etc that use the phrase "deny yourself" and link back to the appropriate verses. Whereas Logos - because the actual phrase doesn't occur - doesn't find any relevant results.
Is this a fair summary of the situation?
If so - and with the very different approach to searching between the two engines - its not at all clear to me how Logos would need to be changed to support the sort of search you are hoping for. You would need some form of "fuzzy matching" where the fuzziness was not about rendering in different translations but more about different expressions that point to the same meaning.
0 -
Hmm. Ok, it's not google I used. It is indeed Duckduckgo. Im sure google works the same. (And, more people understand "google" than DDG.
Im not sure what DLNT is, but, I do see it is part of the link.
I appreciate how you seem to always understand what I am not saying correctly.
Thats the second time this month, and probably the 100th time overall. Thank you so much. You dont know how awesome it is to have someone understand what I am not understanding. It's very much like having an interpreter to a foreign language and is very much appreciated.
THANK YOU!!!!Denise said:https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+16%3A24-26&version=DLNT
Batman was using the wrong version (smiling). BTW, DLNT is from someone from Logos Bible Institute. That makes it ok.
Actually, DuckDuck did well. And even ignoring DLNT, BibleGateway still found it.
0 -
You are yet another one who has been through many of my frustrations over the years. And, Actually, if I am not mistaken, were one who helped turn me around back on L7. So, to you as well, THANK YOU!
Where the heck am I messed up at? Well, other than having the wrong words for fuzzy search. For some reason, I dont think it would have ever dawned on me to just do "deny" and "self". I remember it as "deny yourself" as opposed to "deny themselves" but regardless, I would have thought Logos would have figured out what i was looking for.
Thank God I did extremely well with those "Sword Drills" when I was a kid and for Google, err, Duckduckgo (lol) otherwise I'd be completely helpless finding verses.Replicated one fuzzy Bible result in Leviticus. Google understands yourself being synonymous with self so changing Bible search to deny self included Luke 9:23 in fuzzy results so modified Bible search to deny (self,himself) that includes Mark 8:34 in results
Keep Smiling
0 -
Batman said:
This has been the frustration I have had with Logos for over a decade.
and will probably have for many more as Faithlife will never have the necessary computer power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_data_centers
Yes, Logos is smaller in scale of corpus and user but still the necessary algorithms require very serious computer power.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Thanks for that boost of confidence. Ha!
Well, you've always been a straight shooter with me. So, why stop now?
Appreciate it.MJ. Smith said:Batman said:This has been the frustration I have had with Logos for over a decade.
and will probably have for many more as Faithlife will never have the necessary computer power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_data_centers
Yes, Logos is smaller in scale of corpus and user but still the necessary algorithms require very serious computer power.
0 -
Batman said:
was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
Thanks for a great, concrete example! The "problem" with your query is (assuming you're looking for the condition Jesus gives for following him) that the pronoun is in second person rather than third person. I think it would be good if fuzzy search would plug in additional pronouns, especially on queries that are producing only a few hits. Of course the reason that Google is finding it for you is because of many people talking about the passage(s).
One practical tip to improving results in fuzzy search: Use more words. Changing your query to "deny himself" produces the desired results, but that requires you to be exact, which nullifies the advantage of fuzzy search! Simply lengthening your query, on the other hand, to "deny yourself take up", also produces the desired results. Adding two more words in your search might have been faster (and definitely "cleaner") than opening Google, especially if you were wanting to find all three synoptic references.
Edit: An additional improvement to fuzzy search might be to allow terms to be designated as "required." Perhaps something like "!deny yourself take up your !cross" could either:
- Exclude results that don't have both "deny" and "cross"
- Simply adjust the ranking to put greater weight on those terms
Edit2: Sorry for the double response! I guess that's what happens when you see a post on the way to bed, leave the tab open overnight, then respond without refreshing first! 😏
0 -
Reuben Helmuth said:Batman said:
was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
Thanks for a great, concrete example!
<snip />
Our thanks as well for a good example of something that "should" work but doesn't. You're right that our goal with fuzzy search is that, for many cases, "close" will be good enough. Without going into additional details about why this works for some web search engines, we're making some fixes that should improve this example and others like it.
