1) Why Logos and 2) Why Logos over Accordance

Page 2 of 3 (59 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next >
This post has 58 Replies | 15 Followers

Posts 2409
Forum MVP
Mike Binks | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 9:33 AM

Hi Derek,

It is great to see that you are keeping up with developments here on the forum even though you have stopped using Logos.

Since you brought Logos it would be a shame not to be able to use it at all. You never know when it might come in handy.

Have you had a try with the latest release? Your experiences earlier were atypical and are even rarer now. I should think that things would run much smoother for you this far down the line.

I think it fair to point out that this thread is seeking to help the originator to describe the current differences between the two programmes rather than as they were some months ago.

Why not have a go at the latest release and let us know how you get on with an up-todate version?

Posts 185
Rick Ross | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 9:45 AM

Thanks, Jacob.  I will take a look at Thomas' blog.

Posts 2263
Dan Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 1:01 PM

I love Accordance... I also love Logos 4.... Each has it's own charm and use. I like how Logos opens automatically all related commentaries for passage (though it sometimes misses items), Logos has a wonderful selection of resources many more than there are in Accordance, but  despite what people say Logos is not always cheaper in fact sometimes it is much cheaper, take Nelson's Word biblical commentary LOGOS 700, ACCORDANCE 400 (logos has one additional book JOB volume 2). Also accordance has some items not available in logos, I love the poetic Revised English Bible. I wouldn't want to be without either, I find original language study far easier in Accordance, as well as much faster switch in parallel resources. Also general Bible reading in accordance is nicer for me with the exception that footnotes are a separate module.  so you can see them in a small window as you scroll which is super nice for something like NET bible, or the NAB, but in general the pop up notes in Logos are nicer.   Logos devotionals are nice in that they pop open to the proper day when you open them up automatically.  And I could go on (also i saw someone state iphone ipad were a reason to go logos, but logos is  going to have a lot of catch up to do soon there, accordances app will actually allow you to install any of you owned files to your phone, because Logos uses a cloud setup, they have to get permission from the publishers, most all the items I want to use on Logos are not iphone compatible because of the silly cloud model, even downloading items to phone for airplane mode, leaves you unable to access footnotes).  

If you can only buy one examine both carefully, get the one which one will work best for you. I am slightly more partial to Accordance, but I would advise anyone to consider purchasing BOTH, are good and the life application bible notes  are reason enough to own accordance.

Although I use to say the two Daily study bible series were reason enough to own Logos, but those two series are some of the non cloudable and no longer purchasable items. Also my Jerome biblical commentary and Oxford Bible Commentary are the same way. 

-Dan

PS: Logos is working on bring back the Barclay to Logos although this will be the latest rendition, NRSV replacing his lovely translation and the text being updated and gender neutralized. Personally I prefer people for men and humankind vs mankind, etc, but I do feel the loss of Barclay's translation lessons the series, and there is no word on bring back the OT series.

Posts 4952
Forum MVP
Todd Phillips | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 1:13 PM

Daniel W. Francis:
espite what people say Logos is not always cheaper in fact sometimes it is much cheaper, take Nelson's Word biblical commentary LOGOS 700, ACCORDANCE 400 (logos has one additional book JOB volume

WBC for Logos has been on sale for $400 more than once.  That's the thing with Logos, to get the best price, you have to get books when they're on special (or pre-pub) or talk to sales for better prices.  Not sure why they do that but I suspect it's a marketing tool: limit what is on sale at any particular time to generate interest.

Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Moving Logos between systems / Detailed Search Help - ThinkPad T520: 2.4GHz i5-2430M, 8GB, 7200RPM HD, integrated video

Posts 70
Ryan Burns | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 4:58 PM

TJ,

Looking forward to your post. Glad I can now officially reply as a user and not as a marketing employee Smile

Three main things come to mind on why I chose (prior, during, and after being an employee) Logos over Accordance.

