Interface....inital impressions
Comments
-
-
You can also drag anything that opens into the shortcuts toolbar, literally. You can drag anything straight from the File/Guides/Tools menu, you can drag your library panel (drag from the library icon itself), you can drag (almost) every reference link while viewing a resource, you can also drag commands that you enter into the command bar (after the auto-complete shows up with a selection), and you can drag any open tabs into there and it will remember what your tab is showing no matter what. And, if you like, you can drag windows program shortcuts there and your internet browser's shortcuts too!
0 -
Hi Joe and thanks -- that's a great help!
Dale
Blessings,
Dale Durnell
Coming to you from Henryetta Oklahoma (45 miles south of Tulsa, and 85 miles east of OKC)
0 -
Al Bastin said:
I'm waiting on the DVD, but I have noticed that at least two people have commented on Microsoft Office 2003 vs. 2007.
I'm wondering of those of you (us) who are using Office 2007 are having less trouble making the intuitive switch to Logos 4 than those who are not using Office 2007?
I have Office 2007 and I am struggling to work out this new interface. I normally am the person that people come to for assistance when it comes to software but I really can't make heads or tails of this new interface. It is only now that we have search function in these forums that I have found this post showing how to save a layout. It was only by chance I found a post instructing on how to position windows, but as yet still don't feel totally comfortable with that. Up until now I have always found Logos Bible Software very easy and logical to use but not v4.0. The next thing I have to try and make sense of is prefered resources i think its called...keylinking was so much easier and clearer as to what was happening and I could clearly see what was happening with each datatype...so far this new system doesnt' look to helpful for large libraries ... everything looks to be thrown in the one basket and its lucky dip as to what comes out on top... I've never felt an need for a Camp Logos and just as well since it would be too expensive to fly to the states for it, but right now I really could do with one, but I'll never have the funds for that so I hope this is going to get easier than what it is so far.
0 -
The Second Law of Thermodynamics from order to Disorder[^o)]
God Bless
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Dale, I'd love to hear what you like least about the new interface. The windowing system? The menus? The simplified toolbars?
Bob, I know I'm on thin ice here -- and I don't want to start a flame war, so I'm praying that cooler heads will prevail and just accept what I'm saying without resulting in the blood letting that usually follows something like what I'm about to say.
I love Word Perfect. I've used nearly every version since 5.1 for DOS. It was (and still could be) a great word processor. While I consider M$ Word to be "the word processor that does everything, the hard way" Word Perfect allows me more control over my documents in ways that Word can't even produce. But, several iterations ago, WPWin users had to explicitly change a setting to allow WPWin to work like WordPerfect and not like Word. The WPWin crew decided that because the world was migrating to Word, that they needed to mimic Word and so they created an interface that looked and acted like Word. Bob, if I wanted to use Word (and, yes, I'm forced to at times because folks I correspond with are also using Word), I'd ditch WPWin because I don't need to programs that look and act the same. But, I keep WPWin on my system, and I use WPWin because I like the way it works for me, and I like the control it gives me over not only my interface but expecially my documents.
Coming from the world of Honeywell DPS-6 mainframes, and Remote Network Processing, replete with card readers and line printers, I came kicking and screaming into the GIU world of Windows 3.1, then 3.11, then 95, then 98 (I skipped Win Me, thank you very much), then Win 2K, then Win XP, I've got Vista on the machine I'm writing this on and I can hardly wait to ditch Vista (and move on from XP) as I put Win 7 on all of my machines. But, I've come to like Windows. I like menu bars, I like tool bars, I like to be able to modify them. I like control over my program, and I like the look and feel of Windows (although I'm not terrible crazy about the Vista/Office 2007 interface -- there's too much missing there also).
Bob, if I wanted a Mac, I'd buy a Mac. But, I don't want one, wouldn't have one, and refuse to get in the camp that says it's better than a PC. For some things, a four wheel drive SUV is the way to go. But, I'll still take my Mercury Marquis, thank you very much. But, why is it that I'm getting the impression that Logos is trying to make the Windows version of Logos look, act, and feel like a Mac? I hear folks (I've read their threads in the forum) say how they like the "clean" home page -- I'm sorry, it looks cluttered to me, and there doesn't seem to be anyway to shut off the bubble machine and make some of that stuff go away. I read where folks like the lean and mean fightin' machine of a spartan header line. But, after several days, installation on three machines with very different configurations, and some time to think about whether I should even voice my opinion -- I'm still not thrilled with what I'm not finding in the new interface.
