On Jan 3, 5:50 pm, keith...@hotmail.com wrote: > On Dec 28 2007, 5:43 pm, clifto <cli...@gmail.com> wrote:> singhals wrote: > > > Henry Brownlee wrote: > > >> Cher, I know this isn't going to be any help, but maybe it's a case like my > > >> Grandma once told me. An old mule dropped dead while pulling a load on > > 1-3-2008 > > There are many reasons to speculate why it doesn't appear:  death may > have been particularly gruesome and the family and/or the law > enforcement authorities may want to keep it private/hush-hush as > possible, SSDI workers inputting the data make mistakes, death could > have occurred in a different state, death information may have been > omitted or reported incorrectly, etc. > > If you don't have any luck with the other suggestions offered, post > the names and date information you were given here, along with exactly > what you are trying to find out (do you want a death certificate? > names of children and or siblings?, etc.) so that I can check some > alternate sources to get the information you want, or so that some > other alternative ideas may be suggested. > > keith...@hotmail.com > GENEALOGICAL RESEARCHER > (Tulsa, Oklahoma) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-------------------------- > > > > > >> Tchoupitoulas Street. The policeman assigned  to the incident > wasn't too > > >> keen with his spelling skills, so he dragged it over to Camp Street to make > > >> out his report. > > > > Oui, but hauling a dead mule 'round nawlins is a lot easier > > > than schlepping a dead body around, even in nawlins. ;) > > > You jus' ain' usin' the right lagniappe. > > > -- > > Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Government officials and activists flying to Bali, > > Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause > > as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - 1-20-2008 Something else you can do is to contact the county courthouse probate court for whatever city he died in, to check and see if there is a probate file containing his last will and testament. If there is a file, there is a page in it showing names and addresses of surviving family and other information that you may be interested in ordering a copy of by mail. Perhaps there is a relative's name or friend's name listed there who has information about the family that you are looking for. GENEALOGICAL RESEARCHER keith345@hotmail.com -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 2007 Update to RootsWeb Surname List New and Modified Surnames starting with I - To learn more about the RSL, including how to access the full RSL which has over a million surnames (these postings are only the NEW or CHANGED names). how to submit surnames, etc., visit http://rsl.rootsweb.com/ - Write directly to the submitter if you would like to exchange information. Entries are formatted as follows: Surname Date1 Date2 Migration Comments & Nametag Surname: The surname being researched Date1: The earliest date for which the submitter has information. Date2: The most recent date. Migration: Where people of this line lived during the period listed. Comments: Additional information (not always included) Nametag: What you need to actually contact the submitter. Abbreviations used in the migration are listed on this web page: http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/codes/ OK, so you see a surname listed below and want to share and compare with the person who submitted it. How do you find the submitter? It's not all that bad: to obtain the address info for the submitter whose nametag is "example" (just for example), go here: http://rsl.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/rslsql.cgi?op=user&user=example Reminder: the nametag is the last word on each line in the list below. ===================================== 1 January 2008 Ihashi 1869 1953 Central Division, JPN>Seattle, WA,USA dms0725 Immel 1856 1963 Ubernthal, Hesse, Germany>United States grandfather samtx11 Infanti Italy Brasil 1881 Corvello Inman 1660 1837 Eng.>Maryland>Eng.>Tenn. Dandridge, Tenn. guymowen Irwin 1800 Now IRE>Hrn Co.>Alg Dist.,ON,CAN keimly Israel 1700's now England> Philadelphia, Pennsylvania> Allegheny City, Allegheny Co., Pennsylvania> San Diego Co., California Michael & Mary J. Paxton Israel> Israel Israel 1746-1822 Pa> Barbados> Wilmington, De [American Revolution - Grand Master Mason Philadelphia Lodge #3 & High Sheriff] - Joseph Perry Israel 1822-1898 Pittsburgh, Pa.> Montoville, Wi> San Diego, Calif. trowk2 Ivanko 1850 1945 Cernina Slovakia>Mt, USA FMBerti See directions at the top of this message for information on how to retrieve the submitters' contact information.

clifto wrote: > Robert Melson wrote: >> Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes: >>> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: >>> >>>> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing. >>>> What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse >>>> and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource. >>> The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste >>> of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. >>> It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. >>> >>> It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. >> But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem >> one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore >> Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is >> crap." > > I find a lot of usable stuff on rootsweb and on ancestry. I don't find any > usable stuff on LDS. I criticize those entities where I find no usable > stuff. which means you did not look in the right place what could you not find on fsmilysearch.org ? what have you uploaded to the other sites? Hugh W

