A crossover post

Page 2 of 3 (54 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 53 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 32110
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 4 2010 10:15 PM

David:
I am using on ANY Windows-based software package on the market (File menu > Help > About), but I have no clue how to tell you what version L4 I am running. NO CLUE.

My windows often has the version under Help>About  which Is just where I find it in Logos:

And when I do a search on פִי   I get 54 occurrences - none of which are independent words/lexical units/lemmas which strikes me as a pretty solid reason for not being able to do a word study. So would you like to give some more examples of why you find it frustrating and have us help you through the learning curve? Remember that it is much easier to build an intuitive interface for a uniform set of users - a luxury that Logos does not have.

 

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 49
David | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 4 2010 10:25 PM

DanGiese:

Michael Paul:
Second, if you are going to make a Mac application at least stick to the standard form of a Mac menu, namely the File menu. Aren't there some form of human interface guidelines here?

I've thought that since I first saw Logos 4. Too much of the GUI looks like a Windows program and ignores standard Mac conventions, i.e. the Preferences command should open a Preference window, NOT a pane in the program! Why are the scroll bars a non-standard size? Why do the scroll bars not show the up/down arrows together on one end--even though it leaves a blank space for them. I could go on and on... But Logos4Mac needs to look and operate like a Mac program and not a port from Windows!

I've thought just the opposite. I think the GUI looks Macish and ignores standard Windows conventions

You see Bob P., this is the kind of problem you run into when trying to merge Windows with Mac. They are incompatible; they are different mindsets. Try to morph the two, and you will make people angry, and will probably fail. What's the saying? Try to make something do everything, and it ends up not being able to do anything very well?

Posts 49
David | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 4 2010 10:42 PM

MJ. Smith:

 

My windows often has the version under Help>About  which Is just where I find it in Logos:

Well, shazaam. There it is. Please forgive the software fatigue that caused me to not register the icon. It's what happens when you make your living fighting with poorly designed software. I'm serious.

MJ. Smith:

And when I do a search on פִי   I get 54 occurrences - none of which are independent words/lexical units/lemmas which strikes me as a pretty solid reason for not being able to do a word study. So would you like to give some more examples of why you find it frustrating and have us help you through the learning curve? Remember that it is much easier to build an intuitive interface for a uniform set of users - a luxury that Logos does not have.

As I said, word study does not give me the option to search for פִי. When I paste פי into the window a list appears that does not include פי. It means mouth. It is a legitimate candidate for a word study. Psalms 109:2 is an example where it occurs by itself. Even if it is tied to some other word, it should come up (as it does in L3).

Posts 32110
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 4 2010 10:51 PM

MJ. Smith:

And when I do a search on פִי   I get 54 occurrences - none of which are independent words/lexical units/lemmas which strikes me as a pretty solid reason for not being able to do a word study.

Hebrew lexical items meaning mouth i.e. in appropriate from for word study:

If a word isn't working, the easiest way to find the lexical form is through an interlinear or an English word study. By fastest I mean fastest for me with my very, very limited Hebrew.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 1374
nicky crane | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 1:03 AM

To check version of Logos4, as in Windows, click help, then about Logos4, and a new window opens with the version of Logos4 at the beginning of a lot of other info that I don't read.

Posts 3810
spitzerpl | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 4:35 AM

I'll be the odd ball. I like the menu structure of Logos. It makes sense to me. What in the world does "Print" and "New Window" have to do with "File." It seems like it became the where-should-we-put-this menu of windows. When I think of File I think of files, maybe I'm just too simple. Now, what they have needs some work. If I type "Note Abraham" it should bring up every note file with Abraham in it. As of right now the best I can get is a list of all my Notes. But at least now it is actually dealing with things that are to be filed.

In fact, to solve the problem, I recommend renaming the tab "Files." that defines it as different from the old structure and makes the three tabs all plural, files, guides, and tools.

Posts 10819
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 4:54 AM

Rosie Perera:
The main form of suffering is all the heckling from you insufferable Mac users

Sometimes I'm like Paul in Romans 7. I just can't help myself. Geeked

Posts 10819
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 5:02 AM

David:
I don't think Logos has a clue how to design an intuitive, easy to use interface.

