The future of Logos and Faithlife: Help us make the right decisions!

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. 

 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

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

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.

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:
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.

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!!!!

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.

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. 

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. 

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.

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)][:^)]

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.

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. 

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. 

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.