a question from an Accordance User

I agree to a point that need revenue to keep things updated and improving. However, it seemed to me that Logos was mainly focus on getting the revenue from book sales and biannual program updates. I thought that was a nice way to do it.

Logos could still continue to offer the 2-year fallback license, and I hope they do, but not just to us Logos 10 FFS owners. I still see the value of having offline features and I hope many others do as well. A proper balance to somewhat satisfy everyone can be found and I hope will be.

I still own (and love) Accordance and hope it moves to a new place of strength. I respectfully withdrew from the forum when I felt the new owner did not share my values in how the community was being facilitated. I have no issue with the Nathan and would not rule out rejoining again in the future. It’s not a grudge thing or even a protest, but rather where I decide to contribute my time. To be fair, I have had a few moments in this community and even wrote Bob, who was very gracious in hearing me out and sharing his point of view. I really respected that.

It’s all good…Accordance as software, Nathan as admin… and there are a number of us dual platform users because we are certified nuts when it comes to Bible study! 🤪

@DMB I never saw the packages that way before, but that is a brilliant observation! 💥

@Steven MacDonald I think that is a fair statement. What I think gave Accordance the cutting edge lead was people like Roy Brown who was a Biblical scholar himself. I would watch him on webinars and always learn things because his passion for original languages was reflected in the design of the software and resources. I credit Accordance, more than Logos for my own journey in original languages because of that.

This has been my question at Logos, but it also applies to Accordance. Where are the scholars who are influencing the direction of the development roadmap? The webinars I recieve in my email from Logos are for note taking, Inductive Bible Study, etc. This is all good for the wide customer base of Logos. But there seems to be a paucity of engagement on Original Languages. It could be argued to go elsewhere for this, but wouldn’t it be better for some of it to come from the platform we are using because it is hard baked into the design of what they are trying to equip us to do?

OK. I wax on. I know this is only one POV. Yet, if you look at the death of Bibleworks and the rise of lots of other freeish options, there is a clear place to motor forward on Original Langiages. I hope Logos and Accordance make space in their strategy for this while reaching for other markets. 💁🏻‍♂️

Just my thinking but 'original languages' is a wide space. Everything from 'received' usage (mainly Accordance/Bibleworks) to broader metrics (semantics, cognate resources, interpretive use, etc) … Logos mainly.

Although I use Accordance, Logos has more OL resources for a wider view. Granted the Targums in Logos only recently other than CAL, and badly dribbling out on Syriac.

I think the space is ripe for someone to do really cool things with the text comparison tool. The Logos tool is very long in the tooth, and even yesterday someone posted a feedback idea on incorporating AI into it.

I also think there is room to look at a tool dedicated to LXX - Hebrew and Greek studies. I started to play with this concept earlier this year, but ran out of steam. Maybe in 2025. 🫤

I'm probably wasting Kristin's thread, though I feel like the subject is appropriate.

Accordance now has several sales (as does Logos). But strolling thru the Accordance store, there stood the Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language. I assume it's recent (wants 14, which I'm still on 13). Should I throw in the towel and get it. The issue is Faithlife commitment to OL (!). EHL has been on Logos prepub, highprice, reduced price, doubled price, and years going on years. No communication, no nothing. Then I notice Tov's Hebrew (Logos lost theirs). And the Masora Thesaurus (not too distant from a CitedBy in Logos).

I'm sorely tempted; take my chances. The basic question is where's Logos going? Obviously I'd prefer Logos.

On my Mac I have both installed 13 and 14. It opens in 13 with no problem.

Probably was back when I was CEO of Mallard Computer. Feels like a lifetime ago!

It's true I've been a Bible tech user for a long time (my only regret is I didn't start sooner!). In seminary, my professors' use of tools were divided among three major apps (some used one, others used another, and some used another), so I amassed large libraries across them all during seminary (although Wordsearch has merged). I do consider myself a bibliomaniac and a "tape worm" of bookworms. :-) When it comes to Bible study materials, I feel richer than Elon Musk.

Thank you, Fabian. Maybe I can read it before Accordance might disappear!

To purchase there helps them. Also to purchase V. 14.

I have 13 installed of issues in 14 with TLG file import and some other user import stuff. For all other tasks I use 14.

@DMB if you're referring to The Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (4 vols), it's currently in production for Logos and will be available soon (I don't have an exact release date yet).

I can assure you that Logos is committed to original language studies, and there are individuals on our staff who are well steeped in them. At the recent ETS & SBL conferences in San Diego, I met with a number of publishers, including Brill who publishes the Hebrew resource above, and we will continue to be adding new original language content to the platform. Moreover, this is a growing area as we continue to partner with an increasing number of schools and seminaries.

I agree and Nathan has handled it well…. Sadly it appears a form of Tribalism exists in the Bible Software universe - some can't understand being able to be in both camps, as maybe they both have value in the long run…. Some can't handle anything other than positive remarks about the Tribal Chief they support….

