As it stands, the first of the "ideas" is un-actionable as stated by Bob. Let's reassess the issues and reapply our 905 votes if they are to count for something, like notes...
[Y]
[Y] Also would appreciate Logos updating status for User Voice items.
For example, Sermon File Add-In with 557 votes has a status of "Planned" that does not match Bob's recent reply => http://community.logos.com/forums/p/42650/318013.aspx#318013
Also being discussed => Missing: Sermon File Addon
Keep Smiling [:)]
That's kind of an interesting (removing performance as an issue). It effectively removes the problem as if it no longer exists. I agree that's what Bob wrote. I'm just still amazed Bob (apparently) made such a poor decision, since the bottom line was 'this is about as good as it's going to get'. We ARE two YEARS past the rollout and four YEARS past the base design.
And for goodness sakes, Logos4 IS basically just a text display engine hooked to a search database. We're not talking unbelievable complexity here. It has trouble doing 'notes'??
So, yes, maybe reallocate the votes. Maybe L4 performance is the best he can do.
That's kind of an interesting (removing performance as an issue). It effectively removes the problem as if it no longer exists.
That's not what's being suggested at all. Bob's point is simply that generic requests aren't really helpful. They attract hundreds of votes because their generic nature means the affect virtually everyone. But they're impossible to fix because you could spend months speeding up 10% of the app, and 90% of the people are still unsatisfied. It's much more helpful to have specific, measurable, achievable requests, and that's what Bob is proposing. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Mark ... it's perfectly reasonable since you have a fast computer, and have had one for some time. I'd give pretty good odds Bob uses a fast computer along with his developers. So they don't see the problem, and strategically don't wish to see the problem either.
But if you don't have a fast computer, then removing the top issue with Logos4 is just that ... removing the top issue.
The parallel exists on the cost of resources. I have ample funds to buy at will so what's the problem with pricing? Can't afford it? Too bad.
I think there's a place for caring about folks that can't afford cadillacs (Logos' reference).
Denise, off the soapbox please [:D] Mark said "Generic requests are not helpful". How does that translate to "Removing the top issue is ok because I have a fast computer"?
If you read it closely, I think you have missed Mark's comment and Bob's. Maybe an example will help.
"It's all too slow" is likely not helpful to Logos. To say however, hypothetically, "Searching my whole library for x takes 17 minutes" is productive and can be examined. Or doing a specific operation in Notes takes 11 minutes. Or reindexing when 1 resource is added to my library take 93 hours. Specific is good!
THAT'S what Bob, and Mark, are suggesting -- if you can be specific, specific problems can be addressed.
Sorry Dominick ... I've a fast computer too so it's no skin off my back. What do I care?
I say dump the performance issue and move the software up another notch! Keep in mind each new feature DOES require more performance. Hello.
I say 'Let's do it'!
Go for it.
Give you pretty good odds you've got a fast computer too. So, let's join hands and move this little baby to the next level.
And then next time someone grouses they can't use their Bible software very well, we'll just explain 'Well, gee, it's not even a priority on the UserVoice'.
And why's that? Because Bob can't fix things unless it's really specific?
You're right Denise - "Bob, just make everything a whole lot faster". Thanks
That's very effective, thanks for the insight (and sarcasm).
You nailed it, Dominick.
Although 'faster' might be better stated as 'maybe like every other program we own'.
Or maybe 'like Microsoft' (which ever version you may prefer ... they're just down the interstate, if questions).
Or maybe 'like my most powerful art package or synthesizer' (almost all of which seem to figure it out)
We're not talking something 'special' here.
Something really hard to grasp.
And true ... something that needs a 'UserVoice' to figure out.
Although 'faster' might be better stated as 'maybe like every other program we own'. Or maybe 'like Microsoft' (which ever version you may prefer ... they're just down the interstate, if questions). Or maybe 'like my most powerful art package or synthesizer' (almost all of which seem to figure it out)
Be careful what you wish for - a quick Google search shows people complaining about performance problems with Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Adobe Photoshop/CS4, Quicken, Windows 7, Windows Vista, IE 9, IE 8, IE 7, Chrome, Firefox, Adobe Acrobat, Flash, Skype, iTunes....Solitaire is a rock solid performer so far from what I can see. [;)]
Denise,
No-one is talking about removing the top issue. Everyone is talking about better stating the top issue so that programming resources can be better focussed.
So they don't see the problem, and strategically don't wish to see the problem either.
Frankly, that's nonsense. I do see the problem, and have posted often about performance issues. Let me give you one example:
Why do I mention this? Not because I think this optimisation happened purely because of my post. Lots of people contributed to drawing this to the attention of Logos. But I mention it because:
All Bob is asking for is for Uservoice requests to be specific. Again, that's not unreasonable.