Before the NG's pretty much closed down, I was following the Mac discussions in the NG and noted how much was missing from the Mac version that we already had in the Windows version and have had (in many cases) since Series-X was a puppy. Now to keep parity with the two versions of the program, and I know I may be on thin ice here, but it seems as if we're dumbing down the Windows version to keep the two versions on a par. I know -- that's not fair, but it's a first gut reaction.
There's no Windows familiarity (or at least barely) to speak of with L4 -- as a colleague in the test group has said, it's unlike anything he's (or I've) ever used. And yet, I get the feeling that's because he and I use Windows and Windows application, and not a Mac and Apple products.
I remember how I was nearly shouted down and derided in the NG a while back when some of the Mac users (in a Windows section of the NG) were clamoring for a more Mac interface for their Windows application. It got ugly. I hope it won't be that way today. But, again, if I wanted a Mac, I'd buy a Mac, but I don't and I didn't, and I won't. And, I'm not realy happy that my work horse Bible program for Windows is moving to what appears (IMHO) to be a Mac GUI without regard to the basics that are part and parcel of Windows.
I know, you're too far along and too invested in this new interface to ever think of going back the other way. And, I'm way too financially invested to ever abandon the Logos community (not that anyone else has anything like the quality and number of resources available through Logos). But to me, there's just soooo much missing in the current interface. Where's the rest of the Library Maintenance repertoire? Suppose I want to move files around -- where's the Location Manager. Suppose I need to "refresh my resources" -- where's that feature. Bob, I helped beta test the Sermon Addin, and I know others have used the PBB feature. But what gives with the statement that they aren't in Beta 1, and may not make the final cut? I know some folks who paid for those features and now the program is moving along to the next level and features bought and paid for aren't on the drawing board?.
Print (Ctrl+P) is a basic command and feature of the Windows OS. Hey, it's even part of the basic Mac OS. It's been part and parcel of almost every OS I've been associated with. How come there's so much missing from the File menu, e.g., Print and Export.
Bob, I love the sync process - don't me wrong - that I can have the same desktops (oops, layout) on all my machines and not have to reconstruct them each time I move to a different location. But, where's my local backup of my license? Suppose my internet connect goes down (I don't know about Washington, but hey, it does happen here in Oklahoma) or I'm on a laptop at some location without the internet. There just seems to be too much reliance on a technology that may or may not be available at all times and in all places. Suppose there's some missionary in some remote part of the world (and we have some in the Logos user community) who just doesn't have internet access. Are we abandoning those folks?
We'll it's Friday morning, and I appreciate the opportunity vent a bit. Thanks for hearing me out
Dale
Blessings,
Dale Durnell
Coming to you from Henryetta Oklahoma (45 miles south of Tulsa, and 85 miles east of OKC)
0 -
If Dale D. and Andrew M. are having trouble, egads, I will need cpr when I finally get the dvd and install v. 4. I just fininshed Camp Logos 2 two months ago and now I wonder if it was all in vain. I have friends and ministers I have tried "sell" on the use of Libronix but they told me they didn't want such a complicated software package to use and also to have to maintain. That was version 2. I know I should hold off on a solid opinion until I give it a fair chance but I really don't know if it will work for me to have a system that needs the internet to sync and not just be able to sync on my own. This is where I am just from reading all the posts.