In article <Xns9A20901F7E127sakiuclaedu@130.133.1.4>, saki <saki@ucla.edu> writes: > melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote in > news:13oaemqja2316f5@corp.supernews.com: > <snip> > Wasn't Phillip Klass actually using William Tenn as a pen name? Sturgeon > was the correct source of that quote, of course---"Sturgeon's Law" it was > called. Blush! You're absolutely right. Out-thought myself yet again! > > For some reason the LDS indexers were unintentionally very good to me and > included some actual, verifiable links to ancestors of mine in the IGI > database. So for me it's been a tool that works pretty well, if used > judiciously. I ignore entries that aren't sourced to film and always > check film or fiche myself to verify information. > > Occasionally I've found entries that have been properly indexed but which > I missed on my first or second pass through records that have poor film > images---for instance, searching for all children of two particular > parents. Sure enough, when rechecking the film, there they are. > > The IGI's usefulness does depend on your ancestral region, of course, and > depending on where they're based it might be a waste of time to use it. > But occasionally there are hidden gems to be found. As with everything else "out there", you can't just accept things, you have to verify them. The LDS is neither better nor worse than the other public/free sites when it comes down t accuracy, and I see no reason to single them out or accuse them of operating a useless, innacurate or somehow deceptive site. I'll add here that I'm NOT a Mormon - good, bad or indifferent. > > ---- > saki@ucla.edu Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford

melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote in news:13oaemqja2316f5@corp.supernews.com: > In article <47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>, > Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes: >> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: >> >>> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly >>> disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've >>> found there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped >>> using their site as a resource. >> >> The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste >> of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. >> It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. >> >> It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. > > But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem > one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore > Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is > crap." Wasn't Phillip Klass actually using William Tenn as a pen name? Sturgeon was the correct source of that quote, of course---"Sturgeon's Law" it was called. For some reason the LDS indexers were unintentionally very good to me and included some actual, verifiable links to ancestors of mine in the IGI database. So for me it's been a tool that works pretty well, if used judiciously. I ignore entries that aren't sourced to film and always check film or fiche myself to verify information. Occasionally I've found entries that have been properly indexed but which I missed on my first or second pass through records that have poor film images---for instance, searching for all children of two particular parents. Sure enough, when rechecking the film, there they are. The IGI's usefulness does depend on your ancestral region, of course, and depending on where they're based it might be a waste of time to use it. But occasionally there are hidden gems to be found. ---- saki@ucla.edu

In article <47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>, Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: > >> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing. >> What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse >> and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource. > > The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste > of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. > It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. > > It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is crap." Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford

jburns wrote: > I didn't get any answers here. Can any suggest a forum or mailing list > where I might find the information I am looking for? yues pay a people finder or a private detective or a probate firm Hugh W

Sir Creep wrote: > On Jan 8, 8:47 am, Christopher Jahn <xj...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Census data can never be *proof*; not only do they not require >> documentation, you have no way of knowing who provided the >> information. Was this person REALLY James Lail, or someone >> pretending to be him? > > You learn something new every day. Today I learned that identity > theft was rampant in 1865-70. just read the Tichbourne case or Jan Bondeson - The Great Pretenders: The True Stories Behind Famous Historical Mysteries Hugh W

Steve W. Jackson wrote: > In article <5uj321F1i3jqiU1@mid.individual.net>, > Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote: >> I don't think Mac genealogy software is worth bothering with >> after wasting about two hundred dollars in a MAc Store >> >> with an Intel Mac I run good old FTM 16 on WinXP sp2 on PAralles 3.0 on >> Mac OS 10.4.1110.5.* OS intel macs are all dual boot if you pruchase an >> OEM MS os and install it >> >> Hugh W > > I'm really curious...if you're so anti-Mac, why do you have one? I > can't recall the last time you did *not* chime on any discussion of Mac > genealogy software with your advice to run Windows on that Mac and use > some other software. I have used macs since 1994 but the genealogy software I have seen is lousy FTM 16 has a better GUI in fact eg you can use the trees to navigate and double click to edit and individual or click a button to edit the equivalent of a family group sheet and a back error like a web browser to see previous views A lot of keyboard shortcuts too the ones I use most are not in FTM 2008 - yet all my blogging, flickr.com , mail, usenet is done on the mac side PC AOL 9.* is better than the Mac version and MS IE 7 is not availabel for the MAc but an esential tool for webmasters and a defacto standard for much online banking Java apps ae getting better at being OS agnostic but there are more transcription utlities for the PC An intel Mac is heaven for Unix people because they have the command line interface available too for me Intel Mac rule I am writing this in SeaMonkey on my friends amchine:- Systemversion: Mac OS X 10.4.11 (8S165) Kernel-version: Darwin 8.11.0 Computernavn: iMac G5 Model: PowerMac8,2 CPU-type: PowerPC G5 (3.0) because I am cat sitting for a month in another appartment I also a heavy google apps user in Firefox on the Mac I don't like the apple mouse 3 button plus wheel MS m ouse is much better the Mac OS supports CTRL + wheel forward as a zoom in function and Windows keboad have the alt grod key the Windows key is also the Apple key I find the grey on white of the apple keyboard tiring for old eyes I should have got big white letters on black Hugh W which is greta for difficult hand writng in images like the US censu

