Hold off on changing Accordance for 5 years, except for pure additons.

[Enoch]

Accordance is quite a complex system with a long learning curve.  Who knows how to use even 60 % of it? Let the buyers learn Accordance & stick with it, instead of confusing matters with unnecessary changes.  Example:  The high-light system in Accordance 12 was fine.  IMHO for some reason it was changed for 13 causing difficulty in using it.  So I ask that the changes stop except for glitch removal, stop until we can catch our breath. please.  And please never make modules unusable by changing Accordance. 

[Accordance Enthusiast]

7 minutes ago, Enoch said:

And please never make modules unusable by changing Accordance. 

 

That's a big pity that it happened. They really should keep working in all versions, or we should have an easy way to convert these modules.

[Accordance Enthusiast]

10 minutes ago, Enoch said:

unnecessary changes

 

I appreciate all the improvements since Accordance 12, but I agree that the old systems / techniques and features should keep working, even if a new one becomes available.

 

[Accordance Enthusiast]

Most of all, I ask that the new versions should not be released with dozens of frustrating bugs I already reported as a Beta tester.

[ukfraser]

There was a lot of clamour by users on the forum wanting to know when 14 was going to be released as many had got used to a very approximate two year release cycle and lets face it, collectively, we are a bunch who are never satisfied with what we have and always want more!!!!

im not aware of resources becoming unusable with later releases but i am aware of new resources requiring a specific release or later. 
If you look at this feature request thread, there is an ever growing list of features users want to see and as we attract new users, this list will continue to grow. 

I am happy to let the accordance team set their own upgrade strategy.

Edited January 22, 2023 by ukfraser

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Thanks for the feedback! Plus keep in mind that the user ultimately is in the driver’s seat as to when to upgrade to new versions of Accordance. You can stick with an older version of Accordance as long as your OS version doesn’t cause any issues with it, and you can upgrade to a new version of Accordance on your terms. I’ve been told we still have a couple people on Accordance 8 and 9 since they just can’t bring themselves to upgrade to a newer version (even though they’re really missing out). We obviously want all our users on our latest version, but that decision is up to the user to decide the best time to upgrade.

[Kristin]

22 hours ago, Enoch said:

Example:  The high-light system in Accordance 12 was fine.  IMHO for some reason it was changed for 13 causing difficulty in using it. 

 

I agree 100% with everything you said, @Enoch! Especially with Accordance 12. When I had v.12 it was perfect. NO highlight corruption, NO note corruption, NO issues.

Then v.13 came and I have had so much highlight and note corruption I literally lost a years worth of work. It would not matter if I went back to v.12, since the various versions all share the same highlight and note files, so once they are corrupted they are corrupted. The highlight files have been corrupted on, I believe 4, but maybe 5 occasions. 

Yet comparatively v.13 has close to no issues compared to the issues of v.14.

[Kristin]

6 hours ago, Nathan Parker said:

keep in mind that the user ultimately is in the driver’s seat as to when to upgrade to new versions of Accordance.

 

With all respect, @Nathan Parker, I would disagree with this comment. To "be in the drivers seat" suggests that the user has adequate knowledge in order to make informed decisions. I would argue that when the vast majority of people downloaded v.14, they had truly no idea they were walking into a potentially catastrophic situation.

 

You could argue that I was personally in the drivers seat. This is because after what happened to my highlights with v.13, you can believe me that I decided there was no scenario I would even consider downloading v.14 without security that it would not make things worse. That is why I was watching the beta group. Then, when it was released with known bugs, you can rightly assume I did not download v.14.

However, MOST users did not know about the known issues. So in other words, those of us who knew about the bugs were in the drivers seat downloading it, while those who were not part of the beta and did not know, were not in the drivers seat but were rather trusting Accordance that the product would not be released until AFTER beta testing was done.

[JonathanHuber]

Nathan is responding to the OP requesting that Accordance change nothing for years. Most of us do not want that. For the few (one?) who do, the obvious option is just don’t install any updates. In that sense, yeah you’re totally in drivers seat. 