  1. Library - Both programs are, in essence, about accessing information in a library. Logos simply has a bigger selection. The odd of finding the book you want in Logos is greater than it is in Accordance. That's a big point for those wanting to do Biblical studies. A big library is important.
  2. Learning Curve - Out of the box, Logos is (in my experience) far easier to use. Before I bought Logos in seminary, I downloaded and tired the accordance demo. Nothing made sense. Search results didn't return in an easy to navigate manner and I had no idea what all the icons did. Granted, with time and reading support docs and training videos, I could have learned everything. But with logos it was "enter verse. click go." Everything was much more intuitive for me. That said, I'd add that once you become an intermediate or advanced user, both do what you want and need them to do. I'd say that Logos is MUCH more friendly out of the gate.
  3. Size - There is no way around the fact that Logos is the giant of the Bible Software market. As someone alluded to earlier, just compare the user forum numbers (though feel free to pick any other matrix and Logos will out do the rest of the players). What this means is that Logos has a massive in-house, in the office, development team. Because of this, you see a lot of great additions to the desktop app, like the iPhone/pad app and biblia.com. You are seeing opportunities to access your library in multiple locations. Logos is aggressively seeking out the best and the brightest to take the software to the next level and beyond.

Final thoughts (I've been holding this one back for a little while)... Accordance prides itself on being "mac native since ...." and that they are "the only software built just for mac" but these catch phrases always seemed lame to me. I don't care if you were built for mac just this morning or by Jobs himself. I care even less that you have pigeon holed yourself to one market and one platform. The fact is that Accordance is a small company, with modest revenue, and a narrow vision (from what I see) for the future of Bible Software. Logos is driven to be on the cutting edge and deliver the best digital Bible study tools on the plant... That's the sort of software I get excited about as a user and why I go with Logos 4 (and whatever Bob and the team have up their sleeve next).

Posts 8369
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 25 2010 5:20 PM

Ryan Burns:
Learning Curve - Out of the box, Logos is (in my experience) far easier to use. Before I bought Logos in seminary, I downloaded and tired the accordance demo. Nothing made sense. Search results didn't return in an easy to navigate manner and I had no idea what all the icons did. Granted, with time and reading support docs and training videos, I could have learned everything. But with logos it was "enter verse. click go." Everything was much more intuitive for me. That said, I'd add that once you become an intermediate or advanced user, both do what you want and need them to do. I'd say that Logos is MUCH more friendly out of the gate.

I own and use both Logos and Accordance. Each has its own strength. Which to purchase is a 6 of one half-dozen of the other type of evaluation.

#2 I completely disagree with this evaluation. "Enter  verse, click go" has always worked with Accordance.

If your #3 carries any real weight, we should all scrap our Macs and go for Windows. We would all drive Toyota. The herd is not always right.

#1 is the only criteria that carries any real weight in this discussion.

As a member (or even former member) of the Logos marketing department, I suspect that you are somewhat biased.

Posts 82
David Adams | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 8:52 AM

Luomat:

You raise an interesting and, for me at least, important question. As a seminary professor teaching the Old Testament on the basis of the Hebrew text I am often asked by students and pastors what bible software I recommend. I started using software to study the bible back in the early 1980s, and through the years I have used almost everything that has come along. I was exposed to Gramcord while it was still under development in the early 80s, and I began using Accordance, which implemented Gramcord for the Macintosh as soon as it became available in 1994. So I have used it extensively for 16 years now, and am heavily invested in it. I purchased Logos as soon as it became available for the Macintosh, mostly so that I could be familiar with it in order to answer student questions but also to access a few resources that I had received from publishers in Logos format. The following observations are based on my own use of bible software over a long period of time. I have no connections to Logos, Accordance, BibleWorks, or any other software publisher, except as a customer.

For most of the last 20 years or so I have responded to the question of which bible software students should buy by saying that they should try all of the software available for their hardware and choose the one that they felt most comfortable with. I thought the best bible software was the bible software students would actually use. As the software as evolved from the mid-90s to the mid-00s, I judged that there was not enough of a difference between the packages to justify making a strong categorical recommendation in favor of any one package over another. They all did more-or-less the same thing, and more-or less-equally well. As I said above, I used Accordance as my own primary tool, and I enthusiastically recommended it to Mac users who wanted something to help with original-language study. And I know for a fact that I ‘sold’ a lot of copies of Accordance to students and colleagues. When Logos v. 1 for the Mac became available I encouraged students to take a look at it, but frankly I was not particularly impressed with it, and still preferred Accordance.

