The Gaping Hole in Logos' Usability

I posted this on a FB Logos group and thought I'd add it here to see what the forumites think.

What I consider to be a gaping hole in the usability of Logos is its poor graphical output tools. The screenshot below is from Biblearc, a web-based tool that is easy to use, intuitive, and can do multiple graphical wonders with scripture (phrase diagramming, arcing, bracketing, markup, and more). This phrase diagram of Hebrews 1:1-4 took me about ten minutes to make. Try that in Canvas, etc.

I suspect I'm not the first person to point at Biblearc so I doubt it's a secret to the developers and brass. But I sure wish they'd build something like this that is of similar ease of use, integrated into the (at least) desktop app.

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Simon’s Brother

This is the sort of thing that Logos should have been working on and already released something for Max Subscribers. Canvas just doesn’t cut it and the sentence diagramming tool was good for what it was when it first came out but is tired and fallen way behind when you look at the flexibility of Bible arc. Max subscribers do want and expect more than AI Toole and credits and paying for rental of books they already own, for what they are paying for their subscription price

Mattillo

Graphics in general has never been Logos’ thing. I’ve come to the conclusion that they aren’t interested or are unable.

DMB

Not to detract from the morning's gaping hole, but yesterday, I was thinking why graphics (mainly zooming-images) are such a problem at FL. I routinely click on news site graphics to get a better look.

My imagination sees annual (or the old bi-annual) meetings where they discuss 'what next'. And since there's no longterm planning, each meeting, graphic improvements get cast out of the temple of text.

Or! They look at user-stats, notice few use the limited graphics, and then say, 'well, gee … need more text!'.