I'm very hesitant about that approach, I like purchase-and-be-done system where I am not locked in for payments for life. We will have to wait and see whether they offer enough academic products in one subscription tier for it to make sense, but overall I feel like this is a bad move
A lot has been said regarding the pricing and its relationship to 1) AI features (which use credits) and/or 2) the accompanying rented library. By and large, the best deal is for existing Logos 10 Silver/Gold/Full-feature users. It brings the subscription fee to around USD$10 depending on the subscription tier. At this point, you will feel injustice if you peg the subscription fee to the accompanying books. That has always been how Logos customers perceive value-for-deal when it comes to comparing the different packages. Logos always highlights to you the difference in the number of books you are getting with the different pricings. So somehow, through no fault of our own, we might have already been enculturated into judging the new model with the same criteria.
The best way to come to terms with the subscription model is to relate the subscription price to adding an AI capability to your library. I do feel people in academia might be the biggest beneficiaries of this model because you are able to use AI to do preliminary convergence and/or divergence work. AI being able to read books and synthesize information is not new technology. Zotero plugins like ARIA are able to do that with full-text journal articles. But ARIA requires OpenAI credits, and if we know how much a single search inquiry costs, we will be able to better accept the subscription. Therefore gone are the days where you have to read in depth to know if Scholar A agrees with Scholar B on a certain interpretive issue in their writings, AI helps you to read literature and informs you on that. The benefit with that is that such an AI bot hallucinates less because its sources are the books in the Logos library. For such a connection between AI and context (of Logos), Logos basically must pay a yearly fee for bulk purchases of AI credits as well as a developer to code the context and parameters for the connection. Think: Paying premium for ChatGPT + coding it to be e.g. a writing assistant for you.
Another struggle people may have is, "AI has no role to play in theological inquiry," which is an issue of ministerial ethics. Furthermore, people may be desensitized free usage of AI apps like free ChatGPT and that is why they are taken aback by the "payment."
The point is that the ownership of the library has always been with the user and that is not going to be taken away. If you are happy with the way that legacy versions work, then stick with it. You are not losing out any more than what you do not already have. In short, you are making a technological purchase more than an academic one. Of course, Logos is hoping you make the leap by convincing you that AI can help you to do more in the qualitative sense. At the end of the day, one has to make that investment decision for oneself based on the nature of given responsibilities and your affinity with AI. :)
I agree with this. I’m really struggling to know what to do. The problem is that I can’t heads or tails with even their legacy package. I have Accordance with several large commentary packages and for Greek. But Logos releases the books and I prefer to give them money than Amazon. Ugh.
Did I miss something? Is this a new announcement? Will I have to do something different than I’ve already done to keep using logos without a subscription?
So what about the new subscription model. Is anyone getting the legacy one to avoid having to subscribe?
I'm very hesitant about that approach, I like purchase-and-be-done system where I am not locked in for payments for life. We will have to wait and see whether they offer enough academic products in one subscription tier for it to make sense, but overall I feel like this is a bad move
A lot has been said regarding the pricing and its relationship to 1) AI features (which use credits) and/or 2) the accompanying rented library. By and large, the best deal is for existing Logos 10 Silver/Gold/Full-feature users. It brings the subscription fee to around USD$10 depending on the subscription tier. At this point, you will feel injustice if you peg the subscription fee to the accompanying books. That has always been how Logos customers perceive value-for-deal when it comes to comparing the different packages. Logos always highlights to you the difference in the number of books you are getting with the different pricings. So somehow, through no fault of our own, we might have already been enculturated into judging the new model with the same criteria.
The best way to come to terms with the subscription model is to relate the subscription price to adding an AI capability to your library. I do feel people in academia might be the biggest beneficiaries of this model because you are able to use AI to do preliminary convergence and/or divergence work. AI being able to read books and synthesize information is not new technology. Zotero plugins like ARIA are able to do that with full-text journal articles. But ARIA requires OpenAI credits, and if we know how much a single search inquiry costs, we will be able to better accept the subscription. Therefore gone are the days where you have to read in depth to know if Scholar A agrees with Scholar B on a certain interpretive issue in their writings, AI helps you to read literature and informs you on that. The benefit with that is that such an AI bot hallucinates less because its sources are the books in the Logos library. For such a connection between AI and context (of Logos), Logos basically must pay a yearly fee for bulk purchases of AI credits as well as a developer to code the context and parameters for the connection. Think: Paying premium for ChatGPT + coding it to be e.g. a writing assistant for you.
Another struggle people may have is, "AI has no role to play in theological inquiry," which is an issue of ministerial ethics. Furthermore, people may be desensitized free usage of AI apps like free ChatGPT and that is why they are taken aback by the "payment."
The point is that the ownership of the library has always been with the user and that is not going to be taken away. If you are happy with the way that legacy versions work, then stick with it. You are not losing out any more than what you do not already have. In short, you are making a technological purchase more than an academic one. Of course, Logos is hoping you make the leap by convincing you that AI can help you to do more in the qualitative sense. At the end of the day, one has to make that investment decision for oneself based on the nature of given responsibilities and your affinity with AI. :)
Thanks, that helps explain what this is all about and what’s at stake / to gain.
I agree with this. I’m really struggling to know what to do. The problem is that I can’t heads or tails with even their legacy package. I have Accordance with several large commentary packages and for Greek. But Logos releases the books and I prefer to give them money than Amazon. Ugh.
Did I miss something? Is this a new announcement? Will I have to do something different than I’ve already done to keep using logos without a subscription?
Snagged it too. Always on the lookout for their freebies lol