Reuben is also correct that, in many cases, more words in the query may help fuzzy search.
0 -
Sean
Always glad to get an "official" response from an "official person who is officially" oh never mind, you get the picture
Thank you for responding.
Several people have dealt with me over the past decade. I pray patiently, but, some have all but given up. Many, probably never understanding WHY I have so many issues with something they clearly have no issue with.
I have to say, I was somewhat surprised when one person said "Thank you for concrete evidence", and then a second. I took the assumption that was because I used similar phrasing. But, once again, I am seeing "great, concrete example" And, again, a "Thank you" for it.
This now leads me to believe there are issues. but, people have not been able to "put there finger on it". Maybe I am reading to much into this? I am known to do that. Maybe I was correct with the former assumption? Or, am i correct in the latter? I have no idea; but am again leaning toward the latter.
Regardless, it is for this very reason, I have been frustrated with Logos. I cannot believe that there is any amount of training that could have changed things. I am under the impression that the only thing training might have done was tell me "use more words". In many cases, that might be true. Suppose however, that is all a person recalls? Now granted, I probably did remember at that time, "cross", but, I was looking for the phrasing used to demonstrate that when the world says, "Does God want me to lie and deny who I am?" picking up a cross didnt uh, cross my mind. So, yes, I was relying on Fuzzy search; which did not work.
Will training on Logos be of SOME help? I have no doubt. But, in different directions and areas. But, when I find it slower to do a general search (as I was able to do in previous software; and on Google-- err DuckDuckGo-- for free, well, you can see why it feels $2k or more spent on Logos would be frustrating; because ultimately, I have no desire to use the software, and no amount of training can cure that.
Fortunately, JF is trying very hard to break through that for me.
So, that is where I am, continue to be, but, hopefully not through to L9. I am grateful for the progress L8 has made; but, obviously and apparently, not enough. But, I will take what I can get, as I have invested far more than I care to think about, at this time (despite it being far less than most people here). And fortunately, once I can get through these barriers, I do see the value I originally saw. But again, breaking through the barriers will continue to be the issue with me until those breakthroughs have been found and fixed.
Thanks again for the input.Sean Boisen said:Reuben Helmuth said:Batman said:was working on a subject, that required a passage. I typed in "Deny yourself" in all bibles, hoping whatever phrasing would come up. I had ONE verse come up; in Leviticus. Not what I needed. So, I google it, and in 2 seconds it appears!
Thanks for a great, concrete example!
<snip />
Our thanks as well for a good example of something that "should" work but doesn't. You're right that our goal with fuzzy search is that, for many cases, "close" will be good enough. Without going into additional details about why this works for some web search engines, we're making some fixes that should improve this example and others like it.
Reuben is also correct that, in many cases, more words in the query may help fuzzy search.
0 -
Batman said:
<snip />
I cannot believe that there is any amount of training that could have changed things. I am under the impression that the only thing training might have done was tell me "use more words".
<snip />
Agreed: this isn't a training issue, since the purpose of Fuzzy Search is to help you find things you can only partially remember. Because it's fuzzy, it's not perfect (though we agree this verse in Leviticus is a substandard result), but the more such substandard instances we identify, the more we can improve the service.
Of course, I don't think your purchase of Logos was wasted: this is only one of literally hundreds of things the software does. But we're always looking for opportunities to improve it, so it's helpful to have this concrete bug substandard performance [;)] report.
0 -
Batman said:
But, I will take what I can get, as I have invested far more than I care to think about, at this time (despite it being far less than most people here)
Well, Mr Batman, your assumptions aren't entirely correct (almost; granted fuzzy is not too fuzzy). But I have a larger investment than you (mindless purchasing) and I hardly use the software. Meaning all (any of) the cutesy features.
And I'd argue, in the long run, you'd be smart not to. Train the brain. Everything the hard way. Smarty-pants rabbit hole searching.