[Lester P. Bagley]

The theory of "no change to accordance for 5 years at least" is, very simply, a death sentence for the program and company. Really bad suggestion.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

@JonathanHuber is correct. My response is to the poster’s suggestion to “not change the program for five years”. Accordance certainly wouldn’t be able to keep an app that static for that long. Technology changes, plus there are useful feature additions to one’s Bible study we’ll need to add with each major release, not as a means to “pad” the software with a bunch of features, but to truly improve people’s Bible study. Those feature additions would certainly need to occur more often than a “five year release” schedule. The Bible software companies that didn’t innovate on a regular schedule are the ones who have now ceased business operations or have been acquired by other Bible software companies. Accordance will always continue to innovate and find ways to make your Bible study better.

 

In terms of being “in the driver’s seat” for installing upgrades, the user is still ultimately the one who can decide when to install a major Accordance upgrade onto their computer. We don’t force anyone to install a particular upgrade on their computer. I usually don’t install any major upgrades to apps or the operating system on day one but wait until certain bug fix updates are in place, plus I’ve changed my overall app upgrade strategy. There are a handful of apps that I wait and upgrade once the version is no longer supported by my operating system version if it’s an app I don’t use often and don’t require regular new features (although Accordance is definitely not one of those apps since I use it daily).

 

Accordance 14 was an anomaly. We’ve already admitted and done as much repenting that we can in terms of our releasing it before it was fully ready. We’ve also been hard at work on bug fixes, as our users have been able to see from recent updates. We’ve learned our lesson, and we won’t repeat it in the future.

[Kristin]

2 hours ago, Lester P. Bagley said:

The theory of "no change to accordance for 5 years at least" is, very simply, a death sentence for the program and company. Really bad suggestion.

 

Hi @Lester P. Bagley

I agree that no changes is impractical, and there are changes I would like to see. For example: being able to export my notes, which is my own work. Highlights being trustworthy and not corrupting. Years ago I had suggested practical improvements to the highlights (such as the numbers going to 10 when there are 12 tribes, etc) but I speak the truth that I would not want any of the above if it would add yet more corruption.

 

However, I would argue that a true "death sentence" would be the program being so buggy that it forces people to go elsewhere. Anyone who has been watching the forums since the drop of v.14 knows that there have been multiple threads where:

- multiple people have claimed they will not make further purchases until the bugs are addressed
- they won't look at sales emails until the bugs are addressed

- people have been asking about a v.14 refund
- multiple people have claimed they are needing to look at other programs to get their work done.
- multiple people have been asking how to downgrade to v.13
- multiple people are scared to download things in the future.
- etc etc.

 

So while I agree that changes have their place, stability is essential to the longevity of any program, including Accordance.

 

Hi @Nathan Parker

5 minutes ago, Nathan Parker said:

We don’t force anyone to install a particular upgrade on their computer.

 

That is very much appreciated! I also appreciate that Accordance does a good job keeping modules working on older versions, which is critical for people who don't want to upgrade.
 

7 minutes ago, Nathan Parker said:

Accordance 14 was an anomaly. We’ve already admitted and done as much repenting that we can in terms of our releasing it before it was fully ready. We’ve also been hard at work on bug fixes, as our users have been able to see from recent updates.

 

If Accordance is aware of this, why are people still being encouraged to update to v.14? As was discussed on another thread, people are still getting emails to update. Shouldn't the bugs be fixed first? I know there was a recent bug fix thread, but that same thread pointed to another thread to keep posting bugs, and further, that "update now" email went out BEFORE the bug update a few days ago. So on one hand you say v.14 was an anomaly, but on the other hand it is still being pushed and the company itself is not recalling it.

 

On a side note, I am not sure if it was an anomaly, since the note and highlight corruption came as a result of v.13. So from my personal experience, each version introduces more corruption.
 

8 minutes ago, Nathan Parker said:

We’ve learned our lesson, and we won’t repeat it in the future.

