A "Yes" or "No" Please...

I have asked for a handful of things ever since L4 first came out. Out of approximately 6-8 things I wished to be "fixed" in L4, only one was ever incorporated--a fix for the font size of the reference (book/chapter) bar. Sadly, almost all of the things I have asked for seem (to me) to be in the catagory of "obvious gimmes", and most have received [Y] from others who likewise see both value and need for them. Still, three years and a whole new software edition later...nothing. Of the half-dozen or so features I asked to be included in L5 so I could comfortably say good-bye to L3...none were included.

So at this time, I would like someone with sufficient insight to the future of L5 to give me a straight yes or no about just two of these requests, which are rather basic and easily implemented features that I would like to see added to L5.

First, will Logos ever return the Window History menus to the program? It is hard to me to over-emphasize the utility I get from these menus in L3--I use them constantly, all day, every day. Without them, I am nearly blind.

For crying out loud, this is a simple and easy thing to add. As has been mentioned before, this is nothing more than the kind of feature found with the Forward and Back buttons on IE. With new versions of that browser, you have to right click the Back and Forward buttons to get the menu, but that is immaterial. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE...this can't be a difficult thing to add. Please include it soon.

The second request is for the Folders and Subfolders view of our Libraries. This is the very first request I made on this forum back in '09. Today it is more needful than ever before--my library is over 5600 items--I really need the ability to visually organize and take control of my library. As I pointed out back in October (especially this page and following), with insightful help from Philana, this feature is practically already included in Logos in the form of the Favorites menu. The screens below show how I would implement this feature. You, of course, could create and name the folders however you wish in your own Library.

Now, if I absolutely have to, I will just resort to using the Favorites feature to accomplish what I want...but that will negate the purpose it currently serves. All I am suggesting...er, begging for...is that Logos simply port the exact same feature into the Library, call it My Library, and allow us to Folderize our libraries to our hearts' contentment. As I suggested in the earlier post, a simple radial button could switch either or both of the libraries on or off. As this is purely a visual apparatus, and essentially already part of the program, I can't imagine this could be a difficult thing to implement.

So...please...can someone with sufficient "weight" at Logos tell me whether these things will ever be implemented or not? I don't want to start "folderizing" Favorites for my entire 5600+ resources only to have the feature added to Library and have no way to transfer the weeks-worth of my life that it will take to get this job done. But I don't want to wait for another 3 or more years just hoping that a My Library folder option will materialize.

Many people have voiced a desire/need for this feature...please include it soon. Thanks.

Oh, btw...please don't talk to me about Collections. They DO NOT ADDRESS the needs of those who want the FOLDERS feature. It is that simple. As a matter of fact, Folders and Sub-folders would probably be the best way to implement the Collections feature. But I want to have my Library available in a folder tree format, which gives me full control of how my Library visually presents. Thank you.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

David Paul

And for what it's worth...I have purchased the top-level Logos base package ever since Scholar's came packaged with the neat "library tie"...

...and have continued with Silver, Gold, L4 Portfolio, and now L5 Portfolio. That may give me all the critical mass of a grain of sand, but I do think that Logos ought to give consideration to the fairly lightweight requests of one of its better customers. I haven't even mentioned the $K of additional resources I've added over the years...all on an income that would likely horrify most of those on this forum (I'm not even sure if I will break five figures of income for this year). Please consider my requests on these issues. Thanks.

Speaking of five figures...I just broke four! Whoot!!

[:D]

Bob Pritchett

I'm sorry you're frustrated.

One of our goals for Logos 4 was to reduce complexity -- conceptually and visually. That necessarily comes at the cost of power and flexibility, but "the market" seems to have agreed with most of our choices here -- sales (and use) of Logos 4 are much, much higher than Logos 3, and most users seem happy with the trade-off.

Of course some users miss this or that "power feature", and sometimes we streamline things too much. It's an ongoing discussion.

Both of these feature requests would re-introduce complexity, and I'm not sure there's enough demand to justify the time in coding or the extra complexity added to the UI. (If we did the menu of "back" options on right-click on the back-arrow, that would reduce visual complexity while still offering the feature... I'm most open to this.)

You could get "close" to the second feature by using tags in the form "Commentaries--Single Book--Genesis" then sorting the library by tag. You couldn't then collapse "Commentaries" on its own, but you'd have a concise, readable and navigable view of your hierarchy. (We're unlikely, except in Favorites, to support any organization system that puts a book in "one place." We tried that in Logos 3 and weren't happy with the results. We're interested in systems, like tagging, that allow a resource to be in multiple places. IF -- big if -- we ever did do what you're suggesting, we'd probably do it through a "smart" tag navigation system that took tags like "Commentaries--Single Book--Genesis" and then turned them into a hierarchy with expand/collapse available at each "--". This is similar to how we handled Subject hierarchies in the Logos 3 browser using LoC subject headings, which follow that convention.)

