Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 170

Thread: What would you like to see in Bibleworks 11?

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidR View Post
    ralphza, the idea of coordinating searches in original languages and in English (or other modern languages) in this way has been brought up several times in various forms (including, for instance, coordinating Hebrew Bible and LXX searches). It would be a lovely idea if it could be done, but my recollection is that the obstacles are really insuperable.

    The problem is that it would require an enormous amount of hand-tagging of words, much of it requiring subjective decisions about what word in English corresponds to what word in the original language. I don't think it can be done simply by a computer, though once a human-generated index existed, of course a computer could search it.

    Consider for instance 1 Chron. 10:1 (which I chose arbitrarily because it happened to be up for me in BW in connection with another thread here):
    BHS 1 Chronicles 10:1 וּפְלִשְׁתִּ֖ים נִלְחֲמ֣וּ בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיָּ֑נָס אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ מִפְּנֵ֣י פְלִשְׁתִּ֔ים וַיִּפְּל֥וּ חֲלָלִ֖ים בְּהַ֥ר גִּלְבֹּֽעַ׃

    NIV 1 Chronicles 10:1 Now the Philistines fought against Israel; the Israelites fled before them, and many fell dead on Mount Gilboa.

    NET 1 Chronicles 10:1 Now the Philistines fought against Israel. The Israelites fled before the Philistines and many of them fell dead on Mount Gilboa.

    Both NIV and NET render אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ as "the Israelites"; but an automatic computer process could not know this--someone would have to manually tag those words in those versions as corresponding to אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙, with אִֽישׁ not represented by any individual word. In NIV the second instance of פְלִשְׁתִּ֔יםִּ is rendered "them" for the sake of style. And the word(s) "many" (NIV)/"many of them"(NET) don't appear in the Hebrew at all. Again, an automatic computer process would have no way of knowing these points.

    So, great as the idea of cross-version color coding is as an ideal, it is probably not feasible. Unless, of course, someone has a million bucks they'd like to pay me to do the tagging in my spare time.
    Maybe just highlight it one or more of the "literal" translations (YLT, for example) and let users figure out how those translations map to the other English translations. I agree that it's not an easy problem to solve, but this would be the least subjective approach, and the tagging would only be needed for one(?) version.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Martin K View Post
    • I would like to see back buttons that allow me to go to previous layouts of the entire screen,
    • ...and also a backbutton for each individual window that is open.
    • I'd also like to see a way to link BW with Logos in such a way that windows can scroll together in both programs. I am currently using this feature with Logos and Paratext and it works great. Would be nice if BW could do that too.
    • Lastly, I'd REALLY like to see an App version of BW to use on my phone and tablet. (Android please)
    I, too, would love to have BW available for Android. I bought a tablet specifically so I could use BW easily when away from home, but I had to buy a Windows tablet which, even used, was significantly more expensive than the Android equivalents (ipad is way out of my price range!!). I've loved my BW-on-a-tablet though!!

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    9

    Default Do we really need another version of BW?

    Hi everybody,

    I have a controversial question, but nevertheless a very honest one. And I hope somebody might be able to give me a good answer. I have been a faithful user since BW7.0. Presently I own BW10. However, I also use Logos a lot, which has come a long way since its early years. I have now arrived at a point where I truly ask myself, why would I want to keep upgrading BW? I recently upgraded to BW10 but now I ask myself, why on earth did I do that? I could kick myself for wasting the money because I really just upgraded out of habit. But I am completely unable to defend that decision if someone asked me what BW gives me in addition to Logos.

    So here is the question I have for the forum: Is there anything that can be done in BW with Greek and Hebrew texts, that can not be done equally well or even better in Logos? ... Please don't misunderstand, this is not to dis BW in any way, but when I look at the extremely powerful Visual filters and in-depth word analysis tools of Logos, which also happen to be graphically very pleasing, then I truly ask myself, what does BW still have to offer besides perhaps some interactive photographs from original manuscripts? Perhaps I don't know BW well enough to appreciate having it beside Logos, but then the marketing people at BW are not doing a good job convincing people like me.

    So, I'd really like to hear from those of you who also own and work with Logos 7, --- why BW?

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Martin K View Post

    So, I'd really like to hear from those of you who also own and work with Logos 7, --- why BW?
    First of all, I should note, this probably deserves its own thread as it has been discussed off and on for years.

    That said, let me begin with the end. Ultimately, this comes down to a personal preference issue. I can't argue for what is best for you, but I can tell you what is best for me.

    1) I've been a Bible software user since 2000, buying both BibleWorks and Logos that year. My experience with both programs has taught me that the two companies might do the similar kind of things, but are not the same philosophy. Logos is at its heart an electronic library program. BibleWorks is a tool for engaging the text of the Bible itself in modern and original languages. So although they both have some of the same materials, the way you use them, the way the program is built around them is fundamentally different.

