Wanting to see certain badly outdated books to be removed from Original Languages and Bible Study Collections

[Unix]

Could these be removed in a future update?:
Lexicons: Thayer's Greek-English lexikon
Bibles: I don't care for any of the Strong's tagged Bibles, although I'm not sure it would be realistic to remove them from the Collections, but the KJVS and NIV-GK could be removed, at least from Original Languages? Bible in Basic English could easily be removed, there are other purchasable options such as Good News Translation (could You by the way produce the 2004 3rd Edition Good News Translation UK-English 66-book Bible?) and God's Word.

Commentaries: Jamieson, Fausset & Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Matthew Henry Complete Commentary, Bible Knowledge Commentary (2 volumes)
 

 

[EricC]

 

Could these be removed in a future update?:

Lexicons: Thayer's Greek-English lexikon

Bibles: I don't care for any of the Strong's tagged Bibles, although I'm not sure it would be realistic to remove them from the Collections, but the KJVS and NIV-GK could be removed, at least from Original Languages? Bible in Basic English could easily be removed, there are other purchasable options such as Good News Translation (could You by the way produce the 2004 3rd Edition Good News Translation UK-English 66-book Bible?) and God's Word.

Commentaries: Jamieson, Fausset & Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Matthew Henry Complete Commentary, Bible Knowledge Commentary (2 volumes)

 

 

 

Unix, do you mean removed from your machine? Or do you mean, "Please, Accordance, stop including these titles in the Orig. Languages and Bible Study Collections"?

If someone doesn't want them on his or her machine, I think there's a way to get rid of them (but I don't recall what it is). IIRC, there is the problem that then Easy Install keeps offering to re-install them, though, so as a feature request, it might be good to allow the end user to have a configurable list that contains what he does not want to be even offered to install via Easy Install unless or until he changes the list.

 

I for one would not want Thayers or Strong's tagged Bibles removed from the collections and it would, in my opinion, reduce the value of the collections.

[Mark Allison]

Just right-click on the item in your library and select "Remove Item". You'll be asked if you want to "Keep File" or "Move to Trash". Either option will remove it from Accordance. "Keep File" will keep it in on your hard drive and "Move to Trash" will remove it from Accordance and from your hard drive.

[Alistair]

 

Could these be removed in a future update?:

 

 

For everyone or just for you?

[Unix]

I'm suggesting removal of English Bible versions because I doubt people use Strong's numbers after one year in seminary level Gk-studies, IF they use the numbers I think the use is very temporary. Instead perhaps Accordance could offer a small bundle of English Bible versions with Strong's numbers, to be rented on an Annual (or perhaps bi-Monthly) basis? I don't believe in renting per Month. If a good rental option would be offered, I think it would be realistic to remove some English Bible versions with Strong's numbers. I use a wide variety of English Bible versions, still some of the included ones in the Original Languages and Bible Study Collections version 11, are among my least used ones, and the ESV I don't use at all. I mean it: not at all, I have no use whatsoever for the ESV, not even for one verse or in any circumstances, To mention the related Bible versions, I do use the 1971 RSV, and to a more limited extent the NRSV plus many more. (On another platform where I don't have the WEB, I even use the 1901 ASV for a few verses and if the language of the WEB is too modern in certain cases, I probably won't use it in Accordance.)

 

Btw, the Collections I have myself, are version 8 English Studies Introductory Level and version 10 Starter. As You can see I'm interested in having no clutter in my library. I generally don't get overly excited about pre-packaged selections, and the bigger the worse. I did however because of the ongoing sale look at what's in the Bible Study Collection and found that there's one volume, 1-2 Kings An Introduction and Commentary by Wiseman that I'd like to have (Tyndale series), but not more from that series. As I'm still at version 10 Your suggestions about removing select books probably doesn't apply, version 11 introduced the possibility of downloading only the specific books You want from Collections. I have valuable add-ons. If I would purchase a collection during the next Two years I would likely not install the new version of the software - thereby I don't think I would be able to download anything except if installing on one more computer with the newest current version of the software. I like to keep at version 10 for a while because it's more difficult to "cheat" with original languages.