Wow! Here I have been using L4 on both Windows and Mac for 8 months now and somehow I never realized just how non-intuitive the application really is. I frankly do not see the enormous problem you describe. Sure, the File Menu could be better organized, but I disagree that it needs to be completely scrapped and replaced by someone's vision of an industry standard.

The File Menu contains user-generated files. How does this not make sense?

Posts 10819
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 5:12 AM

David:
When I do a word study on פִי ... Well forgive me ... you see I can't do a word study on פִי because whenever I try I can only select from a drop-down list, and פִי isn't on it.

Have you considered the possibility that you may be attempting to use the incorrect form of the word. Word Studies are performed on the Lemma, not the manuscript form of the word.

Posts 5337
Kevin Becker | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 5:30 AM

David:
As I said, word study does not give me the option to search for פִי. When I paste פי into the window a list appears that does not include פי. It means mouth. It is a legitimate candidate for a word study. Psalms 109:2 is an example where it occurs by itself. Even if it is tied to some other word, it should come up (as it does in L3).

L4 has changed the logic of how the Bible Word Study works from L3. I prefer the new way because inflected forms can, on occasion, overlap and the program forcing me to use lemmas invites precisions. The multitude of tagged texts makes it easy to go to from a form to a lemma.

In your example case the BWS needs to be run on פֶּה

I am sympathetic that Logos 4 changes a lot of things and may feel unintuitive. Stick with it, ask questions here and I'm confident you'll be using it to more productively than L3.

Posts 225
Michael Birney | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 5:41 AM

Jack Caviness:

Sure, the File Menu could be better organized, but I disagree that it needs to be completely scrapped and replaced by someone's vision of an industry standard.

The File Menu contains user-generated files. How does this not make sense?

I totally agree, the file menu could use some new organization, but overall, it is much easier to use than L3,  and although it takes some getting used to, it is not at all non-intuitive.  

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 9:19 AM

David:
Every time I use L4, Proverbs 25:19 comes to mind.

I can't concieve of BobP being "treacherous." I thank God for the whole Pritchett clan. Let's leave hyperbole at the door.

David:
I develop user interfaces for machine/equipment operators. I know it is my job to make the operator's job as easy as possible by giving them an interface that is intuitive and simple to use.

Logos 4 is a beautiful piece of software. It is very intuitive and the first-time user can jump right in. All they have to do is enter a Bible reference and Passage Guide will return a whole day's worth of study material in seconds. On the other hand, there are dozens of features I would call "Power User tools."  A user does not need to graduate from Logos to some other program when they are done teething. They grow into the higher features of the program. The new found toolbox (it's been there all along Wink  ) just enhances the productivity of the software

David:
plant operators hate developers who have no clue what the real world is like

In the industrial enviroment the developer gets to define what the "real world" is. A friend of mine lost three of her fingers because the UI developer did not perceive a creative person could override his protocol. Another, an electrician, was killed by a robot when he did not use lock-out procedures. Machines are unforgiving when interacting with humans. Granted, the Logos program isn't going to kill anyone but the developer still gets to define what the app will do and how it will do it.

David:
Nearly two decades of Windows software development has settled on conformity to intuitive, easy to use standards

Windows is still evolving, improving. The blurring of the lines between Mac & Windows is one of those improvements. (Mac has also moved towards that blurred line. Just don't try to tell their users. Zip it! ) Bob Pritchett has always thought outside of the box. He thinks in possibilities and asks, "Why not?"

David:
This feels oh-so-Detroit.

(I miss my '77 Chrysler Newport, too. Crying )

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 49
David | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 10:34 AM

Matthew C Jones:
I can't concieve of BobP being "treacherous." I thank God for the whole Pritchett clan. Let's leave hyperbole at the door.

Nor can I. The comparison pertains to how a malfunctioning body part impairs the function of the whole body.

Matthew C Jones:
Logos 4 is a beautiful piece of software. It is very intuitive and the first-time user can jump right in. 

Yes, it is beautiful, but intuitive to who? I wish that when people make such comments, they would indicate if they are a Mac or Windows user; and if their computer experience is limited to surfing the Internet and preparing next Sunday's sermon; or if their world consists of sitting in front of a computer 8-10 hours per day grappling with multiple business apps, which are virtually all Windows-based.

Matthew C Jones:
In the industrial enviroment the developer gets to define what the "real world" is. A friend of mine lost three of her fingers because the UI developer did not perceive a creative person could override his protocol. Another, an electrician, was killed by a robot when he did not use lock-out procedures. Machines are unforgiving when interacting with humans. Granted, the Logos program isn't going to kill anyone but the developer still gets to define what the app will do and how it will do it.

It is the developer's responsibility to develop apps that provide a safe and efficient, unfettered working environment for the operator. They are not mutually exclusive. Lockout procedures have nothing to do with UI development. You are blurring the distinction between controls programming and UI development. Controls programming handles the interlocks. A major goal of UI development should be to make the operator's job as easy as possible. Operators desrve the safety they need, and a UI they want, not what the programmer decides to give them. Operators don't mind software features that protect them. What they hate are apps that unnecessarily get in their way because they are produced by code monkeys in cublicles who don't have the slightest idea what working on the plant floor is like; who, btw, are rightfully despised. 

Matthew C Jones:
Windows is still evolving, improving. The blurring of the lines between Mac & Windows is one of those improvements. (Mac has also moved towards that blurred line. Just don't try to tell their users. Zip it! ) Bob Pritchett has always thought outside of the box. He thinks in possibilities and asks, "Why not?"

I don't consider abandonment of proven standards improvement. The standards are there for a reason. They make the software easy to use because once you have internalized them, you don't have to think about what you're doing. Very important.

Posts 32110
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 11:23 AM

David:
they would indicate if they are a Mac or Windows user;

The Mac users have their own forum ... unless stated otherwise you can reasonably assume that this forum is PC users.

In implementing large scale business applications over the years I learned, among other things, the following with regards to user interfaces:

  • what is intuitive to one users is not to another; one picks a middle ground of comprise and adjusts training appropriately
  • any solution upsets some people's work flow - especially if one forces them to abide by the policy manual (state regulations)
  • everyone wants to enter less information and get more information out ... and complains that at company X the computer just knew ... (never admitting that it was simply a different office that entered the data.
  • standards constantly evolve - users consistently insist you've chosen the wrong set of standards
  • change is a cardinal sin - it's supposed to work the way it's always worked, frequently always worked someplace else
  • there is always a special case you forgot to take into consideration - colorblindness, braille readers, work schedules on ice or ships, loosely coordinated independent agencies ... leading to overloading administrator's mail boxes with messages that the system is a piece of s___  and requires time they don't have and reap no benefits from. Nothing like illegal shadow systems to bring out this response.

That's my experience in a central administrative office with the authority to insist on hardware standards but with branches around the world. Logos has a much more complex set of user issues with no authority over the users. Let's give Logos a break. Ask questions; put in suggestions; vote for our favorite requests on the user voice site. No, Logos has not made all the right decisions, but they've shown a willingness to change based on user feedback.e.g. full page interlinear.

 

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 11:50 AM

David:
Nor can I. The comparison pertains to how a malfunctioning body part impairs the function of the whole body.

It's a stretch to say a UI you don't like the looks of is "malfuntioning." Is there a particular menu item in Logos that does not function? Nicky & MJ answered how to find what version is installed. Jack pointed out we need to use the lemma for word studies.

David:
Yes, it is beautiful, but intuitive to who? I wish that when people make such comments, they would indicate

 
My wife hardly knows what a CPU is but loves Logos.That tells me it is intuitive enough for the novice. I'm not a novice. (MSDN, ADC, IBMDC, and programming transfers, screw machines and triple axis robots for GM/Delphi.) I am still discovering the powerful capabilities of the Logos program and I love it too. For two users as different as my wife & I to both enjoy using Logos is quite an achievement is usability.

David:
Lockout procedures have nothing to do with UI development. You are blurring the distinction between controls programming and UI development. Controls programming handles the interlocks. A major goal of UI development should be to make the operator's job as easy as possible

I did digress with my plant floor experiences but my point was the robot did exactly what it was programmed to do when it killed the tradesman. Although it is critical to understand as best as you can what a user's needs will be, many needs are not even known to the user themselves until the application has been put to the test. Yhe Logos software has been maturing for decades. It has many uses today that were never even imagined at the beginning. The development staff and company leadership are impressively qualified to handle present challenges and future needs.

David:
I don't consider abandonment of proven standards improvement. The standards are there for a reason. They make the software easy to use because once you have internalized them, you don't have to think about what you're doing. Very important.

If your analogy were true Windows 7 would run on a 16-bit processor, need only 32mb RAM, and take 4GB of hard drive space. If Bill can change his "standards" why can't Bob Smile ? (Hey, do you think Bill will sue me for putting a smiley next to "Bob" in this thread?)

P.S.  MJ is right. People always resist change. But I would hate to go back to the limitations of Logos version 1.6.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 12:56 PM

David:
A major goal of UI development should be to make the operator's job as easy as possible

 Simplified User Interface:

   Duhh, does a DoubleBurger gots 2 or 3 meats on it?

Next thing it needs is pictures of the coins & bills so the users can properly count back change.

On the other hand, here is a work of art:

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 1717
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 1:34 PM

David:
I don't consider abandonment of proven standards improvement. The standards are there for a reason. They make the software easy to use because once you have internalized them, you don't have to think about what you're doing. Very important.

I generally agree with this, and for the first decade or so Logos was near fanatical about observing Windows UI standards. We implemented nit-picking UI guidelines that many people never noticed, and we're still pretty obsessive about the little things you want to "just work." (Adobe Air apps drive me crazy, for example, with lack of support for Ctrl+Left and Ctrl+Right to move the cursor in whole word units in edit boxes. We always did this kind of thing, and supported the keystrokes for combo-box UI, etc.)

But the "new news", especially for us old-timers of the PC industry, is that the new UI standard isn't a handbook from Microsoft or Apple. It's the web. On the web completely new conventions are being developed and adopted, and people are learning to click hyperlinks (and expect them everywhere), not to only click 3D affordances. The new "standard" is "what works on the web", and this frees us up to do the right thing for the application.

Even Microsoft is constantly changing and improving their UI, even in the "standard" areas. I present the Excel 2010 file menu (it's the whole screen shot!), which shipped after Logos 4 and looks like it imitated us, right down to the multipane UI:

http://news.office-watch.com/img.aspx?img=892-Excel%202010%20-%20New%20document%20menu.jpg&a=892

We built our new print UI (currently being implemented) before seeing Office 2010's; it's spooky how close the two are.

Now you may hate Office 2010 (or have started hating it in Office 2007!); I'm just making the point that the "standards" are gone. The new standard is "what's best here."

(We are, of course, still listening to feedback, and it may be time to improve our File menu. But I don't think the answer is necessarily to read the Windows UI Guidelines....)

 

Posts 856
Michael McLane | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 2:39 PM

Thanks Bob, I am all for what works best. Of course, what works best for me is exactly what I am used to, and that is the standard UI Smile. None of us like change too well, especially when it comes to the things that we have grown accustom to over the years. Also, any change always means that we loose something along the way, even if we gain in other areas. I am new to Logos (got in on the tail end of Mac 1, been using Windows and the alpha since), but I understand that many did not like the change to L4 (I like it better, but I did not get used to using 3), but now, time has a way of smoothing things over as we learn to work in the new and, hopefully, improved work flows.

However, nothing is going to make me like the File menu in its current incarnation! There just has to be a better way to browse my created resources. And it will only get worse as PBB, Sermon File, Lesson Builder, etc. are added. That's hundreds if not thousands of files to browse through. And I would like to browse when I am not sure what I want to search for. I don't necessarily have the answer, that's why I am a pastor and not a software designer.

All that said, thank you for listening and being open to "improve [the] File menu."

PS. I am so thankful for Logos and all the work you all are putting into a fine product and for listening to your customers.

Posts 49
David | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 2:56 PM

@Matthew

Yes, they know how to make a very pretty app. One man's art, though is another man's clutter. I personally don't ever want to see that page again.

 

Posts 1145
William | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 5 2010 5:59 PM

Matthew C Jones:

 Simplified User Interface:

   Duhh, does a DoubleBurger gots 2 or 3 meats on it?

Next thing it needs is pictures of the coins & bills so the users can properly count back change.

Matthew, I agree but I think one thing needs to be added.  They need the pictures of the coins and bills AND a calculator to have them give the correct change in the first place.  Have you not noticed all the places that are going to the machine that drops the change for the cashier.  These company's must do that.  9 out of 10 times these cashiers can't make change.

 

Page 2 of 3 (54 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next > | RSS