Jump to content


Photo

Thread on Logos Forum


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
60 replies to this topic

#41 Daniel Francis

Daniel Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Interests:Contemplative prayer, ecological stewardship, science-fiction, and cat herding are some of my interests.
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 12:27 PM

 

At this time, Accordance has a much lower "cost of entry".  Their $49 starter package is a really good value, even though it is limited.  You can still get a really good idea of what Accordance can do.  For the average Christian, it may be all they need for basic Bible study and devotions.  You get some texts, some dictionaries, and some other basic tools.  But you get the whole engine, not a shell.

 

 

Just my .02.  YMMV.

 

My point exactly. For a great many people in the pew they need a good Bible dictionary the text tied to original language and a decent Bible commentary. Logos offers nothing for the Christian who is on a budget or needs very little. Yes they offer Faithlife free... But last night for example I was in bed meditating over Luke 7:36-50, I decided for heck of it to go to faithlife in Logos and I felt really shocked. The notes are often quite verbose and insightful, I go there and find the notes and referred to notes particularly shallow. I was told by one person in Logos forum that FLSB blows IVP's NDC out of the water, and I agreed with him after last night I would say depends where you are studying. A thing I do not care about FLSB is it's constant advertising, I mean if you have spent a fortune and have all the commentaries and dictionaries links to further study is great, but if you are a person who has just FLSB it just feels like a hook to get you to buy X resource (there is nothing wrong with that they did make the basic resource and gave it to you freely, it just feels too much like the money changers in the temple to me, to others it may just feel like being pointed in the right direction for further illumination).  I well realize that FLSB is a constant work in progress and may expand greatly seeing as it has no physical bounds. And while the iOS version of FLSB has resources like Original Language support if you decided you wanted it on the computer and downloaded the Logos engine, you quickly discover FLSB does not even include a Bible Translation by default (you can get the lexham added free of charge at the Logos website but currently this freebie will still require you to enter in a credit card (one pastor recently trying out FLSB on his own was very upset over this) although NO charges will be put through, this bug is being rectified as can be seen in the sister site verbum.com which requires no credit card for a zero balance purchase). And you do not have original language support in the LEB once you have it, that is only free in the mobile APP. The owner of Logos has stated he has no interest in in people not willing to pay $300 to get into his software because the technical support for those users cost him more than he would make on $50 package. Less than 2% of Logos users buy any resources beyond their initial purchased base package. That is his right to make the decision for what is right for his company and I do applaud him for making FLSB as a free resource but I greatly applaud Accordance for making an extremely affordable package that gives Christians all they might need to get started (and possible all the want) as well as for their iOS program free of charge allowing people to have on their device full powerful tools to study the word (much of FLSB functionality requires an active connection to Logos servers and cannot be saved to the device).

 

-Dan

 
Below I copy the two resources on that passage (I have added in the relevant redirect notes from FLSB in squared brackets)
 
7:36 One of the Pharisees Although Jesus often rebuked the self-righteousness of Israel’s religious leaders, they were not always antagonistic toward one another.
 
7:37 a sinner See 15:1 and note. [“Sinners” might designate prostitutes (perhaps 7:37, 39), but the text is ambiguous.]
 
7:40 Simon A reference to Simon the Leper (see Matt 26:6 and note), a Pharisee who may have been previously cured of leprosy by Jesus.
 
7:41 denarii The denarius was the usual daily wage for a laborer. A debt of 500 denarii was seemingly insurmountable.
 
[Image of a denarius]
 
7:43 to whom he forgave more Jesus’ point here is similar to 5:32. The woman, who appeared to be in greater need of forgiveness, expresses her love and appreciation more than the Pharisee who likely thought that he needed no such forgiveness (see v. 47).
 
7:49 Who is this who even forgives sins See 5:21 and note. [The forgiveness of sins was a prerogative of God alone.]
 
7:50 Your faith has saved you See Matt 9:22 and note. [Your faith has healed you Jesus often cites a person’s faith as the impetus for healing (compare 8:13; 9:29; 15:28).]
 
 
John D. Barry et al., Faithlife Study Bible (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2012), Lk 7:36–50.
 
