Disappointed
On logos.uservoice.com, there was a request for a privacy feature. Bob closed this request, saying it was fulfilled by simply turning off updates, and requesting a DVD update periodically. I'm personally disappointed that requests for privacy functionality are still being treated with such a cavalier attitude. I understand that we live in a world that doesn't value privacy any longer, but that doesn't make this the right answer.
It's unprofessional, and it makes me rethink spending time teaching my Seminary professors how to use Logos, and convincing others to buy it.
Russ
Comments
-
I'm disappointed in the handling of this as well. It seems a fair number of people voted for that feature and ignored. I'm not sure what to make out of it other than it sounds a lot like my opinion doesn't really matter.
It seems to me if you have enough people voting for it that it might be a reason to rethink your position and it looks like it was moving upwards so either Logos doesn't really understand the concern or doesn't care to.
0 -
Questions for Bob:
What, specifically, is the objection to such a feature? I don't buy, "it increases support costs." All features can be said to increase support costs, why is this specific feature, which had well over 100 votes, being treated differently? Beyond this, if you're more concerned about your support costs than my privacy, then just say so up front, and I'll find some other software to use.
Or is that you're planning on (or already are) mining this information for some specific reason? Are you using some sort of analytics to support marketing, or plan to, across people's notes files and prayer journals?
I can't imagine this would be hard to code--if you're doing a directory sync, it's just a matter of moving those files into a directory that doesn't sync--if you're doing file by file synch, it's just an if statement with an array to match, and some work on the UI front end. So I really don't understand the wholesale resistance to doing the right thing here.
Russ
0 -
Russ White said:
and requesting a DVD update periodically
I think the concept DVD update service is brilliant, but here's where things stand as of today:
1. 4.0a is still the version you get if you buy the DVD media and 4.0c has just been released. 4.0a was released seven months ago and there have been many updates which have fixed bugs and many core features added.
2. There are a number of resources which are not included in the base disk which are download only.
Aside from security, the issues around downloading many gigabytes of information is not possible in a number of situations. I called Logos two months ago and asked about an updated DVD and I was told to check back in a month... checking back, there's still nothing.
I love L4, but for those who can't or shouldn't (for security reasons) download data, it's a real problem for which there has not been a good answer to. All I can figure is that there must not be a market for people in this category.
Donovan
0 -
I think Logos has dealt very fairly and graciously with its users. Perhaps they may not have implemented exactly what we want or how we want it, but we cannot deny that they are an open and responsive company. These complaints did not exist with Libronix because users didn't have as high expectations that they do with Logos 4. But since they've listened, now we act as if they have to do everything we ask, and defend why they choose not to.
The item was number 20 on the list, and Bob believes that it has been suitably addressed. In response, we accuse him of unprofessionalism and a cavalier attitude, and threaten not to recommend Logos to others? I'm grateful that the staff at Logos are patient and have thick-skins. They regularly receive complaints and criticism on their own forum, but continue to work faithfully to produce the product that they believe is best.
0 -
Russ White said:
I'm personally disappointed that requests for privacy functionality are still being treated with such a cavalier attitude. I understand that we live in a world that doesn't value privacy any longer, but that doesn't make this the right answer.
It's unprofessional,
I understand your disappointment but would like you to reconsider four things:
1) Your assumption that Logos acted in a cavalier attitude. Logos may have done a thorough analysis of the benefits, costs and tradeoffs before making their decision. It is not fair to assume that they did not.
2) If one looks at the history of ideas in the world, valuing privacy is a relatively new and growing concern.
3) If I were to state what I see as the relevant declining value in the world, I would say personal responsibility. It seems to me that the Logos decision correctly places the onus on me to not enter sensitive data into the prayer list - the one place I would be apt to enter sensitive information.
4) Why is the decision unprofessional? In your post the only grounds you give for this evaluation is that Logos made a decision you don't agree with.
I understand why Bob said turning off the internet connection solved the problem. This is not my first choice for a solution - I would have preferred an option to omit prayer lists from the synchronization process. I understand why you are disappointed. I don't understand slandering individuals and a company because you disagree with a decision.
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 -
Russ White said:
What, specifically, is the objection to such a feature?
Just a guess, not insider knowledge (of which I have none). The implementation of access to Logos across multiple devices requires synchronization. This process would become unmanageable if Logos requested that all users maintain their own synchronization process.
Russ White said:Or is that you're planning on (or already are) mining this information for some specific reason?
Logos was already mining data in L3 - where do you think they got their usage figures to prioritize features in L4? Data mining is the ultimate in not looking at the detail. As long as Logos uses the data solely for data mining your privacy is ensured. Your only fear should be a court of law demanding the information - a reasonable concern with your library card as well.
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 -
1. Calling a decision unprofessional is not slander. It's interesting how accustomed we've become to misusing language, to the point that we misuse it on a regular basis, and how fast we are to take offense, and proclaim victimhood. I specifically think that closing a feature request by saying you can simply not use the software as intended is unprofessional--I know where I work, it would be considered unprofessional. Closing it because there's no interest is one issue, closing it because you can use the software in a way not intended is another.
2. The argument from personal responsibility makes no sense. The feature request is about giving people the tools they need to exercise personal responsibility. In fact, this argument presumes it's personally irresponsible to use this specific feature of the software--and then you say it's wrong not to recommend the software. It seems to me that if it's irresponsible to use some of some specific feature of a piece of software, the irresponsible course is to recommend the use of the software itself. Your argument turns back against itself, and self-refutes.
I'm disappointed that on this forum, and within Logos, user privacy is treated with such little relevance. If privacy is a growing concern, a company like Logos should be on the cutting edge of building privacy in, instead of at the trailing edge.
Russ
0 -
[quote]Just a guess, not insider knowledge (of which I have none). The
implementation of access to Logos across multiple devices requires
synchronization. This process would become unmanageable if Logos
requested that all users maintain their own synchronization process.So Logos should force me to synchronize all my notes whether or not I want that feature in all cases? That's a rather thin argument, IMHO. It's like Facebook saying, "well you can't keep anything private, or we can't give you the feature of tagging you in pictures other people upload."
Russ
0 -
It seems to me that Bob could have posted you can already do this via "turn off Internet access" as opposed to commenting on it and marking it complete.