Rick, bless your heart! I was hoping at some point, you or staff would chime in. Even this morning on my walk, I was thinking, well, ok, Accordance, sigh. And I'm sure this Accordance-thread folks will be happy to read your answer (expertise and future development/resources). Whoo hoo!!!

Thanks Rick. That is fantastic news and I can’t wait for these new original language resources to be released! Very exciting! 😁👍

I was going to post a new thread about how OL seems dead on Logos. It doesn't get much love on sales; features are dead on the platform (discourse tools not upgrades for ages, while BibleArc and others appear and grow, just for one example); and resources are low. For someone who viewed Logos as the 'future' of OL studies, I'm terribly disappointed.

But I hope this is really good news and some hope. Features, on the other hand, seem to be lost. Everything is now for 'preachers' and research (with all the power and capabilities of Logos) seems dead as feature updates, which is a waste of capabilities. But new direction ($$$) seems fixated on 'preachers' and 'power-user preachers' seem to be calling the shots. Used to have more academics developing things and writing for Logos. Now it seems like a thing of the past. Hope I'm wrong.

At least more resources…

And let's not forget Tablet and Phone app. Dead as dead can be in development and features, even after the promise of subscription and quicker development etc.

Didn't the subscriptions just start within the last couple months? Seems a little unreasonable to expect major new features already.

I am excited about the possibility of better original language tools. As a preacher, I spend a lot of time in the original languages. I think that will benefit vastly more users than just those focused on academic work.

@Rick Mansfield (Logos) is a rock star. 🌠

Don't agree with that, brother. Main reason is exactly forums and news. It's all about 'preacher tools'. There is usually (or used to be) a lot of discussion and the exchange of opinions for new features, which is good and was always a positive mark for Logos. For a long time, nothing on the OL front. So, it's reasonable to think that there are no updates (big or small) in the near feature. Or at least the OL team is not as 'talkative' or sharing ideas as others.

The thing about subscription is exactly the promise of faster developments. Can't see it coming for research tools if there's no discussion. And also Tablet improvements etc. So, as far as it's possible to know, subscriptions are improving certain areas faster, but others are dead.

And let's not forget the CEO's 'vision' about a tool for preachers and all the talk. It seems naive to think it's not a 'new company vision' that is driving all focus to some tools, features and resources.

Again, I hope I'm wrong and welcome comments. But all the usual clues about OL development are not there, and the others are. So…

God bless.

Do the devs make a habit of publicly discussing unreleased features on the forums? Honestly, I hope that's not how the process works, but I haven't been around long enough to know for sure.

Yes, and below is just one example. I actually like that they get feedback. My only problem is the sole focus on preaching tools these days.

@Mateus de Castro wrote:

I was going to post a new thread about how OL seems dead on Logos. It doesn't get much love on sales; features are dead on the platform (discourse tools not upgrades for ages, while BibleArc and others appear and grow, just for one example); and resources are low. For someone who viewed Logos as the 'future' of OL studies, I'm terribly disappointed.

I share this concern, at least to the point that there has been little in recent years to make one think that OL is part of the future roadmap.

But if Rick M. says he is out working the publisher network, I am confident we will see some movement on more recent resources. 😎

There is also a thread giving a preview on a 'Smart Search' for the Bible.

I totally get the AI focus. Makes a lot of sense… so, just waiting for OL's turn in this new era! 😏

Yes. Especially when there's a promise in there about 'regular feature upgrades' or some-such. And only some areas are getting those.

Still hoping to see more offline features as well.

You touched on an important topic. Why is Logos assuming you are either a "preacher", or an "academic" ie: one who studies the original languages? Many are both and I dare say that is the ideal for those who can.

This would make sense, well only if they care to give the LFL customers a reason to want to go past two years

That's what bothers me. It seems too focused now. I love most of those features, but I could use other kinds as well. Just not holding my breath.

Does, this mean that we may be seeing a new Logos OL library or basepackage in the future?

I agree with you 100% that Logos seem to assume that it's users or Preachers and academics but I am not so confidence that Logos assumes people are doing original language studies. Notice, Logos no longer sells an OL library or basepackage.

Obviously just guessing, but I doubt an OL package. They probably view the greek/hebrew libraries as 'enough'. And more guessing, I'd suspect it has more to do with the marketplace (colleges/seminaries) instead of Logos per se … Accordance is sort of the canary in the mineshaft. But if more OL resources are in the future, that'd be fine (I hope we're talking more than grammars etc). Akkadian comes to mind very quickly (cognate to hebrew resources). Also Accordance has some nice ones, not in Logos.

@BKMitchell, if you're asking me, I don't know as I'm not a part of planning such. But "in the future" is pretty wide open.