--------------------------------------------
 
7:36-50 The woman who was a sinner (cf. Mt. 26:6-13; Mk. 14:3-9; Jn. 12:1-8).
This story illustrates the accusation made in v 34. Jesus had been invited to the home of a Pharisee, called Simon, probably for a meal after a synagogue service. It was not uncommon for uninvited guests to be found at a banquet, and among them was a woman well known as a prostitute. Since people reclined on couches instead of sitting on chairs to eat formal meals, she was easily able to reach Jesus. She proceeded to anoint Jesus with perfume, very possibly bought with her immoral earnings, but she could not finish her task for tears. Her actions were no doubt unseemly, but she was under too great emotional stress to care what people thought. The Pharisee was disturbed by the way in which Jesus accepted this respect given by such an undesirable person in so embarrassing a manner. His feeling that Jesus might be a prophet was being contradicted by Jesus’ being seemingly unaware that the person touching him was a sinner—and therefore ‘unclean’. But Jesus knew what was happening and made his point to Simon with a parable whose message was quite clear: love is the proof that a person has received forgiveness, and the more people are forgiven, the more they will love.
There is no need to blacken Simon’s character by suggesting that his reply was haughty or indifferent (43). Nor was his treatment of his guest discourteous. He had performed the necessary duties of hospitality, but he had not gone out of his way to give Jesus a special welcome. By contrast the sinful woman had lavished her devotion upon Jesus. This proved that she had been forgiven for many sins. Jesus then underlined the fact that she was forgiven and asserted that it was her faith that had brought her salvation.
Some commentators have argued that the woman’s love for Jesus was the cause of her forgiveness rather than its result. They would interpret v 47 to mean: ‘the reason her sins are forgiven is that she loved much’ and then see v 48 as the first declaration of forgiveness to her. This view would make nonsense of the parable (41-42) which clearly teaches that love follows forgiveness, and it ignores the stress on faith in v 50. The error is due to not recognizing that ‘to love’ is the Heb. phrase for ‘to show gratitude’. We must assume that the woman had previously heard and accepted the gospel message.
Notes. 41 A denarius was roughly a farm worker’s daily wage (cf. the NIV mg.).
46  Olive oil was vastly cheaper than perfume.
A somewhat similar story is told in the other gospels, but it probably describes a different incident.
 
New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, ed. D. A Carson et al., Accordance electronic ed. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 992.
 

Edited by Dan Francis, 18 September 2014 - 11:15 PM.


#42 Daniel Francis

Daniel Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Interests:Contemplative prayer, ecological stewardship, science-fiction, and cat herding are some of my interests.
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 12:34 PM

David,

I was referring,of course, to my own subjective impression of pricing on logos and accordance for modules that interested me.

 

Take for example, the logos price on the Anchor Yale Bible Commentary series (86 volumes) at $1969.95 vs  the price on accordance which is on sale right now $999!     

 

A VERY big difference!

 

And there is one very big difference. 86 volumes not 85... Logos for some reason has lost the right to publish the Matthew volume... There was some debate about it being a poor volume with not much to offer and being replaced in a few years by a newer volume, but I have found the Anchor Matthew volume quite insightful.

 

-Dan



#43 Gordon

Gordon

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 707 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:13.x
  • Platforms:Windows, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 12:48 PM

 

And there is one very big difference. 86 volumes not 85... Logos for some reason has lost the right to publish the Matthew volume... There was some debate about it being a poor volume with not much to offer and being replaced in a few years by a newer volume, but I have found the Anchor Matthew volume quite insightful.

 

-Dan

Unfortunately, Acccordance has also lost the right to publish this volume for those who purchased after May 14!  http://www.accordanc.../?pid=Anchor-NT


‏ כִּ֤י לֶ֣קַח ט֭וֹב נָתַ֣תִּי לָכֶ֑ם תּֽ֝וֹרָתִ֗י אַֽל־תַּעֲזֹֽבוּ׃


#44 Daniel Francis

Daniel Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Interests:Contemplative prayer, ecological stewardship, science-fiction, and cat herding are some of my interests.
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 12:59 PM

:( sorry to hear that...

