Question re: ACCS

Thanks Logos for bringing back the ACCS!

However, I wonder about the claim "updated edition" on the product page http://www.logos.com/product/31152/ancient-christian-commentary-on-scripture-complete-set-updated-edition and that it doesn't grey out the buy button for me.

The page says it's the 29-volumes edition from 2010. What makes it 2010 is the volume on the apocrypha. However, my boxed version from IVP Academic is the 29-volumes edition from 2010 as well.

I'd expect this to grey out for me and others who own the full set - or am I missing something?

If so, it would be nice to be able to have an opportunity for a delta-upgrade - also for people who own a pre-2010, less than 29 volumes version, such as offering the last volume(s) separately or put this on automated dynamical pricing.

Mick

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rosie Perera

Good question. I'm wondering the same thing. It isn't greyed out for me either.

Will we get this update automatically if we already own the 29-volume edition?

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490114#Comment_490114

I bought this from Logos in October 2010 -- The Revised editions (Mark and Romans) either were included -- OR - perhaps they were updated since that time since I definitely have the two revised volumes I DO have the Apocrypha volume ..............Also, mine is NOT greyed out!

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490114#Comment_490114

Will we get this update automatically if we already own the 29-volume edition?

The resource IDs in this "Updated Edition" are different from those on the old ACCS CD-ROM, so these will not be a free update for previous owners. (This is also why the Buy button isn't greyed out.)

I don't know why the resource IDs are different, or what is the nature of the changes in the "Updated Edition".

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490195#Comment_490195

The copyrights (or publication dates at least) listed for the updated version volumes are all 2010 or earlier, so it seems unlikely this is anything other than a repackaged version of the edition that has been available since then.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490195#Comment_490195

so these will not be a free update for previous owners.

To clarify: what I meant to say is that they will not automatically download for existing owners of the old collection. (As you may recall, in certain cases, Logos has unlocked--for free--a new collection with new resource IDs for existing owners of an old collection. I don't know if this is a possibility in this situation or not.)

Kent Hendricks

This is a revised edition. The publisher has removed and replaced approximately 2% of the content.

Because we were removing content--even if only a little--this is technically considered a new, distinct resource. If we had kept it the same resource, the update would have removed the content you already own.

If you own the previous edition of the ACCS, you will still have the option to get the revised and updated edition for free. We'll be sending out instructions early next week.

Gordon Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490233#Comment_490233

If you own the previous edition of the ACCS, you will still have the option to get the revised and updated edition for free. We'll be sending out instructions early next week.

[Y][Y][Y][Y][Y][Y][Y][Y]

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490233#Comment_490233

The publisher has removed and replaced approximately 2% of the content.

What does this mean? Was there a rights problem with some of the translations? Or is this an editorial decision for some other reason? I am confused as to why something would be removed in a new edition.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490242#Comment_490242

The publisher has removed and replaced approximately 2% of the content.

What does this mean? Was there a rights problem with some of the translations? Or is this an editorial decision for some other reason? I confused as to why something would be removed in a new edition.

Warning! Snarky remark follows.

Maybe the modern scholars just discovered their scholarship from 2010 is now outdated and needs to be corrected. [6]

edit: That is kinda funny considering it is an "Ancient " commentary. But, then again, I have edited a post that is only one minute old. [:)]

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490242#Comment_490242

Kent did say 'removed and replaced.' Perhaps more accurate citations were found?

For whatever reason 2% isn't much and I am glad it doesn't seem IVP is asking us to re-buy the collection for that 'improvement.'

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490249#Comment_490249

Kent did say 'removed and replaced.' Perhaps more accurate citations were found?

It seems if the citations were just more accurate, then it wouldn't warrant a separate resource for the updated version. He specifically said that new resource exists so that existing owners don't lose access to content they already own.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490255#Comment_490255

Kent did say 'removed and replaced.' Perhaps more accurate citations were found?