All of that changed for me when I first saw Logos 4 in the fall of 2009. At that time it was only available for Windows, but Logos announced that they would be doing a Mac version that would be feature-equivalent to the Windows version. I downloaded the first alpha that was available, and have worked with it ever since. (To be fair, I worked mainly with the Windows version running under Parallels until we got to about Alpha 23, when I judged the Mac version to be far enough along that I could use it as my primary tool.) Beginning in the spring of 2010 I started strongly advising students and colleagues to use Logos instead of Accordance (or BibleWorks for Windows users) and continue to do so. Since the release of Logos 4 it is clear to me that Logos now stands head and shoulders above everything else.  Here are the four main reasons for my recommendation:

(1)  Logos is better at what the average parish pastor needs to do. 

Virtually all of my own bible study is study of the text in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. All of the students that I teach in our M.Div. program are required to learn Hebrew and Greek. Nevertheless, I recognize that even our students will spend most of their study time with English translations, and they will be preparing to teach Christians who almost exclusively read the bible in English. Life in the modern world being what it is, pastors have a lot of demands on their time, and are not always able to set aside as much time as they should to devote themselves to the study of the Word. Thus, they need a tool that both supports their English-language study and supports their original-language study, and does so in a way that helps them maximize the benefit of their study and preparation time. Logos 4 does this better than anything else. The Passage Guide, Exegetical Guide, and Bible Word Study Guide jump-start a pastor’s preparation (or a layman’s study time), and point them directly and quick to the most relevant and helpful resources that they have available (depending, of course, on what they own). The Biblical People, Places, and Things tools bring together a lot of information quickly and point the way to avenues for further study. And the platform provides a vast array of resources to support both the study of the Word and, equally important, the teaching of the Word. Even though I am a 'professional exegete', I realize that the average parish pastor needs something different than I need from bible study software. Easy and efficient access to the program’s features is quite important to pastors, and Logos excels in this regard. Fortunately it does both what parish pastors need, and what we 'professional exegetes' need. That's a rare and good thing.

(2) Its About the Resources, Stupid.

Pardon my being blunt (and don't take it personally), but it is very easy to get caught up in the ‘flashy lights syndrome’, the tendency to focus on pretty, but largely irrelevant distractions. In the world of software, this largely takes the form of a focus on ‘features’, as if piling up lots of features makes for good software. What matters in bible study software is that the software not only has lots of easy-to-use features (see above), but also that those features actually lead you somewhere. In this case, that ‘somewhere’ is the library of resources. Accordance (and to a much lesser extent BibleWorks) have done a decent job of providing their users with a reasonable library of basic resources, but neither can compete with Logos. As a result of their arrangements with most major publishers of theological works, Logos gives the student of the bible the opportunity to build a substantial theological library of more than 10,000 volumes. And even more importantly, all of these resources are inter-linked within the software and work together. For most of this material, Logos is the only source for these resources in electronic form. To give a real-world example, I am a Lutheran, as are most of the students that I teach. Logos is the only platform that has any significant resources for the study of Lutheran theology, or the interpretation of the Bible by Lutheran interpreters. And not only are these valuable resources available within Logos, but they work automatically within the framework of the software, so that as soon as the student runs a tool or conducts a search, the software automatically incorporates these resources and points my students to valuable insights from within the Lutheran theological tradition (assuming they have purchased these resources) without having to do any additional work. Contrast this with BibleWorks, which has so few resources available for its users that its website actually discourages users from buying electronic resources in favor of paper ones – a great example of attempting to make a virtue out of a necessity! Given its substantial library of resources, and the way in which they work together, Logos has no rival for supporting the serious study of theology and pastoral practice. None at all. 

