So long Logos4...

I resonate and empathize with the frustrations expressed here. You really need to invest yourself in learning this software. Help is available, and I am thankful for the videos posted (both official and Mark's); additional help is available of course from MP and John, for a price, along with the manuals that can be purchased. But it is tough getting up to speed, especially if one wants to really take advantage of the software's capabilities. And I am NOWHERE near that point yet.

But here is my question. maybe I am not an average computer user (denser than most), but isn't this the norm for software support these days? I don't use a lot of software suites, but if memory serves, isn't this the same approach used by other advanced software programs? I don't recall receiving any real help with learning these in any kind of systematic way. Sometimes they provided in-program help, and sometimes not... and if they do now, it is often linked to the cloud.... so forget getting any kind of meaningful help if you can't connect to the Internet (grr). Increasingly, help seems to be provided in the guise of user forums, like here (again, good luck without a decent Internet connection). Hence, the proliferation of publications such as "Learning XXX Software for Dummies" and their ilk. And getting training manuals (beyond the simpler "dummy" versions, if available) for some of these common software programs can be really expensive. And if you call "support"... you will be on the phone an hour just trying to get through the line (if at all)... and then you will get someone who doesn't speak English well, doesn't really listen to your problem, gives you a canned response... and really couldn't care less. And in many cases today, they'll charge you for the service (at least, after an initial period of 30-90 days). Even then, many will focus more on technical problems than with training you how to use their software. At least, that has in GENERAL been my experience.

Now, please don't misunderstand me. I am NOT saying that I think this is RIGHT, and in no way does it diminish your complaint. Actually, it very much ticks me off too (I've recently been wrestling for a very long time with so-called "customer support" for a particular software program that I've been having problems with... I can only WISH they were as responsive as Logos! Every letter I write receives the same absolutely identical cut-and-paste wording that makes it clear no one actually READ what I wrote, or they ask questions in their reply that are completely answered in my original letter in words RIGHT BELOW their question. And this is for a very well-known and popular software program). I think what happened in this scenario described above wasn't good, but I think its pretty typical. If anything, we've gotten spoiled by the generally good support Logos provides. And things are slowly changing as the company grows (probably not for the better).

I've now got SO much invested in Logos, that it doesn't make sense for me NOT to pay for the manuals, disks, etc. to learn to use it properly. I likewise got a lot out of the wikis, and actually downloaded the whole kit-and-kaboodle using a little app called Site Sucker ('cause my Internet here is lousy, and I couldn't rely on my ability to access the wiki online). So I pretty much have a manual now built from the wiki (in addition to now having the training disks and videos... I also downloaded the latter). But like you, I wish there was a (free) help line, or that the manuals were free and provided in a document to the initial buyer, etc. (would Logos really lose all that much to write a manual and include it as a free initial resource with the program? Or would it actually be profitable in the long run by creating more users who know how to use the program and who therefore purchase more resources?).

I've just learned over time that I need to accept that the learning curve is high for Logos, and I have to invest myself in learning it (and in assembling the tools to do so) and that it is just going to take time. But that it will be worthwhile in the end.

Just wondering... maybe I have just had bad experiences with other large software companies.... but is training/help really that much worse/less accessible  than for other major, complicated pieces of software today? 

Phil Jagger said:

In his original post Kevin stated: 
"What used to be on a menu is now a command you must remember or suck out your thumb or do an internet search for. I downloaded one of the free books recently, only to discover it was already in my library. No problem - just remove duplicate resources right? I know there was a menu item in Logo2/3 to do this, but now you have to be a clairvoyant to guess a suitable command. Would you believe there was no match in the entire library search for "remove duplicate"? In Logo2/3, if I has to search every menu item, I could find it inside a minute."

One obvious solution to the problem of duplicate resources is to avoid them in the first place.  My library is comparatively small (4,500 resources) so I have no problem remembering whether I have a resource, but some may have too many resources to remember all of them (and truth be told, they sometimes slip one in on me through collections) or they simply may not concentrate on keeping track of what they have in their library.  It seems fairly obvious, and has been mentioned already, that the answer is to remove (hide) duplicate resources.  To check this I deliberately downloaded the ABDB which I have had since time immemorial (before the EBDB) since it's a free resource.  The website allowed me to do this.  Not only that, I was unable to find an indication in either the Logos4 library or in Windows Explorer that I had a duplicate (usually indicated by a (2) after the file name).  What would be good is if, when ordering a resource, Logos would check to see whether you already have a license for it (hopefully that shouldn't be too difficult).  If it is found that you already have the resource then Logos coud display a "Notice of Duplicate Resource" and allow the user to bail out or proceed (why, I don't know).  Perhaps I'll make a suggestion to do this.