* Due to a licensing agreement issue, the Matthew volume has been removed from the Anchor-NT module release (May 14, 2014). This volume will again become available once a settlement on electronic rights has been reached. Users who purchased Anchor-NT prior to this date can rightfully retain their copy of the Matthew volume. Other users will receive the Matthew volume with a free future update.

 

We have been told Logos is not trying to get it back, so there is a bit of difference.

 

-Dan


Edited by Dan Francis, 18 September 2014 - 01:01 PM.


#45 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 01:19 PM

Regarding #2, "Lexicons do not always find the text you are looking for."

 

I think this means that when you click on a word, it does not bring you to the correct lexical entry. I have found this to be true for HMT-W4. Let me explain, and please forgive the length taken up by the examples.

 

Even though I bought Accordance for its grammatical and syntactical search capabilities, I thought an added benefit would be rapid reading of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek on a tablet. However, one of the first things I noticed was the amount of lexical errors in the instant details window in HMT-W4, both in the Windows desktop version, and later in the iOS pop up window. Some of these errors occur in one lexicon but not in another. In the examples below, I compare BDB and CDCH.

 

Most of the errors have to do with homonyms, listed in the lexicons as number I, II, III, etc. For example, ענהI answer, reply to . . . ; ענהIIbe afflicted, humbled; . . . ענהIII sing . . .; and ענהIV be occupied, be busy . . . . . In most cases, the lexical entry is from the wrong homonym. While the gloss with the parsing information is better at listing the correct homonym, sometimes it also is incorrect. Another type of error is presenting the wrong part of speech, e.g., a verb entry for a noun.

 

At first I thought these errors were localized to a few difficult Hebrew passages, but they seem to be everywhere, at least in the Prophets and Writings. I will give some examples from Isaiah 14 and 15:1, which I read last night. There are nine lexical errors in Isa 14, and the same one twice in Isa 15:1.

 

14:1 נִלְוָ֤ה listed correctly in parsing information as לוהI join

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears correctly as לוהI join

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as its לוהI borrow

  - so, there is an error in CDCH for this entry; in it, לוהII is join (in the Niphal)

 

14:6 אַף֙ listed correctly in parsing information as אףII nose, anger

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears incorrectly as אף כי furthermore, . . .

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as אףI also, and, moreover . . .

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for אף here

 

14:10 נִמְשָֽׁלְתָּ listed correctly in parsing information as משׁלI be like

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears incorrectly as I. מָשָׁל n.pr.loc. v. מִשְׁאָל

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as its משׁלI rule, dominate, . . .

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for נִמְשָֽׁלְתָּ here

 

14:11 נְבָלֶ֑יךָ correctly listed in parsing as נבלII harp

           - in BDB, lexical entry incorrectly I. נבל (with no definition)

           - in CDCH, lexical entry incorrectly נבלI wither, fade

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for נְבָלֶ֑יךָ here

 

14:12 חוֹלֵ֖שׁ incorrectly listed in parsing as חלשׁII make prostrate

           - in BDB, there is only one entry for חלשׁ , CDCH and HAL have I and II

           - in CDCH, lexical entry incorrectly חלשׁII be prostrate; should be חלשׁI inflict defeat upon

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for חוֹלֵ֖ש here

 

There are also problems with:

 

14:19 כְּפֶ֥גֶר - correct in parsing and BDB as פגר corpse, incorrect in CDCH פגרI be exhausted

14:20 זֶ֥רַע - correct in parsing and BDB as זרע seed, incorrect in CDCH זרע sow, gives verb entry for a noun

14:25 וְסֻ֨בֳּל֔וֹ - correct in parsing as סבל burden, incorrect in BDB and CDCH as סבל bear, gives verb entry for a noun

14:29 מִשֹּׁ֤רֶשׁ - correct in parsing and BDB as שׁרשׁ root, incorrect in CDCH as שׁרשׁ uproot, gives verb entry for noun

15:1 נִדְמָ֔ה - correct in parsing as דמהIII be ruined, cut off, incorrect in BDB and CDCH as דמהI be like

 

All of the above words have correct lexical entries in Logos for HAL, Holladay's Concise HAL, BDB, and Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament (with the exception of 14:12 חוֹלֵ֖ש , Wörterbuch prefers prostrate like BDB, and BDB's entry for 15:1 נִדְמָ֔ה , entering דמהI for II).

