PDA

View Full Version : BW loosing out to competition



Magavara
04-20-2013, 04:21 PM
REMOVED - Interesting comments to my original post. Some seem to have come from BW users, while others give the impression they came from BW disciples. In any case Iím no longer interested in replies and therefore removed my post.

calvary
04-20-2013, 06:48 PM
I don't have time right now to match you point for point, but I really don't agree with much of your assessment about BW compared to Logos. Rather than the Walmart/small grocery store comparison, a better comparison would be Walmart and LL Bean. The two just serve the community in different ways. If you're happy with Logos great. But BW excels over Logos for my purposes (yes, I have both).

Dave

MBushell
04-20-2013, 07:07 PM
By looking closer at some of the developments among the competition, it seems that BW is becoming less and less attractive, especially to new buyers. Accordance will soon be launching their PC version, which is in many respects more intuitive and user freindly than BW, but the biggest competitor is undoubtedly Logos. I am a long time user of BW, but will now make the switch to Logos for the following reasons - unless BW will do something quickly.

Logos is by far more user friendly and intuitive than BW.
BW is still not using Unicode for Greek and Hebrew, which is a major headache for sharing across platforms - Accordance has the same issue.
Logos can be used on my PCs, iPhone and android tablet!!! Big issue.
Anything BW can do, Logos does equally well or better. Logos is just so much more than BW, the two don't even compare. It's like trying to compare a small family grocery store to a WalMart Superstore. Anybody who starts out now by investing in Bible software would be a fool to invest in anything else but Logos.
BW lost their edge and simply has nothing to offer to the average Bible software user, that would act as an incentive to choose BW over Logos.

My suggestion to BW. Do some serious revision by creating a truly intuitive user interface, make the move to Unicode, get onto the mobile platforms and cut the costs of your upgrades for existing users by at lease 80% for the base program.

One question does occur to me after reading your post. If you are so concerned about BibleWorks, why is this the first time you have ever posted to this forum? Why now? We do take user suggestions seriously, but we take them more seriously when they come from people active in the community. It puzzles me that you felt the compulsion to do this now, as a sort of a parting shot.

These complaints and questions have been addressed many times on this forum. People new to the forum and reading this analysis should browse around the forum a while before assessing their validity.

Mike Bushell
BibleWorks

Michael Tarver
04-20-2013, 10:46 PM
Have you seen how much Logos costs?

re. User Friendly: I hope we don't quickly dismiss Magavara because there are some good points. For example, BW is not real intuitive. So for the brand new user this can be frustrating.
It's not like an Apple iPhone which my 5yr. old son is manipulating like a pro.
But on the flip side, I applaud BW for all the updates, videos, seminars, and hard work they've done to continually improve the program.

Now for my purposes in translation work BW is super. I find it convenient to edit my text. and work with the available Hebrew, Greek lexicons on the analysis pane. I don't know if it's even possible to have a user created text in Logos.

re. font: I now have BW9 and wherever I copy and paste the Heb./Greek texts they appear as such. I don't think this was true with early versions of BW.

MBushell
04-21-2013, 12:13 AM
Have you seen how much Logos costs?

re. User Friendly: I hope we don't quickly dismiss Magavara because there are some good points. For example, BW is not real intuitive. So for the brand new user this can be frustrating.
It's not like an Apple iPhone which my 5yr. old son is manipulating like a pro.
But on the flip side, I applaud BW for all the updates, videos, seminars, and hard work they've done to continually improve the program.

Now for my purposes in translation work BW is super. I find it convenient to edit my text. and work with the available Hebrew, Greek lexicons on the analysis pane. I don't know if it's even possible to have a user created text in Logos.

re. font: I now have BW9 and wherever I copy and paste the Heb./Greek texts they appear as such. I don't think this was true with early versions of BW.

Michael,

I haven't dismissed Magavara. But all of his points have been made before on this forum. Some have been addressed, some are in process, and some were deliberate choices on our part. We have experimented, as some of you will remember, with interfaces that are easier for new users. They invariably get in the way of experienced users. It is very nearly impossible to have an easy, intuitive interface to a complex program that is also efficient in its use of keystrokes and screen real estate. We have chosen to focus on the latter and just hope that most users hang in there long enough to enjoy the fruits of exploration. We can't be all things to all people. And we don't want to rule the software world. We just want to serve that segment of the community that thinks like we do. We also try not to follow fads. That may make us look like we are behind the times but real progress seldom results from fads. We could satisfy all the requests for bells and whistles, but prices would double and we just don't see the need to go that route. There is a real need in the market place for a powerful, focused Bible research program that tries to be complete and comparatively inexpensive. That won't meet every need. But we hope it helps some people. And I do hope that Magavara finds the holy grail of Bible programs that he is looking for. If I can quote from an old Start Trek program: "He may find that having is not quite so pleasant a thing as wanting." There is a bit of Christian wisdom hidden in that Vulcan sentiment.

I think Unicode export of Greek and Hebrew has been in there for a couple of versions. But I don't think it was until 9 that we made it the default. Unicode, unfortunately, was not the seamless solution that we all hoped it would be. I think all things considered, fonts are just as much a hassle and mess as they were before Unicode. It's just a different set of problems.