It seems if the citations were just more accurate, then it wouldn't warrant a separate resource for the updated version. He specifically said that new resource exists so that existing owners don't lose access to content they already own.

This will be a pain though. Now we'll own two copies of the whole set, and won't have the slightest clue where the 2% content that was removed from the old one is, so we won't want to hide it necessarily, but what good will it be? I'd be inclined to just accept the new edition as a replacement for the old, or at least I would like to see a detailed change log from the publisher that explains what was removed and why.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490255#Comment_490255

It seems if the citations were just more accurate, then it wouldn't warrant a separate resource for the updated version.

By citations I didn't mean bibliographic type data, but that for a specific verse or phrase a better quote (citation) was found or that a possibly incorrect one was removed.

Of course, unless the publisher tells us more we'd only be guessing.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490263#Comment_490263

This will be a pain though. Now we'll own two copies of the whole set, and won't have the slightest clue where the 2% content that was removed from the old one is, so we won't want to hide it necessarily, but what good will it be? I'd be inclined to just accept the new edition as a replacement for the old, or at least I would like to see a detailed change log from the publisher that explains what was removed and why.

Good thought, Rosie, and I fully agree with you.

Martin Grainger Dean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490362#Comment_490362

So did anyone received the updated version of ACCS? Martin.

Gordon Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/492241#Comment_492241

I haven't heard anything from Logos yet, Martin.

Kent Hendricks

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/492645#Comment_492645

This unlock should be finished processing this coming Friday. If you haven't yet received communication about this, you should sometime tomorrow.

Travis Walter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/492648#Comment_492648

Anyone get any email yet? I own the boxed version also and have not seen anything on this.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/492861#Comment_492861

I got this today:

You are receiving this email because you own at least one resource in the Ancient Christian Commentary Series in Logos.

We are pleased to announce the release of a revised and updated digital-only edition of the ACCS. Approximately 3% of the content has been revised or updated. Some content has been removed and replaced.

Because you already own the previous edition of the ACCS, you will receive a free unlock of the revised edition. This unlock will be processed later this week. There is nothing you need to do to get the free update; it will happen automatically.

-Dan

Liam

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493003#Comment_493003

I just received this email as well. Does anyone know what the differences are yet? It seems from the email that there will not be a choice to keep the old version instead of the new. Knowing what will be being replaced would really be nice! Granted, 3% isn't a whole lot.

David Wilson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493004#Comment_493004

Not sure yet what the individual volume differences might be but we did get 32 resources total downloaded, the 29 volumes as initially identified, a "monograph" providing the Introduction and Bibliographic information PLUS the "original" volumes on Mark and Romans (as well as the revised ones).

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493783#Comment_493783

EDIT: I was talking about Matthew 1-13…. Not sure yet what the individual volume differences might be but we did get 32 resources total downloaded, the 29 volumes as initially identified, a "monograph" providing the Introduction and Bibliographic information PLUS the "original" volumes on Mark and Romans (as well as the revised ones).

I am sure there is more but looking side by side I notice significant formatting changes… Page i and page vi are good examples of the differences i have noticed so far, although i really do prefer the original formatting….

-Dan

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493797#Comment_493797

LOL

Errors Added:

Original

Appendix

Early Christian Writers and the
Documents Cited

New

Appendix

Early Christian Writers and theDocuments Cited

Gordon Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493800#Comment_493800

Heeheehee. The first resource has the incorrect title of "Introduction and Bibliographical Information" when it ought to be "Introduction and Biographical Information".

I know that I can right-click a word within book text to report it as a typo but I don't know how to report an erroneously titled resource. Anyone?

P.S. I appreciate the free update. Thank you IVP and thank you Logos.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493807#Comment_493807

Now the question is whether to hide one of the edition series, and if so which one?

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493809#Comment_493809

Thanks to IVP and Logos for the free upgrade. (Need I point out that this sort of thing doesn't happen with print editions?)

