After having used my iPad for almost a month now, I think it’s time to answer my own post, and see whether or not my expectations have been met.

As much as many people would have loved to see Apple fail miserably, the launch of the iPad has been a huge success. I have no vested interest in the company and, quite frankly, dislike the way it does certain things, but you’ve gotta love what it does. The iPad, dubbed by some, somewhat scornfully, as an oversized iPhone/iPod Touch, is an entirely different animal. Not only that, it is probably bound to change the way people interact with print and visual media in the long run.

Among the cons I would not mention the lack of a camera, multitasking or Flash support (the first two will be coming sooner or later –multitasking is announced for this coming Fall), but more mundane things, like no earphones or a ridiculously short power adapter cable. Color me nit-picky, but this is being cheap.

As a “portable solution,” I think the iPad is just right for me. Neither too heavy nor too small. I can carry a full library of books, a number of Bible software programs, lots of apps, and the weight remains the same! I can even change font type and size for the most part, which is a real treat. The screen is fantastic, and easy on the eyes in my experience.

As a “multimedia hub,” I can also say I’m very pleased with it. Reading, watching photos or streaming videos is a thoroughly enjoyable experience that I recommend.

In sum, my general expectations have certainly been met, but where they have been certainly exceeded is in the area of Bible software. I will not give any names just yet, but let me assure you that the general quality of current Bible apps is quite high, and it can only get better with future enhancements (multitasking –which I am already using on my iPod Touch– being one of them). I am very impressed so far, and I think that, once more, the future is now.

People buy gadgets for all kinds of different reasons. Indeed, there are as many reasons as users. Here are my excuses reasons for getting an iPad (which I do not have yet).

1. I want a really portable solution for carrying around Bibles and books. “Around” means, basically, around the house, as well as the church or classroom settings. I’ve used notebooks and iPods, but they are either too large or too small. I thought the iPod touch would be a great deal, and it is in many ways, but I personally find it a bit unworkable for my purposes, due to its rather limited screen real estate.

For the last few weeks I’ve been doing my Bible reading off a study Bible that weighs around 1.4 Kg (nothing unusual for study Bibles). I keep it in the sitting room and also take it to church, and as much as I like the feel of a book in my hands, my wrists start to hurt after a short while, the font size appears to be increasingly smaller as time goes by, and I have to keep moving around in search of a better lighting angle. Besides, I need a ball pen and a notepad to jot things down (I know, I know…). I’m hoping the iPad, which is less than half that weight, allows font typeface and size changes, has its own light and (as far as Bible programs go) is capable of attaching notes to the text, will greatly enhance my current experience. All of it with the form factor of a study Bible and the added bonus of having dozens and dozens of other Bibles and reference books readily accessible without increasing its weight one bit!

2. I want to spend more time in the house’s common area, with the rest of my family.  The iPad looks eminently suited for this. The idea of sitting comfortably on a couch while doing what I need to do, rather than spending more hours in my study is quite appealing. Even if I have to occasionally wear earbuds, it is much better to be together. And more fun!

3. I’m tired of using a mouse. Again, I relish the thought of doing things with my fingers and taking breaks from clicking away. There is something about interacting with a device with my hands that I find more relaxing and natural than other methods.

4. Since the iPad seems to be a true entertainment hub, it should become an alternative way to listen to music and podcasts, and watch films, streaming videos and photos.

I guess what I’m looking for is something of a balance between productivity, study and relaxation. Will the iPad fit the bill? Well, I’ll soon find out. Will I discover new excuses, er… reasons I did not anticipate? Probably. Monday is the day…

I apologize for the rather long blogging hiatus. My professional work load is such right now that I do not foresee any noticeable changes in the coming months. I’m simply too busy and have to meet various deadlines. As I’m sure you will understand, that takes priority over any other activities on the side (including BSR). So, don’t count on any new major review anytime soon, although I may be able to blog occasionally. I’ll also try to tweet about what’s new as time permits.