Mike

Michael Hanel
04-21-2013, 03:12 PM
By looking closer at some of the developments among the competition, it seems that BW is becoming less and less attractive, especially to new buyers. Accordance will soon be launching their PC version, which is in many respects more intuitive and user freindly than BW, but the biggest competitor is undoubtedly Logos. I am a long time user of BW, but will now make the switch to Logos for the following reasons - unless BW will do something quickly.

Logos is by far more user friendly and intuitive than BW.
BW is still not using Unicode for Greek and Hebrew, which is a major headache for sharing across platforms - Accordance has the same issue.
Logos can be used on my PCs, iPhone and android tablet!!! Big issue.
Anything BW can do, Logos does equally well or better. Logos is just so much more than BW, the two don't even compare. It's like trying to compare a small family grocery store to a WalMart Superstore. Anybody who starts out now by investing in Bible software would be a fool to invest in anything else but Logos.
BW lost their edge and simply has nothing to offer to the average Bible software user, that would act as an incentive to choose BW over Logos.

My suggestion to BW. Do some serious revision by creating a truly intuitive user interface, make the move to Unicode, get onto the mobile platforms and cut the costs of your upgrades for existing users by at lease 80% for the base program.

It's hard for me as a user to take your criticisms very seriously. To an extent I can understand your frustration. If BW is not built to do what you want it to do, yes, of course, you're not going to be happy with it. But it's not really fair to ask them to completely reinvent their program "quickly" (e.g. build a more intuitive interface, use Unicode natively, build an iPhone and Android App) AND cut costs at the same time. Do you understand that that doesn't even make sense? BibleWorks could conceivably do all the things you're asking, but I don't know how they could do it and remain such an affordable program, which right now is one of BibleWorks' chief advantages over all the other Bible software programs.

Ultimately, I think you're asking that BibleWorks and Logos be the same kind of program, but they fundamentally are not. Logos is primarily a library program, BibleWorks is primarily built to focus on Biblical texts. To say Logos is better because it has more resources is not really accurate. If what you want is a program that has a lot resources, then, yes I guess Logos is better. But if you want a program that will help you read, exegete and analyze the Biblical texts, then you can't get a better resource than BibleWorks. Note that having a large library is not a key ingredient to exegesis. I'm afraid most people today turn to commentaries and other modern works first rather than the original texts, but that doesn't necessarily make for better exegesis. If it does, then Christians have been missing out on a lot of the Good News for millennia.

I personally own both BibleWorks and Logos, but I use them for very different things. Yes it's true Logos has resources that BibleWorks doesn't, but it's also true that BibleWorks has resources that Logos doesn't. And what is more important to me is that BibleWorks puts them all in one package for one very affordable price. Logos doesn't even actively sell an "original languages" bundle of software anymore because, it has been reported, it just didn't sell that well (supposedly they do offer one, but you have to call in special to request it). What that tells me is that the market that Logos is catering to is not me, because to me the only pieces of Logos that would interest me are things immediately dealing with the Biblical texts. Logos lives on selling you more stuff, but I don't think the more stuff necessarily makes it a better program. I think it makes it a different kind of program.

I don't know what kind of work you do with the program. It may be that the program that BibleWorks makes is not one that fits your needs. If so, that's fine, I guess that means BibleWorks loses your money as a customer, but then I don't really think BibleWorks is losing to the competition. BibleWorks is not competing on the same kind of field.

Dan Phillips
04-21-2013, 04:23 PM
First, "loosing" what? The Kraken? You left off the direct object.

Second, this criticism is so wildly off-base that I seriously wonder whether you've actually used BW9 more than a minute -- or Logos 5, for that matter.

BW9 beats Logos for "bang for the buck." Not even close. It gives an AMAZING array of tools on the cheap.

And it's lightning-fast, and robust.

The complaint that it isn't on iPhone reveals that you don't seem to use it for what it's made for. So you're saying you're switching from a Ford Explorer to an eighteen-wheeler because the former doesn't do what the latter does. Yeah? You thought it would? Hunh.

For one thing, as I've often said (http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2010/10/why-i-love-bibleworks-8.html), Logos doesn't even touch BW9's ability to keep an ever-expanding database of instantly-available, lengthy, detailed, text-tied documentation.

Logos is excellent at what it does. What it does is different than what BW9 does. BW9 is excellent at what it does. If you don't think much of BW9, I'm thinking that working directly with the actual words of the Hebrew and Greek texts isn't your main thing. So maybe yo want something else.

Which reflects on you, I say without inference, and not on BW9.

Eighteen-wheelers are great at what they do. Nothing like them. Want one and have the coin? Buy it.

But don't say that it's because Explorers stink, and need to become eighteen-wheelers.

bkMitchell
04-21-2013, 07:24 PM
Greetings Magavar,

And, Welcome to the forums. I use both BibleWorks9 and Logos5 regularly, but for different tasks. AND I am in total agreement with everything Michael Hanel and Dan Phillips have said on this thread so far! They both get an Amen from me!