    Once you understand point 1, the question is, "do I want a library, a Bible tool, or both?" In other words, for many people, your question is not an either/or, but a both/and.

    2) One reason why I like BW is because it is fairly limited in scope. They give me the Bible and tools for engaging the Bible. With Logos, all I get are bombardments of sales, upgrades and more products. Because the two programs are so different, their business models are too. I like BW because it isn't trying to do everything and asking for my money to do it. It knows its purpose and it keeps to it.

    3) This is closely related to point 2, but from stewardship standpoint, BW represents a dramatic cost-savings to me. You can’t buy from Logos exactly what BibleWorks contains, but if you could, you’d find that BibleWorks prices are very low. They’re not trying to get maximum profit in order to grow into a huge company. They’re instead maximizing the amount of resources they can provide for the smallest price. I choose to reward that business model with my money as opposed to the other. So while I continue to upgrade BibleWorks, I’m not sure that I’ve added to my Logos library in 2 or 3 years.

    4) Under the “it just works” logic. I use both pieces of software on church provided computers. These computers are not cutting edge, by any means. BibleWorks runs smoothly and I have no problems. Logos runs slower than molasses and when it updates, it drives every other process on my computer to a halt. To some who have the latest and greatest, Logos probably runs wonderfully, but for those of us who aren’t working under those circumstances, Logos is very often unusable.

    There are more reasons I could list, but those are some of the ones that immediately jump into my mind. BibleWorks will never have as many resources as Logos, but BibleWorks has most of the key resources I wanted and is constantly pursuing other options that completely change the game (for instance, the BibleWorks manuscript project) in the Bible software game and yet remain true to its original scope and purpose.
    Michael Hanel
    PhD candidate Classics Univ. of Cincinnati
    MDiv Concordia Seminary
    MA Classics Washington University
    Unofficial BibleWorks Blog
    LibraryThing!

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Hanel View Post
    First of all, I should note, this probably deserves its own thread as it has been discussed off and on for years.

    That said, let me begin with the end. Ultimately, this comes down to a personal preference issue. I can't argue for what is best for you, but I can tell you what is best for me.

    1) I've been a Bible software user since 2000, buying both BibleWorks and Logos that year. My experience with both programs has taught me that the two companies might do the similar kind of things, but are not the same philosophy. Logos is at its heart an electronic library program. BibleWorks is a tool for engaging the text of the Bible itself in modern and original languages. So although they both have some of the same materials, the way you use them, the way the program is built around them is fundamentally different.

    Once you understand point 1, the question is, "do I want a library, a Bible tool, or both?" In other words, for many people, your question is not an either/or, but a both/and.

    2) One reason why I like BW is because it is fairly limited in scope. They give me the Bible and tools for engaging the Bible. With Logos, all I get are bombardments of sales, upgrades and more products. Because the two programs are so different, their business models are too. I like BW because it isn't trying to do everything and asking for my money to do it. It knows its purpose and it keeps to it.

    3) This is closely related to point 2, but from stewardship standpoint, BW represents a dramatic cost-savings to me. You can’t buy from Logos exactly what BibleWorks contains, but if you could, you’d find that BibleWorks prices are very low. They’re not trying to get maximum profit in order to grow into a huge company. They’re instead maximizing the amount of resources they can provide for the smallest price. I choose to reward that business model with my money as opposed to the other. So while I continue to upgrade BibleWorks, I’m not sure that I’ve added to my Logos library in 2 or 3 years.

    4) Under the “it just works” logic. I use both pieces of software on church provided computers. These computers are not cutting edge, by any means. BibleWorks runs smoothly and I have no problems. Logos runs slower than molasses and when it updates, it drives every other process on my computer to a halt. To some who have the latest and greatest, Logos probably runs wonderfully, but for those of us who aren’t working under those circumstances, Logos is very often unusable.

    There are more reasons I could list, but those are some of the ones that immediately jump into my mind. BibleWorks will never have as many resources as Logos, but BibleWorks has most of the key resources I wanted and is constantly pursuing other options that completely change the game (for instance, the BibleWorks manuscript project) in the Bible software game and yet remain true to its original scope and purpose.
    Nice response Michael. Maybe you could post it as well under the new thread that has been started on this issue.
    Mike

  6. #126

    Default

    Michael has already identified some key points, but let me add/reiterate... I also have both BW10 and Logos7 Gold. I use both regularly.
    Also note that I am approaching this as a sem prof who is trying to find what works best for my students.

