繁體 & 简体

I wish Faithlife would put into separate Base Packages for 繁體 & 简体. We do not need the same books/ datasets in both 繁體 & 简体. There are sheer redundancy, and unnecessarily make the cost more expensive.

Regards.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Wei Qiang

Yes totally agree!

Agree too.

Philip Peng

I wish Faithlife would put into separate Base Packages for 繁體 & 简体. We do not need the same books/ datasets in both 繁體 & 简体. There are sheer redundancy, and unnecessarily make the cost more expensive.

Regards.

Hi, Leo,

Thank you for your suggestions. We have thought about that too. However, we don't have enough 繁體 or 简体 titles to make a separate Base Packages yet. In order to cover both 繁體 or 简体 users' needs, this is currently what we can do. Once we have enough books from publishers in the future, we will certainly make two separate base packages. I hope you can understand. Thank you.

Leo Wee Fah

Spending money for "redundancy" is not wise on our part[:'(]

Philip Peng

Spending money for "redundancy" is not wise on our part

Hi, Leo,

Buying them with Base Package bundle already gave you about 90% discount from its original price. If you can consider buy the Traditional Chinese and get the Simplified Chinese for FREE or vice versa, it might make you feel a bit better. If you don't want to buy the "redundancy" copy, you are always welcome to buy it as stand-alone copy, but that will cost you more to just get the traditional Chinese or simplified Chinese alone than buy them as base package bundle. Sorry, but this is how it will be before we have enough resources to make them separate base packages. I hope this will make you feel better.

Best regards,

Philip

Kolen Cheung

Spending money for "redundancy" is not wise on our part

Hi, Leo,

Buying them with Base Package bundle already gave you about 90% discount from its original price. If you can consider buy the Traditional Chinese and get the Simplified Chinese for FREE or vice versa, it might make you feel a bit better. If you don't want to buy the "redundancy" copy, you are always welcome to buy it as stand-alone copy, but that will cost you more to just get the traditional Chinese or simplified Chinese alone than buy them as base package bundle. Sorry, but this is how it will be before we have enough resources to make them separate base packages. I hope this will make you feel better.

Best regards,

Philip

I think Traditional and Simplified Chinese is closed enough to consider them not as 2 separate translations (i.e. independent license) but 1 single translation in 2 variants (i.e. single license covering both.)

In the very beginning of Logos entering Chinese market when they offered Chinese Bibles, it is quite ridiculous (sorry if that sounds too strong but can’t think of a better adjective for this situation, may be funny?) that the 上帝 version is in Traditional Chinese only and the 神 version is in Simplified Chinese only.

Also, paying twice for the difference between 上帝 and 神 versions also doesn’t make sense. Because literally one could search all 上帝 and replace by 神 to get the 神 version. That’s their only difference.

So in my situation, I bought the traditional Chinese version, which was 上帝 version only, while I really need to use 神 version. I figured it is easier for me to replace 上帝 by 神 mentally then to replace every simplified Chinese characters with traditional ones if I bought the other.

So to conclude,

please consider regarding Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese version as 1 single license, pay once own both. (And provide existing customer who own a traditional version to obtain the simplified version for free if they want to. e.g. via bundle and dynamic pricing.) I know sometimes there are resources really are translated by different translators in the 2 versions. Exclude these in this argument.
please consider regarding 上帝 and 神 version of the Chinese bibles (such as CUV) as 1 single license. Similar as above.
(I haven’t mentioned this above) consider using automated tool such as OpenCC with permissive Apache 2 license. Consider wikipedia as an example: https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/西雅圖橋樑列表 (just random example), there’s a conversion button in the top left corner to switch between Traditional/Simplified Chinese (, or even variants between them which is irrelevant here.) For resources that only one such translation exists, automated tool can be used to switch (with a caveat mentioned that this is automated.)
(not mentioned again) provide user a switch to choose between Simplified Chinese or Traditional Chinese (or both) and only those are downloaded, to save disk space because often time they don’t need both (except when they need to serve both audiences.)

Elijah

In my opinion, books in traditional and simplified Chinese can be sold separately, but the feature set must continue to be available for both versions with a single purchase.