JD <jd4x4@ wrote: > Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote: > >> JD <jd4x4@ wrote: >>> keithareynolds@hotmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> I know there are a number of genealogy software packages but i don't >>>> know where to begin. I am looking for something relatively simple >>>> that will let me do charts. I would also like to be able to export >>>> the material into word to go with written material. Or is there a >>>> better way to go? >>>> >>>> Does anyone have suggestions? >>> Totally agree with the others about trying them all before buying. >>> The views, reports, & entry methods are a VERY personal preference! >>> >>> I'll add that in the coming months I think that all of the major ones >>> will likely add better support for auto-entry of info from web >>> sources. Just my feeling, I'm not an "insider" or anything. >> if you use auto entry you will add some errors too >> auto search is OK >> but check all you add >> >> Hugh W >> >> > > You have me curious now, Hugh. I'm still sorting out the auto-entry > features of the current crop of software and I'm only roughly familiar > with FTM 2008 and it's auto-entry/import from the Ancestry.com site > (which I think is a GREAT feature, btw). > > Are you referring to errors originating with the source sites/cites, or > with the software processes themselves (ie. user setup, templates, etc.)? > > And while on the subject, do you know of any current software that > automatically "pulls" the additional relevant cite info. etc. from the > web, other than FTM 2008? I am an original user of ancestry.co.uk before that I had the 1881 CDs and the PRO 1901 pay per view from reading news:alt.genealogy I knew the importance of the federal census indexes of ancestry.com which is why I became an ancestry evangelist (before that a GUI / Mac one too) because I knew if they got a good cash flow they would digitise the rest and I would enjoy the benefits personally FTM 2008 has more modern basic tecnology but it lacks much of the functionality of FTM 16 and earlier so after beta testing 2008 in August and helping beta test the repair of SP 2 - I still find the learning curve too steep Back to ancestry.co.uk in particular the birth places of the 1891 census are riddled with errors because of the auto fill softeware used to key in the index Since then TGN have appointed quality control stafff and the standard has improvedIn UK genealogy if you are reseaching a popular surname or patron ym you must get certified copies of the vital records back to 1 July 1837 for example in http://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/rectype/census/uk/default.aspx Exact Search Results - U.K. Census Collection You searched for Thomas Watkins Refine your search Sort By Viewing 1-10 of 28 | Next » Search Results 480 1881 England Census 443 1881 Wales Census 417 1901 England Census 401 1901 Wales Census 382 1871 Wales Census 379 1861 England Census 377 1861 Wales Census 367 1891 England Census 360 1851 England Census 347 1891 Wales Census 346 1871 England Census 329 1841 England Census 323 1851 Wales Census 243 1841 Wales Census 6 1891 Scotland Census 4 1881 Scotland Census 3 1901 Scotland Census 2 1841 Channel Islands Census 2 1861 Scotland Census 2 1881 Channel Islands Census 2 1891 Channel Islands Census 2 1901 Channel Islands Census 1 1841 Isle of Man Census 1 1851 Isle of Man Census 1 1851 Scotland Census 1 1871 Scotland Census 1 1881 Isle of Man Census 1 1891 Isle of Man Census two of them are my direct ancestors Edward Jones born Raglan in one instance is not in Wales but in England born Ragland and older spelling Alfred Watkins born Llanfair Kilgeddin (which has at least 6 variant spellings) is Alfred Watkin born Llanvair (probaly the local pronunciation) the "s" is tiny in the original so a fair transcription there are many many much worse examples in SGB it is almost a game for the SKS to see who is first find lost ancestors On the other hand in my LAPHAM One-Name study I do include wrong spellings as AKA to enable other to find a point of entry the same with alternate marriages which get sorted as more data emerges but still should be noted in a study In IGI there ae a lot of LAPPAM which is exactly how the name was spelled in Kilmington parish registers for a period - and how it is pronounced today around Bristol and Somerset so the LAPPAM get AKA Lapham to help the index another common erro is entering Baptisms as date of birth and burials as date of death the only cerect way is to write Before DDMMYYY FTM 2008 introduces geolocations unfortunately in the field used by most of us for historical place names which are not in the maps.live.com base I am considering TMG 7 but I have no wish to customize so I regard it as too complicate - almost unfinished Essentially a family tree program is a word processor and the output is a text document with gedcom structure and links Hugh W