    1. Value: BW is $389 and $295 with the group purchase. Logos' Biblical Languages Package is $475 at the institution rate and requires the institution to put up all the money in advance.
    2. Approach: BW focuses on the biblical text and works outward to related resources; Logos focuses on a library and drills down into the texts and connects them
      • This is a pro/con either way depending on what you want to do

    3. Included resources: BibleWorks has so many texts included in their standard package that would cost so much extra in Logos whether you buy separately or upgrade your library.
      • The wide variety of English and Greek versions
      • The huge number of non-English language versions
      • Inclusion of Greek/English of Philo, pseudepigraphical, apocryphal, Jewish...
      • The large number of free databases and add-on modules

    4. Other Resources: There are a few resources that are unique to BW that I use regularly
      • NETS = New English Translation of the Septuagint - This is the latest scholarly standard. Logos does not offer it but has their own Lexham translation instead (but the English is fully tagged w/ interlinear)
      • Danker Concise Greek-English Lexicon and Friberg Analytical Lexicon - If you can't afford BDAG or the EDNT, these two lexicons are the best available for students (in addition to Louw-Nida which both BW and Logos include). In Logos, they basically have the UBS Concise which is just a gloss, though you can buy Friberg for $16 more. Danker is not available.
      • ESV Concise Bible Atlas

    5. Tasks: Once you are familiar with BW, it is usually much faster to conduct many tasks. Michael noted that Logos is slow, but I no longer have speed complaints on my computers that are 3 and years old. By tasks, let's say I want to find all the εν τῳ INFINITIVE constructions in the LXX and NT and allow for a δε to appear between the εν and τω.
      • In BW: ESC ESC to clear command line; BGM to get to morph text; 'εν *1 o@dd?s *@vn*
      • In Logos: (to search both NT and LXX, you will need to have previously created a collection w/ these 2 books): search > morph; choose text, passages, collection; type in (and choose from dropdowns) lemma:ἐν BEFORE 2 WORDS @DDS BEFORE 2 WORDS @V??N
      • In some ways, Logos is more logical, but it takes longer. Now what to do with the results?
        • Here Logos is very nice because you can lay out Greek and English alongside each other and scan results much more quickly with search results highlighted in both Greek and English
        • BUT, to export results in a quick way to paste into a paper...
          • In BW, I can use the checkboxes to keep what results I want, use Checkbox Options to clean up the list, right click and choose Copy Verse List (No Text) and I get a fully condensed list to paste
          • In Logos: Save as Passage List; right click and delete one at a time; Print/Export; choose Print as minimized list; copy to clipboard > but then I need to edit it because it includes a header and footer
          • Let's say I didn't want 10 results in the list. In BW, 14 clicks total. In Logos, 26 clicks total.
          • I know that may not sound like much, but it is just lot easier and faster in BW

    6. Company: BW is a group of committed persons who really want to make Bible software accessible while maintaining a business. Logos feels more like a business wanting to make Bible software available. Pro/cons to both...


    So why do I use Logos?
    • I have purchased resources that I use all the time in Logos that simply aren't part of the BW vision. Anchor Bible Dictionary, Hermeneia Commentaries, UBS Translator Handbooks...
    • The sympathetic highlighting (hovering over a word in Greek highlights word in English translation) is a great feature
    • There are some excellent word study and grammatical features, especially when tracing down a word's translation
    • Logos' desire to preserve the book view is better for a resource like BDAG.
    • Logos does implement the Tov Hebrew/Greek better
    • The reverse interlinear approach is nice for quick work since some of the English versions are fully tagged with the underlying Greek/Hebrew
    • I can do Greek root (not just lemma) searches


    That's just a start. Again, both have pro/con, and I use them both depending on what I want to do.
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Glatfelter Professor of Biblical Studies
    United Lutheran Seminary at Gettysburg & Philadelphia
    uls.edu - CrossMarks.com
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    9

    Default Tagged Apparatus

    What I would love to see, would be the ability to hover over Greek and Hebrew words of an Apparatus in the Analysis Window and get the definition and parsing just like in the Browse Window

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    126

    Default

    I have wished for it long time ago, but I never remembered to mention it in the forum. Here it is:

    I'd like to be able to toggle between abbreviated and full-spelling parsing information in the analysis window.

    For example: abbreviate "indicative imperfect active 3rd person plural from ἐρεθίζω" to something like "ind impf act 3rd pl, ἐρεθίζω"

    Better if users may define the abbreviations for themselves (such as the user defined abbreviations for the biblical names), because different people have different preferences.

    It will be handy when we want to export the parsing info. to Word processor. The full spelling unnecessarily takes too much space.

    Thanks!
    Martin Zhang

  9. #129

    Default Complete Louw-Nida Lexicon

    It would be nice to get the footnotes, etc. in the Louw-Nida Lexicon. For instance, under the first heading, 1.B. Regions Above the Earth, we find this footnote:

    Name:  LouwNida.png
Views: 285
Size:  162.4 KB

    It would be nice to have all such footnotes, indexes, bibliographies, etc.
    Last edited by cmyktaylor; 04-30-2017 at 12:14 AM. Reason: Better Image

  10. #130

    Default Wish List for BW 11

    Bluetooth connection to external projectors, please!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •