Bible Software Consolidation -- Who's Next?

I have a form of Logos since seminary which amounts to something like 25 years.   Experiences with this software has led me to detest its advertising, complications of use, high expense, and generally annoying habits of automating the simplest things that I can do myself.  As a result of my relationship with Faithlife over the years I have used all possible bible based programs that were alternatives to this beast.  So now Wordsearch has been bought and an absolute monopoly for many, if not all, aspects of the bible related software market has been concentrated into this company (in windows)...with the result of discontinuation of the Wordsearch platform.  So now I hesitate to spend anymore money on Logos in anticipation of it being sold to the highest bidder and waste of more of my money.

While I would love for Olive Tree or Accordance to be acquired by Logos, solely to get the resources I have there to finally be available in Logos, at the same time I recognize that less competition is never a good thing for customers [:S]

PL said:

Who do you is the next one to fall? OliveTree? Accordance?

It looks like Faithlife / Logos might be the last one standing...

I can assure you Accordance is doing just fine. We’re not going to “fall,” and we’re not going anywhere. 

There’s room for more than one major Bible software company. It’s not a zero sum game. This isn’t Highlander. There can be more than one. 

Bob Pritchett said:

PL said:

It looks like Faithlife / Logos might be the last one standing...

When we started there were lots of DOS programs, and soon many Windows ones... QuickVerse, Ask God, BibleWindows, GRAMCORD, Wordsearch, CDWordLibrary, Online Bible, PC Study Bible, etc.

Today many of those are gone, but there are even more mobile apps, web sites, etc. 

I think of our space as incredibly competitive -- while QuickVerse and BibleWorks and PC Study Bible have faded as competitors, YouVersion, BibleHub, and others have come on strong, and new mobile apps and web sites seem to spring up every month.

People haven't stopped studying the Bible, and they haven't stopped building new tools to help! :-)

Ah yes. I remember in 2007 looking through all the Bible software in an overstock store. I decided to pick up Libronix because it was the only one with the NAB as an option. The rest was history.

I had several programs running at one point. Accordance, Pradis, eSword, Wordsearch, Logos and Online Bible. When Logos 4 was still in beta on the Mac, I realized that this was nuts. As soon as Logos 4 came out, so did the pruning shears. I acquired BibleWorks which is still cool for searching, but Logos is where you will find me most all of the time. I don't miss any of the others.

Logos runs on everything and is truly the library king. I am so grateful because I could never do what I do without it.[8-|]

Mark Smith said:

It seems Logos is a mature product right now. I am not sure what new features they can continue to come up with over time that will truly enhance Bible study.

I have made some request. If the developers have a boring time I would love to see my request come alive.

Donovan R. Palmer said:

And I hope they are never merged into one.

And I'm thinking Bible platforms, like other software, encourage (demand) a way of thinking. I was late to the BW party, but I keep it open for quick use. It seems to 'flash' the related OL info faster than you can think you want it. Logos is largely a make-a-list proposition, with little interest in the centuries that separate list items. Accordance is somewhere in the middle.

Fabian said:

"We need Bibles in more foreign languages". 

Amharic, Geez, Tigrinya etc..

Donovan R. Palmer said:

There are times that I want everything to fall away and for the Biblical text come to the front and drive my studies... this is where the Accordance designers get into my headspace.

Would you mind explaining this to me (maybe others can pitch in too).  When I use Logos I study the text.  I type a text and get results for the text I'm using.  I focus mainly on pericopes, outlining the text, defining words, checking background material and different commentaries.  Most stuff you do when studying a passage.  Getting the exegetical outline then convert it to a homiletical outline, etc.

I go to Accordance and I seem to be doing the same.  But...I keep hearing people say Accordance focuses on the text and Logos "doesn't."  I'm not sure what you and others mean.  

Thanks!

