9 replies to this topic

[Rick]

Seems like a lot of brown bars throughout the app. It's kind of heavy on the eyes.
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 10.03.00 AM.png   174.97K   56 downloads
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 09.43.53 AM.png   198.8K   40 downloads

[Darko]

That was my first impression, too.

[Rod Decker]

Seems like a lot of brown bars throughout the app. It's kind of heavy on the eyes.
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 10.03.00 AM.png   174.97K   56 downloads
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 09.43.53 AM.png   198.8K   40 downloads

I don't mind the brown bars, but the buttons need to be more distinct. A black button = active, but with a dark brown button next to it, it's hard to tell which is the active setting.

[Darko]

I don't mind the brown bars, but the buttons need to be more distinct. A black button = active, but with a dark brown button next to it, it's hard to tell which is the active setting.

That is true, too.
But, listen to us, how spoiled we are! I'd just like to say that the app is great, and the search possibilities are unexpectable. I'm so happy with what i have on my iPod now.
And I'm not sure that it was a good idea for the Accordance people to release the iOS app on New Year's Eve. They are going to spend the night answering the questions here.

[Guntis]

It's clear that Olive Tree for their Bible Reader 5 got inspiration from the Apple iBooks app. Actually I like their approach as it builds on familiarity with the other e-text reading app. And UI colors are much lighter too. The only thing I'm missing there is black popup windows from Bible Reader 4.

All day long I'm thinking what would have been if Oak Tree had made agreement with the Olive Tree and made Accordance resources available in Bible Reader format, Olive Tree would have added "Sync with your Accordance account" section in the Library window, and we would have excellent Bible app with both Accordance modules and cheaper Olive Tree modules (only for iOS hardware). Accordance team would have free time to concentrate on their Mac desktop version, Olive Tree wouldn't have another competitor… All would win, including end users.

Attached Files

•  IMG_1147.PNG   63.74K   69 downloads
•  IMG_1148.PNG   55.5K   63 downloads

[Helen Brown]

We have an excellent relationship with OliveTree, but there was no way to have them access Accordance modules. It's just not that simple, our modules have a lot of extra value built into them and thus a very complex structure as well as powerful search capabilities.

[Rod Decker]

All day long I'm thinking what would have been if Oak Tree had made agreement with the Olive Tree and made Accordance resources available in Bible Reader format, Olive Tree would have added "Sync with your Accordance account" section in the Library window, and we would have excellent Bible app with both Accordance modules and cheaper Olive Tree modules (only for iOS hardware). Accordance team would have free time to concentrate on their Mac desktop version, Olive Tree wouldn't have another competitor… All would win, including end users.

I would not want to be limited by the search interface and capabilities of OliveTree. This would not have been a win for Accordance users unless OT put in as much time as the Accord folks have to redesign the search capabilties. Besides, OT tries to keep things going on multiple platforms, and we may have lost some/many the iOS unique features. As a simple reader with some basic parsing, etc., OT is ok, but I've not been impressed with the other features as implemented. Already the v. 1 Accord app has a better search interface and capabilities. Perhaps next fall would be a good time to have another SBL shootout, but this time limited to mobile apps!

[Rick]

All day long I'm thinking what would have been if Oak Tree had made agreement with the Olive Tree and made Accordance resources available in Bible Reader format, Olive Tree would have added "Sync with your Accordance account" section in the Library window, and we would have excellent Bible app with both Accordance modules and cheaper Olive Tree modules (only for iOS hardware). Accordance team would have free time to concentrate on their Mac desktop version, Olive Tree wouldn't have another competitor… All would win, including end users.

I have a buddy who works for a major Christian publishing house (if I said the name you would definitely know it) and they've done a similar thing to what you're saying with all their Bible apps. Basically, they contracted another company to write their apps. My friend says that this has lead to a squelching of creative and unique ideas from both sides of the partnership. Fun ideas the developers come up with, the publisher doesn't like, and vice versa. Their apps are decent enough (my guess is most Accordance users have at least one of them installed on their iPhone), but lack any innovative "wow" features that many indie apps have.

For me, I would prefer that Accordance for iOS stays in-house. It gives them creative liberty, which I think we already see peeking through some of the corners of this iOS 1.0 release. The speed continues to amaze me, and I'm sure someone brilliant is responsible for that. My hope is that going forward, they make some equally brilliant strides with the UI (arrangement of buttons, the brown bars, and transitions.)

[Alex H.]

We have an excellent relationship with OliveTree, but there was no way to have them access Accordance modules. It's just not that simple, our modules have a lot of extra value built into them and thus a very complex structure as well as powerful search capabilities.

Thanks for that explanation Helen, my hope had been some kind of partnership but I can see how it would have been a second-best solution.

[Kogame]

Seems like a lot of brown bars throughout the app. It's kind of heavy on the eyes.
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 10.03.00 AM.png   174.97K   56 downloads
 Pastebot 2010-12-31 09.43.53 AM.png   198.8K   40 downloads

In response to the original post, I also think that the heavy brown bars take up too much space on the screen. I would prefer a lighter interface with thinner line. In the end I want as much screen space as possible for the texts and tools.