The fact that he marked it complete suggests to me he isn't listening to it or has already decided he doesn't care to do anything about it regardless of votes.
This sounds a lot to me like there isn't any listening going on. I don't have to agree with his decision, but I also don't think I'm dismissing his view either. Marking it complete appears to be dismissing the view as already complete and no further discussion is needed.
It seems to me that the uservoice was a way for people to vote on things important to them....is that still true? If so, why was it marked complete?
Heck, he could have just commented and said that's probably as far as Logos is going with it at this point? What if he didn't close it and it 1000 votes? Would he reconsider then? Closing it means either its not open for discussion or they're concerned it'll keep going up and they won't listen at that point.
ie, In the forum thread everyone kept insisting it isn't a problem and no one wants this feature. Well, why not let it go on then? As mentioned it was at 100+ points and still moving upwards...someone cares.
If the logic is well it still isn't representative of customer views, then get rid of uservoice voting.
0 -
We all balance privacy issues when we use our computers. Every email I send or website I visit, they all contain the possibility of loss of privacy. Programs I use constantly phoning home to check for updates, even Google mines our searches for information. I am comfortable with the risk i take with Logos and synchronization
Considering the great flexibility Logos 4 gives us to be able to use our data on multiple platforms, In light of the benefits I feel the privacy issue to be at the rock bottom of my wish list for Logos to implement.
What exactly are we thinking Will happen with our data? After all who wants to try and find my prayer list from off of a Logos server by hacking in? I was more concerned about credit card info floating around for prepubs that take years to make in some cases. Bob has already addressed the credit card issue, and I'm fine with it.
0 -
All of this talk of privacy in a public forum with your name attached to it just doesn't make sense to me. Without access to logo's files, I know that you use L4, you use notes or prayer lists, or ... I know even more info about you in that many of you list websites on your tag lines, and I also know even more by clicking on your name. Knowing this much, I could probably track down your hometown, your address, and probably your phone number (all of which I am sure you can do to me too). Given all of that how can you really be concerned about privacy? Seems to me like an opportunity to complain.
Those who really have privacy concerns have turned off the updates, turned off the internet, and are not members of this forum.
0 -
Personally, I do not care about issues of privacy (with the current configuration) and I have no vested interest in seeing the feature implemented
That being said, I can understand why Russ and others were disappointed with the way the request for privacy features was handled (what I think of the issue of privacy is actually irrelevant to the merit of the complaints).
I would like to remind us that Logos is a business that exists to make a profit (if it was not the case it would be a non-profit organization and even then many of the observations below would still apply). As such, paying customers can legitimately expect from Logos, the same thing they expect from other software companies and businesses in general (and even more because Logos claims to operate according to Christian principles). Some comments here give the impression that users are getting the product for free and the only thing they should express is gratitude (just replace Logos with Microsoft and Apple and see if you still recommend the same course of action). Yes, we should be thankful for the products offered by Logos, but this is business relationship and the gratitude goes both ways and does not (and should not) exclude constructive criticism (the very fuel of improvement)
Logos.uservoice.com was designed to get user input and use that input to prioritize improvements and fixes. A legitimate expectation is that items that have garnered a substantial number of votes will be given proper attention (the point of having Logos.uservoice.com in the first place).
Customers that have invested thousand of dollars of their hard earned money should not be faulted for expressing the fact that their expectations were not met. I personally think “fixing” the privacy issue by penalizing the user and taking away key functions of the program is not a solution at all and does not warrant the label “completed” when it comes to the request. Such a solution would be unacceptable in most professional environments and can legitimately be considered substandard (just imagine Microsoft telling you that if you do not want viruses in your PC, the solution is to disconnect it from the internet, it would be a “solution” indeed but far from customer expectations).
As some have mentioned, allowing users to select what is synchronized should be feasible technologically (if strangely it was not possible, explaining that to the user would have been much better than marking the request as “completed”).
The hard reality of the free market is that things get done when users complain and let company understand what they have to lose by not listening (I can think of a few radical changes that Logos made after customers strongly voiced their opinions).
While many here think they are helping the customer and or Logos, faulting those who voice their disappointment does not help the situation and surely does not help Logos that might lose their business (lecturing or patronizing a customer is not known to resolve customer complaints). If you are satisfied with everything Logos does and how they handle all situations, that is great (you are the ideal customer and Logos should thank you for that), however you should allow others to think differently and give them the freedom to express themselves without being attacked and labeled (they are the people that Logos needs to woe and please in order to keep their business)
This is not to say that we customers always make legitimate demands or that we are always reasonable, of course not. It does not also mean that Logos is doing everything wrong. Au contraire, Logos is doing most things right and this is why I have invested so much in this company. But with great investment come great expectations and a desire to hold the company to higher standards.
Alain
0 -
Michael Birney said:
All of this talk of privacy in a public forum with your name attached to it just doesn't make sense to me. Without access to logo's files, I know that you use L4, you use notes or prayer lists, or ... I know even more info about you in that many of you list websites on your tag lines, and I also know even more by clicking on your name. Knowing this much, I could probably track down your hometown, your address, and probably your phone number (all of which I am sure you can do to me too). Given all of that how can you really be concerned about privacy? Seems to me like an opportunity to complain.
Those who really have privacy concerns have turned off the updates, turned off the internet, and are not members of this forum.
"All I want is for the extension cord manufacturer to build the cord so the cord won't pull out of the plug."
"If you don't want electrical fires, then shut the electricity off in your house."It's always best to apply the argument your making in the case at hand to some completely related case to see if it makes sense before posting it in public. Again, I don't find it so horrible to ask that if a set of users open, and vote for, a specific feature, that Logos leave it open and address it if it gets to the top of the heap over time, rather than simply closing it because you can simply not use the software as its intended to be used and "solve" the problem.
Russ
0 -
BobbyTerhune said:
We all balance privacy issues when we use our computers. Every email I send or website I visit, they all contain the possibility of loss of privacy. Programs I use constantly phoning home to check for updates, even Google mines our searches for information. I am comfortable with the risk i take with Logos and synchronization.
And the point is not whether or not I'm comfortable with what I currently have in Logos being synchronized. In fact, I don't much care right this second whether my notes files are synch'd or not. But I can clearly see a point where I might care, and I can clearly see where others will, and should, care. Being alert to privacy concerns (I work on the network side of the world, and know a good bit about how secure your data really is), if I see a chance to improve privacy in software, I always work in that direction. I've had these very same discussions with other folks who make software, and, in fact, with people at Verisign (now Symantic), Google, and others.