 

Thank you for saying this. 💕

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

@Kristin Thanks for your comments. We’ve continued to “promote” Accordance 14 since there are still many users who are successfully using Accordance 14 without any major issues (I myself use it daily without any major issues), and each bug fix update has improved numerous customer-reported issues. We still have some way to go (we need to do an update to fix some syntax issues, plus other outstanding issues), but overall, Accordance 14 is really getting there and working well for many users. Trying to “recall” it now would only hinder the progress we’ve made with Accordance 14, not advance the progress. Accordance 14 is still an overall exciting release with some excellent new features, and we’re getting better at resolving the remaining bugs on a regular schedule.

[Enoch]

On 1/22/2023 at 1:48 PM, Nathan Parker said:

Thanks for the feedback! Plus keep in mind that the user ultimately is in the driver’s seat as to when to upgrade to new versions of Accordance. You can stick with an older version of Accordance as long as your OS version doesn’t cause any issues with it, and you can upgrade to a new version of Accordance on your terms. I’ve been told we still have a couple people on Accordance 8 and 9 since they just can’t bring themselves to upgrade to a newer version (even though they’re really missing out). We obviously want all our users on our latest version, but that decision is up to the user to decide the best time to upgrade.

But the user of Accordance 8 (which I still have in one of my computers) will find that if he buys new modules, they may not work in 8.  I found that Accordance 12 was hampered when I added Accordance 13.  I get error messages on 12 now saying that a module cannot be opened because it requires a newer version of Accordance.  I think that a Greek text and a Hebrew text was impaired after I added 13 to a computer I have. "The text HMT-W4” cannot be opened, because it requires a newer version of Accordance." This now pops up if I fire up 12, though (as I recall) HMT-W4 always worked in 12 before I "upgraded" (downgraded?) to 13.  And as I recall the 2 new lexicons from Brill won't work with 12.  So the user is not then in the Driver's Seat. And the user is forced to go to a newer version of Accordance to use certain new modules.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Enoch

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

1 hour ago, Enoch said:

But the user of Accordance 8 (which I still have in one of my computers) will find that if he buys new modules, they may not work in 8.  I found that Accordance 12 was hampered when I added Accordance 13.  I get error messages on 12 now saying that a module cannot be opened because it requires a newer version of Accordance.  I think that a Greek text and a Hebrew text was impaired after I added 13 to a computer I have. "The text HMT-W4” cannot be opened, because it requires a newer version of Accordance." This now pops up if I fire up 12, though (as I recall) HMT-W4 always worked in 12 before I "upgraded" (downgraded?) to 13.  And as I recall the 2 new lexicons from Brill won't work with 12.  So the user is not then in the Driver's Seat. And the user is forced to go to a newer version of Accordance to use certain new modules.

To my knowledge, this occurs when we release updates to certain modules that then require a newer version of Accordance. If you don’t update those particular modules to a newer version, they should still work on the earlier version of Accordance. I can research some clarity on this if need be.

[Enoch]

Since the response came after I requested that Accordance stop issueing new versions of Accordance for a long time so that one can actually know Accordance --

response that persons were ever wanting new features.  OK.  So I revise the unFeature request, that only additional features may be added, which features do not change

anything in the existing program for those who know it.  Sigh.

 

[Enoch]

On 1/25/2023 at 2:38 PM, Nathan Parker said:

To my knowledge, this occurs when we release updates to certain modules that then require a newer version of Accordance. If you don’t update those particular modules to a newer version, they should still work on the earlier version of Accordance. I can research some clarity on this if need be.

I think of updates to modules as fixing bugs in them, like a version of the Bible which errors have been found in & Accordance has corrected them.  I suppose that your ieda then would be that Accordance label its module upgrades as destroying your module if you haven't "upgraded" the version of Accordance?

[Lawrence]

1 hour ago, Enoch said:

I think of updates to modules as fixing bugs in them, like a version of the Bible which errors have been found in & Accordance has corrected them.  I suppose that your ieda then would be that Accordance label its module upgrades as destroying your module if you haven't "upgraded" the version of Accordance?

 

This is a version-management issue. It would be nice for modules to carry their own 'created for version xyz' information that is accessible in both machine-readable as well as human-readable form. Then Accordance can either offer new module versions side-by-side (e.g. ESV for Accordance 13 // ESV for Accordance 14) or have a module-upgrade / module-downgrade feature.