0 -
Dale, I too hope that this stays friendly, that said however, you put in print what I have been trying nicely to put in print... but never succeeded. Every time that I came to a point that I was saying what I believed needed to be said, I was being unkind... so I would scrap it. I have books that I too have paid for and am learning that they will be gone and I will have lost the investment in them... I also, living about an hour north of downtown Detroit, find that I frequently have no internet... here or away traveling, especially in airports where I currently get some work done... I was not happy that unless I have internet I am sunk... my internet is down about 1/3 of time and yes this is the USA, and not a third world country... oh, and my ISP... is the only game in town. I have to say that there are some nice things here, but for the life of me, I can not tell you 5 of them... they just don't come to mind... but I can certainly tell you 50 things that are missing and from the sounds of it they will not make the RC... will they be in V4.2, I don't know, but this really concerns me. But maybe the worst of it all for me is that I am too heavily invested in libronix to make a switch... it seems to be headed in a direction that I am exceedingly and overwhelmingly uncomfortable with... and I can't get off train... so I am stuck using a program that is seemingly very inadequate with no way for me to improve it... I don't know. I am confused, even getting angry. I suspect that I will be using logos 3f for as long as my OS will support it, but then who knows what will happen... I may have to buy a new library if libronix has not come back to a usable/customizable/workable solution.I used to think that having 14 different ways of doing things was a bit redundant... right now, that is one of the things that I am missing. I made a new layout last week for V4, after using if for about 1 week now, I feel that I need to spend some time back on V3f so that I can get some real work done, not because this is a beta that has some features unhooked for the version, but because they wont even make the cut... so I will have to keep V3 on my machine to stay functional, that means that I would not make the switch unless some big things change.A few years ago there was a photo editing program that was large, but not Adobe, that revamped everything from the ground up... they nearly sank over the next 3 or 4 generations to get back even a small piece of the market that they had... I hope that this does not go the same way. well, enough said, it is just very upsetting to see what was good (V3f) and usable, to be going out the window and making me more work for nothing. Sorry Logos/Libronix but as Dale said, if I wanted a Mac... I would have bought a Mac... I have a PC, because I want a PC... but it is even more in that this is really about functionality and not loosing what I already have and paid for. And, I am not cheap... but I am concerned.thanks for listening,Pastor Kelly who I now believe is way out in the middle of nowhere in Michigan.
----- Original Message -----Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 11:52 AMSubject: Re: Interface....inital impressionsRe: Interface....inital impressions
By Rev Dale L Durnell OSL in * Logos 4 Private Beta *
Bob Pritchett:Dale, I'd love to hear what you like least about the new interface. The windowing system? The menus? The simplified toolbars?Bob, I know I'm on thin ice here -- and I don't want to start a flame war, so I'm praying that cooler heads will prevail and just accept what I'm saying without resulting in the blood letting that usually follows something like what I'm about to say.
I love Word Perfect. I've used nearly every version since 5.1 for DOS. It was (and still could be) a great word processor. While I consider M$ Word to be "the word processor that does everything, the hard way" Word Perfect allows me more control over my documents in ways that Word can't even produce. But, several iterations ago, WPWin users had to explicitly change a setting to allow WPWin to work like WordPerfect and not like Word. The WPWin crew decided that because the world was migrating to Word, that they needed to mimic Word and so they created an interface that looked and acted like Word. Bob, if I wanted to use Word (and, yes, I'm forced to at times because folks I correspond with are also using Word), I'd ditch WPWin because I don't need to programs that look and act the same. But, I keep WPWin on my system, and I use WPWin because I like the way it works for me, and I like the control it gives me over not only my interface but expecially my documents.
Coming from the world of Honeywell DPS-6 mainframes, and Remote Network Processing, replete with card readers and line printers, I came kicking and screaming into the GIU world of Windows 3.1, then 3.11, then 95, then 98 (I skipped Win Me, thank you very much), then Win 2K, then Win XP, I've got Vista on the machine I'm writing this on and I can hardly wait to ditch Vista (and move on from XP) as I put Win 7 on all of my machines. But, I've come to like Windows. I like menu bars, I like tool bars, I like to be able to modify them. I like control over my program, and I like the look and feel of Windows (although I'm not terrible crazy about the Vista/Office 2007 interface -- there's too much missing there also).