 

So one of my obvious concerns is how incorrect lexical entries in the instant details and pop up windows detract from rapid reading Of course, if you triple click to a lexicon in the desktop or amplify to the root or lemma in the ipad, you can find the correct entry, but a major benefit of the program is the instant details window/pop up, which should be correct.

 

Another major concern is that incorrect tags in the parsing information might affect grammatical and syntax searches. Like Dr. Holmstedt said, for serious work you have to read through results yourself, but I assumed there would be a higher degree of accuracy than I am finding to begin with.

 

I thought about reporting these errors, but they are so numerous I even stopped highlighting them.

 

On a related note, I have found only one lexical entry error in the NT. Don't ask me where, but I did highlight it. Maybe next time around I'll report it.

 

 

Michel Gilbert



#46 tony10000

tony10000

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 18 September 2014 - 01:40 PM

 

The owner of Logos has stated he has no interest in in people not willing to pay $300 to get into his software because the technical support for those users cost him more than he would make on $50 package. Less than 2% of Logos users buy any resources beyond their initial purchased base package. 

 

Logos' business model is quite a bit different in that they have to maintain servers to keep all the information synced and to provide data for all of the web and mobile services.  That costs money, thus they charge a higher "admission price".  Ironically, the 2% who pay for the product have to support these resources for the 98% that don't. 


  • Daniel Francis and davidmedina like this

Tony Thomas

www.zoeproject.com

 

Windows 7 and 10 Systems

iPad Mini 2G 

iPod Touch 5G

 

 

 


#47 Gordon

Gordon

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 707 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:13.x
  • Platforms:Windows, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 01:45 PM

MIchael,

Sorry, I didn't read your message carefully enough. I  see what you mean.

 

Edited by Gordon, 18 September 2014 - 02:14 PM.

‏ כִּ֤י לֶ֣קַח ט֭וֹב נָתַ֣תִּי לָכֶ֑ם תּֽ֝וֹרָתִ֗י אַֽל־תַּעֲזֹֽבוּ׃


#48 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 01:59 PM

Gordon, please re-read my post:

 

"One of the first things I noticed was the amount of lexical errors in the instant details window in HMT-W4, both in the Windows desktop version, and later in the iOS pop up window." I am referring to the pop up window in the ipad, and <Ctrl> - hover/click in the desktop version, which bring up my preferred lexicon. Those entries are often in error.

 

Also, "If you triple click to a lexicon in the desktop or amplify to the root or lemma in the ipad, you can find the correct entry, but a major benefit of the program is the instant details window/pop up, which should be correct." I know how to find the correct entry. But my concern is with lexical entries from my preferred lexicon in the instant details and pop up windows.

 

Michel

 



#49 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 02:44 PM

 

Regarding #2, "Lexicons do not always find the text you are looking for."

 

I think this means that when you click on a word, it does not bring you to the correct lexical entry. I have found this to be true for HMT-W4. Let me explain, and please forgive the length taken up by the examples.

 

Even though I bought Accordance for its grammatical and syntactical search capabilities, I thought an added benefit would be rapid reading of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek on a tablet. However, one of the first things I noticed was the amount of lexical errors in the instant details window in HMT-W4, both in the Windows desktop version, and later in the iOS pop up window. Some of these errors occur in one lexicon but not in another. In the examples below, I compare BDB and CDCH.

 

Most of the errors have to do with homonyms, listed in the lexicons as number I, II, III, etc. For example, ענהI answer, reply to . . . ; ענהIIbe afflicted, humbled; . . . ענהIII sing . . .; and ענהIV be occupied, be busy . . . . . In most cases, the lexical entry is from the wrong homonym. While the gloss with the parsing information is better at listing the correct homonym, sometimes it also is incorrect. Another type of error is presenting the wrong part of speech, e.g., a verb entry for a noun.