(3) Syntax Searching

The first generation of bible software enabled us to search the text, to quickly find a vaguely-remembered passage or discover a passage that we did not know at all. The second generation of bible study software added the ability to search original-language texts morphologically, to find specific forms or words in Greek or Hebrew, and to compare the usage of a Hebrew or Greek word across a variety of contexts. Logos revolutionized bible study for those who don’t know Hebrew or Greek by making it possible for them to access information based on original-language data from within an English-only environment. However, one major weakness of all bible software is that it tends to reinforce the idea that the meaning of a text is somehow hidden within the meaning of individual words or forms. Morphological searching is very valuable, but it can also be misleading if the nature of the information provided is not well-understood by the interpreter. Simply understanding the form of a word (morphology) or how the word has been used by others (etymology and lexicography) do not of themselves provide magic keys to understanding the meaning of a passage. Understanding the meaning of a passage is ultimately dependent upon understanding how each word is used in relation to the other words in the passage. This requires contextual competence (the ability to understand how words are being used together in a literary context). And this kind of contextual competence requires an understanding of syntax and, ultimately, a degree of literary awareness. We are still a long way from the ability of bible software to help us with literary awareness. Today, the third generation of bible software has begun to make it possible for computers to support the study a text syntactically. This is a major advance, and Logos pioneered the move. We are still in the early days of this technology, but Logos has developed a number of significant resources in this direction, and more are on the way. Accordance has begun to catch up, insofar as version 9 now implements syntax searching. But the much more limited resources available — as of this writing only one resource, and that limited to Genesis and John — means that Accordance lags quite a ways behind, and is likely to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. BibleWorks is not in the game at all at this point.

(4) Flexibility

Over the course of my 30+ years of computer use, I have owned and/or used virtually every major operating system available. A long time ago I reached the point where I stopped being interested in tinkering with computers as a hobby and have focused on using them as tools to support my real work. I predominantly use a Macintosh because it lets me get my real work done with the least hassle. But I have no illusions that the Mac, as much as I love it, is the last word in the development of computerized technology. Ten years from now I may be using something else. And this is a last major reason that I now recommend Logos to my students. Logos 4 is the only bible software platform that runs on both Windows and the Macintosh. This is important to me, not only because it helps to preserve my investment in the resources that I have purchased, but also because it gives me confidence in knowing that I am protecting the investment of my students. I know that the students that I am teaching now will eventually be using something other than what they currently use. Windows users will become Mac users, and a few may even go the other way.  A few years from now I and they may be exclusively using an iPad or something like it, or something no one has imagined yet. Logos is committed to providing excellent tools on a variety of platforms. Not only does Logos 4 run on the Macintosh and Windows, but there is a great subset of these tools available for the iPhone and iPad. I am pretty confident that if there is a sufficient market to sustain it, they will provide tools for the Android or other systems as well down the road. The point is that the world changes, and Logos knows it and is committed to keeping up with it. Since with Logos you buy the books, not the software (per se), the resources are portable, and you can use them on all the supported hardware platforms. This is a huge advantage for pastors, schools, and churches that are interested in being good stewards of the resources available to them, and is a major reason that I recommend Logos 4 to my students and to pastors that ask me.

 

To wrap up, it is only fair to say that there are still a few things that Accordance does a little better than Logos 4. The interface for morphology searching makes it easier to do complex morphological searching in Accordance, though the same results can be obtained from Logos. The timeline module in Accordance is better than the corresponding resources in Accordance. And while Logos provides a great set of maps to support biblical study, I find that I keep going back to the map tool in Accordance when I want to generate a map to use for my teaching. It is simply much more flexible and easier to customize. While the speed of Logos 4 is greatly improved over its predecessor, Accordance is still a bit faster, especially for morphology searching. But all of these are largely picking at details around the edges. We could compare other features, and we might find some that are better in one software and others that are better in another. The bottom line is that for all of the functions that are most important to most students of the bible, Logos is simply much better than everyone else.

I am sorry to have gone on for such a long time, but since you asked a serious question I assume that you are interested in a substantial answer. Then again, that is probably a professional hazard of seminary professors.

David L. Adams
Concordia Seminary
St. Louis, Mo., USA

Posts 70
Ryan Burns | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 9:02 AM

Jack Caviness:

#2 I completely disagree with this evaluation. "Enter  verse, click go" has always worked with Accordance.

That's fine. We've had different experiences. However, my experience was after entering the verse and clicking go in Accordance, it wasn't intuitive for me as to what to do next. My experience as a first time user with both programs was that Logos was a more user friendly experience out of the box.

Jack Caviness:

If your #3 carries any real weight, we should all scrap our Macs and go for Windows. We would all drive Toyota. The herd is not always right.