 

 

File format changes can be very brittle programming-wise. It does take some programming resources to do module-versioning (which, unfortunately, is itself yet another file format change), so it's up to the developers and their management whether it's worth investing the time. Done properly, though, it would simplify support for the multiple versions of Accordance working with multiple versions of modules that represents Accordance's user base.

 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

Merged these two threads so we can continue the discussion in one thread. It seems the simplest way to get some real interaction on this.

[Enoch]

On 1/22/2023 at 9:11 PM, Lester P. Bagley said:

The theory of "no change to accordance for 5 years at least" is, very simply, a death sentence for the program and company. Really bad suggestion.

Excellent point, Lester. But it seems to confirm my idea that in general the biggest reason for computer program "updates" is so that the company that made them can keep making money on them, rather than to benefit users.   In other words, it seems that many software companies are not content to produce a product, sell it, & then users can use it forever.  Their continued abilty to make money on that product requires getting "updates" sold, not because the users need them, but the companies want to continue selling that product.  So the companies are not content to make a product & sell it, then produce other new products to sell, but they want to keep making money off the old product's buyers.  But selling a finished product is not a death nell for the program itself.  I could still be happily using Accordance 8 and buying only such new modules as worked with it.

But yes, I think you are probably correct that a company for its survival may need to continually be selling "upgrades" to its original central program.  And some company may want to deliberately sell modules that will not work with the old version of the program to try to force buying the main program "upgrade."

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

I can’t speak for the rest of the software industry, but there are actually two main reasons why Accordance releases regular upgrades to their apps:

 

Technology changes. Changes in technologies within the operating systems (such as 16 Bit to 32 Bit to 64 Bit, Classic to Carbon to Cocoa, 68K to PowerPC to Intel to Apple Silicon, Dark Mode, Windows support, Mobile apps support, web app support, etc). As new technologies become available, we certainly have to adapt to them. If one looks at the Bible software companies that didn’t adapt well to technology changes and hung on to legacy technologies, those companies cased operations or were acquired by someone else. Some of the technology changes (Dark mode) came with a major upgrade to Accordance. Others (I believe 64 Bit on Mac and Apple Silicon support) came to a minor update to an existing major version.

 

New features. We don’t attempt to overload Accordance with a bunch of bloated features you won’t use in your Bible study, but there are times when users have requested certain features in Accordance they’d like to see. Even though I love Accordance as it is today, there’s already a handful of features not in Accordance yet that would make my Bible study easier if Accordance added them. I’m sure that’s the way it is with other users as well.

 

The reason why Accordance charges for major upgrades is simple: software development costs. To ensure Accordance can keep adding new features customers request and adapt to technology changes, every once in a while, Accordance charges for a major upgrade. Even between major upgrades, we’ve been known to add features to a “point release” customers have thought we’d wait and add for a future paid upgrade to Accordance. We do well overall with module sales, but charging the small price we charge for upgrades helps contribute to our development costs.

 

We don’t purposely attempt to sell modules that won’t work with older versions of Accordance to force you to upgrade. In the past, I could get a large chunk of my personal Accordance library running on Accordance 9 and 10 (now I have access to all the modules, so I haven’t tested it). There’s a simple reality that some modules take advantage of technologies that require newer versions of Accordance, and trying to make them work on older versions of Accordance would simply hinder what the module can do for users on newer versions.

[Lester P. Bagley]

2 hours ago, Enoch said:

Excellent point, Lester. But it seems to confirm my idea that in general the biggest reason for computer program "updates" is so that the company that made them can keep making money on them, rather than to benefit users.   In other words, it seems that many software companies are not content to produce a product, sell it, & then users can use it forever.  Their continued abilty to make money on that product requires getting "updates" sold, not because the users need them, but the companies want to continue selling that product.  So the companies are not content to make a product & sell it, then produce other new products to sell, but they want to keep making money off the old product's buyers.  But selling a finished product is not a death nell for the program itself.  I could still be happily using Accordance 8 and buying only such new modules as worked with it.

But yes, I think you are probably correct that a company for its survival may need to continually be selling "upgrades" to its original central program.  And some company may want to deliberately sell modules that will not work with the old version of the program to try to force buying the main program "upgrade."