 

At first I thought these errors were localized to a few difficult Hebrew passages, but they seem to be everywhere, at least in the Prophets and Writings. I will give some examples from Isaiah 14 and 15:1, which I read last night. There are nine lexical errors in Isa 14, and the same one twice in Isa 15:1.

 

14:1 נִלְוָ֤ה listed correctly in parsing information as לוהI join

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears correctly as לוהI join

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as its לוהI borrow

  - so, there is an error in CDCH for this entry; in it, לוהII is join (in the Niphal)

 

14:6 אַף֙ listed correctly in parsing information as אףII nose, anger

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears incorrectly as אף כי furthermore, . . .

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as אףI also, and, moreover . . .

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for אף here

 

14:10 נִמְשָֽׁלְתָּ listed correctly in parsing information as משׁלI be like

           - in BDB, lexical entry appears incorrectly as I. מָשָׁל n.pr.loc. v. מִשְׁאָל

           - in CDCH, lexical entry appears incorrectly as its משׁלI rule, dominate, . . .

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for נִמְשָֽׁלְתָּ here

 

14:11 נְבָלֶ֑יךָ correctly listed in parsing as נבלII harp

           - in BDB, lexical entry incorrectly I. נבל (with no definition)

           - in CDCH, lexical entry incorrectly נבלI wither, fade

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for נְבָלֶ֑יךָ here

 

14:12 חוֹלֵ֖שׁ incorrectly listed in parsing as חלשׁII make prostrate

           - in BDB, there is only one entry for חלשׁ , CDCH and HAL have I and II

           - in CDCH, lexical entry incorrectly חלשׁII be prostrate; should be חלשׁI inflict defeat upon

  - so, BDB and CDCH have the wrong lexical entry for חוֹלֵ֖ש here

 

There are also problems with:

 

14:19 כְּפֶ֥גֶר - correct in parsing and BDB as פגר corpse, incorrect in CDCH פגרI be exhausted

14:20 זֶ֥רַע - correct in parsing and BDB as זרע seed, incorrect in CDCH זרע sow, gives verb entry for a noun

14:25 וְסֻ֨בֳּל֔וֹ - correct in parsing as סבל burden, incorrect in BDB and CDCH as סבל bear, gives verb entry for a noun

14:29 מִשֹּׁ֤רֶשׁ - correct in parsing and BDB as שׁרשׁ root, incorrect in CDCH as שׁרשׁ uproot, gives verb entry for noun

15:1 נִדְמָ֔ה - correct in parsing as דמהIII be ruined, cut off, incorrect in BDB and CDCH as דמהI be like

 

All of the above words have correct lexical entries in Logos for HAL, Holladay's Concise HAL, BDB, and Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament (with the exception of 14:12 חוֹלֵ֖ש , Wörterbuch prefers prostrate like BDB, and BDB's entry for 15:1 נִדְמָ֔ה , entering דמהI for II).

 

So one of my obvious concerns is how incorrect lexical entries in the instant details and pop up windows detract from rapid reading Of course, if you triple click to a lexicon in the desktop or amplify to the root or lemma in the ipad, you can find the correct entry, but a major benefit of the program is the instant details window/pop up, which should be correct.

 

Another major concern is that incorrect tags in the parsing information might affect grammatical and syntax searches. Like Dr. Holmstedt said, for serious work you have to read through results yourself, but I assumed there would be a higher degree of accuracy than I am finding to begin with.

 

I thought about reporting these errors, but they are so numerous I even stopped highlighting them.

 

On a related note, I have found only one lexical entry error in the NT. Don't ask me where, but I did highlight it. Maybe next time around I'll report it.

 

 

Michel Gilbert

 

 

This really needs to be split off this topic to one under 'bug swatters' or something. I would not have read it since I stopped following this thread, but glanced when I saw Hebrew.

 

The issue is related to the ability to determine the homograph number when looking up a word. I think the underlying assumption here is that the user can navigate to the appropriate homograph on their own, but I agree it would be much quicker if it did this automatically.

 

As you noted, in none but one case was the morphology tagging incorrect since the tagging always distinguishes between the homographs. However, we do not maintain the tagging, the Groves Institute does. You can report errors to them.