 

Not sure that's an apples to apples conclusion. My point isn't about herd, but about resources. Logos has 180+ employees and revenue to support future development. While, sure, large companies have issues sometimes but if based on current user, $$, and growth, Logos is seems like a good ship to be on. The proof is in the pudding. Logos can more quickly generate new products more quickly and at a greater rate than Accordance because they have the resources. Accordance doesn't have an iphone app (been in development for 6 months +/-) or any online access to their resources (that I know of). Logos has all those things because they are a bigger company with more resources to expend on expansion and growth. As a user, that is a factor worth considering, right? If you want an iphone app and online access to your resources (and whatever other cool things you can think of) who is most likely to deliver?

Jack Caviness:

#1 is the only criteria that carries any real weight in this discussion.

Hey, I vote with my $$ just like the rest of you. The query for feedback was why "I" chose Logos over Accordance... those are "my" 3 reasons that I chose and choose Logos and they carry weight with me. So, hard to say they don't carry weight in the discussion.

Jack Caviness:

As a member (or even former member) of the Logos marketing department, I suspect that you are somewhat biased.

Everyone is biased, including me. No problem there.

 

All this is just my 2 cents.

 

 

 

Posts 1203
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 4:16 PM

Daniel W. Francis:
And I could go on (also i saw someone state iphone ipad were a reason to go logos, but logos is  going to have a lot of catch up to do soon there, accordances app will actually allow you to install any of you owned files to your phone, because Logos uses a cloud setup, they have to get permission from the publishers, most all the items I want to use on Logos are not iphone compatible because of the silly cloud model, even downloading items to phone for airplane mode, leaves you unable to access footnotes).  

Just so you know... we're not done with our iPhone app. It's getting some pretty serious (and cool!) attention. So, I don't think it's fair to compare our shipping-nearly-a-year app to someone else's not-yet-shipping app. You should compare our "not shipping yet" app to their "not shipping yet" app. And, while I'm not making an announcement, I'll suggest that then the comparison above will be irrelevant. :-)

-- Bob

Posts 640
Jeremy | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 5:16 PM

David Adams:
While the speed of Logos 4 is greatly improved over its predecessor, Accordance is still a bit faster, especially for morphology searching. But all of these are largely picking at details around the edges.

A few months ago I ran across a blog of someone who was testing Accordance, Bible Works, and Logos at some sort of conference. It was a very technical morph study of Hebrew weak verbs. The conclusion of the study (I think) was that Bible Works couldn't do it, Logos kind of could, and Accordance could. I wonder if anyone knows where that blog was and if Logos 4 does it any better/faster. 

 

Posts 3299
steve clark | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 5:36 PM

David Adams:
I am sorry to have gone on for such a long time, but since you asked a serious question I assume that you are interested in a substantial answer. Then again, that is probably a professional hazard of seminary professors.

Thank you Sir for taking the time. Your post is very informative!

QLinks, Bibl2, Reporter, Macros
Dell Insp 1720
Core 2 Duo, 1.6 G, 4G RAM, Vista

Posts 2263
Dan Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 27 2010 5:49 PM

Bob Pritchett:

Daniel W. Francis:
And I could go on (also i saw someone state iphone ipad were a reason to go logos, but logos is  going to have a lot of catch up to do soon there, accordances app will actually allow you to install any of you owned files to your phone, because Logos uses a cloud setup, they have to get permission from the publishers, most all the items I want to use on Logos are not iphone compatible because of the silly cloud model, even downloading items to phone for airplane mode, leaves you unable to access footnotes).  

Just so you know... we're not done with our iPhone app. It's getting some pretty serious (and cool!) attention. So, I don't think it's fair to compare our shipping-nearly-a-year app to someone else's not-yet-shipping app. You should compare our "not shipping yet" app to their "not shipping yet" app. And, while I'm not making an announcement, I'll suggest that then the comparison above will be irrelevant. :-)

-- Bob

Fair Enough and I am very happy to hear that you are working on updates for the iphone. I wasn't sure it was an on going project, i mean your widget never got updated, and accord's one is nice for super quick bible passage copying when you don;t want to bother opening up you app. I don't mean to infer anything bad about your program (other than lack of PPC support but then I know you can't support old hardware forever).  If I could crossgrade over all my files  from accordance I might even consider deleting Accordance. I like like both and use both daily. And truth be known if i had to make a choice of one only I would likely choose Logos, it is a great program. But thankfully I can have both. And while i would recommend Logos to anyone I want every mac user to know Accordance is out there and an option, and possibly for some a better one. 

