outdated resources

Why are most of the resources that come with the base packages so dated? I get that sometimes we need to do some research on the church fathers and take a gander at what some commentator had to say more than 200 years ago. However, that is not the norm. We want to know what our contemporaries have to say. More to the point, the professors in my college courses require more recent resources to be used (most prefer to have resources within the last 10 years). Not only is the thought process different now than it was 200 years ago, but scholars now have more technology, resources, and "original (if there was such a thing)" manuscripts to work with. Therefore, newer resources are more desirable. All that being said, there are VERY few newer resources in the base packages. There is the EEC, of course, which is a great resource (too bad there are only 10 volumes currently) but, as a general rule, the majority of what you are paying for are extremely outdated resources. All that just to ask 2 questions. 1.) Why is it that the base packages focus on much older materials? 2) Why doesn't the comparison tool show the original publication dates of the materials to aid people in making a more informed decision? Thank you.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mark Barnes

Why is it that the base packages focus on much older materials?

I don't actually think that's the case. If anything there are fewer older materials than in L6 (although if you already have a good L6 package, and don't like older stuff you might only be seeing the older stuff because it's what you don't own).

But having a decent amount of public domain stuff keeps the price down, obviously. We're getting 90% discounts on resources in a base package, but publishers generally aren't willing to give 90% discounts on their newest and best-selling products. Realistically, if you removed the less valuable stuff, you wouldn't make the package much cheaper, if at all. Think of it as an almost-free bonus [:)].

2) Why doesn't the comparison tool show the original publication dates of the materials to aid people in making a more informed decision?

Partly because there are dozens of ways of assessing value, and age of publication is only one of those (and a not very good one at that). Whilst your professors may insist on recent resources for secondary sources, they won't be doing that for primary sources, and they'll quickly complain if you cite recent books that are badly written and researched, or aren't academic at all. I agree that generally newer resources are more desirable, but old=bad and new=good is far too simplistic.

mike

I feel you..

I dislike classic commentary series as well. They're like unwanted-stuffing, in which I would probably never have time to read them; so its very hard to like them, except for a handful people. But Logos make thousands of money by fluffing the packages with these classic commentaries because they are public domain.

I have a feeling they'll continue to do so, just look at how many they are..

edit: well, Mark is right, they are like freebies in light of how expensive the other resources are.

Dwayne Justice

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/842381#Comment_842381

2) Why doesn't the comparison tool show the original publication dates of the materials to aid people in making a more informed decision?

Thanks for the response Mark. While I may have been using the term "resources" loosely, my main focus in this regard are commentaries which are primary sources as far as my professors are concerned. I have actually been marked down in grades because of the resources I used from my logos library with the reasoning "use newer commentaries." I even got that comment on one commentary from like 1985 or something like that. I do agree with your main point, though, that just because it is newer doesn't mean it is better.

Ben Amundgaard (Faithlife)

Hi Dwayne,

Thanks for your questions and observations, they are very helpful. We are always trying to improve our libraries and knowing what customers find useful is incredibly valuable.

In case you find it helpful, I have a few reflections on your questions that might offer some context (or at the very least my perspective [:)]).

1.) Why is it that the base packages focus on much older materials?

There are a few answers to this question. However, I'd like to preface it by saying that we really tried to make these the most up-to-date libraries we've released (we may or may not have succeeded in your estimation, but know that it wasn't our intent to create libraries focused on old resources). While they include older resources, I wouldn't say the focus is there. To use Gold as an example, it contains many contemporary commentary sets and reference works (some we've never included in base packages):

Bible Speaks Today
Pillar
ACCS
Tyndale Commentaries (included at the Silver level)
New Daily Study Bible (included at the Bronze level)
NIGTC
EDNT (included at the Silver level)
Anchor-Yale Bible Dictionary

Purchasing these books on their own would cost much more than the price of Gold.