Certainly there are some companies that want to continue to make money without offering any real update value. Generally, they rather quickly go out of business. (I have boxes of programs I once used that were never updated and now no longer run on modern hardware. Most of those companies no longer exist.)

The two major reasons for program updates (other than the obvious fixing of bugs) are:

1) Additional function (the Accordance of 20 years ago, while amazing for that time, is no where near as powerful a tool as today).

2) Keeping up with hardware. Everyone imagines that their computer should be able to run all future software. Unfortunately, that would have us all running programs that are pretty much useless in the modern world.

The challenge for any company is balancing these two. Often they are interdependent to the point that users are unhappy that they can't have the most powerful software running on the least capable hardware.

[Enoch]

On 2/7/2023 at 10:20 PM, Lester P. Bagley said:

Certainly there are some companies that want to continue to make money without offering any real update value. Generally, they rather quickly go out of business. (I have boxes of programs I once used that were never updated and now no longer run on modern hardware. Most of those companies no longer exist.)

The two major reasons for program updates (other than the obvious fixing of bugs) are:

1) Additional function (the Accordance of 20 years ago, while amazing for that time, is no where near as powerful a tool as today).

2) Keeping up with hardware. Everyone imagines that their computer should be able to run all future software. Unfortunately, that would have us all running programs that are pretty much useless in the modern world.

The challenge for any company is balancing these two. Often they are interdependent to the point that users are unhappy that they can't have the most powerful software running on the least capable hardware.

I can think of programs that run on DOS 3.3 & Windows 3.11 which are still useful, as are many programs made for the TI 99 4/A, for example a number of mathematics tutoral programs, Where in the Word is Carmen San Diego?, Mine Sweeper, Logos 1.6 (so easy & intuitive to use; not complex so that you need a college course to learn it), Pin Ball on Millennium, Funnels & Buckets.  I think it is only about 2 years since I sprang for  Accordance 13 not realizing that I would not like the radical change to the highlighting system.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. IMHO. 

 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

There are some useful legacy apps, and I’ve even had fun booting up old computers and playing with them. There are plenty of apps that Apple has sunsetted that I used to enjoy (Aperture was one, Apple Photos never did fully replace it).

 

However, when it comes to daily work, I realize I have to be current enough since technology keeps changing, as much as I wish it’d slow down (I don’t always buy every new version of every app I own, but once critical functionality starts to break, then I upgrade. There are a few exceptions where I do need the latest version of certain apps). If I could go back to a landline phone (not the new modern VOIP stuff), flip phone, etc., I would. I know in my line of work, I can’t, but I miss some of the legacy/analog stuff when life was simpler.

 

We did do a webinar on the new highlighting system (sorry to hear you haven’t been a fan of it). I believe we supplemented the old system with a newer system, but I could be wrong on that. It’s been a while since I’ve watched that webinar.

 

 

[Kristin]

10 minutes ago, Nathan Parker said:

 

We did do a webinar on the new highlighting system (sorry to hear you haven’t been a fan of it). I believe we supplemented the old system with a newer system, but I could be wrong on that. It’s been a while since I’ve watched that webinar.

 

Hi @Nathan Parker,

In case it is helpful to know, I think my experience likely sums up the views of most people who were not a fan of the new highlights. There are a few reasons why I would say this is the case:

1) the new highlights introduced catastrophic corruption. I know I am not the only one who had spent hours and hours and hours on highlights just to see them be destroyed on multiple occasions.

2) the way the highlights were changed did not really make sense. There had in fact been improvements which could have been made (the numbers go to 10 while there are 12 disciples, tribes (I had recommended it going to 20), the letters going to j is totally random, either have an alphabet to z or not, etc, etc), but these things which really needed to be improved were not touched. Instead, the fundamental way someone highlights was changed, which was not better, just different.

3) while I do not personally use the pen feature, those who wanted to generally found it to not be accurate enough. No matter how careful you are to draw a line, it would only get to the letter you meant to hit half the time with the remaining time on a different letter or even different word.

There are some other issues also, but I think those are the main reasons why not everyone was a fan of it.