DAL

I do not know who is next, but I really hope that I maintain the features I like best about the different software packages out there. If you count Word Search, I own 6 different bible study software tools. Logos is my primary go to, and the others, I go to for what is different. There are ones that do maps and graphics much better than logos, and one that generates a great word cloud on book or verse range, and one that has a resource that is not available in any of the other software libraries; anther one is much better as a mobile app than the others.  I spend 95% of my time in Logos, but use the other ones as needed to enhance what I am doing through Logos. That is just what I use on my desktop and laptop. In Church, I use a seventh one to follow along with the sermons and take notes on the fly. Thanks, Carla

David Thomas said:

I believe the "Bible text to come to the front" is an intentional focus on primary literature

I can't speak for Donovan, but for guys, the difference is similar to tools ... some are designed to do just one task; others allow customizing. When you grab the designed-for, you concentrate on the job. When you grab the customizable, you dink around first, and then the job.  Guys that show up at our house almost uniformly have the designed-for ... grab and go. 

In Bible study, it's similar. I'd argue that most Christians are grab and go. A Bible, some text notes, maps, and maybe some background. Done. The Logos market is hugely customizable (but still limited to early 1900s studying). Accordance started out more grab and go, but is slowly adding this and that. BW is most definitely grab and go. Pedal to the metal and don't look back.

The presumption text vs OL is from the late 1800s and early 1900s. For example, my software is grab and go, but not exegesis. Analytics. You have whichever text you want, in whatever language. The text is highly marked-up, along with over-laying diagrams. On the other side, you have visualizations for aging, style, phrase-matching, theology-structuring, sequenced notes and so forth. Like BW, it answers questions quickly.

Fabian said:

danwdoo said:

I too would have loved to see Olive Tree join with Logos if nothing else because they offered a range of foreign language bibles I can't get in Logos.

I see this problem in nearly all Bible softwares. They could easily get more customers if they would realize "We need Bibles in more foreign languages". 

Why should I buy a Bible software if they don't support a Bible in may language? Second: Or if the import of a public domain Bible in my language is nearly unsuccessful, because the import options are not good enough. (This points to my post above.)

In a sense when it comes to resources Logos is a reactive product.

A book is produced, there is a lot of demand, logos takes the book, and adds in their extra value, and then produces it a half year or more later.

Logos could easily be a proactive product where they read the market, or better read the need for certain resources... Bible translations in 10/40 window countries for instance, and put those out in partnership with the translators making that happen. A partnership with Wycliff or Pioneer would make a lot of sense in that regard.

Other missionaries could then reap the harvest of such work the next time they have an internet connection.

I know someone who wrote a whole bible commentary in the language of an indian tribe in south america as a personal book. They were printing them, putting them in 3 ring binders and distributing them among the natives. While at the same time, the missionaries imported the .doc into logos, and had the commentary to facilitate their own work with the tribe.

A fully functional logos version of these translations make sense. I bet they could make a faithlife group, and distribute the licenses that way, and be ahead of the curve, and be partnered together on the front lines with those doing the work.

Maybe they already are. Who knows!:)

Dale E Heath said:

And there's the retail biggies Rose Publishing / Christianbook

https://www.christianbook.com/?navcat=toplogo

https://www.hendricksonrose.com/page/wl/hr/hr-about

WOW, I hadn't heard of this one! I didn't see an announcement but the Rose website logged in with my CBD credentials and contained all my info and orders. Color me shocked [:P]

R. Mansfield said:

I can assure you Accordance is doing just fine. We’re not going to “fall,” and we’re not going anywhere. 

There’s room for more than one major Bible software company. It’s not a zero sum game. This isn’t Highlander. There can be more than one. 

In many cases there NEEDS to be both. I used Accordance for a number of years, and then added Logos. While I don't use Accordance nearly as much anymore, I can imagine that many scholars would find BOTH programs useful. 

I still wish somehow that FL could fund BW and get them to run native on Mac. I never got deep into it, but I like it's lean strip-down search Bible interface. There's something to be said for putting first things first. I run lots of exegetical guides on verses because if aren't looking at text you often miss the main attraction.