I only meant and mean: For everyone upgrading to version 12, version 2017 or version 13 of the Collections Original Languages and Bible Study specifically, the resources could still be included in Essential and above.
I understand what several have expressed either by posting or liking that particular post where it was expressed, that removing the suggested resources would lower the value of the Collections. But the value goes lower some day anyway, it's just a choice what gets removed and some resources may get so outdated especially compared to newer resources so that they are effectively rendered basically useless.
A suggestion, again I don't know whether it is realistic or not, for a replacement for Thayer's, would be Danker's 2009 Concise Greek-English lexicon, which is based on the NT only and not on the Apostolic Fathers and such. It was the last lexicon he produced, shortly before he died and now there's no-one of those who created the BDAG lexicon alive anymore. Now, what makes the inclusion of it questionable, is that it's cheap as printed matter but might be expensive to produce as an Accordance module. Danker's 2009 lexicon would not need to be included in Advanced and Ultimate because BDAG is more suitable at that level (and should remain an add-on).

 

 

Upon further reflection Brenton English Septuagint could be removed from the Original Languages Collection.

[Alistair]

I guess its called a collection because it is a collection—some resources will will appeal more to some customers than others, but thats how bundles work. Otherwise you only buy individual modules piecemeal—such as your Wiseman commentary—as a stand alone. Makes for a somewhat impoverished library, IMHO.

 

Or would you prefer a "pick your own bundle"? 

[romans6]

Unix, everyone has their own opinion and preferences I guess. I don't intend to disrespect your preference by saying this but I totally disagree with what you are suggesting to remove from the OL collection. The NKJV and the NIV are classic and staple English Bible texts and they aren't even included in the current OL package anyways (unless I am missing something when I read the package details on the Accordance website). I think your best bet is deleting them from your computer as Mark suggested. As far as English translations go my top picks are NASB, ESV, NKJV, NIV, HCSB in no particular order. I would be bummed if I was missing any of those translations.

 

Quick edit: My usage of the word "preference" in regards to why I choose a Bible translation was probably the wrong word choice. I am more interested in using them because of the team that constructed the translation, the style of translation, and the source texts used in their constructions (though I have a ton to learn in this area), in result the more translations the merrier because each has its own strengths and weaknesses. I typically quote the NASB when writing papers because it is quite literal; however, I love the NIV if I am listening to an audio Bible or reading for devotion because of the flow. If I am doing everyday Bible study I like to read the ESV for it is literal but isn't a "stiff" translation like the NASB, it is also a great translation to preach from. 

Edited May 1, 2016 by romans6

[ukfraser]

I think it is great that accordance provides a list of resources included in each collection. The best thing to do is select the most appropriate collection for you and delete what you dont require from your own library.

 

http://www.accordancebible.com/Collections-Comparison

[Julia Falling]

I'm suggesting removal of English Bible versions because I doubt people use Strong's numbers after one year in seminary level Gk-studies, IF they use the numbers I think the use is very temporary. 

 

 

Upon further reflection Brenton English Septuagint could be removed from the Original Languages Collection.

 

 

I have had five years of Greek in a classroom.  I still use the Strong's Numbers Bibles because I want to see how various versions handle translation of specific Greek or Hebrew words.  I find it very useful.  I also like the cross-highlighting that is possible with keyed Bibles when open in parallel with each other and with an original language text.  I don't think these Bibles are obsolete in any way.  And not everyone has the opportunity or the time to study original languages.

 

I now have three versions of the Septuagint.  I don't want to give up any of them.

 

Romans6 – Those are the versions I use most, too (plus the NET).

 

As suggested by others, it might be best for you to consider deleting what you don't use.  I, and I suspect many others, use their keyed Bibles extensively.

[Λύχνις Δαν]

I'm pretty sure Unix, that the arguments against this suggestion are stronger than those ventured in its favour.

 

I'm fairly certain that any item removed would upset someone, perhaps hurting Oaktree sales. In support of Julie's statement above I have three English LXXs now and Brenton in particular I have a certain fondness for the language of. As such I wouldn't be mad keen to deny someone else having it.