The best way to make the case for any feature idea is to put it on http://logos.uservoice.com. If it's a feature with wide support, we're more likely to do it.

So, if you need a definite answer, it's "no" right now -- we're not planning either of these features. I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing. But it would help if it had a lot of UserVoice votes.

-- Bob

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431939#Comment_431939

Okay...thanks for the reply. At least I know now.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431939#Comment_431939

I just went back and reread your post. I'm not sure you understand fully what I'm suggesting.

We're unlikely, except in Favorites, to support any organization system that puts a book in "one place."

That's not the way Favorites works. A single resource can be dragged into any number of folders...I've done it.

We tried that in Logos 3 and weren't happy with the results.

I might be wrong, but L3's Library has nothing at all like what I'm talking about. I can choose Title, Subject, and Author radial buttons, but the folders that show as a result are "locked" in according to how Logos organized the resources. I can't change, alter, add, subtract, move anything around. It is Logos-ordained, not user ordained.

We're interested in systems, like tagging, that allow a resource to be in multiple places.

I think this may be where the disconnect is. How Logos chooses to look for stuff has NO BEARING WHATSOEVER to what I'm talking about. Like I already said, Favorites DOES allow a "link" of the resource to be in a thousand places--I can create a folder called "Martian Moon Pies" and put the KJV link in it. I can put the same link in a folder labeled "The Only True Bible" and another one labeled "Books with Incredibly Stilted Language". Already, every single Logos user has a Favorites folder that looks nothing like any other user's folder, but when they click a link, the resource opens. How is this a problem for Logos??? It doesn't have any effect on Logos at all, right? Doesn't it happen every single day and the company has no clue? It certainly bears no repercussions.

IF -- big if -- we ever did do what you're suggesting, we'd probably do it through a "smart" tag navigation system that took tags like "Commentaries--Single Book--Genesis" and then turned them into a hierarchy with expand/collapse available at each "--". This is similar to how we handled Subject hierarchies in the Logos 3 browser using LoC subject headings, which follow that convention.)

You keep saying "we". Why? I think you are over-thinking this issue. In a funny way, this has nothing to do with Logos at all. I'm not asking you to code anything new at all (so to speak). Just drag a copy of Favorites to the Library, call it My Library, and let me fill it up how I see fit. The only thing that really needs to be done is to create two radial buttons that turn (visually) the Library and My Library on and off for the sake of screen real estate. When people for the first time open up Logos, their Library shows, listed alphabetically, just like now. But they have in the Library window a My Library button that allows them to create their own Favorites-style organization of their Library. They can populate it however the see fit...or they can ignore it. All it is is a personalized set of links, just like Favorites already is. The only thing is it is located in the Library tab (where it should be) so I can use Favorites for its intended purpose.

To say this is introducing complexity is akin to saying four wheels on a vehicle are more complex than one. Uh, perhaps...but the complexity (if we can say that without snickering) is unquestionably worth the effort, because the usability factor is astronomically higher.

Again...if Favorites isn't causing a train wreck on a daily basis in Logos's office now...then this suggestion won't change that, because in reality all it is is a duplicate of that already existing feature located in a different place for the sake of massive usability improvements. Once implemented, Logos won't know that a thing has changed. But users will have visual control of their Libraries. What's the harm in that?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431978#Comment_431978

Instead of waiting for folder-based organisation to be added (or not) to the Library, you may wish to consider using tags as an organisational structure:

Advantages:

You can quickly see which books aren't tagged (under "--") and organise them.
You can multi-select and apply the same tag to a large number of resources at once.
The library search will quickly filter results within your categories.
The tags are word-broken, so you can search for "mytag:corinthians" to quickly find all tags containing that word.
Any resource can have any number of tags applied to it.
These tags will become implicit search collections throughout the app (or you might consider this a disadvantage).

Disadvantages:

It's not displayed in a hierarchy, just a flat list.
You can't use tags for anything else other than this organisation.
The names are sorted alphabetically; you'd have to add a leading "001", "002" or similar to override the sorting.
You can't rename a "folder" easily, or rearrange folders in the hierarchy.

I'm not recommending one way or the other; just making a suggestion that may or may not work better in practice for you (than creating thousands of favourites).

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431989#Comment_431989

Also remember that if you simply organize your Library by "Type" (by clicking on the Type column header) the library will be displayed according to the resource type, which is similar to the images you showed above (without the subfolders). The advantage here is the flexibility, because you can do the same with other fields as well (like the tag field as shown by Bradley... but that requires a lot of work classifying resources - the "type" field and others like "Series" are built in and useful).