Bob, if I wanted a Mac, I'd buy a Mac. But, I don't want one, wouldn't have one, and refuse to get in the camp that says it's better than a PC. For some things, a four wheel drive SUV is the way to go. But, I'll still take my Mercury Marquis, thank you very much. But, why is it that I'm getting the impression that Logos is trying to make the Windows version of Logos look, act, and feel like a Mac? I hear folks (I've read their threads in the forum) say how they like the "clean" home page -- I'm sorry, it looks cluttered to me, and there doesn't seem to be anyway to shut off the bubble machine and make some of that stuff go away. I read where folks like the lean and mean fightin' machine of a spartan header line. But, after several days, installation on three machines with very different configurations, and some time to think about whether I should even voice my opinion -- I'm still not thrilled with what I'm not finding in the new interface.
Before the NG's pretty much closed down, I was following the Mac discussions in the NG and noted how much was missing from the Mac version that we already had in the Windows version and have had (in many cases) since Series-X was a puppy. Now to keep parity with the two versions of the program, and I know I may be on thin ice here, but it seems as if we're dumbing down the Windows version to keep the two versions on a par. I know -- that's not fair, but it's a first gut reaction.
There's no Windows familiarity (or at least barely) to speak of with L4 -- as a colleague in the test group has said, it's unlike anything he's (or I've) ever used. And yet, I get the feeling that's because he and I use Windows and Windows application, and not a Mac and Apple products.
I remember how I was nearly shouted down and derided in the NG a while back when some of the Mac users (in a Windows section of the NG) were clamoring for a more Mac interface for their Windows application. It got ugly. I hope it won't be that way today. But, again, if I wanted a Mac, I'd buy a Mac, but I don't and I didn't, and I won't. And, I'm not realy happy that my work horse Bible program for Windows is moving to what appears (IMHO) to be a Mac GUI without regard to the basics that are part and parcel of Windows.
I know, you're too far along and too invested in this new interface to ever think of going back the other way. And, I'm way too financially invested to ever abandon the Logos community (not that anyone else has anything like the quality and number of resources available through Logos). But to me, there's just soooo much missing in the current interface. Where's the rest of the Library Maintenance repertoire? Suppose I want to move files around -- where's the Location Manager. Suppose I need to "refresh my resources" -- where's that feature. Bob, I helped beta test the Sermon Addin, and I know others have used the PBB feature. But what gives with the statement that they aren't in Beta 1, and may not make the final cut? I know some folks who paid for those features and now the program is moving along to the next level and features bought and paid for aren't on the drawing board?.
Print (Ctrl+P) is a basic command and feature of the Windows OS. Hey, it's even part of the basic Mac OS. It's been part and parcel of almost every OS I've been associated with. How come there's so much missing from the File menu, e.g., Print and Export.
Bob, I love the sync process - don't me wrong - that I can have the same desktops (oops, layout) on all my machines and not have to reconstruct them each time I move to a different location. But, where's my local backup of my license? Suppose my internet connect goes down (I don't know about Washington, but hey, it does happen here in Oklahoma) or I'm on a laptop at some location without the internet. There just seems to be too much reliance on a technology that may or may not be available at all times and in all places. Suppose there's some missionary in some remote part of the world (and we have some in the Logos user community) who just doesn't have internet access. Are we abandoning those folks?
We'll it's Friday morning, and I appreciate the opportunity vent a bit. Thanks for hearing me out
Dale
0 -
JoanKorte said:
I have friends and ministers I have tried "sell" on the use of Libronix but they told me they didn't want such a complicated software package to use and also to have to maintain. That was version 2.
That's exactly what we're trying to fix. We're trying to make 4.0 much simpler to use and maintain. So Dale's points should actually be encouraging, not discouraging, to you. :-) He's complaining that we took away Library Maintenance -- a scary, complicated "maintenance" tool if there ever was one. Now you don't have to worry about it. Sounds easier to me. :-)
(I'll respond to Dale in more detail in the next post...)
0 -
Bob,
Thanks for replying. Still the discouraging thing is having to depend on others i.e. internet connection, more to keep my system up and running rather than having the control I have now. It's all on my hard drive and I can sync my own computers. At least, that is my pre-initial impression. Awaiting the dvd.