 

Posts 22
tjluoma | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 1:02 PM

Ryan Burns:

My point isn't about herd, but about resources. Logos has 180+ employees and revenue to support future development. While, sure, large companies have issues sometimes but if based on current user, $$, and growth, Logos is seems like a good ship to be on. The proof is in the pudding. Logos can more quickly generate new products more quickly and at a greater rate than Accordance because they have the resources. Accordance doesn't have an iphone app (been in development for 6 months +/-) or any online access to their resources (that I know of). Logos has all those things because they are a bigger company with more resources to expend on expansion and growth. As a user, that is a factor worth considering, right? If you want an iphone app and online access to your resources (and whatever other cool things you can think of) who is most likely to deliver?

They've also been involved in developing for the Mac since the early 90s, and have released two working versions of their Mac app in the time it took Logos to get one working Mac version released.

Logos has been in the Mac market for a very short amount of time for their users (former employees?) to be skeptical about their ability to deliver.

Logos has an iPhone app, but honestly it's been of little use to Mac users before now. It will be interesting to see how much more useful version 1 of Accordance's iOS app is than Logos' was.

So yes, Logos has more resources to throw at development, but their offerings on the Mac and iOS haven't been so far ahead as to leave distance Accordance can't cover.

After a few days with Logos 4, I keep coming back to the speed and performance issues. There are a lot of pastors out there with 3, 4, 5 year-old computers. I was really surprised to see Logos' answer to be: 

"On older computers, Logos 4 can be sluggish. We recommend purchasing a new computer or sticking with Logos 3 until you can."

source: http://www.logos.com/4/faq

That's just not likely scenario for most pastors (anyone been to a church budgeting meeting lately?), especially when looking at a software purchase of several hundred dollars.

The library options that Logos has are truly impressive. To me, that seems like it might be the decisive factor in choosing between the two software packages, for most people. It's also the toughest element for one person to evaluate for another.

Comparing these two programs is no easy task.

 

Posts 22
tjluoma | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 4:42 PM

Correction: "Two versions of Accordance" is inaccurate. I was thinking there had been a new version of Accordance when I first started using it, but that was just a "point" release bug fix.

The point I wanted to make was that it seems specious to say "You're better off with a bigger developer" when that developer doesn't have much of history on the Mac.

This is why this comparison is difficult. Sure, you get a bigger development team and a bigger library with Logos. But Accordance is giving 100% of their attention to a Mac version with a longer history. I'm guessing that will show a difference in the iOS app that Accordance releases, even if it comes in later than the Logos app.

I dunno. I'm just trying to see this all from several angles.

It would be nice if both Logos and Accordance could coordinate their release schedules so somewhere mid-October we had stable new releases of both the Mac and iOS versions. :-)

 

Posts 3
Mark A. Jamison | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 5:03 PM

Hi Luomat,

 

Allow me a moment to give a little background, I'm a PK who grew up loving to read, and while the Lord has not, as yet, called me to the pastorate, I have audited the odd seminary class hear and there when I was near a seminary. So basically I'm possibly a different perspective altogether. It would be a tad disingenuous to call me a true laymen, but at the same time I'm not relying on either Accordance or Logos to assist in my profession.  

I also must confess I'm in the Software industry, though not affiliated with either product discussed here. 

I own both Accordance and Logos. I was a big fan of Logos, before I switched platforms from PC to Mac. So 2.5 years ago I was one of the ones beta'ing the first librionix beta. I disliked the instability of it, and , to tell the truth, disliked the fact that some of the best parts of Logos was itself missing. So I went looking for another Bible software package. I eventually came across Accordance, and liked it far better that my other options. I should note that I briefly entertained the idea of VMWARE fusion + XP + Logos, but eventually passed on that since the only valid XP license I had available was from work, and thus meant that should I ever leave work I would need to find that Bible software process again. 