I would say, though, don't forget our Library Expansion bundles. If I can put on my user hat for a second, I find these at least as valuable as base packages—and maybe more so as they are more focused. If an original language base package were to be offered, it would have a little bit of everything, some of which you may not be interested in. The expansion bundles focus on particular areas. In regard to original languages, I would point to the expansions for Ancient Texts and Translations, Greek Studies, and Hebrew Studies. And don't forget the Textual Variants Feature Expansion. There is a lot of good original language content in these bundles.

This is a really good one to keep in mind, as well:

Essential Hebrew and Greek Texts (6 vols.)

can you give me an idea how that text might look like. I've done hundreds of PBs, so maybe I can find a way for this to work for you. Tho, not on Mac. If I remember well, Logos doesn't support PBs on Mac. Or did that change recently.

What, greek/hebrew libraries are you referring to? When I look at the following page: https://www.logos.com/compare/libraries2025 I do not see any mention of the greek/Hebrew libraries you speak of? I see Leader, Preacher, Researcher, Standard, and Verbum. I see the legacy libraries which included a number of denominational libraries and the standard libraries of past years but no mention of the Greek/Hebrew libraries that you think they might view as 'enough'?

Thank you for your response, well I am wondering what Logos Library can I recommend to those interested in OL who do not have a logos library and who want to focus on Hebrew/Greek and who do not need or want commentaries, preaching resources, and theology? In the past Logos had an OL library and the SESB as a wonderful entry into Logos what is there now that replaces those points of entry?

https://www.logos.com/search?query=expansion%20library%20hebrew&sortBy=Relevance&limit=30&page=1&ownership=all&geographicAvailability=availableToMe&useFuzzySearch=false&viewMode=list

Thanks for the quick reply! I see so you were refering to the expansion libraries? I was hoping that there would be something in the 2025 library line up …

The 2025 "Researcher" Libraries are Logos' attempt at doing just this. As Rick mentioned, base libraries have to include a little bit of everything. When the Researcher libraries were first mentioned on the forums, they were discussed as packages designed to appeal to the OL crowd. Perhaps it just isn't possible to offer the ideal OL Library at the 90% off pricing that is standard for base packages. I believe the Researcher Libraries represent their best attempt at doing this, for better or worse.

@BKMitchell as Aaron says above, the Researcher libraries are where you would want to start. Then you could add appropriate bundles to it that are more specific.

That's because all the boys were being gentlemen and let the girls go first and then the only crayons left were the 8 crayons in a box. LOL

Back when I was in seminary, there was a "German Bible Society" bundle or "GBS" bundle (forgot how it was worded exactly) that I was told was the closest replacement of SESB. It didn't have everything SESB had, but it still had much of what SESB had and had the majority of GBS' biblical language stuff. SESB was discontinued before I had a chance to grab it, but I think I grabbed that replacement bundle way back when. I think a similar situation happened with IVP Essentials. It was replaced with another IVP bundle. Thankfully I didn't make the same mistake with missing out on IVP Essentials like I did with SESB.

Thanks, I have seen the Researcher Libraries but it would be nice if there were libraries that didn't come with a little bit of everything. This is also kind of my problem with the new logos subscriptions rather then just features subscription also come with libraries of books.

Anyway, thank Aaron Hamilton!

Thanks for the reply, but I think I would want something or I would want to recommend something much more focused than the Researcher Libraries are so starting the appropriate bundles makes more sense.

I had the SESB 3 and it was great! Now while Logos sells neithe the SESB nor the GBS bundle I think they still have the most of the resource from those libraries in the store. I think it would be nice if they had a new SESB Library.

I agree, OL is a mixed bag. Brian mentions https://www.logos.com/product/364098/essential-hebrew-and-greek-texts

But even that is a mixture of this and that. I thought pre-NewEra had a nice Essentials or similar.

This statement is the closest thing I have seen in a while that reverberates with my own thoughts.

I agree, but I've found the floating window workaround is pretty good. I have two floating windows open in addition to the main app. All three are full-screen. One floating window is my scripture reading setup; for my daily reading time in my print Bible, this window is up, with a pane with my top five Bibles on the left, a pane with my top study Bibles in the middle, and a pane with all my favorite commentaries on the right, all linked in a single link set. The other floating window is my book reading setup, with the books I'm reading on the right side, and all resources I want for book reading on the left side: a few Bibles, a Library window, and various tools. The main app window is for a ton of full-screen tabs of all sorts. This is all a single layout.

What have you found less than fully functional about floating windows? I would prefer three instances of the app to my setup, but I've found my setup works well.

Hi @Thomas Glen Leo ,

That is good to hear that the floating windows have worked well for you. To be honest, I can't quite picture what you are describing. Would you mind posting a screenshot?

As far as why I haven't found them fully functional, the primary issue is that they just aren't fully functional. Even Logos doesn't claim that a floating window has the functionality of a normal layout. That said, my independent "workspaces" (Logos "layouts") are all regarding different topics. I often need to minimize them (not close them…) and then create new workspaces from workspaces. My understanding is that you can't create full-fledged layouts from a floating window. Those are just a few of the issues off the top of my head.