Logos 5: What would you like to see

I suspect that Logos 4 will have a longer lifespan. It has been built in an environment with fewer storage and processing constraints. And assuming that it is written in appropriate modules, developers should be able to swap in new modules without a ground up rewrite. Therefore, I'm not looking forward to Loos 5. I'm looking forward to the perfection of Logos 4.

Jack Hairston

I agree with MJ Smith that perfecting Logos4 must come first, and it might last a long time afterward. I still use Logos3 for lack of capability for Notes.

If you do rewrite Logos again, strip it down to bare essentials: Searches and Notes. Nothing else matters to me.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243864#Comment_243864

Everything I want in the next version could be added to Logos 4, because it was built as a much more expandable platform than Logos 3 was. What I want is mostly the stuff that's on UserVoice already. I'm not sure I see much benefit to listing my top priorities here, but these are the UserVoice suggestions I'd place votes on if I had enough votes to spread around:

Personal Book Builder (it's already started so I haven't wasted votes on it)
Focus on Code/Performance Optimization (this is something that's never finished and they are always working on it, so I haven't bothered to vote for it)
Make an intelligent flash card program for vocab & Bible verse memorization.
Rework notes function - in one or multiple phases (I've got 3 votes on this one)
Save/update Layout without needing to remember its name / Name of layout in title bar (yup, that would be helpful but so many others have voted for it I haven't bothered)
Copy from anywhere (Guides, Search Results, Resource Info panel) (it's mostly been accomplished by the Print/Export feature but I still want to be able to copy from the book description in the resource info panel; I started this one but had to sacrifice my vote on it for something else)
Bring back Topic Search and Fuzzy Search (I'm satisfied with the way they're doing topic search now, using LCV; but I would like to see the return of fuzzy search)
Ability to filter the library by collections (yes, this would be nice)
Provide management of mytags (This is very important to me, as I use tagging extensively)
Organize files popup by file type, alphabet and recently used (I've been wanting this for quite some time)
A Visual Bookshelf feature like Mark Barnes's cool web-based one, only even better! (This would be awesome)
Stem/Cognate Search (Quite important; some competitors do this)
Add Sorting Features to Basic Search Output (Great idea!)
Ability to search within headings and/or Table of Contents (This is partially given to us by the new LargeText search filter, but not all resources have been reformatted to appropriately make this work across one's entire library)
User generated data: timelines (This was something L3 had which should be on the "Missing Features" list)
Resource Associations (This is something else that L3 had which never came across into L4)
Improve graphic viewing within (Yes, graphic viewing capabilities within resources are pretty limited; would be great to be able to zoom in to see more detail)
Improve handouts (I'm waiting for the Handouts rewrite; I'm not sure it's a feature I'd use, but I know for sure that Handouts as they currently exist are not a feature I'd ever use)
Provide option to have Logos open to a disignated layout (Would be nice; again this is something that L3 could do)
Better Control of Multi-Book Volumes/Works (I'm very eager to see something done on this front)

OK, that's enough for now. There are lots of other features on UserVoice that I'd like to see, but these are the ones from the first two pages that I'm most interested in.

Jim VanSchoonhoven

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243871#Comment_243871

1. Notes reworked get an idea from almost any bible program

2. PBB that makes it easy to add PD and your own material to program

3. Better interaction with websites, so they can be ran with in the program in a window.

J.R. Woods

I would love to see more syntax searching videos for Logos 4 and making the search engine more user friendly.

As I read the discourse Bundle by Runge, and seek to apply these concepts in doctorate level research, I would love to see a discourse tagged

database option that can expose the ability to search for items such as "thematic demonstratives" or "right dislocations". All they would have to do is

utilize the same technology with his discourse NT and viola!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243895#Comment_243895

so they can be ran

It's "so they can be run..." -- I've been dismayed to see how many people these days -- LOTS on the Logos forums -- no longer learn (or remember) many of the irregular past participles in English (run is the past participle of run; the easy way to remember this (it should sound right to your ear if you're a native English speaker): it's I run (present), I ran (simple past), I have run (past participle); when you hear people saying "I have ran" that's incorrect. When combined with the verb "to be" in a passive construct ("websites can be run"), you use the past participle not the simple past.

Sorry for the nitpicking (this is the first time I've pointed this error out to anyone -- you just happened to be lucky person number 100 who tipped the scales[:)]), but as a Logos user who is attentive to grammatical stuff in Greek and Hebrew, I can't help but try to educate my fellow English speakers to do it better in English too, because it helps with understanding other languages.

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243910#Comment_243910

Peace Rosie! And to all! *smile*

run - ran Rosie, that could very simply have been a typing error.

Sometimes I am chagrined by posting something and noticing -- perhaps the next day -- that I made a stooopid typing error.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243910#Comment_243910

I have run (past participle);

Hum, I would call it a finite verb with a perfect aspect.[8-|]

BTW: the perfect aspect in English does use the past participle (i.e. run").[:)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243931#Comment_243931

I have run (past participle);

Hum, I would call it a finite verb with a perfect aspect.

BTW: the perfect aspect in English does use the past participle (i.e. run").

I meant the boldfaced word was the past participle. Sorry that wasn't clear from my formatting.

SunFlower

From the item "Why less women" Lower price, But you do have to stay in business, you can not give it away for free [:'(]

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243940#Comment_243940

Thanks for your reply everyone.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243946#Comment_243946

While we're talking grammar, there's an interesting one in the thread just referenced: "why less women?" It's actually "why fewer women?" Less is used for non-quantifiable things, such as water or money. Fewer is used for quantifiable things, such as dollars or doughnuts. "Less money" but "fewer dollars."

Learn something new every day, eh?

Coming soon: A discussion of further vs. farther.