If you jump from Gold to Platinum (at an upgrade price of ~$500 depending on your dynamic price), you get:

Hermeneia and Continental Commentary Set (a $1,700 purchase on its own)
BDAG
Dictionary of Classical Hebrew
TDNT
TLOT
TLNT

These libraries also include some of the most up-to-date translations of the Church Fathers on the market.

All that to say, we've tried to include as many contemporary resources as we can while keeping the base packages at their existing price points.

That said, to answer your specific question I have a few thoughts:

While there are increasingly newer critical editions of certain works (e.g. Jonathan Edwards, which is in the Reformed packages), many older resources are standard works for certain traditions and have no 'modern' equivalent. This is especially true for denominations that have predominantly been English speaking since their inception (e.g. Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists).
A lot of customers value older resources, for them, leaving them out would make the libraries less attractive.
Including older resources to balance the newer resources does keep the price down while offering a good selection of resources.

2) Why doesn't the comparison tool show the original publication dates of the materials to aid people in making a more informed decision?

It's really hard to know what to put on comparison charts. Some people want a lot of detail, others are overwhelmed by all the detail and just want an overview. We've tried to strike a balance and are always making small changes to make the charts more useful. This is a good suggestion and one we'll keep in mind as we move forward.

All that said, thank you thank you thank you for your feedback. We are blessed to have customers that feel so passionately about our product that they take the time to dialogue with us about it. [:)]

Dwayne Justice

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/842582#Comment_842582

Hi Dwayne,

Thanks for your questions and observations, they are very helpful. We are always trying to improve our libraries and knowing what customers find useful is incredibly valuable.

In case you find it helpful, I have a few reflections on your questions that might offer some context (or at the very least my perspective ).

1.) Why is it that the base packages focus on much older materials?

Bible Speaks Today
Pillar
ACCS
Tyndale Commentaries (included at the Silver level)
New Daily Study Bible (included at the Bronze level)
NIGTC
EDNT (included at the Silver level)
Anchor-Yale Bible Dictionary

Purchasing these books on their own would cost much more than the price of Gold.

If you jump from Gold to Platinum (at an upgrade price of ~$500 depending on your dynamic price), you get:

Hermeneia and Continental Commentary Set (a $1,700 purchase on its own)
BDAG
Dictionary of Classical Hebrew
TDNT
TLOT
TLNT

These libraries also include some of the most up-to-date translations of the Church Fathers on the market.

All that to say, we've tried to include as many contemporary resources as we can while keeping the base packages at their existing price points.

That said, to answer your specific question I have a few thoughts:

While there are increasingly newer critical editions of certain works (e.g. Jonathan Edwards, which is in the Reformed packages), many older resources are standard works for certain traditions and have no 'modern' equivalent. This is especially true for denominations that have predominantly been English speaking since their inception (e.g. Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists).
A lot of customers value older resources, for them, leaving them out would make the libraries less attractive.
Including older resources to balance the newer resources does keep the price down while offering a good selection of resources.

2) Why doesn't the comparison tool show the original publication dates of the materials to aid people in making a more informed decision?

First, I apologize for the "picture" I had to paste below. For some reason, when I am on this particular computer (at work-yes, I should be working at work, but I am doing this instead) I am unable to copy and paste from word into this forum or BlackBoard. I don't know why. That is just the way it is. Anyway, please bear with me here:

Dwayne Justice

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/842944#Comment_842944

OOPS! I just realized that I said FFFTW instead of FLFTW. I have no idea what FFFTW is supposed to mean! LOL! Anyway, FLFTW (FaithLife For the Win!)

Andrew116

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/842945#Comment_842945

I think needing such new sources is pretty niche. For most users quality and usefulness is not a function of recent publication

There aren't even that many good quality commentaries or monographs written on a topic in a 10 year window.

Maybe what you really want is journals?

But to always be on the cutting edge of research would get pretty expensive. Maybe a good relationship with a theological library is what you really want...