In this case, I'm approaching the problem as a customer, rather than as a partner, consultant, or in some other position. But I always argue the same case: the user should have the option of what to divulge and what not to, and the alternative should not be, "just don't use my service if you don't like it.' It just seems like a very simple principle to me--whether or not I have the specific privacy concern at this specific moment, the user should have the option of what to divulge and what not to.
At any rate, no reason to beat a dead horse.
Russ
0 -
Cooling off.......... deep breath ....................
I'm glad Logos listens and responds to it's users concerns.
edited by author
0 -
Alain Maashe said:
While many here think they are helping the customer and or Logos, faulting those who voice their disappointment does not help the situation and surely does not help Logos that might lose their business (lecturing or patronizing a customer is not known to resolve customer complaints). If you are satisfied with everything Logos does and how they handle all situations, that is great (you are the ideal customer and Logos should thank you for that), however you should allow others to think differently and give them the freedom to express themselves without being attacked and labeled (they are the people that Logos needs to woe and please in order to keep their business)
I have stayed out of the little frays for such a long time, just to insert myself into this one - dumb on my part. The things I was going to say to criticize the above paragraph mostly applied to me also.
I would delete all my posts in this section, but if I do, then everyone else's after mine loose their context.
edit - but Alain, your paragraph applies to you most of all. You are lecturing me (a customer) and telling me not to express my opinions. Just look down the loaded finger Alain, its a big ol log in your own eye. Nobody is taking away anyones right to complain, and he was not attacked, at least by me, just pointing out the flaws in the argument is not an attack.
And Russ - bad electrical cords really? Doesn't even come close to applying, burn your house down vs disagreement about privacy settings - not even as close as apples and oranges. To paraphrase you - "think before you publicly post."
0 -
Russ White said:
I'm personally disappointed that requests for privacy functionality are still being treated with such a cavalier attitude.
This issue has already been discussed extensively in multiple threads in this forum. Bob already posted a lengthy analysis of his position on this matter. To now accuse him of acting in a cavalier manner is both uninformed and unfair.
0 -
Logos President Bob Pritchett has posted a lengthy and thoughtful response here.Russ White said:I'm personally disappointed that requests for privacy functionality are still being treated with such a cavalier attitude.
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/15836/122727.aspx#122727
Russ, I notice you were active in this thread with multiple posts before Bob's reply, but never responded directly to him. Maybe you missed his post so I am providing this link in case you prefer to speak directly to his response.
Blessings
0 -
I was unaware the uservoice was a democracy. I thought it was there to inform Logos how users feel about whatever they are voting on. The system works for that designed purpose. I know we like to think Logos will allow us to choose and effect changes and policy but they never promised us that power. We were only given a mechanism by which to express ourselves.
Sometimes I ask my kids for input on what we will have for dinner. Sometimes I act on their input, sometimes I don't.They may not even get a satisfactory explanation as to why their suggestions were not followed.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
I have no need for a privacy option, but as it would be incredibly simple for there to be an option in Program Settings to turn Sync off, I think Logos should do it. I understand why some users want it. If they're only using one machine, and willing to keep their own backups, why should they be forced to upload all their user data to Logos' servers?
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
I was under the impression that Logos wanted input via the uservoice page as to what was important to people and others could vote on it if it was important to them. The page shows what users (at least some of them) are interested in. There are other features with higher votes that don't appear to be accepted either. It would seem to me the answer was let it stay on the list and see where it goes but it was marked completed when people clearly didn't agree (100+ votes). It would seem to me that if it wasn't important that the idea would die on its own anyway but it seemed be going upwards.
If they're not willing to listen to input, then like I said remove that feature. If its really for only features that they like or want to implement then just say thats what the list really is for. I don't understand the point of asking for input but if you don't like the feedback to close it down.
ETA: I'm in product development for my company and it seems that the answer we generally use for requested features we're not planning to implement would be the same and apply here. ie, We don't have enough requests or believe there's enough interested customers. When we get more requests, we'll review it. We get our feedback directly from customers and open surveys. It sounded like uservoice was that avenue for more requests and to review it in the future.
0 -
James Ng said:
If the logic is well it still isn't representative of customer views, then get rid of uservoice voting.
I was an early proponent of user input based upon my experience with it for Harmony Assistant. Allowing a user voice should never be translated into majority user rule. The users' voice is one, major component of solid software development not the only or overriding component.
James Ng said:This sounds a lot to me like there isn't any listening going on.
This I agree with. I think there is a significant contingent on the forum that do not listen. I find myself often drawn into a rebutting mode - I read to build a reply rather than to understand the other point of view. Luckily, I often write but do not click the send button. If I do read to rebut I assume some others do too. However, this is a small portion of the threads and posters.
James Ng said:If so, why was it marked complete?
I think it is better to mark proposals that have been evaluated and deemed "won't be done" as complete and free the votes for projects that may be done. It would be better to have a subcategory within "done" to indicate "rejected". But at least in the test period, we and Logos are stuck with the way user voice works. I don't think it is as effective implementation as Harmony Assistant's.
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 -
James Ng said:
I was under the impression that Logos wanted input via the uservoice page as to what was important to people and others could vote on it if it was important to them.
I'm sure they want to know all of the info tallied on uservoice. But each concern has it's own level of difficulty and expense associated with adopting it. If something is relatively easy to implement and moderatly desired I suspect it would be done quickly. If a feature is extremely difficult to integrate it may never be accomplished even with a high demand in uservoice.
I think we should have Logos version 3 available perpetually.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Alain Maashe said:
While many here think they are helping the customer and or Logos, faulting those who voice their disappointment does not help the situation and surely does not help Logos that might lose their business (lecturing or patronizing a customer is not known to resolve customer complaints).
Allow me to defend myself against this one sentence which may or may not be directed partially to me.
By now you probably expect me to insist on a level of politeness no matter how much one disagrees with the original poster. Making accusations that you can not support by facts (especially if you have no way of knowing the facts), fallacies such as character assassination, the attitude "I'm right because I'm always right", etc. do not cut it with me. Just as I occasionally step in when a forum member is being mistreated, I will occasionally step in when a Logos poster is being mistreated. I am more apt to step in when the thread is on a topic that has a history of veering out of control.
