Custer,
The purpose of the Log Browser was already perfectly clear.
The only thing I noted is that the Log Browser will give rise to a lot of hosting customers taking matter into their hands, they can or will act upon information from logs presented by the Log Browser.
From that perspective, there is nothing wrong with the Log Browser.
However, Plesk customers are the sysadmins choosing for Plesk Panel as the system managing web hosting.
For sysadmins, the fact is relevant that hosting customers, taking matter into their hands, will often poorly patch specific errors.
That is, with the Log Browser, sysadmins will very likely notice an increase in errors (on the server level), directly or indirectly caused by hosting customers (not by Plesk panel).
As a result, it is very (very) likely that complaints about Plesk will increase, even if that is unjustified (since errors are directly or indirectly caused by hosting customers).
In short, with the Log Browser, there is a high(er) probability that sysadmins will question the proper functioning of Plesk and/or will seek alternatives (such as cPanel).
I am not sure whether you are and/or Parallels is aware of the economic effects a simple functionality like the Log Browser can have upon sales and/or general satisfaction with respect to Plesk Panel.
It has to be noted that general satisfaction of Plesk customers (i.e. sysadmins) is dependent on the number of issues occurring with Plesk AND their ability to resolve them.
When looking at the Parallels forums thoroughly, one can see that a lot of unjustified dissatisfaction is present already.
It also has to be noted that sales have been both increased and decreased by introducing specific functionalities in Plesk in the past.
When considering the above, many examples can be given, but I can only speak for myself: for instance, up till a recent past, I did not want to host Wordpress within Plesk, due to vulnerabilities in Wordpress versions, the lack of perfect updates via the Plesk Panel and, primarily, the fact that hosting customers are often using (insecure) plugins and/or own customizations, leading to general server vulnerabilities.
Simply stated, I just used another web hosting system for hosting Wordpress sites.
In short, all the above seems not to have any relation to the good idea (!) of the Log Browser, but an actual relation is present.
Naturally, you are right to state that we discuss different dimensions and/or implications of the Log Browser.
However, the way of viewing is not that different: we agree that the Log Browser is a good idea.
The only thing I add is that the Log Browser is a "method of gaining insight into information, that should be exclusively visible to sysadmins, not hosting customers".
The conclusion from that addition is that an increase in vulnerability of the whole Plesk Panel can (no certainty there) occur.
Another conclusion, following and based upon before mentioned conclusion, is that the true Plesk customers (i.e. not being hosting customers) can become dissatisfied, with a potential drop in sales for the Plesk product range.
The choice is completely up to Parallels.....and the actual implications will only be visible after some time.
As a personal and final note, this is the end of the benevolent feedback from my side.
Kind regards...