 

People who do not actually do key number searches (I myself do them very rarely) nonetheless benefit from the cross-highlighting feature which is built upon them.

 

In libraries, which is what we all have in Acc., older works of lower utilization are moved out of regular circulation and perhaps eventually pensioned of, but there the circulation data is present to support a determination of the use being made of the work or not. Here the libraries are distributed and honestly no single user's use of an item gives a great indication on its own of the use of that work by others. Usage data could be pushed back to Acc but for a variety of reasons I cannot imagine that being a popular idea - I be very tempted to turn such a feature off if it were offered.

 

Regarding rental licensing models, please no.

 

My own view is much like others, library customization is the answer. Of course I actually haven't worried much about clutter in the library I must say. The works I use a lot I find readily and the rest may happily gather digital dust in the stacks occasionally offering up a gem I not expected.

 

Thx

D

[Unix]

I use the NASB77 to some extent - for many passages, but instead of the 1995 Edition which I barely use. I do use the HCSB but only for a few parts of the Bible and have difficulties finding much scholarly opinion about passages in it in the Theological Journal Library, and if I want a Reverse Interlinear for it I would get it from WORDsearch - couldn't even imagine getting an RI for it in other platforms, note that I think Accordance is the best platform, but anyway. I use the NKJV for very few verses, mainly just 1 Jn 5:7f. I have the NIV84 bought used, and the NIV11 bought used with the -GKE add-on bought new, so I wouldn't want the NIV to be included because a special sale price would be lower than the custom upgrade price and I wouldn't want Zondervan. Furthermore, I don't have the NIV under other platforms, except the NIV84 under Verbum and the NIV11 Anglicized under OliveTree (OT is by far the worst platform of the ones I have (and the ones I don't have are even worse) and I only have a tiny library there with the Encyclopedia of Ancient Christianity as the only valuable item):

As far as English translations go my top picks are NASB, ESV, NKJV, NIV, HCSB in no particular order. I would be bummed if I was missing any of those translations.

 

Quick edit: My usage of the word "preference" in regards to why I choose a Bible translation was probably the wrong word choice. I am more interested in using them because of the team that constructed the translation, the style of translation, and the source texts used in their constructions (though I have a ton to learn in this area), in result the more translations the merrier because each has its own strengths and weaknesses. I typically quote the NASB when writing papers because it is quite literal; however, I love the NIV if I am listening to an audio Bible or reading for devotion because of the flow. If I am doing everyday Bible study I like to read the ESV for it is literal but isn't a "stiff" translation like the NASB, it is also a great translation to preach from. 

[romans6]

Unix, sounds like you are an avid Accordance user for sure   . Thanks for the forum suggestions in your name description!

[Ashadelo]

Please leave them in, I sometimes use the Strongs Bibles to try and get a better idea of how or even why something was translated the way it was. I have had three years of Greek and three years of Hebrew.

[Bret Hicks]

Sorry, I am fairly fluent in Greek but absolutely would not want the Strong's English versions removed.  This is true because my Hebrew is not as strong, and there are times I am reading an English version and want to see the quick word gloss, and because there are nice searches that can be done on those versions even if one knows the Greek.  Sorry but I think it would be a huge mistake to remove them.  If someone does not want them on their machine, they can always remove them.  But leave leave the resources for the rest of us (who I expect are a very large majority).

 

 

In Christ,

 

 

Bret

[JonathanHuber]

Unix, I'm confused. Why do you want Accordance to remove these modules from the packages? Unless I'm missing something, you've only given a few reasons why you personally don't need them. That doesn't mean that nobody else uses them. Further, even if nobody else used them either (which the above posts show to be counter factual), why should Accordance bother to actively remove them? If you don't want them, just remove them from your library.

[Alistair]

Upon further reflection Brenton English Septuagint could be removed from the Original Languages Collection.

That's the only version of the LXX I have—what's so bad about it?

[Rick Bennett]

While we do revise collections from time-to-time, we're not going to systematically remove resources as suggested in this thread.

 

Thanks for the feedback.