I do have my single favorite rabbit-tool: NEAR (on each side, one or more guesses, enclosed by parens). I learn a lot from failing over and over! Smiling.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Well, maybe I will be able to help, because it seems my entire 10 years with Logos has resulted in a tone of such instances-- ie, "non-concrete" ones at this point; but, I'm sure many more will continue for me.
Up until this point, I have used Logos very little. Every so often, I attempt to use it. Get frustrated, shut er down, and wait for the next downloads and "motivation" to try again. To me, that is a huge waste. I keep praying and praying that I get the motivation/desire to use Logos. Then at that point, no, it wont have been a waste. But, the honest truth is, right at this moment, yeah. It seems cheaper and more efficient to do all the research on my own. At this point. That is where I pray the training comes in, and turns this around. Hey, Amazon didn't make a profit for a very long time; God did not create the universe in a day. So, I keep trying to plug along, and hopefully, one day, all the investments, all the frustrations will pay off.Sean Boisen said:Agreed: this isn't a training issue, since the purpose of Fuzzy Search is to help you find things you can only partially remember. Because it's fuzzy, it's not perfect (though we agree this verse in Leviticus is a substandard result), but the more such substandard instances we identify, the more we can improve the service.
Of course, I don't think your purchase of Logos was wasted: this is only one of literally hundreds of things the software does. But we're always looking for opportunities to improve it, so it's helpful to have this concrete bug substandard performance
report. 0 -
I will never argue my investment in Logos is larger than anyones. I only say my investment is much larger than I should have put into it-- to this point, anyway. Having gotten L3 at a "bargain price" $300-400 instead of the $600+ it was being offered at, but, still much more than I should have paid, given my income levels (I had just lost my job; but, 'HAD to buy it'". Then 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; plus all the littles in between. I figure a couple grand, maybe more. Of course, many many initially invested in the Diamond, and then the Portfolio, and now whatever that $200 grazillion package is. So, with less than 3000 resources, I know I'm nowhere near as large as "super users". Still, for something I rarely use, because, well, basically, I get some verses, thank God, I do remember much of where things are, to get there; and when motivated, I use some of the mobile ed courses; or, pretty much, have them in my library, and get to them, when i have the time, or make the time (when I get that rare burst of motivation).
For now, I hold on to the Logos Now, Connect, subscription plan, whatever its called this week. $100 or $120/yr is worth it to me, IF ever I get to using it "full time".
You may be right using all the features may be more detrimental; but, they are features that impressed me way back on that day I tipped myself off the fence to buy it. They still do; except, everything I have run into, and get beat up on, attempting to use it. [^o)][:^)]Denise said:Batman said:But, I will take what I can get, as I have invested far more than I care to think about, at this time (despite it being far less than most people here)
Well, Mr Batman, your assumptions aren't entirely correct (almost; granted fuzzy is not too fuzzy). But I have a larger investment than you (mindless purchasing) and I hardly use the software. Meaning all (any of) the cutesy features.
And I'd argue, in the long run, you'd be smart not to. Train the brain. Everything the hard way. Smarty-pants rabbit hole searching.
I do have my single favorite rabbit-tool: NEAR (on each side, one or more guesses, enclosed by parens). I learn a lot from failing over and over! Smiling.
0 -
Sean Boisen said:
we're making some fixes that should improve this example and others like it.
Great. This will be excellent.
0 -
This is the best Bible study tool I have ever used, hands down! I would be very lost if something were to happen and we did not have this tool any longer.
0 -
I have been using Logos for several years. Searching is very, very challenging. If any improvement I would suggest something be doe to make searching much easier.
Some of the search stings that I have seen in this forum leave me amazed. I do not think I could ever come up with what I have seen.
0 -
I looked at Equip and I could see the value IF I didn't already have the tools and if my church needed them. There might be an interesting market in church plants. We already have website, giving, and for less money, and they work. Like everyone says, changing is hard.
A deal breaker in Equip is the Bible versions- we use a different one, and there would be no way to put something out there with a version different than what we use.