0 -
I understand were Dale is coming from and I agree with him in part. We all would hate to see a good program become a throw away. However, I would like an easier interface, but I have not seen enough in v4 yet to say it is usable. I do not do any of my work, sermons, Sunday School, Bible Studies or personal study with v4. I do all that in v3 and only play around with v4 when I take a break. I really do not know how anyone could use v4 to study or do any real work; IT'S SO SLOW and has few real usable features. I am hoping that later version will be more usable, more interconnected with all its features and faster, as v3 is or much better. I do like, in part, the ease of resizing and moving of frames in the Layout. Nevertheless, remember, Lotus, Word Perfect (several others that do not come to mind now), who had the majority share, but one is gone and the other has been bought and sold so many time I do not even know for sure who owns WP. We all have invested our time, money and emotions with Logos and was expecting something spectacular with v4 a more complete version (it seems more like an Alpha rather than a Beta test to me).
I have done betas with other software before and found that there will be crashes, cliches and the like. That is the purpose of the Beta and I am very glad that they left v3 is completely workable; yet, using the same resources. I am expecting a great end product, of which we all will be proud to have been a part. I am looking for the day that I can use Beta 4.xx to do all my work and eventually Logos 4.
God Bless
0 -
I've posted my response to Dale's great comments in a new thread:
0 -
George Kelley Sr. said:
IT'S SO SLOW and has few real usable features
I get the slow part, and we're working on that. I know it's a killer issue if it's too slow.
What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)
0 -
Rev Dale L Durnell OSL said:
Bob, I know I'm on thin ice here -- and I don't want to start a flame war, so I'm praying that cooler heads will prevail and just accept what I'm saying without resulting in the blood letting that usually follows something like what I'm about to say.
I have been resisting the need to speak out & voice my concern about Logos 4 until i saw Dale's post. I have tried to sound positive because of the many enthusiastic comments from power users & decided it was not worth commenting as it will only end in much disagreement. Since Dale has spoken i must say i share many of his concerns. That said there are many features i like in version 4 but it just does not feel like a Logos Bible Software to me. It seems we are leaving 3F behind and breaking away from it, instead of building on the success of 3F. I know the Logos team have put in a lot of work into this project & are moving forward towards the right direction but if i am honest i see myself using 3F than Logos 4. This is a difficult one to balance as Logos cannot please everyone. There will be winners and losers but a lot of features from version 3F would make it bearable for the losers. In this Logos cannot win as hard as they try. Some will be happy some will not - that is life. I will not blame them on this since i would not be able to do better if i were in their shoes.
I do thank Logos for the hard work & wanting to improve on their software.
Ted
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
I'd like to hear/read a response to Dale's comments about going in a Mac like direction. Bob did make a comment in these forums about going in an iPhone like direction.
I was thinking the same about it starting look mac like and hate that. I like the look of Windows and feel very comfortable in it. If there is a usability reason to change it, the great. But with v. 4 it seems like the look is different just because people like Mac better. I don't and I'm an iPhone user.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0 -
Kevin A. Purcell said:
I'd like to hear/read a response to Dale's comments about going in a Mac like direction. Bob did make a comment in these forums about going in an iPhone like direction.
I was thinking the same about it starting look mac like and hate that. I like the look of Windows and feel very comfortable in it. If there is a usability reason to change it, the great. But with v. 4 it seems like the look is different just because people like Mac better. I don't and I'm an iPhone user.
You might be interested to read this forum where Bob answers in more details.
Bohuslav
0 -
I didn't realize how I missed the sermon Addin. So that's on the list, not at the top yet perhaps but I'm going to miss it.Bob Pritchett said:What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)
1. The familiar Windows look and feel.
2. Sentence diagraming
3. Speed of the program itself (not searching - searching is very fast in 4.0)
Give me those three things and 4.0 is a 5 star program.
Dr. Kevin Purcell, Director of Missions
Brushy Mountain Baptist Association0 -
Bob Pritchett said:JoanKorte said:
I have friends and ministers I have tried "sell" on the use of Libronix but they told me they didn't want such a complicated software package to use and also to have to maintain. That was version 2.
That's exactly what we're trying to fix. We're trying to make 4.0 much simpler to use and maintain. So Dale's points should actually be encouraging, not discouraging, to you. :-) He's complaining that we took away Library Maintenance -- a scary, complicated "maintenance" tool if there ever was one. Now you don't have to worry about it. Sounds easier to me. :-)
(I'll respond to Dale in more detail in the next post...)