 

So I've used Accordance for about 2 Years. Coming back to Logos with Logos 4 as soon as I became aware of it.  I will likely soon dump Accordance altogether. There are two key reasons for this :

  1. Ease of Use/Ergonomics. (Including comany website) 
  2. Choice of additional titles to the Library.
  3. Mobile apps.

 

I'll explain each below:

 

First, the "Ease of Use/Ergonomic" aspect. In two years I've never really had much luck with setting up devotionals in Accordance, in Logos it's child's play. If I want to do searches beyond just "words" and "verses" in Accordance it's a chore, in Logos its a Breeze. Now don't get me wrong, Accordance allows you a lot of flexibility and their concept of workspaces is pretty nice, if all you are really do is a Bible study, but you can do the same in Logos, and for me it is just a simpler to use interface. I included the company website as part of this because I cannot divorce the product from the company website, especially since both companies provide additional books/titles/products/support through that website. Right now If I search for "Martin Luther" on the Logos website, I get a very professional looking output with a very easy way to identify what are products from logos, and how much they cost. On the Accordance website it's generated visa vie a googles search and is pure text. Like so many things in Accordance the website ultimately does the same thing Logos does, only it requires a lot more manual work on my part to parse the information.

 

Point 2 is the choice of additional titles. And here it's a no contest. If you happen to be someone who is of the Reformed faith within the Church, well Logos has material avaible that Accordance doesn't have, or once again Accordance's website has let it down. Go do a search on A. A. Hodge, R. L. Dabney, James Henley Thornwell, or any number of presbyterian Theologians. On the Accordance website absolutely zero shows up. On Logos, they are already there or on the way, in fact the Scholar's Edition includes Cornelius Van Til in it's package. 

FInally, the Mobile apps. I have access to my entire library through Logos apps for my iPhone and iPad (and yes I have both). Accordance is promising something in the future, but so far I don't have anything I could use.

If the libraries you need/want are available on both products, and the mobil aspect doesn't appeal then ultimately I do believe it is very much a "nikon versus canon" type of  argument, as both a very useful powerful tools. However for me, the mobile apps and the extensive library of reformed theologians makes it a no brainer now that Logos has a mac native product.

 

-Mark

 

http://livinginlaodicea.wordpress.com/

 

Posts 8369
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 6:25 PM

Jeremy:
A few months ago I ran across a blog of someone who was testing Accordance, Bible Works, and Logos at some sort of conference.

I see that no one has responded to your question, so I did a bit of searching and found this blog http://thislamp.com/?p=230 . If this what you were looking for?

Posts 640
Jeremy | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 7:34 PM

Jack Caviness:

Jeremy:
A few months ago I ran across a blog of someone who was testing Accordance, Bible Works, and Logos at some sort of conference.

I see that no one has responded to your question, so I did a bit of searching and found this blog http://thislamp.com/?p=230 . If this what you were looking for?

 

Yep that was it. Can anyone here actually do what the blog asked? Could Logos 4 even run that type of search in November of 2009?

Posts 11
Donald E. Stidwell | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 8:13 PM

I also own the latest versions of both packages. I actually started with Accordance 7 back when I first switched to the Mac back on 2005. (Actually I started with QuickVerse and was totally unsatisfied with it, but didn't want to spend the money on Accordance, but realised the I really disliked QuickVerse and Accordance was the only other real option when I switched). I felt that Accordance was a powerful program, but not particularly user friendly for non-scholar, non-seminary, non-pastor types. I am just an "ordinary" church member who wants to study the Bible in either English or Spanish (I actually work in a Spanish ministry). Over the course of time, I learned to appreciate the flexibility of Accordance and especially its speed (which is still second to none, especially with V9). But still I always felt I was someone out of my depth with the program and that too much of the program was really designed for scholars and not ordinary lay folk who just want to study the Bible.

When I bought my netbook to supplement my Macs, I wanted a good Bible study program to use on Windows 7 and since Accordance isn't available on Windows, I did some research and went with Logos. At the time I bought Logos, it was on sale for 20% off which made it irresistible! I bought the Bible Study package and I was stunned by the ease of use and flexibility of Logos 4. (Although, on a netbook, it's hardly fast. It's useable, but no one in his right mind is going to use Logos 4 exclusively on a netbook even with 2 gigs of RAM).  For a non-scholar, the passage guide is fantastic and Accordance doesn't really have anything to match it. I actually was reluctant to admit that I really liked Logos 4 better than Accordance, but the truth is I find that Logos 4 really is more appropriate for the type of Bible study that I do. Add to that the number of titles you get with Logos 4 and the ability to buy e-books as well and Logos 4 is a clear winner to me. Accordance may be perfect for scholars, but for Joe Layman I think Logos 4 is more apt.