[kpang808]

Leave them in please! I don't agree with any of the removals, if anyone wants to remove they can uninstall it from their computer.

[Unix]

OK, so could someone explain me one thing? IF or WHEN I upgrade, to whichever is the version being sold at the time, are all my resources recognized at the time of the upgrade? I know I can leave a note saying I want a custom upgrade price manually reviewed, but the probable scenario is that a custom upgrade price is higher than a straightforward upgrade price which doesn't take into account what I have since before (since some Collections sometimes go on a sale in the webstore)! Consider that several of the resources I have came in used condition so they are unlikely to be taken into account by anything less than a manual custom upgrade. Now, imagine anyone in the same situation as myself: Going to at one point or another do a relatively big upgrade step, big in the sense that the very smallest Collections I have since before barely came with any resources, instead they financed the development of the software, so any upgrade step is a big step.
Now, my own conclusion is that in an upgrade, I would be paying once more for resources such as the Bibles that came used. I don't want to pay extra to Zondervan. Honestly, which way is it? Do the publishers want their even shares each time someone upgrades?
Everyone seemed to focus on that I mentioned Bible versions. How about the commentaries I mentioned in the OP - are most people really certain they want AND use those commentaries? I'm baffled if there's anyone who thinks there aren't better options: One option is not to replace those commentaries with anything but just to remove them from Original Languages and Bible Study Collections! If there's anyone who wants them please just consider a higher level that would include them (I suggested Essential to retain them). The commentaries I mentioned would be best out of sight, not even be considered to be read - go to any seminary and ask if You want an opinion about those commentaries!

 

Also, I'm positive I don't have to point this out to anyone of You, but if there are any beginners reading this discussion: If You have once rightfully acquired a title the license for it will never go away and it will always be re-downloadable unless perhaps it's a rental or You sell it or give it away by doing a license transfer (which You will notice and be aware of and which costs $25 per transfer-occasion one-way anyway regardless of the number of resources being transferred). I understand people want to be able to recommend Accordance, but personally I would find it easier to recommend Accordance (which of course I already do) if there was less of the lowest quality resources in the $100-$350 range, than there currently is. By recommending I include myself, whether I recommend myself to upgrade at a particular point in time, if I would know that I don't finance certain resources multiple times I could upgrade more often, whether just to get the current software or to even get a couple of books.

If You want to know: I'm pretty conscious of these things since I have multiple software platforms and there is some occasional "duplication" so certain resources I've seen elsewhere too and most every platform I use seem to be making the same mistake. Since I like Accordance the most, I'm making my suggestions known only to Accordance, the other platforms are worse in this regard as well and I kind of lost hope of the big competitor.

[Michael J. Bolesta]

Unix

 

My personal experience with custom upgrades is that the Accordance folks are incredibly generous. While possible, I cannot recall a time when a custom upgrade was more expensive that the standard upgrade. The LORD bless you and keep you.

[Helen Brown]

Our relatively new custom upgrade takes into account everything that is listed in your account, whether you purchased it from us, were given it or transferred it legally, or whether you registered a CD/DVD you purchased elsewhere. You will not pay again for the same resource. When you get a quote on the website you can see exactly which items you are being charged for and what price.

 

Somethimes items you bought in the last 90 days will be listed again in the new Custom Upgrade quote, but that's because we will give you a full credit, in that case, for the price you paid for those items. Otherwise you are simply not charged for items you own.

 

The system is as fair to the user as we can make it, even though we may lose after paying royalties owed to the publishers. We want to do right, and we trust that in the long run we will end up doing well.

[Enoch]

 

Could these be removed in a future update?:

Lexicons: Thayer's Greek-English lexikon

Bibles: I don't care for any of the Strong's tagged Bibles, although I'm not sure it would be realistic to remove them from the Collections, but the KJVS and NIV-GK could be removed, at least from Original Languages? Bible in Basic English could easily be removed, there are other purchasable options such as Good News Translation (could You by the way produce the 2004 3rd Edition Good News Translation UK-English 66-book Bible?) and God's Word.