Its an admirable goal and I fully support you in the goal but the interface is way out there and not what a windows user is used to working. If you are aiming to reach, for want of a better description 'casual' users of a windows system who may fire up an e-mail program and Word or maybe Works (does that still exist) then you are going to loose them with the interface unless you include some very good training videos first up out of the box.
I have to other no Logos adult users in my household. One uses the computer for internet banking and email, the other pretty much just for e-mail. Since we share the one computer they get limited time on there. If I were to show them Logos 4 they would be totallly lost and wouldn't know how to do a thing with the interface.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)
Bob,
- I'd like to be able to select my default (preferred) Lectionary. I don't find that option on the Home Page (or any where else)
- I want to be able to select the option to read "Bible Text Only" -- I'm not interested in all the headings and formatting of the BIble that some publisher decided needs to be there.
- Maybe I'm asking for too much -- but I just put the icon for Anchor Bible Dictionary on the toolbar. It's just a black box at at that size and unreadable. I'd really like to be able embed my own icons. Since Series-X (and yes, that was nearly 10 years ago now) I've put a little anchor image up on my toolbar to quickly tell me that's where it was at. Yes, I can scroll over it to see what's there, but as this fills up -- it's gonna get painfully old.
There are three to start with -- One and Two have got to be doable. Three would be a nice to have but not as essential as 1 and 2
Dale
Blessings,
Dale Durnell
Coming to you from Henryetta Oklahoma (45 miles south of Tulsa, and 85 miles east of OKC)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:George Kelley Sr. said:
IT'S SO SLOW and has few real usable features
I get the slow part, and we're working on that. I know it's a killer issue if it's too slow.
What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)
Thank you for asking:
1. Visual Markups
2. Sentence Diagrammer
3. Support for AM Moody Courseware - currently the testing interface is missing
4. Sermon File Addin
5. PBB Support
6. Keylinking via datatype
7. Separate Reverse Interlinear resource which can have visual filters applied and the whole text viewed at once rather than just a snippet.
Seven may be more than you are lookihg for but I really can not separate these out of my bible study experience. They are all important tools and features that play a part at different stages of the process. Without too much trouble I could easilty add more... I appreciate you have said some of these things will make a return but the how long will it be.... you want us to adjust to working with four but you are forcing us to go back to 3.0 because way too much vital stuff has been left out of 4.0 .. and as some have said we have paid for some of these addins, you sold us 3.0 based on these addins and then you deem them not worth including in 4.0 because you want us to adopt your philosophy of bible study... there a certain tried and test methods of bible study but it is still a personal thing that shouldn't be controlled by one persons personal philosophy on the way it should be done and what tools are appropriate.
0 -
AndrewMckenzie said:
it is still a personal thing that shouldn't be controlled by one persons personal philosophy on the way it should be done and what tools are appropriate.
Thanks (everyone) for the detailed lists. I see just about everything coming back, and hopefully not too far out.
Just for what it's worth, though, we're not making these decisions based purely on our own ideas of how BIble study should be done. We have hard stats that sentence diagraming is used by just 1.6% of our users. Less than 10% of users have customized their datatypes beyond picking a preferred Bible.
I'm sure that the percent for both of these is higher in the beta group -- we chose our most involved users for the beta -- but in the big picture we're responding as much to user statistics as to our own ideas of what is and isn't useful.
And we know that you power users are really the most important, so we'll do what you want even if you aren't 50% of the market. :-)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
We have hard stats..
huh oh. In one post you sound like a Harry Potter lover (the magic comment) and now you sound like a politician. This could get ugly. :-)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:AndrewMckenzie said:
it is still a personal thing that shouldn't be controlled by one persons personal philosophy on the way it should be done and what tools are appropriate.
Thanks (everyone) for the detailed lists. I see just about everything coming back, and hopefully not too far out.
Just for what it's worth, though, we're not making these decisions based purely on our own ideas of how BIble study should be done. We have hard stats that sentence diagraming is used by just 1.6% of our users. Less than 10% of users have customized their datatypes beyond picking a preferred Bible.
I'm sure that the percent for both of these is higher in the beta group -- we chose our most involved users for the beta -- but in the big picture we're responding as much to user statistics as to our own ideas of what is and isn't useful.