People who present their disappointment with Logos' decision and/or ask for a re-evaluation are well within their rights. However, the should present their case in a manner that has a chance of convincing Logos. If they just want to vent, I would appreciate it if they do it off forum where I won't run into it or complain about the tone.
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 -
MJ. Smith said:James Ng said:
If so, why was it marked complete?
I think it is better to mark proposals that have been evaluated and deemed "won't be done" as complete and free the votes for projects that may be done. It would be better to have a subcategory within "done" to indicate "rejected". But at least in the test period, we and Logos are stuck with the way user voice works. I don't think it is as effective implementation as Harmony Assistant's.
I guess this is where the product marketing side of me is confused. We don't generally discard anything as "rejected" but more along the lines of "rejected for now" since times change, resources change, etc. Things that get closed out almost never seem to get revisited or if they do the wheel has to be reinvented or the arguments are rehashed over.
If people want to spend their votes on a feature that Logos says "rejected for now" then it still has some validity as it still tells them its important when/if they revisit it.
I have a number of items that on my product list that I don't see as ever getting productized but I'm also not going to throw it away either.
If Bob had just commented and said we're not going to do it at this time I don't think I'd be upset. All of us can understand we're not privy to all of the decision-making or agree with it but marking it complete because we're in disagreement doesn't sound like a conversation or open-minded to me. Again, just my 0.1c (adjusted for inflation and market fluctuation) [:P].
0 -
Russ White said:
Bob closed this request,
The irony is, I setup UserVoice as an experiment in listening. I didn't intend to answer/close anything, (didn't want to influence/color the voting), but was pressured into responding by people on the newsgroups and inside Logos. I guess it was a successful experiment. :-) Now it seems like an important part of our feedback loop, when it started as a late night "try our free UserVoice feature!" experiment.
I was all set to write a detailed response to this thread, when I was reminded that I already did: everything at
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/15836/122727.aspx#122727
is still relevant.
Our switch to forums (nearly a year ago), and the enthusiasm for Logos 4, has re-invigorated our user community. We're getting incredible traffic here, and (I'm sorry!) we're just not caught up to doing what we've already promised, let alone all the things asked for, let alone responding in detail to every suggestion. And if we ignore an idea, we're ignoring user input. If we quickly say "can't do that now", or "don't plan to", we get in even more trouble!
And that's just here in the forums. I've also got phone calls and direct emails. Just today, I'm A) deceptive, and
incompetent, according to correspondents, because the Mac release isn't finished. (One writer helpfully suggested that there are lots of Mac programmers available if I'd just hire and pay them. :-) )I'm not complaining -- I'm just sharing my day. It's a good life; fast growth and passionate users are wonderful problems to have.
We are listening. Always. And in the end, we're going to (largely) do what you (collectively) tell us, no matter how contrary to my plan it may be.
But we're going to bring some judgement, some prioritization, and some future planning to the decisions.
I get the privacy concern. If it turns out most (many? even a significant percentage?) of our users want a solution to guarantee prayer list and notes privacy, we'll implement it. However... even after the reasons in my earlier post:
A) It's a low priority because it's an easy work-around. We've still got "you promised!" features missing, so a problem like "I don't want you to read my prayer list" seems like something you can work around easily by not storing it in our software, at the loss of none of our core Bible study functionality. Coding it would delay a lot of other stuff more people seem even more anxious for; not coding it requires very little sacrifice for the people who care.
The proposed solution may be the wrong one. Selective sync risks horrible technical problems, and lots of extra confusion. Maybe a special "local encryption" password is a better idea. We need to C) There are future plans not yet revealed that could change people's minds. An iPhone prayer list app / feature. Ability to edit prayer lists on a web site. Ability to have a shared prayer list for a small group or church. I'd prefer we don't get everyone turning off notes and prayer list syncing before they see how cool it is to have their notes on the iPhone, on our web-based Bible, etc.
I read an article (by Danny Hillis, in Wired, years ago) about when the writer's grandfather got a telephone, and made them install it in the barn. When told most people put it in the kitchen, he responded "I'm not going to let any fool ring a bell in my kitchen!"
Perfectly sensible, and he got more years of peace from telemarketers. But he was bringing "today's sensibilities" to "tomorrow's technology." The phone wasn't just a bell in his kitchen, it was a way to summon medical help, to check crop prices, to stay in touch with friends, etc. etc. They just didn't know it yet. Today most of us think a phone is so important that we strap one to our belt every waking hour, something Hillis' grandfather would have thought crazy.
And sometimes it is. But it sure beats needing to saddle a horse to fetch a doctor 15 miles away.
Part of my job is to listen, and address your concerns. Part of it is to ignore your concerns, so we can all get to something even better. It's a balancing act, it's subjective, and I'm wrong (or late) lots of the time. But it's worth doing, because if we didn't push in some new (and even uncomfortable) directions, we'd end up with a very hacked up, button-heavy, feature-ridden, impossible-to-learn Bible software program still based on 1992 C code for 16-bit Windows.
Henry Ford said "If I'd asked people what they wanted, they'd have said faster horses." (And yes, I know he ignored their requests for color cars. It is a balancing act. But I'd rather have had his cheap, black automobile than a colorful horse.)
To wrap up my rambling... I think we're going to like the cloud and sync. I think we're all going to like it more than we hate its annoyances. I think we're going to find the risk that a Logos programmer reads our Bible study notes to be less worrisome than the risk we lose our notes when our computer is stolen or crashes.
And if we need to offer some colors for this one-color auto, (like allowing you to encrypt your notes / prayer lists / etc.), it'll be okay to get to that a bit down the road, once we've got the factory built and all the kinks worked out of the engine design. Ford did offer colors later, but it probably was a good idea to drop that variable while getting the assembly line concept perfected. We're still learning about syncs bandwidth and storage requirements; we are actually re-writing the backend right now in light of what we learned from the initial release. I don't want to add the complexity of "some synced data" or unreadable encrypted data that would make errors and data corruption hard to see when we are still tinkering with the fundamentals.
Sorry this is so long... but I hope it helps you see why we're responding as we are.