Fortunately, there are some fine people whom you can turn to for news and updates on Bible software programs. Mark’s blog is always worth checking, and Kevin Purcell keeps abreast of the latest developments.

These are exciting times for Bible software, despite the current economic crisis. The recent launch of the iPad has opened up yet another study platform that looks very promising. I plan on getting one myself (it’s not available yet here in Europe), and hope to share my experience with you in due course. Perhaps I will even end up posting some mini-reviews or videos. Who knows?

I’m sorry I haven’t got better news for you at this point. My efforts to have other people join BSR and share the amount of work a site like this entails have not been successful. I’m not giving up just yet, but expect to see me more off than on, at least during what’s left of 2010.

Take care!

Yes, I know I’m late to the party and this will be old hat to most of you. When Zondervan announced that they would be discontinuing their Pradis software, there were good news and bad news. Good news because Zondervan products were already available for the Mac (Accordance) and would be coming to Logos (thus no need to have yet another proprietary software just for a few titles). Bad news because Pradis 6 was a good piece of software and current users would be left in the cold.

In my review of the previous version of Pradis I already hinted at the problem of backwards compatibility and the cost of upgrading resources that had already been paid for. Now, Logos has announced a deep discount of 40% for previous users of Pradis who decide to get Zondervan’s titles in Logos format.

John Fidel has posted some interesting thoughts on this whole issue, and I tend to agree with what he says. David Lang interacts with it here. As for me, being a Pradis user myself I can feel the disappointment (fortunately I have Zondervan’s products in Accordance), and agree that even with Logos offer, to buy –yet again!– those books to be able to run them under Windows is a bit too much.

To be honest, I don’t know what I’ll do. This would be the third time I would have to pay for EBC, NIDNETT, NIDOTTE and so on (Zondervan Reference Software, Pradis and, now, Logos). This situation is far from ideal, and I would love to see Zondervan go the extra mile to ensure that faithful Pradis users are duly taken care of with more of a nominal upgrade price. 

As you all probably know by now, Apple announced a new gadget yesterday morning. The much hyped “tablet” goes by the name of iPad, and, as is usually the case with Apple products, it has left very few people indifferent. Quite a feat when you consider that it will not be released until late March or early April.

I followed Steve Jobs’ presentation and then managed to watch the whole event earlier this morning. I have also read a number of comments for and against this new media device, written by people who actually got to see and try one. But my real concern right now doesn’t have to do with what the iPad can or cannot do, or what it has and what it lacks. Rather, I’m interested to know what impact it will have on Bible software, if any.

I use the word “know” because that is one of the key aspects, in my opinion. As a recent iPod Touch user I do not have to imagine what studying the Bible on the iPad will feel like; I have a fairly precise idea. Many of us, iPhone and iTouch users, have been blessed with some excellent Bible software (reviews will be forthcoming, God willing) for this platform (iPhone OS). We know how amazing it is to use such devices, how good these Bible apps are, and how awesome they would become … if they just had some more room.

It seems to me that the new iPad is much more than a “glorified” iPhone, and while I regret the fact that it will not be able to do multitasking (just yet!), I’m sure that it will be able to offer an ever better user experience in the field of Biblical studies.

Those who already have Bible apps for the iPhone have a clear advantage, but they better realize that “porting” their products to the iPad is not good enough. Not for Mac users, anyway. More is needed and, what’s best, more is possible.

I think Apple has shown the way with their iWork suite for the iPad. As I see it, and of course I could be wrong, the company who manages to release a Bible software program a la Apple will be the first one to cross the fine line that separates good from outstanding. So, please developers use the new SDK and surprise us with something truly amazing!

So, what do you think? Do you see iPad’s potential having any impact on Bible study software?

The proof of the cake is in the eating, right? Right. Similarly, Bible software is certainly at its best when one can actually see its many practical applications. Here are some samples you may want to look at.