 

This does not happen in Greek since there are very few homographs. But something similar will happen with words which differ only by accent. Accordance by default ignores accents and breathing marks when looking up words; the user would have to navigate to the appropriate entry on their own.

 

I hope this helps to explain things.


  • Gordon likes this
Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development

#50 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 03:24 PM

Rick,

 

My post was a direct response to #2 of the original post, and an indirect response to some denials that #2 is true in any way. You may copy it to another thread if you wish.

 

I think that your underlying assumption refers to navigating to a lexicon in the desktop, not to an instant details or pop up window. Surely, the underlying assumption in consulting a lexicon is that one wants the correct entry, and I think the pop up in ipad and the <Ctrl> - click pop up in the desktop should flash the correct entry. In fact, a very high percentage of the entries are correct in these instant windows, most likely in the high 90s. Isn't navigating to the correct word/homograph as basic as navigating to a word without homographs?

 

Moreover, in the context of the original post, Logos almost always, in all of its Hebrew lexicons, goes to the correct homograph.

 

I would like you to be more clear on whether you intend to address this. Perhaps there are others beside me who would be willing to highlight the errors, and we could report them that way. After all, quick access to lexical entries is one of the reasons biblical software exists.

 

Michel

 


  • davidmedina likes this

#51 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 03:27 PM

 

Rick,

 

My post was a direct response to #2 of the original post, and an indirect response to some denials that #2 is true in any way. You may copy it to another thread if you wish.

 

I think that your underlying assumption refers to navigating to a lexicon in the desktop, not to an instant details or pop up window. Surely, the underlying assumption in consulting a lexicon is that one wants the correct entry, and I think the pop up in ipad and the <Ctrl> - click pop up in the desktop should flash the correct entry. In fact, a very high percentage of the entries are correct in these instant windows, most likely in the high 90s. Isn't navigating to the correct word/homograph as basic as navigating to a word without homographs?

 

Moreover, in the context of the original post, Logos almost always, in all of its Hebrew lexicons, goes to the correct homograph.

 

I would like you to be more clear on whether you intend to address this. Perhaps there are others beside me who would be willing to highlight the errors, and we could report them that way. After all, quick access to lexical entries is one of the reasons biblical software exists.

 

Michel

 

 

 

I understand your point very clearly, and why it was commented on here.

 

One of the app developers would have to comment on the possibility to enhance this feature; I also forwarded this on so it would not get lost in the thread.

 

Thanks for the feedback.


Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development

#52 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,269 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 03:31 PM

You're welcome, and thank you.



#53 Dustin Battles

Dustin Battles

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 259 posts
  • Twitter:@dustinbattles
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Chester, OH
  • Accordance Version:13.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 08:34 PM

Gordon, the price differences varies based on each products. Some books will be cheaper in Accordance (Like the great price we recently got for the WBC) while on others Logos will be cheaper. But in rare occasion the difference is large. 

 

But what makes Logos more accessible is the flexible payment plan. 

 

Dynamic pricing means that whatever you Logos will take it into consideration whenever you upgrade. Let say you buy three volumes from the WBC and then decide 6 month later that you love the series and want to buy it. Logos will give you a discount for the books you already own. Same thing if you upgrade from Silver to Gold, whatever books you acquire that are now included in Gold (although were not part of Silver) Logos will give you a credit toward the purchase of the Gold so you do not have to pay twice for the same books. 

 

They also offer community pricing by which the user community bids on the resources and when it gains enough interest it goes into production saving you money because the community set the price for it.

 

Lastly, the have a pre-puirchase program which you get discounts if you pre buy before it goes live. Of course, you do not pay for it until you get the book.

 

I believe that in the above aspects Logos has the upper hand. Prices that adjust based on what you currently own is, in my opinion, vitally missing from Accordance's sales.

 

In addition, Accordance's payment plan leaves much to be desired. When they ask for references, they actually call them! That was highly surprising to both me and those who I put down for references. (Maybe I missed a big disclaimer?) I got several texts and phone calls saying, "Why does Accordance want to talk with me?" I can't help but wonder if the type of people who are buying *Bible* software are going to be responsible enough not to put fake people down on the reference sheet. 