"Logos is by far more user friendly and intuitive than BW."
intuitive? Would you mind qualifying that?
In the past I have wished that BW would make the window space and placement windows of GUI a little more flexible, but because I have been using BW for a while it is much faster for me to build morphological searches in BibleWorks than it is on Logos.


"BW is still not using Unicode for Greek and Hebrew, which is a major headache for sharing across platforms -"
Not, true!
BibleWorks can export to unicode beautifully and some of the newer texts are inputted in unicode.



"Anything BW can do, Logos does equally well or better. Logos is just so much more than BW, the two don't even compare."
Are, you sure about that? How do you qualify 'better' and 'so much more"?

(as of this date)Logos5 still can't:


conduct boolean searches across verses in original language text when using NEAR and WITHIN queries
restrict Boolean searches to paragraphs, sentences and pericope.
search on Hebrew words with specific vowel patterns in morphological searches
search on punctuation marks
search on Mappiq, Nun Hafukha, Maqqef, Paseq,
distinguish between Pasual and non-pasual forms.
perform wildcard searches on vowel point in Hebrew texts (was possible in Logos3)
perform wildcard searches on cantillation marks
The ability for a vowel sensitive search of the Hebrew OT and to compare it with the morphological codes: לָךְ masculine for instance.
The Ktiv Male(full spelling) and Ktiv haser(missing spelling) forms in Hebrew texts
Accurately search on the Qumran Sectarian Manuscripts (link) (http://community.logos.com/forums/p/49300/439587.aspx#439587)
run 'regular expression' searches on original language texts (was possible in Logos3)
Search Graphically on Morphological features and patterns. (was possible in Logos 3)
View actually manuscripts images


The average users that I know would care about the above, however I am willing to guess that the market that Logos is reaching out to simply do not know nor care about such matters. And, guess what? That's okay! I believe that Logos and BibleWorks serve two very different groups of people (or at least types of study).

bkMitchell
04-21-2013, 09:11 PM
...I think Unicode export of Greek and Hebrew has been in there for a couple of versions. But I don't think it was until 9 that we made it the default. Unicode, unfortunately, was not the seamless solution that we all hoped it would be. I think all things considered, fonts are just as much a hassle and mess as they were before Unicode. It's just a different set of problems.

I think it was BibleWorks7 when Unicode export was first officially implemented. But, I do remember that a user(maybe Michael Hanel) on the forums had a word maco that one could use to convert texts to unicode back during the BibleWorks6 days.

I agree with you about the font issue!
Before, the advent of Unicode and even now I still like to make PDFs and then simply have Hebrew/Greek fonts embedded in them


Grace and Peace,
Brian

Sansom48
04-21-2013, 11:00 PM
I don't want to say that I read these threads a lot, but I do try to make an appearance, and I do try to comment ever so often. The one criticism that I hear all too often is the user friendliness of the program, mainly that it comes with a learning curve. I am on the computer and use several types of software, not just Bible software either, I use imaging software, film and media software, and most recently PDF software. There are plenty of these products are user friendly and basically easy, but with that ease comes a limited functionality. Every time I have gotten beyond the kid stuff I have had to meet a learning curve, because any company that wants to actually give their users high capabilities and a workable interface is going to be mainly plain looking with buttons in various places, and yes it takes awhile to get used to, once your used to it, it is usually amazing how much faster you can actually accomplish things. I know Logos has a lot of features, but in my opinion many of the things they can do, that can be done in BW, have a somewhat complicated way of being done. I have always assumed this is because not many of their users run those kinds of searches. I guess what I am saying is that yes, BW has a complicated interface, but it is like that for a reason, and any professional exegete that is looking for software will be looking for what they can actually accomplish with software for a reasonable price. I find the interface not very user friendly at first but very practical once it is learned.

calvary
04-22-2013, 12:13 AM
It puzzles me that you felt the compulsion to do this now, as a sort of a parting shot.

Mike Bushell
BibleWorks


I get the feeling that Magavara's comments were a bump and run.

bkMitchell
04-22-2013, 01:30 AM
I guess what I am saying is that yes, BW has a complicated interface, but it is like that for a reason, and any professional exegete that is looking for software will be looking for what they can actually accomplish with software for a reasonable price. I find the interface not very user friendly at first but very practical once it is learned.

I think what you are saying makes a lot of sense.

DavidR
04-22-2013, 10:27 AM
In agreement with Michael Hanel and Sansom48: It reminds of the owner of a business (maybe a print shop) who put on their card, "Speed. Quality. Price. Pick any two." :)

Dan Phillips
04-24-2013, 09:44 AM
I've worked and worked at this, and finally (feel like I) came up with a concise way of comparing and contrasting Logos and BW (http://bit.ly/15ET2Fs).

MGVH
04-24-2013, 10:27 AM
I've tried to explain the difference to my students like this:
BibleWorks starts with the biblical text and extends outwards to all sorts of related resources (text critical matters, translations, lexicons, grammars...)
Logos is a library management system that looks deeply into texts, including the Bible, and provides the connections between all the books in your library.
(And Accordance is kind of in between but with an inclination to start w/ biblical text.)