And we know that you power users are really the most important, so we'll do what you want even if you aren't 50% of the market. :-)
Thank you for taking the time to listen. At times it really feels like Logos doesn't listen. And I don't discount your stats totally, but I don't thnk 100% of users would actually let their usage data be submitted...maybe if they did it still wouldn't change the numbers you see overall greatly ...mabye it would... I don't know the uptake on that feature of Logos 3 but it more like those who customize the program are going to turn off the submission of usage statistics I would think.
Bob Pritchett said:And we know that you power users are really the most important, so we'll do what you want even if you aren't 50% of the market. :-)
I really don't see myself as all that important in Logos success or failure, but Logos has for better or worse become and important part of the way I do things.
And I think for the sucess of 4.0 when it gets released to the public needs a core group of users who are overall happy with the product and comfortable with using so that they can encourage and hellp others who are seeing it for the first time, People who can genuinely speak positive about the product and say that the learning curve is worth it, people who are comfortable with the product. Maybe that's where we as a group do become important to Logos.
Bob I do appreciate you thinking outside the box but I guess we are not ready to be converted into MAC users and some of us are not ready to be converted into passive users of our Bible Software either, I know I am not. By all means reach out to these markets but keep the tools you have introducted into our bible study regeime in v3 part of v4,otherwise what confidence do we have in Logos that when Logos 5.0 comes around that the things we become accustomed to in verson 4.0 will not disappear overnight when 5.0 arrives and we have to start all over again. Also please include a bit of flexiblity in there, and even it its hard to find...
0 -
Bob,
Here is my list:
Thank you for asking:
1. Responsiveness of the app. Not searching; but menus and things like that.
2. Visual Markups
3. Sentence Diagrammer
4. Reverse interlinear that can be highlighted and the reverse interlinear window that can get taller so more text is visible at one time.
5. PBB Support
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Bob I agree with Robert's comments and would like Sermon/Illustrations too, Since I bought it before Logos gave it away last October, I'd like to be able to continue using my investment.
In Christ,
Ken
In Christ,
Ken
Lenovo Yoga 7 15ITL5 Touch Screen; 11th Gen Intel i7 2.8Ghz; 12Gb RAM; 500Gb SDD;WIN 11
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I see just about everything coming back, and hopefully not too far out.....
What specific 3.0 features are you missing the most? (I know there are
a bunch, but I'm curious as to what's top of the list for everyone.)1) Logos 3 Home Page or a customised feature to switch from the Newspaper style to the more user friendly ease of Logos 3 Home Page.
2) The ESV reverse interlinear to function as a separate resource. I do not like the new way it functions in version 4.
Ted
Dell, studio XPS 7100, Ram 8GB, 64 - bit Operating System, AMD Phenom(mt) IIX6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHZ
0 -
Ted Hans said:
2) The ESV reverse interlinear to function as a separate resource. I do not like the new way it functions in version 4.
Ted
Ted I thought i was alone on this point... seems like I'm not after all....
Bob by all means I am happy for the new format in there as it works for many, but please just let us have the stand alone version also. I don't want you to offer a stand alone for each version, just the ESV that we orginally had. The new version does not allow us to do the things we could with the old.
0 -
I too agree Ted, and Andrew, the current V4 book just does not do it for me... I have 20 books open on my V4 layout... there is no room to have things open as large as they would need to, to make this book work as it should. yes guy's your not alone.
0 -
Joe Miller said:
Hi Dale, I was thinking about your problem and found a GREAT solution. Drag the tab to the menu bar. It creates a neat link! See the attached illustration.Rev Dale L Durnell OSL said:I would like a new layout (I like my opening pretty clean) with a couple of Bibles on the right and the lectionary on the left. But, I can't get the lectionary to open -- don't find a link to it anywhere on the tools menu and help doesn't (help). Somehow I found a way to get a lectionary at the top of my
In terms of accessing the lectionary apart from the home page this can be done from library. SImply enter the query: type:lectionary and it will list all lectionaries on your system. WIth lectionaries I haven't yet discovered how to change the one that displays on the home page.
0