-- Bob
0 -
MJ. Smith said:Alain Maashe said:
While many here think they are helping the customer and or Logos, faulting those who voice their disappointment does not help the situation and surely does not help Logos that might lose their business (lecturing or patronizing a customer is not known to resolve customer complaints).
Allow me to defend myself against this one sentence which may or may not be directed partially to me.
By now you probably expect me to insist on a level of politeness no matter how much one disagrees with the original poster. Making accusations that you can not support by facts (especially if you have no way of knowing the facts), fallacies such as character assassination, the attitude "I'm right because I'm always right", etc. do not cut it with me. Just as I occasionally step in when a forum member is being mistreated, I will occasionally step in when a Logos poster is being mistreated. I am more apt to step in when the thread is on a topic that has a history of veering out of control.
People who present their disappointment with Logos' decision and/or ask for a re-evaluation are well within their rights. However, the should present their case in a manner that has a chance of convincing Logos. If they just want to vent, I would appreciate it if they do it off forum where I won't run into it or complain about the tone.
MJ,
You are right we should not make accusation that we cannot support, claim to know what is going on in someone’s mind or use fallacies to support our arguments. The funny part is that it is easy to do the very thing we speak against if we are not careful. You have used very strong words to qualify a few of the comments in this thread and others. Words or expressions like “slander”, or “character assassination” are very powerful and can easily be perceived as an attack on the character of the person accused of doing these things (e.g. being a slanderer is not exactly a compliment and says something about one’s character since it involves malice and arguing something that one knows is false). Unless you know what is going on in someone mind (and their mental processes), you should not use those words lightly, doing so cheapen their true meaning.
To be brutally honest, (and apart from the need for users to be courteous to one another) unless you are a forum moderator (able to delete posts or otherwise censor comments) or unless you are a decision maker at Logos what does or does not cut it with you (the same would apply to me) or what you appreciate or do not appreciate (again, the same would also apply to me) is of little consequence ( I am aware of the fact that this applies to my post also) I doubt people post their complaints to please you or me, or require your approval or mine.
I am glad (and Bob response testifies to that fact) that Logos does not take the approach that customers (and paying customers at that) “should present their case in a manner that has a chance of convincing Logos”. This would go against everything good customer service is all about.
Yes customers can be a pain, unfair, rude, and disrespectful … but this should not matter to the business. “They hurt my feelings” is not a valid reason to reject complaints that might be valid despite a “poor” presentation. I should know that, as an instructor I receive students’ evaluations and they are not always kind (to put it mildly).
One of the reasons that I love Logos as a company (which does not mean I am pleased with everything) is exemplified by Bob’s response: customer support from the top and by the book that seeks to appease rather than enflame the already irate customer (helping Logos would mean following the same pattern). The customer might not like the answer but will certainly appreciate the gesture.
Alain
0 -
Great response Bob, and I'm very appreciative for the job you carry out (joyfully it seems) even amidst all the name calling. You can't please everyone, little lone try to do it all at once, but you have my sincere thanks for the job you do.
Logos Platinum
Windows 7 - 64 Bit
Lenovo laptop E520 i7-2640M, 2.8GHz 8G Ram, 2G GraphicsAustralia
0 -
Alain Maashe said:
what you appreciate or do not appreciate (again, the same would also apply to me) is of little consequence ( I am aware of the fact that this applies to my post also) I doubt people post their complaints to please you or me, or require your approval or mine.
Again, I agree with this statement. However, it omits the fact that we have been asked to police ourselves - a charge I take very seriously given why Damian resigned his MVP status.
Alain Maashe said:Yes customers can be a pain, unfair, rude, and disrespectful … but this should not matter to the business.
Simply my point of view here - but if we expect more of Logos because they are a Christian company, shouldn't we also expect more of ourselves because we are Christian? I find it bizarre that I read far more that is rude, demanding, self-centered, insulting, fallacious on these boards than any other board I have had reason to follow. So much so that when I recommend Logos to Catholic and Anglican friends, I suggest they contact me directly when they have questions rather than expose them to these forums. When they are fully hooked on Logos, I ease them into the forums. Note that this was not true on the new groups where participation was small enough that posters got to know each other and there was not the frustration of an incomplete product.
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 -
Bob's first paragraph pretty much says it all:
We're not anti-privacy. I like it myself. But taking on privacy needs for others is a massive responsibility, and an expensive one to implement well. So we go out of our way to disclaim responsibility and to encourage you to NOT store private or confidential information in our software.
Making lots of tough privacy policy and promises just creates a higher standard that we could be legally held to. If we were a bank, I'd consider that a cost of doing business. Since we're (largely) a sermon preparation tool, and sermons are designed to be preached aloud in public, it seems like a wiser use of our resources to put money into content, user interface, and service, rather than building a fortress to protect sermon notes.
I understand the sensitivity of prayer lists. If yours are that sensitive, don't use our prayer list feature. (It was just a "freebie add-on" to our core function; it's not the heart of our software.) If we get pressed to the wall, we're more likely to remove the prayer list feature than to implement guaranteed iron-clad security.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
I'm not going to directly reply to any of the various points above, but I still want to be able to have Logos4 connected to the Internet, but keep control of where my user-content is.
At present, we have no backup, no control and no export.
For me, I still want Logos to add per-item sync controls and export to files (backup).
I have blocked my PC from connecting to the sync services at logos.com, so my content never copies offsite.
No - I'm not happy about this aspect of the application at all.
EDIT: Nothing above this line changed. Just new from here.
Well, somehow I think I replied to the last post on page 1 and never saw any of this 2nd page when I wrote above. DUMB!
So, I have not seen the posts, including Bob's just above.
I understand his points and comments. I just don't agree. I wish for sync control and backups to protect my user-content. Until then, for me the application is very limited as I am forced to do it Bob's way: Don't store my data in his application.
As a result, Logos4 has next-to-useless Notes etc, from my point of view. I like just about all the rest of the application.
(L3 never had these issues, as my data was on my disk. To lose or backup myself. My data. My problem. My control.)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said: The proposed solution may be the wrong one. Selective sync risks horrible technical problems, and lots of extra confusion. Maybe a special "local encryption" password is a better idea. We need to ...
Bob,
(Sounds like you never finished that line above: "We need to ...")
Currently, Logos4 has a three-way control for feedback, per graphic below. I love it. I can turn it on or off. I'm just fine with that. I love buttons and controls.