Mike Heiser explains some of the kinds of searches that can be performed with Logos’ syntactical databases. A few of the examples are geared towards scholars, while others are suited for more general uses. There are also short videos on how the searches were carried out.

David Lang points to a practical use of the INFER command in Accordance. He includes a download link to Robert Marineau’s paper presented at the past ETS meeting held in New Orleans, LA.

Rick Bennet, talks about how to use Accordance to search for nomina sacra in early papyri, and Tommy Wasserman, over at the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog, shares his own experience in conducting searches like these.

Glenn Weaver, in one of his excellent Classroom Tips, shows how to search for Hebrew weak verbs with BibleWorks. You may recall that this was one of the challenges posed at the SBL Bible software shootout session.

It seems to me that Karyn Traphagen has opened a can of worms, and I mean that in a positive sense. Her question is, Should Schools or Students Choose Bible Software?

In my view, every school and every student should be free to choose, provided the software package in question is suitable for academic purposes. Schools should teach students how to use the tools of the trade, not tell them what tool to use (when there are comparable tools available, that is). Yes, this means more work for instructors –who would necessarily have to be acquainted with more than one program–, but it would also mean that students can learn the big picture about computer-assisted study and enrich one another when actually trying to apply those general rules to their particular brand of advanced Bible software.

And in case you worry about the additional burden of requiring computer skills from your students, instead of focusing on more biblical and theological matters, keep in mind that in many European institutions you need to learn a second modern language to get a degree, and it is taken for granted that you will know that language (and pass the exam!) by the time you graduate, without actually taking any classes at that particular seminary or university. Similarly, computer skills should probably be taken for granted, at least in Western countries. Let  professors worry about their own computer skills and command of different Bible software packages. Students will do just fine.

I personally like having different choices, and therefore, in my view, the decision should be yours and only yours. But whatever decision you make, make sure it is an informed decision and don’t let others do the thinking for you!

As I mentioned before, Michael S. Heiser, Academic Editor for Logos Bible Software, has blogged about the past Bible Software shootout at SBL. But what I found really interesting were his thoughts around the “status quo of Bible software.”

In this post I’d like to interact briefly with the first two points he deals with: Syntax and Books.

Let me say up front than I would answer ‘No’ to the question I’ve used as a title for this entry. My reasons for it are the following:

1. Syntax

a) Syntactical databases are just another level of tagging. They do no supersede or render obsolete the other levels (e.g., morphological databases) but rather complement it. Syntax does open new and interesting avenues for doing research, but I would be reluctant to consider it a panacea for all our problems.

b) I’m not sure who exactly is “making light of it” (i.e., syntax databases) or charging syntactical tagging with being “subjective.” The truth of the matter is that  tagging the Greek New Testament, whether it be for morphology, syntax, diagramming or even punctuation, is always a combination of objective and subjective decisions. So, I think the approach adopted by Accordance or BibleWorks at the shootout session is equally valid on this count.

c) I would not be at all surprised to see Accordance or BW (or both) come up with syntactical databases (see, for instance, this forum thread). So the key here will be –sooner rather than later– not so much who’s got the feature but rather what’s the best implementation in terms of intuitiveness and ease of use.

2. Books

a) Logos is a digital library. Accordance and BW are not. So let’s compare apples to apples.

b) At the end of the day, it is quality that matters. More doesn’t necessarily mean better. Standard resources are not that many. If you have what you need to have (the tools of the trade), you are not missing out, regardless of the program you use.

c) I’d like to know more about the “under the hood issues” that apparently make searching Logos’ many titles “superior”. I can say that I find BW’s integration and searching of its secondary resources less than ideal, but the seamless integration and extremely powerful and versatile searching capabilities of Accordance’s tools are quite impressive and, some of them, unparalleled.