Even better, I would advise all users to check their library before ordering a book.  What would you do if you went to the bookstore and saw a book that looks interesting then got home only to find that you already own it?

fgh said:

That said, besides all the users willing to help you with syntax searches, it is actually quite common to see a Logos employee turn up on such threads as well. And I can pretty much guarantee that he gives better help than any of the normal support staff could have done.

Rick Brannon has appeared on the forums from time to time providing help with syntax searches and even providing developed searches.  That said, I still hardly feel capable in the area of syntax searching.  Also, though I should probably invest a little effort in learning syntax searching, I have a basic aversion to having someone else determine the syntax of a passage since sometimes my analysis isn't quite the same.

tom collinge said:

fgh said:

I do think it's part of Logos' duty to make the program intuitive (which they always boast about, but never, in my view, implement (at least not on Mac; I can't speak about the Windows experience))

It is the same on the windows side IMHO.

It is a matter for dispute whether something is intuitive.  "Collections", e.g., falls under "Tools" though I could make a perfectly sound argument that it should be elsewhere (Is it not a subdivision of the Library?).  In other words, what is intuitive for one person may be counterintuitive for another.

As I read through this thread I wonder just why should I keep buying more and more product from Logos.  Yes its a powerful software.  Yes it does back-flips.  Yes it has a great library.  Yes it's the best thing since sliced bread and jam.  Yet it is hard to use and only remains on my computer because its the only game in town after everyone else has imploded in the Christian software business..well maybe not everyone.  To be honest Logos has just worn me out with the endless need for training videos, training weekends, D. Min educational opportunities, the amazing Cloud, must have 100 year old sources, and numerous new products that just meet the spot for the new market niche. 

Egads all I want is a piece of software I can use.  Maybe when Logos produces something that doesn't require me to devote life and limb to being able to use it then my pocket book will be opened. Plus they haven't even developed works that I needed to complete my D. Min project (Paul Tillich) while producing endless garbage (yeah I know) that can be picked up for free for my Kobo. I need less from Logos so I can have more to use...>< 

MJ. Smith said:

Rene, I see your point without any effort at all. However, I also see the future of computing as being more than a great librarian and search engine. Given Bob's bent for being on the cutting (bleeding) edge, I expect Logos to become a great STUDY engine. I just have to be patient (and live to a ripe old age.

Thanks for the input.  At this point I agree the only reasonable thing to do is grow old and hope for something better in ver. 6 I guess.

John Sheeley said:

Andrew,

Not denying you have some frustrations, but I've been using Logos 4 for over two years on the same laptop (Toshiba) and haven't experienced on single download error, or any other error for that matter. Everyone I have personal contact with (other seminary students and pastors) who have Logos 4 love it as much as I do and not one of them has ever complained about problems anywhere remotely like yours. Come to think of it, none of them have ever expressed anything but good things about the software and it's helpfulness. Honestly, for the price I've put into it, Logos has gone way above my expectations. Sure there are quirks to the system (i.e., commands I don't know) but none of them has ever hindered my use. 

And it sure beats moving boxes of books from my house to my office library!

Hope you get the issues worked out before giving up.

 

John, really, no complaints from anyone you know who uses the software? It's the slowest application I have installed on my computer. It is constantly wanting to update something which always requires a restart and that after the initial 5 - 10 minute wait for it to start up the first time since it can't seem to sync anything with logos servers in a timely manner and when it does finally start it takes anther 30 - 60 seconds to download the home page info and then it just continuously sync's slowing down menu selections and anything else you want to do. No I'm sorry but I can't believe that there are only a few of us complainers who are having trouble with this software. I keep patiently waiting for it to mature to a full functioning app but I don't think we'll ever see that with Logos 4. Luckily I do have another  very speedy, mature, functional, Bible app I turn to for my main study needs and only use logos for the misc. resources I require and have already invested in. I used to love Logos but now it's become a love/hate relationship.

Bill Moore said:

I have bought more than one hard copy of a book that was already sitting happily in my library.

tom collinge said:

Bill Moore said:

I have bought more than one hard copy of a book that was already sitting happily in my library.

Same here

I seem to have a compulsion to buy "A history of the Arab Peoples" in hardcopy; I've bought it three times so far.  Don't know why--perhaps I should read it sometime.  I'd worry about my mental state, but take homage that I'm not compulsively buying "The Catcher in the Rye"... [8-)]

Bob Pritchett said:

It would be very difficult for us to abandon WPF, but we are re-writing some components in C++ and making other changes for a more portable/speedy future.

