ACCORDANCE VS BIBLEWORKS SOFTWARE
No one has the time to master everything about a software program. What is most beneficial, is finding out what the professors and other students use at your doctoral institution. I believe Logos was the first to integrate with the Perseus collection, now also available via Accordance, etc. The reality is, most of the benefits of each program are going to quickly added to the other.
ACCORDANCE VS BIBLEWORKS UPDATE
The Logos App for both Android and IOS got a major, and much needed update recently, and is now quite user friendly.Īt my seminary, most HB professors used Accordance (one was responsible for much of the tagging of the HB, so he was a little biased) and the NT faculty were Logos Logos does have the Göttingen Septuagint with apparatus it does appear to be searchable as well
ACCORDANCE VS BIBLEWORKS CODE
(It feels more like writing code at times than simply typing what you want searched.) Once you master them, I would assume they are on par with Accordance. The search features are not intuitive and have a steep learning cure. I am an avid Logos user, and I'll stick up for it. They change how you do research, for the better I think (hope.!). Admittedly, this feature is not useful for many users but, again, if you work in philology, papyrology, textual-criticism, etc., these features are priceless. Each module comes with the apparatus from Göttingen and can also be searched! You can do similar searches with any apparatus (e.g. Because my research is primarily in the ancient translations of the HB/OT, I also own all the available Göttingen Septuagint modules (see below!). Finding some of these references would have taken me hours (perhaps then I would learn the grammar.!?). For example, I have the Gesenius' Hebrew Syntax module, which I have searched for specific Hebrew letter/word combos. Regarding Accordance's search features, I just want to emphasize how useful this software can be for finding obscure data. I've seen some of the secondary literature on Logos and it looks about as user friendly as their biblical tools.
If you plan to use the software for years to come (I'm sure you are given you signature) then I couldn't recommend Accordance more.
their morphological tagging is often wrong, they don't specify what manuscript/s are used as the base, the apparatus are useless if available at all). For example, I have used Bible Works for some of the ancient Aramaic translations and I was pulling my hair out (e.g. Peshitta, Coptic, Targums, Mishnah, Talmuds, etc.), which to my knowledge are either not available on the others or their versions are garbage. I have quite a few of the more 'exotic' modules (e.g. Accordance's search features with the others!). On the other hand, if all you ever hope to use is a basic package then the others are certainly (almost as) good (e.g. But for a 'basic' biblical package it's reasonable, I think (e.g. It's true that some of the modules are quite expensive. The biggest advantage of Accordance is the number of modules they offer. I prefer and have owned Accordance for about five years now (I use it on my PC mostly). I have tried all three. I have spent relatively little time with Logos, quite a bit with Bible Works, and the most with Accordance.