3. Final Comments

It seems to me that unless we define clearly the rules of the “game” and what we mean by “cutting edge”  we will be talking at cross purposes. In my opinion, the game of Bible software is all about letting people access and interpret the primary texts. Everything else, including the program itself (and that goes both for the user interface and the secondary texts), should be subservient to that goal. In line with what I have just said, I would consider syntax searching, root searching or cross-version/cross-language searching as examples of “cutting edge” features.

Finally, let us keep in mind that the really important “wow” factor is to be found in the attainment of the original goal (see above) in a clear, unobtrusive, intuitive way. Other things may be the “icing on the cake,” but in my book they are neither cutting edge nor particularly wowing. If this is considered to be the “old way,” so be it.

Update: Check out Rick Mansfield’s post (I’m sorry. The author decided to delete it), and Danny Zacharias’ blog entry.

Last Saturday, a Bible Software Shootout session was held at the SBL Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA. Participants were (in order of appearance) Logos, SESB, BibleWorks, Accordance and Olive Tree. If you are like me, you would have loved to attend. Sadly, I couldn’t be there. Still, modern day technology does help us to get the big picture via tweets, blog posts and so on.

So, what happened? Karyn Traphagen compiled a list of tweets by people who attended the session over at Boulders 2 Bits, whereas Rick Mansfield wrote a more comprehensive post on his This Lamp blog, and, more recently, Mike Heiser gave us his take on it. We can expect to read reports by David Lang at the Accordance Blog shortly (it’s here actually), and I heard that the Olive Tree Blog will be carrying info on the session too (right here). At this point I don’t know if we will read anything from BibleWorks.

These were the five challenges each presenter had to address:

1. Give the parsing of a word and its meaning from a standard source.

2. Show all the occurrences of a word in the NT and LXX and show the Hebrew word which corresponds with the Greek in the LXX (if there is a correspondence).

3. Find all the occurrences of oi de in Matthew’s gospel followed by a finite verb within the clause.

4. I want to study a part of speech, e. g., demonstrative pronouns or interjections. How do I get all of the lemmas for that part of speech, get all the occurrences of those lemmas, and the results organized in such a way that I could write an article/monograph on that part of speech from the data?

5. I want to study the inflections of the Hebrew middle weak verb, and I want to see what the range of possible variations is for each of the conjugations (perfect, imperative, etc.) person, number, gender, and stem. This means I need to find all the middle weak verbs, find all their occurrences, and organize them in such a way that the variation of their inflections are immediately apparent. The goal of the data organization would be to allow me to write an article about the variations of the Hebrew middle weak verb.

Everybody seems to agree on the fact that all packages were able to solve the problems posed, except for Olive Tree, (but that is understandable given the current limitations of mobile devices and their OSes in certain areas). It is also acknowledged that it was stimulating to learn about the different solutions adopted by each one of the “contenders.”

And that’s the end of the agreement. If you want to know who won this shootout –where no one got hurt–, you’re out of luck. It depends on who you listen to. I’m always amazed at how sensitive this whole area of Bible software comparative reviews/presentations is. If you read the different comments and reactions to posts here and there you will soon realize that, for the most part, people tend to be rather defensive when exposed to software packages other than the one they are most familiar with, and very few dare to “think outside the box.”

If someone recorded the SBL session on video it would be great to know. Failing that, it would be nice to be able to access the content of each presentation so that everyone could draw his/her own conclusions about the pros and cons of each program. Don’t you think?

Update: Accordance handout can be downloaded from this page. Olive Tree’s presentation can also be downloaded here (PDF file).

Tony Cartledge, who attended the session, blogs on the shootout here.

I am extremely busy on various fronts, so I can do little else than point you to some recent reviews you may want to check.

Accordance 8 — A Review, by Keith Mathison, over at the Lingonier Ministries blog. Also, Rick Mansfield has published a screencast (updated shortly afterward here), comparing the new Speed Search feature in Logos for Mac with Accordance.

BibleWorks 8 — A Review, by Keith Mathison, and BibleWorks Review by Weston Williams.