If L4 was programmed using standard programming techniques, it is possible to replace the presentation layer.  While L4 might look different because you will not have some of the features of WPF, I am very happy not having those features so that I can have a UI that is responsive.

Bob Pritchett said:

Dominick Sela said:

3. We have lost any real insight on plans and scheduled for Logos.

This is an ongoing problem -- I'm sorry! I'll try to get back into the forums more this week and provide more of that info. We've been very "heads down" recently....

I personally do not believe that we need to know the plans/schedule y'all have.  If we do not know, then we are not disappointed when things are late.

Bob Pritchett said:

We're also working on a very major bit of plumbing code that will hopefully speed up notes editing

IMHO, this is a result of the code first, design and fix later that was at the core of designing L4.

I have seen other posts where it was stated that they removed code that was not needed to speed up the indexing - this is a clear case of poor design.  We have notes, clippings, and other types of notes used for things like the PG that all could use the same subsystem, but they have their own subsystem.  A good design to hold user data would put a lot of these items together so that it would be easier to maintain, easier to use, and would keep people from complaining.  For an example, a good user data subsystem would have been able to hold things like sermons, and people would not be complaining about not being able to store sermons within L4.

Bob Pritchett said:

(Remember, there was no iPad when Logos 4 shipped!)

That also tells us how long we've been waiting for the advertised finished product and  promised performance and feature parity.

MJ. Smith said:

 I do think Logos makes it much easier to find the number to call than many software companies ... which means that we make more calls. More calls probably means more inappropriate ones. So thanks for being so available even if we complain when things don't work out the way we hoped.

[Y][Y]

Well, I just have one thing to say.  Bob Pritchett is one of the most amazing CEO's in the business world today.  This kind of response from the CEO of the company is unheard of in the modern business world, but it is not unusual at all for Bob.  Absolutely amazing.  I once had him answer me personally in emails about a concern. 

You know, I don't remember ever getting a personal answer or email from Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. 

This kind of customer concern is one reason I will always stick with Logos Bible Software.

Did you hear about the passenger on an airplane who found a roach in his airplane meal?  He wrote to the president of the airline, who wrote back a wonderful apology and promised that the airplane had been taken temporarily out of service and fumigated.  He promised a full investigation of quality control.  But attached to the apology was a sticky note that said, "Send this nut the standard roach letter."

I like Logos customer service better.

Bob Pritchett said:

And, since my car is built on a chassis that the manufacturer also uses to deliver a convertible, it should be easy for me to pop off the "presentation layer" and enjoy the sun this summer!

:-)

The presentation layer of any software application is the most important layer (IMHO) because it is the layer that the user uses.  Therefore, it must work.  

Just because something can be done implies that it should be done.  Just because WPF can do some awesome things does not imply that it should have been used.  People are still complaining about the same thing people were complaining back three years ago when L4 came out - the UI is slow.  I bet the beta testers were saying the same things before L4 came out.  People who have purchased powerful computers to run L4 have have said the same thing; L4 runs slow on their powerful computers.  

You knew about the performance issues before releasing L4, and you decided to look the other way.  The result of this decision, people still complaining about L4's performance years after it has been released.  I will not be surprised, if nothing major changes concerning the UI's performance, that people will still be complaining about L4's performance for another three years.   

IMHO, L4 went in the wrong direction in a couple of ways. (Examples - going from XML to RTF, going from using the mouse to using the keyboard [think of trying to find a book in the library], disregarding users' data, and going from a known development platform to a development platform that had promise but had not panned out).

For me as a user, I would rather see you rip out the WPF portion so that the UI would respond to my actions than to have more functions that I do not use.

Speaking of using L4 and its UI, I can say that I have shown people how L4 runs on my laptop (it is not a new laptop, and it is not an old laptop), and people have decided not to purchase L4 because of the way it runs on my laptop.  

It has been said that the software world is going to a "Release early, release often" philosophy.  I will say kind of.  It depends on how much money a person pays for the software.  The more money people pay for a program, the more they expect in the form of quality.  Those of us who have given $,$$$ of our income to use L4 expect L4 to run like a $,$$$ program; not like a free program that we just downloaded from download.com

Different topic:

If WinRT/Metro is a new OS/UI, I am going to assume that you cannot use that platform right now because there are going to be plenty of people who will be running Windows 7/Vista/XP, and a Windows 8 program will not run on a non-Windows 8 OS.

As  see it, you still have six to nine years before you can switch over to WinRT/Metro.  Because of this, you need to looked at this now because you are going to be using it for a long time.

This whole thread has been quite interesting and even amusing at some points. Initially I was going to keep out of the discussion but my personality being what it is I just have to put my two cents worth in.

I am not even going to comment on the underlying design concerns that have been brought up. Though as a former electrical engineer I am very experienced and well educated where hardware is concerned, I am not a programmer so I would not even pretend to know enough to challenge the way L4 is written. I'll leave whether WPF was the best choice or not to you software wizards. [;)]

But I can speak from experience as a user of seven years, beginning with Libronix 2.0 through several versions of L3 to the present version of L4. And when I first made the transition to L4 I was an early adopter using it for about six months and then finally giving up in frustration returning to Libronix 3.0g. The two minute plus start times along with the constant updates that bogged my system down was more than I could stand let alone trying to learn an completely new way of working with the software.  But after a couple of months I gave it another whirl (in summer 2010) after upgrading my system with more memory and a faster CPU. The difference was remarkable and it wasn't totally because of the upgrades to my system. My start time dropped down to about 30 seconds and the updates were fewer and farther between. And as I learned how to use the software my productivity began to surpass the L3 days. I added another monitor (which is clunky to say the least in L3) and early this year I upgraded my main system to a competely new build. My start time for L4 is now nine seconds and updates are not even noticeable as I work. I didn't install L3 on the new system because I hadn't opened it on the old one for over a year. Even on my older office system, the speed of L4 is acceptable; much faster than when I first tried it out.

There are those in this thread that have made comments accusing the satisfied users of being deluded in the manner of the subjects in "The Emperor's New Clothes". But I don't think 9 second starts, with blazing search speeds and snappy performance constitutes deluding myself. I believe if you have a system that is limited to the minimum hardware requirements then I suspect you will be disappointed with the overall performance and reliability of L4. I guess it is similar to buying a 1970 VW Beetle, throwing $1000 worth of tires on it and expecting it to ride and handle like a 2012 Cadillac. If your system meets or exceeds the recommended requirements but you are still experiencing sluggish operation, repeated crashes and horrible overall performance then the problem lies within your system, not the software. I have not experienced a crash in L4 for over a year across three different systems. I use it very heavily on a daily basis for several hours at a time. This week I reinstalled L3 just to get a more up to date comparison. What a waste of time! So I have again removed L3.

The icing on the cake is the group of users on the forums. I use several other complex software packages that lack even a fraction of the community support and information available in these forums. All in all though I was initally disappointed with L4 I am now very happy with it. That is partly due to my system upgrades but mostly due to Logos doing their part to continually fix and improve the software. So if that makes me a deluded subject of the Emperor then I say "I love your new clothes Sire!" [:D]

Now, Bob (Schlessman) .... wouldn't we ALL like to have you helping us out on our PCs!! But with over a million accounts (users?), I don't think you could get around to optimize everyone's computer. It would definitely take you a while. And so the issue with 'software'.

Now me .... I know nothing about PCs (hardware). I got what seemed to be a fast one (emphasis on 'seem'). Then I ordered an SD drive with no clue how to install it. But there were some screws on the bottom so I undid them all (too many as it turned out). Looked inside for something that looked like the little gold things on the plug in. And then pushed it in. Surprisingly it worked. The extra memory was easy until it appeared there were 2 bays for it. Hmm. Which one? But I would not advocate this type of PC surgery for all Logos4 users who simply want to study their Bible.

Now you ... you could probably do it with your eyes closed and hands behind your back. While studying your Bible too!

Dave Hooton said:

George Somsel said:

tom collinge said:

If WinRT/Metro is a new OS/UI, I am going to assume that you cannot use that platform right now because there are going to be plenty of people who will be running Windows 7/Vista/XP, and a Windows 8 program will not run on a non-Windows 8 OS.

If you are implying that Logos 4 would not operate on Windows 8, it is possible that you may be incorrect.

Windows 8 is a dressed up version of Windows 7 and I am running Logos4 "under the skin" of W8 (which is running as a guest OS) and L4 is almost as fast as native Win 7!

I installed Windows 8 Release Preview on my separate harddisk and of course put Logos into work on that system. It looks to me it works even faster than on Windows 7 I use otherwise. The challenge I think Bob has been speaking about will be with ARM version of Windows 8 RT and possibly Win 8 Phone version. Intel (PC) version of Windows 8 will run Logos right after the release of that system (actually it does already now).

To add just one more thing, I use Logos on my 5 year old Dell XPS 1330M and that is also where I tried Windows 8 RP.