To all who posted replies -- thanks for doing so and pardon my own delay in responding.

Among other things, the following are very helpful:

-- knowing I'm not alone

-- the links to the videos on Youtube

-- putting BIAB into perspective for me. Namely, if something so complex is *also* so very poorly documented, I've revised my expectations -- i.e. I no longer really aspire to learn the program inside out if it's such a massively time-consuming chore. One post above suggested doing 400-500 projects to master it; while another suggested reading all 600 pages of what others have said is a rather inaccessible and otherwise flawed manual; in my case, ain't neither gonna happen. Life is too short, and there are better-documented musical tools out there.

I'll instead use BIAB just as a sort of magic but inscrutable scratch pad for accompaniment ideas, and certainly won't upgrade to new paid versions; the last thing I need are more features.

Guitarhacker, I guess we'll agree to disagree. Yes, it would be a huge task for PG to update its documentation; but that's why they get paid; and their failure to do so just pushes the task of understanding the program to the users, so that rather than the company doing it once, now potentially hundreds or thousands of users have to each do it on their own.

Part of my job involves software development. I love creating custom solutions for clients; it's fun to make novel, useful things. And I do hate documenting, as it is nowhere near as fun; in fact it's a real tedious drag. But I do it anyway, as well as I possibly can, because I care about my users as much as I personally love creating software.

PG's attitude here seems to be like only wanting dessert without eating its vegetables.

Maybe I'm spoiled by other software vendors who seem to go out of their way to make workflow intuitive / documentation truly helpful and up to date, but personally, I expect no less. One shouldn't just leave the dirty work of proper documentation to the kindeheartedness of devotees who post youtube videos for free.

I am not trying to pick any fights. Those who are happy with the state of BIAB documentation and the amount of time and effort needed to understand the latest version -- I'm happy for you. I just can't join your ranks.

As for my original question, about the Video Tutorial PAK vs. BIAB for Bozos -- well, it was mentioned above that the former is based on BIAB 2006, while PG Music support tells me that the latter is based on BIAB 2007.

Given the loads of new features added since then, knowing the vintage of these tutorials is very relevant to a would-be buyer. It's pretty bad that these are 7 and 6 versions out of date; but that this fact is not mentioned on their product pages is, for me, very disappointing, if not actually perhaps a bit dodgy. A trusting person would assume that a company would not sell such out of date material without making the vintage clear up front. This has completely squelched my willingness to buy anything from PG on impulse; from here on, I'll be very careful to ask just what I'm getting.

Anyway, thanks very much again to all who've contributed here.