What some of us still are asking for, is the same for sync of User-Content.
A three-way control of "Sync User-Content to Logos Online: [ Always | By-Item | Never ]" would be just fine. Some might be happy with just "[ Always | Never ]" which we don't really have at present, without giving up the many other things we might want to keep.
Maybe four-way: "Sync User-Content to Logos Online: [ Always | By-Item (Default YES) | By-Item (Default NO) | Never ]".
(New items would take the default YES or NO, so most people could set and forget.)
For the four-way, most users have "Always". A few of us are using "Never". I would rather use "By Item (Default YES)" and and turn some off but leave the rest working.
I welcome and look forward to what new things your company can bring. I expect I will like many or most of them. I just wish control of my data.
As to the complex UI. If a user selects "Always", or "Never" you don't need to ever display the "Sync: YES | NO" UI on anything. Only if someone selects to have control does the UI need to display and allow control of the YES/NO flag for that item in the local database.
The way you suggest, most users will be happy to run with "Sync=Always", and don't need to ever see or care about the flag. Just do as it is now. I don't think anyone is asking you to break great features, or take anything away from those that like a given thing.
A few days ago, I signed into the web version of "Logos4" and noticed it had some of my older Collections. It was great. But it had none of my new ones as I'm running with "Sync=Never" so your servers have old data. I would much rather be live, but exclude a few items when it suits me.
I hear you when you say its low priority to Logos. I just see it different.
Thanks for your time.
Jim.
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:Russ White said:
Bob closed this request,
And that's just here in the forums. I've also got phone calls and direct emails. Just today, I'm A) deceptive, and
incompetent, according to correspondents, because the Mac release isn't finished. (One writer helpfully suggested that there are lots of Mac programmers available if I'd just hire and pay them. :-) )I'm not complaining -- I'm just sharing my day. It's a good life; fast growth and passionate users are wonderful problems to have.
We are listening. Always. And in the end, we're going to (largely) do what you (collectively) tell us, no matter how contrary to my plan it may be.
A) It's a low priority because it's an easy work-around. We've still got "you promised!" features missing, so a problem like "I don't want you to read my prayer list" seems like something you can work around easily by not storing it in our software, at the loss of none of our core Bible study functionality. Coding it would delay a lot of other stuff more people seem even more anxious for; not coding it requires very little sacrifice for the people who care.
The proposed solution may be the wrong one. Selective sync risks horrible technical problems, and lots of extra confusion. Maybe a special "local encryption" password is a better idea. We need to C) There are future plans not yet revealed that could change people's minds. An iPhone prayer list app / feature. Ability to edit prayer lists on a web site. Ability to have a shared prayer list for a small group or church. I'd prefer we don't get everyone turning off notes and prayer list syncing before they see how cool it is to have their notes on the iPhone, on our web-based Bible, etc.
Sorry this is so long... but I hope it helps you see why we're responding as we are.
-- Bob
Welcome to my world we should commiserate some time
. Like you I get called all sorts of things everyday from people spending thousands to millions of dollars. Every dollar is important to them so I can absolutely emphasive with them. The part that you indicate Logos is always listening is what I'm suggesting that you are giving the impression you are NOT doing from my experience. Here's an example of our situation:Option #1
Privacy feature on Uservoice. It gets 100+ votes. Logos marks it complete and puts a comment, turn off internet use and get dvds. We'll skip the fact that that solution doesn't seem to work for some people per the other thread but it wasn't hitting the mark on what was requested.
Option #2
Leave it open and just put your comment in there where this is an alternative.
Option #2
Let it sit OPEN and see how many votes it gets so that you can SEE how important it is.
Option #3
Leave it open and put in a comment that Logos isn't implementing this at this time,
Option #4
Let it sit OPEN and put a simple comment. Logos has no plans at this time to implement this feature but weill re-evaluate this at a later date after Logos 3 parity is achieved.
NONE of these options means there are resources or anything else or any other guarantee, its just to see what the feedback is and how important people think they are.
Option #1 gives me the impression you're not listening in two different senses. The first is passive listening where you're just letting voices count, but the second is more important from a sales AND customer service side which is active listening. Your "solution" didn't address some of the concerns.
The last 3 options while it doesn't commit to anything at least gives me the impression you're listening. Option #2a might even suggest to me Logos is active listening.
When I look at my priority list I have a list of features that are defined by "some" criteria. When I have "extra" resources (haha) and I need to put more "features" on that list I usually go to my secondary list of features that we've never committed to. I NEVER have a list of completed features (there's no point) to evaluate and see if it should move forward, by definition they're done. When you move something over to the "complete" category you've effectively put it out of your mind and you don't appear to be open to viewing it.
Here's an interesting thought now. Russ started another feature on uservoice, I again voted for it and it looks like someone else did. How will you handle that one?
Again, just my thoughts.
0 -
I probably should not jump in on this, but after following this thread since it started, I have decided to do so. In the interest of full disclosure, I am one of those enthusiastic (maybe even passionate) users of L4 Bob referred to. I am not a software engineer or programmer; I am a preacher and teacher of God's word who loves the advantage of studying with, IMHO the best bible study software on the market.
When I made the transition from L3 to L4 I spent a couple of days wondering if I had made the right decision. This uncertainty was due mainly to my lack of knowledge and partly due to some of the features that were not available in the first release of L4. Since that time I have learned much more about how to use the program and the features continue to improve with each release.
For many months on these forums I have seen people make many good suggestions and I've seen logos respond in one way or another to each. Many of those suggestions are still pending (including a couple of my own) and some may never be implemented. I'm okay with that. What I believe will happen (and I think Bob's post supports this belief) is that Logos will continue to improve the software and introduce innovative, useful tools and features to help their target market be better at what we do. I also underdstand that they are running a business and have a long term vision, with a plan they believe will help them achieve their goals. I have nothing but praise for their business model and will continue to support them with my feedback and my wallet.
I will not try to defend Bob when it comes comes to whether or not he and his company are treated fairly by the comments of those who have posted here and others as he has demonstrated he can do that much better than I could. I will say that many of the negative comments I have read are simply not my experience.
I spent more than 20 years running a service business and can tell you that many of my customers were difficult and demanding at times. Some of them were my best customers and best references, even though they were always complaining. I also had some whom I simply could not satisfy because their priorities simply did not fit the vision and business model of the company. They usually went somewhere else, and on some occassions came back when they discovered that no one could meet their expectations.
It sounds like the privacy concern is something that is on Bob's radar and there is a plan to address it down the road. It also sounds like they are focusing their resources developing some of the other features and services. I am glad to hear that because there are a number of things (printing, PBB's, sentence diagramming, etc.) I would like to see done before these other suggestions (even those I have made and support) are developed.
Just my two (okay, maybe ten[;)]) cents
0 -
I think that there are lessons to be learned by everybody throughout this thread. I am sure that the company can learn a few things as well as the very strong supporters of Logos, the very dissatisfied customer and the average consumer.
I would describe myself as an average consumer. I could live with or without Logos, even though I do enjoy the program a lot there are others out there that meet my needs just as well.
Why do I say this? Because as an average consumer I have learned valuable lessons over the years when it comes to software. 1) Always start off small and not go all in (money wise) on a product that you are not yet familiar enough with to know the positives and the negatives about. I started off small with Logos and upgraded/built my library over time. By the time I had invested hundreds or thousands of dollars, I knew what was there. If privacy or other issues were such a major concern for me, Logos would have never gotten this much money out of me and I would have a financial out. I hear so many times with this and other software "I would quit using it but I have so much money invested in it....". Why would I blindly invest so much money into a program that I am not familiar with just to regret it? That was a very hard lesson for me to learn. 2) Program upgrades are not always program upgrades, just a different version. There are several people here who have decided to revert back to Logos 3 for various reasons. Each person has their own list. The word "upgrade" can be very subjective based on you and your needs. If you invested a lot of money into Logos 3, it is still usable and some claim even better.
In summary, lessons need to be learned by everyone and we must accept the fact that we sometimes make bad decisions buying software that we don't need or like. I have been very guilty of this in the past but I don't blame the software company, I blame myself for inadequate research of the product and failing to use cheap packages or the duration of free demo periods to fully understand the pros and cons of the software so that I can invest in another option if necessary. As I have learned to be a good steward with the money and more picky about what I buy for my computer, I have discovered I am less stressed out over them.
Just my experiences. "Buyer beware" applies to all companies, whether they produce Christian products or not. A business is just that, a business. It is going to offer great upgrade offers, incentives and sales to make money. Every business does this. Sure hearing "$50,000 worth of books for $1,000 is a great incentive but I must evaluate whether or not I really need it. I just had to make a hard decision two days ago concerning upgrading Logos.
0 -
Hi Jim, I am not stepping into the fray here and nor do I wish to diminish the personal concerns a few folks are raising. I just had one technical question for you. I use a Mac (so you will have to pardon my ignorance about PC solutions). On my Mac I backup my entire installation of Logos using the built in feature called "Time Machine". If anything were to happen, I could easily click a button and my entire Logos installation (books, notes, layouts etc) would be restored exactly as I last used them. Does Windows not have a backup feature that works? is there not a third party solution for backup? (NOTE: back in the day I used Norton Backup, but that was 10 years ago and I think they stopped supporting that product??).Jim Towler said:At present, we have no backup, no control and no export.
Blessings,
Joe
0 -
Joe,
yes, there are 3rd party solutions, I use Acronis True image. I "time machine" my win box back about once a month or two.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Hi Joe,
Yes - I can backup my entire PC, and I have two different packages installed that give me levels of full or selective backups. I can also run command-line or scripted copies of entire directory trees. Thats not the problem.
The real issue is that I don't have control over, and hence don't own my user data. If I mess up and delete a note in error, or kill a collection rule, or something goes wrong, there is no official recovery method.
I can't import a single lost Note from last week. If I deleted it in error, the copy on the Logos servers is no use. We don't even know if its already long-gone, or still there and just tagged for delete in 30 days.
If I want to restore a note I deleted 12 days ago, I can only return the whole installation back to that date. I can't keep all my other changes since then.
Sync to the Logos servers has its place, and its a great idea. But we need a backup and to have back control of our user-content.
I can find any number of forum posts where someone deleted a collection by mistake . Or Logos tech support deleted all the users content. Or another user that now has two of everything. We don't actually have any backups. (V3 has files we controlled and could backup/restore)
Commands for export and import will fix it. I could export my Notes every few days, and let my file backup software take care of those files. If something goes wrong, I can read some wiki, work out how to pick out the right file, and import it back into Logos4 (and hence the Logos servers too - If I turn syncs on).
Because the databases "belong" to the application in undocumented ways, i don't actually have my own data. We need export/backup commands.
Logos4 already knows how to import v3 Notes and a few other things. Its part of the way there already.
There are comments that the internal database stuff is often stored as a large XML string in the database fields. It can't really be too hard to export them out to files.
If I can't backup my own data, its not my data!
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
The irony is, I setup UserVoice as an experiment in listening. I didn't intend to answer/close anything, (didn't want to influence/color the voting), but was pressured into responding by people on the newsgroups and inside Logos. I guess it was a successful experiment. :-) Now it seems like an important part of our feedback loop, when it started as a late night "try our free UserVoice feature!" experiment.
To Bob Pritchett:
I think uservoice is a great idea that benefits users & Logos alike. I don't have any expectations of being empowered to steer the company (as some de facto share holder) whichever direction my whims take me. Thank you for uservoice and please keep reading our input.To everybody else:
I am sometimes amazed at how an individual user can make demands on the company when "100 votes" on uservoice is only one raindrop in the 100,000's of Logos users who have not expressed support for an issue. I liken it to Bob Pritchett giving me a ride in his Lamborghini and I have the nerve to change his radio station without asking. It is not reasonable to demand Caterpillar corporation to sell mopeds just because their yellow paint scheme would look cool on one.The need to reproduce a corporate environment to run Bible software borders on looney. I should know because I've run Logos on two 36" monitors on my PictureTel video conferencing setup from my GM days. It's really cool but very unnecessary.
There are mega corporations that do use distributed systems. GM has been with CISCO long before their EDS acquisition. Amazon has billions of dollars at risk "in the cloud." Those corporations that abhor cloud based computing aren't trying to synch notes, prayer lists and sermon preparation. They have data that really is more sensitive. I know each of us thinks our data is the most important in the world but in reality, hardly anybody else cares to snoop it. Unless, .....
What are you people actually preaching and praying about that needs so much secrecy?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Jim Towler said:
At present, we have no backup, no control and no export.
I'd offer you dropbox but it's in "the cloud."
There is an old fashioned thing we called RAID that you can run without internet , clouds or PictureTel steups.. [;)] It even has selective file backup options.
With biometric security, even your wife can't access your notes. You can pick up a fingerprint scanner as low as $15 now.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I'd offer you dropbox but it's in "the cloud."
There is an old fashioned thing we called RAID that you can run without internet , clouds or PictureTel steups..
It even has selective file backup options.With biometric security, even your wife can't access your notes. You can pick up a fingerprint scanner as low as $15 now.
I have no idea what this post is about, or what you are saying to me.
RAID is not a backup to protect from a deleted Collection rule. Nor is sync to cloud. A fingerprint reader wont let me export or backup my Logos user-content.
0 -
What demands are people making? I'm saying it was closed where it doesn't make sense asking for an explanation and suggesting it could have been better handled doesn't seem outrageous to me. Are you suggesting that I'm not allowed to vote either or disagree?
Your argument of "only" 100 votes is silly because its been closed, no one knows how many votes it would have gotten since its been shutdown and even if it got 100,000 votes it still doesn't mean Logos would do anything about it.
Either uservoice is a valid voting mechanism that says its representative of the users or it isn't. Simple question for Logos. Is it or isn't it? If it is, then let it run. If it isn't, then I don't see the point of it. You can't have it both ways.
0 -
Jim Towler said:
I have no idea what this post is about, or what you are saying to me.
The original post is protesting Bob Pritchett's handling of a uservoice item "for a privacy feature." Susequent posts in this thread addressed turning off synchronization. (Hence, my joke about Dropbox as an option to replace Logos 4 cloud sync.)
Biometric scanners are a viable barrier to enhance security. They would have to cut off your finger to get past that one. (Hence, my suggestion for a fingerprint scanner.)
You already have a couple programs allowing incremental backup & restore. If you develop a thoughtful backup routine you can use the tools you have to accomplish your stated goals.
When I was in Michigan the file security protocol for Saginaw General Hospital was (aside from RAID) 2 daily backups. One copy was locked in the fireproof safe on location. The second backup was removed from the premises. No backups were destroyed for at least a week. If files were deleted or corrupted, we had ample notice and restored them.
I don't know how much time you spend generating new data in Logos or why your system is vulnerable to frequent data loss but Logos 3 still exceeds all your needs without the vulnerabilities.Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Jim Towler said:
If I want to restore a note I deleted 12 days ago, I can only return the whole installation back to that date. I can't keep all my other changes since then.
Isn't this true of most database applications? Mind you, I do have my own work around on this - the same I have on other database app's. Back up the database and use a test harness or browser to extract my data and reinsert the "lost" data. Mind you, this is a big enough hassle that I need to be very motivated to recover the data.
I thoroughly agree that an export/import function is needed and am anxiously awaiting this promised feature. But given that this is a database app, how do you expect individual backups to work?
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 -
WOW - So many different ideas ...
My "... I have no idea ... " comment was in regard to dropbox - which I have never heard of. And that RAID is not about backups. Nor is fingerprint readers.
My earlier main reply was to a specific point by Bob. And I offered how simple I think selective sync could be.
My later point was to a question Joe asked about being able to do a complete backup. Yes - but its all or nothing.
And yes - I understand the original point by Russ. Wanting to leave the question open. Clearly these matters are important to some of the users of Logos software.
0 -
James Ng said:
What demands are people making? I'm saying it was closed where it doesn't make sense asking for an explanation and suggesting it could have been better handled doesn't seem outrageous to me. Are you suggesting that I'm not allowed to vote either or disagree?
No. Vote as you please and disagree or not as you wish. Just don't expect the dissolution of uservoice because the creator doesn't wish to deliver what we clamor for. If I were going to tell Bob Pritchett what to do, I would have preferred he leave the item on uservoice as one more barometer of people's sentiments. But I certainly would not demand he terminate uservoice because he had "closed" further discussion of one issue.
My father-in-law was a nationally known artist. He painted a massive oil of an eagle that many expressed interest in purchasing. Each time an inquiry was made, he raised the price to discourage it's sale. Finally he listed it "NFS" (not-for-sale) to escape determined buyers. My wife inherited the painting on his passing. I look at Bob's closure of the uservoice item as tagging it "NFS" -- meaning this has been addressed and will not be implemented so move your focus to viable items.
This certainly does little for those who are determined to ask for what can not be granted. Bob could just hold that carrot out on a long stick and see how long we march towards it. His current response gives me hope that the other issues raised in uservoice actually do have some measure of viability. After all, Bob didn't close them.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Hi, I recognize there are other larger issues and like I said I was not trying to diminish those. I was just more curious if you had something that would create a backup of the specific files and it seems like that is possible on the PC side.Jim Towler said:Yes - I can backup my entire PC, and I have two different packages installed that give me levels of full or selective backups. I can also run command-line or scripted copies of entire directory trees. Thats not the problem.
The real issue is that I don't have control over, and hence don't own my user data.
Thanks
Joe
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Back up the database and use a test harness or browser to extract my data and reinsert the "lost" data.
Frequent backups are the easiest way to prevent data loss. But heroic efforts to salvage data have been successful even on a spindled, punctured floppy disk. Raw data recovery is not that difficult. But frequent backups is so simple it is unprofessional not to use them.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
James Ng said:
Option #1
Privacy feature on Uservoice. It gets 100+ votes. Logos marks it complete and puts a comment, turn off internet use and get dvds. We'll skip the fact that that solution doesn't seem to work for some people per the other thread but it wasn't hitting the mark on what was requested.
The silly irony here is that I didn't mean to "shut the idea down." As I mentioned, my plan is to just watch UserVoice, and I never intended to use it as a way to hear from Logos. User pressure, and internal pressure, forced me to start responding/commenting. In this particular case, someone inside Logos was annoyed by how many "unresolved" suggestions where sitting there, and emailed me a list of proposed comments/status changes. Which I just whipped through one night. I didn't realize I was ending your ability to vote on this, so I've now re-opened it and set it to "under review".
:-)
0