I would think the most effective sales strategy is to make its software the standard for every Bible college and seminary (I presume they already believe this)
In terms of Logos cost to an individual, I need to break it down into two/three components: the software itself, the hardware "add" (see below), and the books. Pastors will buy books anyway- then to say it's costly, one has to compare the cost of "real" books and Logos books. One clear added cost is the cost of Logos itself, and also added cost of having Logos capable hardware vs what one would use if one didn't use Logos.
To those who wrote that people are moving away from technology, that may be true for some but the numbers say otherwise, and for some time, the fastest adopters are seniors. They've learned it keeps them in touch with their children/grandchildren/etc. And we've seen that when people "get" that they need tech, like with Zoom-like technology, they learn really fast.
Windows 11
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
We’ve been building Logos Bible Software since 1991. It’s the heart of everything we do, and of accomplishing our mission:
We use technology to equip the Church to grow in the light of the Bible.
Logos is the premiere tool for people who are serious about Bible study. It’s heavily used by pastors, scholars, seminary students, and lay people.
But people who are serious about Bible study -- and want to use a powerful, dedicated tool for study -- are a small percentage of most churches. We want to serve everyone in the church, and we know that many people ‘grow in the light of the Bible’ through classes, small groups, video, and free content on the web.
Faithlife Equip is our platform for helping everyone in every church grow in the light of the Bible. We believe an integrated platform (one account!) is of great value to the church, and that the more we integrate the daily ‘mechanics and logistics’ of the church (member management, communications, calendar, giving, website, etc.) with biblical content (sermons, curriculum, Bible study, videos, etc.) the more likely it is that we can engage and serve the whole church.
My church, Trinity Bible Church, Phoenix, AZ, uses material from 9Marks and The Gospel Coalition. Both of these organizations are very supportive of expository preaching. Our belief is that preaching directly out of the Bible text week after week will benefit our congregation by emphasizing the importance we should be putting on the Word of God. These sermons also serve to train the congregants in the basics of hermeneutics. Historical and cultural context is dealt with, as well as an appreciation for the effort that goes into exegesis. It is an opportunity for the preacher to provide training by example.
I suggest that if Logos were to pick up the mantle of championing expository preaching, you would be helping pastors to awaken their congregations to the necessity of opening their Bibles during the week. This could help to increase the percentage of those interested in serious Bible study.
You have very good book resources available on this topic. However, the mobile training is a bit on the expensive side and is somewhat limited. The least expensive offer, which does mention expository preaching, is over nine hundred dollars.
0 -
Going to make a suggestion that I don't expect will be picked up and developed, but it's worth a shot. As I've made clear many times for the last decade or so, I still use L3 as my primary Logos tool, but I still use more recent L# versions are needed, which are sufficiently different such that they can run side-by-side. I actually find this very useful for many reasons, so my suggestion to FL is that they create a relatively (not completely) stripped-down version of the L# software that allows newbie users to use that (effectively separate) program for simple daily use while having the bulkier and more adept and powerful version waiting in the background to provide help when basic isn't enough. That way, folks can get plenty of daily use out of the simpler program, while being able to dip their toes into the meatier issues as circumstances require.
Here's my pitch for the basic version: make it more like L3. There are so many searches and whatnot that can be accomplished on L3 in 0-2 clicks and 1-5 seconds that take 4 or more clicks and 10-30 seconds--or longer--in later versions. I am definitely making this pitch in the hopes that I can comfortably lay L3 to rest by transitioning to a supported (non-deprecated) product while being able to keep and utilize the numerous benefits and features that were inexplicably abandoned when moving to L4 and beyond. I won't get into specifics here, although I am happy to do so if asked. Mainly, what I want to do is emphasize that a simplified version of the software would eradicate a major perceived downside to the current software, and provide a camel's nose that could eventually turn customers of "the basics" in eventual power users. As is currently possible with L3 and L-current, both programs should be able to run side-by-side. The idea is that a person's library would be accessible in both versions, but the procedures for using the software would be far more simplified as a result of having fewer options for use.
In a nutshell, being all things to all people is not likely to come to pass. Providing a slimmer, quicker version of the software could resolve many issues and concerns and open up Logos to a much wider client base.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0