Denise, methinks thou art being deliberately obtuse. My computer is old and decrepit ... but I am still capable of thinking of the good of the whole rather than egocentrically. For a programmer to meet a goal, that goal must be very specifically defined. Accurate definition of a problem can make or break a project. Bob simply asked that we make it POSSIBLE to succeed. We have little ground to complain that Logos fails us when we are the ones making it so Logos cannot serve us.
Mark ... I appreciate your answer and can see your point.
But I'm very uncomfortable with Bible software that walks away from those with limited income, whether demanding high-end hardware, connection speed, or premium priced books.
Those votes on performance weren't due to people loving their slow computers. That's my only concern.
MJ (just saw your entry) ... I can appreciate Bob wanting specificity ... which businessman doesn't? What a luxury. I just think Bob is no dummy, he operates at high speed, and knows very well exactly what you want.
Just having a computer reflects a pretty big distinction in income. To take this argument further (and not even to its extremes), you shouldn't be comfortable with Bible software at all -- everything should be printed on newsprint.
The good news is, there are Bibles printed on newsprint and distributed for free. And there are Bible study resources widely available at every price point from free on up, and software packages available for free and up, too. For various reasons, discussed on the forums many times over the years, we've chosen to address a particular market segment with high-end tools that require pretty recent hardware. We believe this is a service to some Bible students, and offers research capabilities otherwise unavailable.
And when people can't afford these tools (which we try to price as low as we can while remaining in business and funding new development) we recommend other good products and free packages that often run faster on less powerful systems.
I may be off here, but in defense of Logos and what seems to be an insinuation that they over look people who cannot afford a "cadillac" computer, there is still Libronix that works perfectly fine until they can save up for a more up to date computer. Logos doesn't have to still leave the option open for V3 to be used.
Logos doesn't have to still leave the option open for V3 to be used.
Ah I think I have to disagree on that point Frank. They don't have to support it - agreed, they could stop releasing new resources in that format -agreed, but I don't believe beyond those two points they should stop people using it.
But I'm very uncomfortable with Bible software that walks away from those with limited income, whether demanding high-end hardware, connection speed, or premium priced books. Just having a computer reflects a pretty big distinction in income. To take this argument further (and not even to its extremes), you shouldn't be comfortable with Bible software at all -- everything should be printed on newsprint.
Denise I understand your frustration. A couple of years ago I was out of work and my computer gave up, I was testing the private beta of Logos 4 at the time. I was frustrated by the whole situation and Logos bring out this new app that my old computer just couldn't keep up with and finally said enough was enough.
But was it Bob or Logos fault ? Of course not. They are running a business, they need to refresh and renew their product. Just like we need to refresh and renew our computer hardware (though that can be hard at times as I know - it may well mean not purchasing logos resources for an extended period - what's the point of licensing the resources if we can't use them and the ones we already license).
It appears to some I give Bob a hard time on some issues (though that'[s not my heart's intent), but on this one he is totally 110% right. A request to simply say improve performance is to vague. It gives the development leads nothing to work from with their teams. In an application like this, there is no magic see of hidden tweaks that can be adjusted to make it go faster.
Denise I appreciate a lot of what you have to say, so don't loose heart. Keep focused your eyes focused on Christ. From personal experience its the best way to deal with these sort of frustrations - all frustrations in life in fact.
Bring back Topic Search and Fuzzy Search is a suggestion on Uservoice. Since Bob P. updated it's status as PLANNED on Dec 28th, 2011 and according to Bradley on another unrelated post:
Wonder if more votes would provide incentive for higher priority in Logos development plans ? The number of UserVoice votes on this item won't change our schedule for shipping this feature.
Wonder if more votes would provide incentive for higher priority in Logos development plans ?
The number of UserVoice votes on this item won't change our schedule for shipping this feature.
It looks to me like this one should be closed:
Didn't I read earlier today that these are in the current beta?
This is already Under Development:
And that's just from the first 5 pages. There's currently 22...
Aren't things supposed to be marked, first Planned, then Started, then Completed?
It looks to me like this one should be closed: Didn't I read earlier today that these are in the current beta?
Thanks. I actually searched UserVoice for this a couple of days ago (to close it), but I searched for "review", not "reviews", which didn't find a match.
This is already Under Development: And that's just from the first 5 pages. There's currently 22... Aren't things supposed to be marked, first Planned, then Started, then Completed?
Yes, but it relies on a human admin remembering to update the UserVoice case when work is started. I'll update the ones you've mentioned.