Commentaries: Jamieson, Fausset & Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible, Matthew Henry Complete Commentary, Bible Knowledge Commentary (2 volumes)

 

 

IMHO:  It is amazing how others come up with ideas which seem so wrong to others.  Remove Thayer? by no means.  What is gained by removing any of this stuff?  Many persons are still interested in the KJV. And the NIV?  Rupert Murdock would not approve, nor Kenneth Barker, nor myself!  I see point in removing the 3 commentaries either, tho I don't find them of first importance when analyzing a text.  But there may be many DTS stakeholders which would not like the BKC removed.  I don't think of Walvoord as out of date, I recall seeing him in person not so long ago, yet alive.  However, I would encourage DTS to do a serious upgrade on that commentary.  But remove it, no.

[Enoch]

 

 

 

Upon further reflection Brenton English Septuagint could be removed from the Original Languages Collection.

 

What would be gained by throwing out an LXX?  As to Thayer, perhaps someone will revise and upgrade it -- but I find it valuable.  Of course we are all free to throw out what we don't want from our library.  Yes, I would like to have abridgments of lexicons included, as well as improved formats (like I think Logos has for BDAG).

Edited May 2, 2016 by Enoch

[Helen Brown]

We are planning, for the future, to allow you to mark a module with a reversible "do not install" so that it does not clutter up your LIbrary. Of course, for now you can  create an "Unwanted" folder to keep them in.

[Unix]

I realize now I was unclear about how I think: I think the royalties paid to publishers is perhaps the very biggest problem here. Usually I just first point out clutter and the un-necessity of more or less dated works. I don't want Accordance to suffer from an upgrade I make, hence why I also talked about not wanting to do a manual custom upgrade. The times I upgrade it's important for me to know I'm funding the development of the software a little bit. I'm not against royalties per se at all, it's just that I don't want too much royalties to be paid when it comes to the mentioned resources that I'm not as fond of as many other resources in Collections and of course particularly add-ons. Thanks for clarifying that it doesn't even necessarily need to be done manually for any common reason!
Also if someone wondered about why I mentioned NIV: Well technically NIV11-GK is the previous Edition, NIV11-GKE is the current Edition. I think it's up to users to realize that the NIV11-GKE is an OK purchase. Of course Collections are there to simplify choices and make building a library a faster process, but still it would probably not be difficult to market the NIV11-GKE actually I would guess promoting it a little bit extra would not upset the publisher. The publisher may not want to remove the NIV11 or NIV11-GKE from Collections but I doubt the publisher can do much more than give incentives in the directions they want and narrow the profit margin if things go the way the publisher doesn't want but the assembling of Accordance Collections is ultimately probably up to Accordance i.e. OakTree. The NIV11 may not be included in version 11, but I immediately realized it's a probable candidate for inclusion when it came out. Just like OakTree makes decisions on our behalf what size Collections should be and what commentaries and original language texts should be included, so they should do us a favour and put a bit of thought every now and then into the exact composition of what English Bible versions to include. Too few English Bible versions whether the 66-book canon or the Septuagint, is probably better, both to give more freedom of choice to end-users and to lower royalty-costs and make the Accordance Collections cutting edge. This may be a slightly false dichotomy, I'm aware of that a little bit of leaven won't spoil the Collections, what I'm considered about is that looking at Collections You'll get distracted by the number of resources and forget quality and whether things are up-to-date.
Instead of the resources I suggested to be removed, there are likely to be any number of alternative resources upon which (I believe) all could agree as replacements, I mentioned Danker. When it comes to commentaries, there have been a few decent ones during the past 15 years - I can't remember whether Accordance offers them: Oxford Bible Commentary and Fortress Press Commentary (I have them under a competing platform, I like Oxford particularly):

The system is as fair to the user as we can make it, even though we may lose after paying royalties owed to the publishers. We want to do right, and we trust that in the long run we will end up doing well.

 

Thanks - while it's not my immediate concern nor what I would ask You to prioritize in the development department, it will probably help some:

We are planning, for the future, to allow you to mark a module with a reversible "do not install" so that it does not clutter up your Library. Of course, for now you can  create an "Unwanted" folder to keep them in.

 

Edited May 2, 2016 by Unix