However, I have to say that I'm totally unimpressed with the iPhone app. For one thing, the Bible that I actually use the most in Spanish isn't available for the iPhone app (The Reina-Valera 1960). Also, I find the app to be a bit unpolished and as far as I can tell, there's no way to use a split screen to see, for example, a Bible and commentary, that scroll together. So for my mobile Bible study I actually use Laridian's Pocket Bible which I think is the BEST of mobile Bible study applications. (I've been using Pocket Bible for years on the Palm, Windows Mobile and now iPhone and I have a LOT of resources for it). I also use Olive Tree's Bible Reader for my RVR60 since Laridian doesn't have it available.

But back to Accordance and Logos 4: I started using Logos 4 on the Mac back during the early Alphas (while simultaneously using it on Windows on either my netbook or in Boot Camp on my Macs), and while the early Alphas were too unstable to be useful, by the mid-betas I found it perfectly stable enough to use on my Macs as my primary Bible study tool. 

For now, I intend to keep both on my Mac. I have some resources in Accordance that I don't have in Logos and vice-versa. But 90% of the time, I use Logos because I just find it fits my needs better with the number of resources and the Passage Guide which I just love!

 

Posts 13039
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Oct 2 2010 9:56 PM

Jeremy:

Jack Caviness:

Jeremy:
A few months ago I ran across a blog of someone who was testing Accordance, Bible Works, and Logos at some sort of conference.

I see that no one has responded to your question, so I did a bit of searching and found this blog http://thislamp.com/?p=230 . If this what you were looking for?

Yep that was it. Can anyone here actually do what the blog asked? Could Logos 4 even run that type of search in November of 2009?

Living and learning - blog comments included Accordance handout - tried to replicate 1st Bible shootout challenge item using same Hebrew word - opened Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear - hovered over word to show parsing - double clicked for Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon - right click Bible Word Study:

For 2nd challenge, Accordance presentation started with different greek word.  Personally curious - stayed with initial Hebrew word - Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear did not have corresponding LXX greek word, so looked in Library for LXX resources - found "The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture" - right clicking on parallel did nothing - back to library for another LXX resource - opened "Septuagint with Logos Morphology" - used parallel aligned resource to choose Greek word - right click Bible Word Study (BWS) - clicking on Hebrew lemma (initial word) in BWS  showed 11 occurrences of LXX translation with verses in English.  Back to "Septuagint with Logos Morphology" - clicked interlinear display to show Greek and Hebrew on bottom of panel - right click on Greek word has many options - also noticed Greek and Hebrew parsing on bottom of screen.

Adjusted panel sizes some - then screen shot on 27" iMac - full size image is 2,473 pixels wide by 1,440 pixels tall.

Looking at Accordance handout, recognized Logos 4 Bible Word Study lacks ability to filter/group by grammatical usage.

From forum postings, suspect some MVP's could answer about Logos 4 search capabilities on PC in November 2009.

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 8369
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Oct 3 2010 3:15 AM

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :):
Living and learning

Thank you for the superb analysis.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :):
rom forum postings, suspect some MVP's could answer about Logos 4 search capabilities on PC in November 2009.

I did not attempt such an operation in November 2009. The most important consideration is the current capabilities of the two applications. I regularly use—and really like—both. At present, I use Logos more than Accordance, but that may be due to involvement in the various Alpha/Beta releases on both Windows and Mac.

The ideal situation is to own both, but if that is financially prohibitive, investigate. Test both in your real world environment under your preferred Bible Study method. Demo versions and low cost introductory packages are available. Different people will come to different conclusions.

Some customers of both Logos and Accordance are passionate about their choice and fiercely loyal to their chosen application. It is almost as bad as the Windows/Mac debates. Hey! They're tools, not objects of worship. Geeked

Page 2 of 3 (59 items) < Previous 1 2 3 Next > | RSS