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431989#Comment_431989

Instead of waiting for folder-based organisation to be added (or not) to the Library, you may wish to consider using tags as an organisational structure:

I'm not recommending one way or the other; just making a suggestion that may or may not work better in practice for you (than creating thousands of favourites).

I appreciate the suggestion, Bradley...and at some point I may start tagging things should I see the need. But I will probably just begin populating Favorites with thousands of entries. Tags is more of a "coding" response to the issue, whereas my solution is a more tangible and visual one. Being a programmer, you, like Bob, might well have a natural affinity for the tags option, since I imagine you think in code to some extent. But I'm more visually oriented. I want to essentially pick up every single title in my library and put it where I want it. Yeah, it is going to take awhile, I'm quite sure. I'm not terribly excited about actually doing it. But I will be thrilled once it's done, because I will finally KNOW what is in my library AND where it is.

Even so, in this post I didn't even address the main L3 v. L5 issue I have, which is Notes. Bob knows what my desire is. He suggested about a year ago that there might be something coming along that would address my concerns, but I haven't seen anything yet that I would consider a "fix" for the current program. I guess I'm stuck with L3 still as my primary program with L5 doing specialized odd jobs.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431939#Comment_431939

I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing. But it would help if it had a lot of UserVoice votes.

+1 [Y] for right-click back menu. Being able to backtrack history in a tab would be appreciated.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Mitchell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431939#Comment_431939

I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing.

For what it's worth, the mental overhead/learning curve on this is next to nothing for the user since it's a very familiar UI element in every major web browser.

Is there already a UserVoice item for this? I couldn't find it, but I'll vote for it once it's there.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432040#Comment_432040

I want to essentially pick up every single title in my library and put it where I want it.

One option is creating a variety of collections to organize library. Wiki has => http://wiki.logos.com/Collections Logos 5 added Library option to choose Entire Library OR Personal Books OR a Collection OR a Mytag OR a Series. With Library filtered, could sort by series, type, ...

Personally use some Tags, especially for information that is not available in Logos metadata: e.g. morphological tagging, interlinear, ... Also use some tags for various resource purchases. For example, am Thankful for 279 free eBooks on Vyrso.com since Thanksgiving 2011; this am adding tag Free2012 since Mytag filtering can be done using the leftmost characters: e.g mytag:free includes Free2011 and Free2012 tags.

My Favorites includes a folder for resources that have been read cover to cover.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432836#Comment_432836

I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing.

For what it's worth, the mental overhead/learning curve on this is next to nothing for the user since it's a very familiar UI element in every major web browser.

Is there already a UserVoice item for this? I couldn't find it, but I'll vote for it once it's there.

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

Please add Right Click option to Go Back and Forward within a tab in Logos, similar to tabs in a web browser that have right click history for each tab.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Mitchell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432848#Comment_432848

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

And it has three votes from me. Let's make this happen!

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432852#Comment_432852

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

And it has three votes from me. Let's make this happen!

Three votes from me as well.

Bohuslav Wojnar

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432848#Comment_432848

I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing.

For what it's worth, the mental overhead/learning curve on this is next to nothing for the user since it's a very familiar UI element in every major web browser.

Is there already a UserVoice item for this? I couldn't find it, but I'll vote for it once it's there.

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

Please add Right Click option to Go Back and Forward within a tab in Logos, similar to tabs in a web browser that have right click history for each tab.

Keep Smiling

Yes, I also voted for that feature. [Y]

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/432848#Comment_432848

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

Please add Right Click option to Go Back and Forward within a tab in Logos, similar to tabs in a web browser that have right click history for each tab.

Noticed this Logos User Voice suggestion is in the top 100 with 19 votes.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/434598#Comment_434598

The best way to make the case for any feature idea is to put it on http://logos.uservoice.com. If it's a feature with wide support, we're more likely to do it.

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward

is now # 78 out of 561 suggestions with 25 user votes after 4 days of suggestion being created; appears a number of Logos users passionately desire Right Click history to Go Back or Forward for each tab.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431989#Comment_431989

Disadvantages:

It's not displayed in a hierarchy, just a flat list.

You can't use tags for anything else other than this organisation.

The names are sorted alphabetically; you'd have to add a leading "001", "002" or similar to override the sorting.

You can't rename a "folder" easily, or rearrange folders in the hierarchy.

I'm not recommending one way or the other; just making a suggestion that may or may not work better in practice for you (than creating thousands of favourites).

One more disadvantage... the larger a users library the greater time and the complexity of the task in tagging ones resources. Dragging and dropping resources into a folder is simpler from an end user perspective. Appreciate it may not be simpler to implement in code as compared to tagging which comes down to the addition of a new row in a table.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/431939#Comment_431939

One of our goals for Logos 4 was to reduce complexity -- conceptually and visually.

But have you really reduced complexity. From a support perspective possibly. Conceptually ? No. Arranging things in folders is a simple as it gets conceptually for somebody using a computer. The idea goes back further to files in a filing cabinet so by removing a structure that people are so familar with you and have introduced clutter into our libraries so I don't find that visually appealing in any way. I am used to seeing things arranged in folders. It's the visual norm of expectation when it comes to the human-computer interface.

but "the market" seems to have agreed with most of our choices here -- sales (and use) of Logos 4 are much, much higher than Logos 3, and most users seem happy with the trade-off.

Bob do you seriously believe that statement ? That's like Obama saying because I got re-elected it gives me a mandate to implement whatever policies I see fit. I'm glad to hear you are reaching a wider market. But that doesn't mean people are happy with the trade off as you describe it. Your argument is seriously flawed because by nature of saying there a more users of L4 than L3 that means those new users of L4 have no idea of what L3 offered and for them there is no trade-off. For them there is no L3 comparison if they did not use it.

Both of these feature requests would re-introduce complexity, and I'm not sure there's enough demand to justify the time in coding or the extra complexity added to the UI.

Bob as I just pointed out new users are not going to 'demand' something they don't realize is missing to the same degree of passion as your older users. User voice while it has its benefits also has its limits as new users have the potential to skew results at the expense of long term committed loyal users of your software. Added to that I don't think user voice is fully understood/ well used. The most popular idea, with over a 1000 votes, is a very poor one in that is is too general - improve notes. Its as almost appalling as the previously most popular idea - improve the program speed. Hence not is uservoice going to be skeked by new users but also by votes given to very general ideas that of course everyone is going to support. A third problem is that uservoice is a catch all gathering ideas for both desktop and mobile apps. This reduces the opportunity for a user to truly give voice to what they see as important in both of these separate interfaces to the content and data in their libraries. And given the difference in feature sets between Android and IOs apps votes are going to skew towards getting parity between the two apps taking away from much need interface improvements in the desktop application.

You could get "close" to the second feature by using tags in the form "Commentaries--Single Book--Genesis" then sorting the library by tag. You couldn't then collapse "Commentaries" on its own, but you'd have a concise, readable and navigable view of your hierarchy.

This approach may simply things from a development point of view but introduces much more time and complexity for the end user to actually setup a tagging system that fully achieves the desired effect and as the size of a user's library increasing the time and complexity increases exponentially.

I will look into the right-click back menu, though, since it seems easiest and least complexity-inducing. But it would help if it had a lot of UserVoice votes.

This would not introduce any complexity and return the software to behaving more like people are used to software behaving. The flaws in relying on uservoice alone I have already mentioned. Don't get me started on user user usage statistics as a valid measurement.

Bob I appreciate what you have done with Logos 4 and now Logos 5 and the work that has gone into it, but that doesn't mean I endorse what you have left out or removed or agree with you assessment you have reduced the complexity of the software in making those decisions. And on this occasion your reasoning is far from being water tight.

And I do appreciate you putting yourself out here on the forums in this manner. I hope by now you realize my comments are not complaints but genuine honest thoughts and feedback about what I consider to be the best bible software on the market - despite my difference of opinion on some of your approaches.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/435422#Comment_435422

Hello

I like David's Library Organization idea

Maybe Logos could create a "Template" using current Logos Tags for Favorites, to save us all a little time..

EDIT : Or a Collection of Templates to choose from, and Logos can Organize accordingly, kind of like Mp3 Music Organizer.

Douglas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/435424#Comment_435424

Personally, I think Logos reduces Complexity with the Resources it Personally produces, and in Return I think the Software should be as Detail Oriented as possible. I hope this contribution helps..

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/435409#Comment_435409

the larger a users library the greater time and the complexity of the task in tagging ones resources. Dragging and dropping resources into a folder is simpler from an end user perspective. Appreciate it may not be simpler to implement in code as compared to tagging which comes down to the addition of a new row in a table.

Andrew! *smile* Peace to you and Joy in the Lord!

I most certainly agree with you ... from an end-user perspective that is the simplest for most of us .... Indeed! Really!

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/435436#Comment_435436

Logos User Voice suggestion => http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-5/suggestions/3394880-right-cick-history-go-back-forward has 26 votes; every Logos user has 10 votes: up to 3 can be for any one suggestion. Right click in a tab to go forward or back in tab history would be appreciated.

Keep Smiling [:)]

Doc B

Oh, btw...please don't talk to me about Collections. They DO NOT ADDRESS the needs of those who want the FOLDERS feature.

Comparing a folder tree to the Collections feature is like comparing Fred Flintstone's foot-powered car to a Lexus.

I can't see why anyone would prefer a fixed-resource system over the system L4 and L5 uses.

Perhaps I just don't understand what you want, because it certainly doesn't make sense to me.