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493828#Comment_493828

Thanks to IVP and Logos for the free upgrade. (Need I point out that this sort of thing doesn't happen with print editions?)

Oh to be sure I am most grateful for the free upgrade, just not 100% sure why this is an upgrade and not an update, also it;s just cute that there are a number of little errors. These things happen when editing, the one i mentioned was obvious a space being deleted. Next one looks like a spell checker decided the word was wrong or something like that…. On my computer anyway the original looks much more polished, more variance in titles, lines, even the bold is darker than this new one (guessing different font). I am guessing there are corrections and perhaps more but as of yet i haven't discovered it.

-Dan

Martin Grainger Dean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493850#Comment_493850

What is the new filename of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy volume (logos4)? I can't pinpoint it in my resources folder. Thanks.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493880#Comment_493880

What is the new filename of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy volume (logos4)?

ACCSREVOT03.logos4

Liam

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493885#Comment_493885

From what I can tell the difference is that each new volume contains these new indexes that were not included in the old version:

Author/Writings Index

Subject Index

Scripture Index

They actually look extremely helpful! I can't find any other differences between them. Has anyone found any of the material that was removed?

I did find that I have two of the new revised volumes on Romans. So in total I have 3 volumes on Romans (old, new, and another new). Does anyone have this as well?

Martin Grainger Dean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493896#Comment_493896

Thank you, Mark. Remains a mistery what has been changed. Maybe by the time we'll observe the changes. Martin.

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493900#Comment_493900

I have the old set but have not received an email yet. In fact, I have pointed out months ago that I am not getting emails from Logos despite my profile indicating that I am supposed to be getting emails.

Even when checking at the bottom (email me replies to this post), I never get emails.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493896#Comment_493896

Author/Writings Index

Subject Index

Scripture Index

That was my first thought, but comparing one to the original (Matthew 1-13) they both seem to have identical indexes. and scrolling through comparing quickly am noticing no differences there.

-Dan

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493909#Comment_493909

I have the old set but have not received an email yet. In fact, I have pointed out months ago that I am not getting emails from Logos despite my profile indicating that I am supposed to be getting emails.

Even when checking at the bottom (email me replies to this post), I never get emails.

Not sure what is wrong there… but I would suggest you calling customer service, also double check your filtering on your email account, perhaps Logos emails are being put into a spam folder or rejected at the server level as spam.

-Dan

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493896#Comment_493896

I did find that I have two of the new revised volumes on Romans. So in total I have 3 volumes on Romans (old, new, and another new). Does anyone have this as well?

I have four Romans… even the original mark/romans which had revised volumes have had updated releases.

-Dan

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493930#Comment_493930

Peace! The "old" ones all had "community tags."

The "new" ones do not! Will that "metadata" eventually appear in my library?

In other words, "How do "community tags" happen?" Will they be happening here?

*smile*

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493959#Comment_493959

Hi Milford

In other words, "How do "community tags" happen?"

Community tags happen when other users tag the resources (I forget if whether a certain number of people need to tag it for it to become shared) So it may simply be that noone has tagged these new resources yet

Graham

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493965#Comment_493965

Thanks, Graham! *smile* Blessings!

It will be "fun" to watch these resources "populate" their metadata, then, eh???

Maybe I should do a little metadata populating of my own? Sometimes I wonder what is our "responsibility" to the community ...

then I need to ask, which "community" in the Beautiful Body of Christ! *smile* Lots to ponder and praise God for!

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493807#Comment_493807

Heeheehee. The first resource has the incorrect title of "Introduction and Bibliographical Information" when it ought to be "Introduction and Biographical Information".

Added to Metadata correction proposals.

Thanks to IVP and Logos for the free upgrade.

[Y]

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493974#Comment_493974

Neat, fgh! *smile* Good for you! Thank you!

Paul Yeager

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/493979#Comment_493979

Has anyone figured out what the 2% revisions are?