Dustin Battles

BA, MA, MDiv

Pastor 

​The King’s Chapel

West Chester, OH 


#54 Martin Zhang

Martin Zhang

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 08:55 PM

This is a good topic.

 

I also want to bring up some problems.

I have submitted a few corrections. Some were already corrected which I will not put here.

 

1. When a Hebrew verb is translated into English, if the English translation has preposition(s) after the verb, I saw almost always the preposition(s) were tagged, not the verb. This is so common, I finally gave up submitting correction suggestions.

For example, Dan 2:25, 

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-18 21.21.50.png   159.25KB   0 downloads

l¶Eo◊nAh means "brought in", but in ESV "in" is tagged instead of the verb "brought."

 

2. If the translated verb followed by a preposition and a noun, then the noun is tagged.

For example, Dan 2:34

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-18 21.26.17.png   199.19KB   0 downloads

t®qäé;dAh means "broke ... in pieces," but in ESV "pieces" is tagged instead of the verb "broke."

 

3. Words in ESV although tagged, are not linked with the BHS, or verse visa.

For example, Dan 5:13,

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-18 21.37.56.png   196.23KB   0 downloads

l™AoUh is not linked to "brought" in ESV.

 

4. Words wrongly linked.

For example, Dan 5:13,

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-18 21.40.01.png   253.26KB   0 downloads

y¢It◊yAh should be linked to the second "brought" toward the end of the verse rather than the first one.

 

Judges 3:15,

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-18 21.42.24.png   153.3KB   1 downloads

Aoy#Ivwøm means "deliverer", not Moab. This is theologically problematic ^_^

 

5. wrong lexical entry

For example, Judges 5:2,

the word is correctly parsed as a noun, but the definition (in the instant detail) and lexicon (DCH) regard it as a verb.

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-15 09.25.57.png   904.3KB   0 downloads

 

6. Parsing error

For example, Judges 4:20,

JK#ElEaVv…w is perfect waw consecutive, not a regular perfect.

Attached File  Screenshot 2014-09-17 00.57.42.png   714.87KB   0 downloads

 

 

Martin

 

 


Martin
Accordance tutorials in Chinese.


#55 tony10000

tony10000

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 18 September 2014 - 08:58 PM

 

I believe that in the above aspects Logos has the upper hand. Prices that adjust based on what you currently own is, in my opinion, vitally missing from Accordance's sales.

 

In addition, Accordance's payment plan leaves much to be desired. When they ask for references, they actually call them! That was highly surprising to both me and those who I put down for references. (Maybe I missed a big disclaimer?) I got several texts and phone calls saying, "Why does Accordance want to talk with me?" I can't help but wonder if the type of people who are buying *Bible* software are going to be responsible enough not to put fake people down on the reference sheet. 

 

Per the previous host from Helen, Accordance will have special pricing similar to what Logos offers.

 

And their payment plan is reflective of their system.  With Logos, if you stop paying, they can just "turn off" your access to the books.  With Accordance, it is more of a real loan since they have no way to get the books back once you download them.  So, they are justified in being more careful.


  • davidmedina likes this

Tony Thomas

www.zoeproject.com

 

Windows 7 and 10 Systems

iPad Mini 2G 

iPod Touch 5G

 

 

 


#56 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:07 PM

This is a good topic.

 

I also want to bring up some problems.

I have submitted a few corrections. Some were already corrected which I will not put here.

 

1. When a Hebrew verb is translated into English, if the English translation has preposition(s) after the verb, I saw almost always the preposition(s) were tagged, not the verb. This is so common, I finally gave up submitting correction suggestions.

For example, Dan 2:25, 

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-18 21.21.50.png

l¶Eo◊nAh means "brought in", but in ESV "in" is tagged instead of the verb "brought."

 

2. If the translated verb followed by a preposition and a noun, then the noun is tagged.

For example, Dan 2:34

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-18 21.26.17.png

t®qäé;dAh means "broke ... in pieces," but in ESV "pieces" is tagged instead of the verb "broke."