Greg

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243871#Comment_243871

Better Control of Multi-Book Volumes/Works (I'm very eager to see something done on this front)

I agree and would love to see something happen with this one! Having the ability to nest books within expanable groups would go a long way in cleaning up our libraries a bit.

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243931#Comment_243931

I have run (past participle);

Hum, I would call it a finite verb with a perfect aspect.

BTW: the perfect aspect in English does use the past participle (i.e. run").

mmmm I beg to differ.

In my understanding English usage of the "present perfect" tense does not convey aspect. I doubt whether the speaker intends to convey to the listener the notion that the action is complete (as opposed to the future perfect where this is clear).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244008#Comment_244008

In my understanding English usage of the "present perfect" tense does not convey aspect.

My gut tells me that you are right ... so I had to find some resources to "prove" that I am right even if I don't think I'm right.

Evidence 1:

from http://d-nb.info/993270654/34

"The authors comment on how the simple perfect interfaces with lexical aspect (aktionsart) as follows:

'Activity verbs are not as commonly used with perfective aspect as some of the other categories of verbs. When these are used with perfect aspect, they describe a prior experience or activity:'

I have run before."

Andreas Eul's "Tense, Aspect, Aktionsart and Related Areas Approaches to Analysing the Core Meaning of English Perfect Verb Forms" (page 187)

Evidence 2

from http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html

Neither prove that I was right but they do prove that there is considerable room for legitimate differences of opinion - which makes grammar ever so much fun. However, my gut still agrees with you. So I'll admit to:

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244009#Comment_244009

Very interesting. Of course dialectal differences (BrEng is more strict in its use of the present perfect than AmEng) and discourse analysis theories need to be taken into account.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244010#Comment_244010

Of course dialectal differences (BrEng is more strict in its use of the present perfect than AmEng) and discourse analysis theories need to be taken into account.

Yup (Rural Washington state - Finnish community dialect) [:D]

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244011#Comment_244011

Ok. So what are the must have features you desire in the next version of the software?

Jesse Blevins

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244019#Comment_244019

I would like to see :

training manuals that are a part of the software package that are ebooks and fully searchable

templates for each different kind of search

ability to read pdf in the software

some predefined collections put together accordin g to your base package similiar to how they arrange them in the library comparison charts

Lonnie Ritchie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244002#Comment_244002

Rob, I would love to read that discussion about farther and further. This is getting very educational.

Lonnie

rksaw

So what are your wishes.

Honestly, my wish is that more and more people will get their hands on this tool! I've only had Logos for 3 or 4 months and I can't stop raving about it. I'm as giddy as a new believer, and I want to see more people get their hands on God's Word using this tool.

I realize this should be in a different thread, but one thing I am really waiting for though is the Android app. I will be buying a new phone and right now I'm leaning toward the Android system and I cannot wait to use Logos when I'm sitting in a Bible Study or having a meal with friends and a biblical conversation errupts, etc.

Rich

P.S. Don't scrap L4 for L5, just give us more places and ways to use it!!! Good work Logos.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244088#Comment_244088

Further vs. Farther:

Strictly speaking, farther should apply to physical distances: I walked farther today than I ever have before.

Further should be used to apply to intangible "distances": A further reason for walking was that I needed exercise.

However, the dictionary notes that these words have been used interchangeably for most of their histories. We use further both ways, but we never use farther for the intangible, as in a farther reason.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244202#Comment_244202

In terms of notes, it seems that many want improvements here. I've tried to figure out exactly what it is that seems awkward about the current notes setup, and from my limited perspective, here is what I'd like to see:

The current setup, plus another kind of note.

As it is, we set up a note file, then we have to open that file to put notes in it while we're using a particular resource. I've gotten fairly comfortable with that. But I would love there to be a built-in note function that is associated with each resource. That is, if I'm reading Desiring God, I can either append a note to some existing note file, as it is now, OR I could use the one fixed note file connected to that book. So that on right click, the options might be, "Add note to this resource" (Desiring God notefile that is built-in from the time I purchase the resource), and "Add note to (other)." This would include Bible notes, so that if I'm studying Ephesians, Logos has my Ephesians built-in note file ready. I'm study the use of epouranios, the heavenly realms, in Ephesians, I could create my own file for that.

Can someone please comment on this idea? Just interested in people's thoughts. To me, it would unclutter the files listing, and establish a more streamlined file system with primary, book-sourced files and personal files. Anyone think this would be good?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244205#Comment_244205

One other thing on notes. I currently have to type my notes in another program, like notepad, then cut and paste them into a notes document in Logos. I have a fast laptop, and in every other way it runs Logos with good speed. But notes are veeerrrryyyy slow and frustrating to type. It helps a bit to close a few resources in Logos, but I don't always want to do that if I'm using those resources.

Notes have become much more important to me in Logos, so I'd love to see these tweaked a bit.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244205#Comment_244205

Can someone please comment on this idea? Just interested in people's thoughts. To me, it would unclutter the files listing, and establish a more streamlined file system with primary, book-sourced files and personal files. Anyone think this would be good?

In terms of the actual processing, this would probably be implemented in the same manner as if you created a note file manually for each resource. The difference would be that the note file was "hidden" rather than visible and that it was a third option available in the right click menu. As the file menu needs to be reworked eventually - as we create more user files it becomes harder to access them easily - I would need to know how the files menu is to be reworked before knowing how the right click menu best works.

rksaw

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/244308#Comment_244308

Actually, I just found something that I'd like to see. In the "Biblical Places" menu, would you please add a feature to Zoom In and Zoom Out without using the "roller" on a mouse? What made me think of this was that I was looking at something on my laptop and didn't have a "roller".

Thanks for all the hard work,

Rich