 

3. Words in ESV although tagged, are not linked with the BHS, or verse visa.

For example, Dan 5:13,

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-18 21.37.56.png

l™AoUh is not linked to "brought" in ESV.

 

4. Words wrongly linked.

For example, Dan 5:13,

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-18 21.40.01.png

y¢It◊yAh should be linked to the second "brought" toward the end of the verse rather than the first one.

 

Judges 3:15,

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-18 21.42.24.png

Aoy#Ivwøm means "deliverer", not Moab. This is theologically problematic ^_^

 

5. wrong lexical entry

For example, Judges 5:2,

the word is correctly parsed as a noun, but the definition (in the instant detail) and lexicon (DCH) regard it as a verb.

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-15 09.25.57.png

 

6. Parsing error

For example, Judges 4:20,

JK#ElEaVv…w is perfect waw consecutive, not a regular perfect.

attachicon.gifScreenshot 2014-09-17 00.57.42.png

 

 

Martin

 

 

 

Some of these are due to tagging which we do not maintain (HMT-W4), others more of a methodological consideration in tagging phrases in key number texts, and likely a few legit errors. Please email this so they get logged and corrected. We cannot ensure they get corrected when buried in a post like this.


Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development

#57 davidmedina

davidmedina

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Juan, Puerto Rico
  • Interests:God, my family, the Bible, photography and film.
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:19 PM

 

Per the previous host from Helen, Accordance will have special pricing similar to what Logos offers.

 

And their payment plan is reflective of their system.  With Logos, if you stop paying, they can just "turn off" your access to the books.  With Accordance, it is more of a real loan since they have no way to get the books back once you download them.  So, they are justified in being more careful.

 

Totally! They have to be good stewards. 

 

But Logos method has allowed me to get the resources I want because of their type of payment plan and dynamic Pricing. 


Edited by davidmedina, 18 September 2014 - 09:30 PM.

"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." Rom. 12:2
 
Blog: The Renewed Mind.

#58 Martin Zhang

Martin Zhang

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS, Android

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:26 PM

 

others more of a methodological consideration in tagging phrases in key number texts

 

Please email this so they get logged and corrected. We cannot ensure they get corrected when buried in a post like this.

 

by "others more of a methodological consideration in tagging phrases in key number texts" do you mean the 1st and 2nd cases?

 

In my opinion, verbs should be linked with verbs, not with prepositions and nouns. the prepositions and nouns in the 1st and 2nd cases are modifiers per se. They modify the verb(s). Unless those modifiers have their Hebrew counterpart (such as Hebrew prepositions and nouns), we should highlight the verbs which are the counterparts of the Hebrew verbs.

English is my second language, therefore I am not so confident with that. I'll leave this to others to judge.

 

I have emailed most of the examples here. Some a few days ago (the examples in Judges. I believe these might be corrected in the next update), some months ago (the examples in Daniel, in April).

 

Martin


Martin
Accordance tutorials in Chinese.


#59 davidmedina

davidmedina

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Juan, Puerto Rico
  • Interests:God, my family, the Bible, photography and film.
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:28 PM

Can you tell me what the price for the Anchor Bible Commentary series was when it was on sale at Logos? 

 

Not sure what it was or if it was on sale (probably has) as it is not a set that I want to buy. 

 

But my point is that some volumes in Accordance will be at time cheaper while at others will be cheaper in Logos. It is hard to claim, unless you do a deep comparison to find out, which one offers consistently lower prices. In most cases that I have seen the differences are marginals unless there is a big sale. Logos has a more aggressive business model and have frequent web sales and phone only sales.


Edited by davidmedina, 18 September 2014 - 09:28 PM.

"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." Rom. 12:2
 
Blog: The Renewed Mind.

#60 davidmedina

davidmedina

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Juan, Puerto Rico
  • Interests:God, my family, the Bible, photography and film.
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:36 PM

One thing Accordance has the clear edge over Logos is this forum. 

 

Whenever I come here I learn a lot. It is a welcoming forum. 

 

For me, both Logos and Accordance has been a great asset and blessing to my Bible study and spiritual life. 


  • Daniel Francis, PhilT and tony10000 like this
"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." Rom. 12:2
 
Blog: The Renewed Mind.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users