Sir Creep <sircreep@hotmail.com> wrote in news:d9a46f7f-e55b- 43a2-ac1a-9eb8719c2d48@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com: > On Jan 8, 8:47 am, Christopher Jahn <xj...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Census data can never be *proof*; not only do they not require >> documentation, you have no way of knowing who provided the >> information.  Was this person REALLY James Lail, or someone >> pretending to be him? > > You learn something new every day. Today I learned that > identity theft was rampant in 1865-70. THink about it; no photographs, no computer look-ups, no social security database, birth certificates weren't mandatory; To assume a new identity, all you had to do was go somewhere where no one knew you or the guy you were pretending to be. Photo IDs only became common in the last 25 years. It's only in the last ten to fifteen years that criminal records have been widely available on the web. There's nothing new under the sun. I'll bet you didn't know that electric cars outnumbered gasoline- burning cars a hundred years ago. -- }:-) Christopher Jahn {:-( http://soflatheatre.blogspot.com/ Do not speak about Time, until you have spoken to him.

I didn't get any answers here. Can any suggest a forum or mailing list where I might find the information I am looking for? John "Joe Pessarra" <joepessarra@suddenlink.net> wrote in message news:4783c301$0$19883$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net... > Sending some possibilities directly to poster. > > Joe > > "jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> wrote in message > news:86Pgj.717$vp3.362@edtnps90... >>I wish I had more information. She would be between 77 and 87. Smiley was >>her married name at one point. I can't be certain that still is her >>surname. She was born in Arizona with the surname of Nelson. I don't know >>if she had a middle name. >> John >> "Joe Pessarra" <joepessarra@suddenlink.net> wrote in message >> news:4783b84b$0$19876$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net... >>> >>> "jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> wrote in message >>> news:haOgj.285$yQ1.128@edtnps89... >>>> Can anyone suggest where I can find some current California addresses? >>>> I'm trying to find a Katherine Smiley who was probably born between >>>> 1920 and 1930. In 1949 she was living in Needles, CA. I've searched >>>> numerous online directories and have come across 2 Katherine Smileys >>>> that are the right age-one in Buena Park and the other in Huntington >>>> Beach but I can't find their address unless I pay money and subscribe. >>>> I'm reluctant to this as I'm not from the USA so wouldn't probably use >>>> it again. I want to write to these people. >>>> John >>> >>> How can you be certain that the lady in question still has the last name >>> of Smiley? Or, is that a later married name for her? >>> >>> And, you are saying her age is somewhere between 87 and 97? >>> >>> California birth index for 1905 to 1995 show no one of that name born >>> between 1920 and 1930. >>> >>> Do you know a middle name? >>> >>> Will do some more looking, but it would be better if you could give us a >>> little more info. >>> >>> Joe in Texas >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >

Robert Melson wrote: > Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> writes: >> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: >> >>> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly disappointing. >>> What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse >>> and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource. >> >> The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste >> of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. >> It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. >> >> It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. > > But why criticize the LDS/familysearch for the same problem > one finds on RootsWeb and/or Ancestry? Author Theodore > Sturgeon (Phillip Klass) famously said, "90% of everything is > crap." I find a lot of usable stuff on rootsweb and on ancestry. I don't find any usable stuff on LDS. I criticize those entities where I find no usable stuff. -- If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination, my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote: > JD <jd4x4@ wrote: >> keithareynolds@hotmail.com wrote: >> >>> I know there are a number of genealogy software packages but i don't >>> know where to begin. I am looking for something relatively simple >>> that will let me do charts. I would also like to be able to export >>> the material into word to go with written material. Or is there a >>> better way to go? >>> >>> Does anyone have suggestions? >> >> Totally agree with the others about trying them all before buying. >> The views, reports, & entry methods are a VERY personal preference! >> >> I'll add that in the coming months I think that all of the major ones >> will likely add better support for auto-entry of info from web >> sources. Just my feeling, I'm not an "insider" or anything. > > if you use auto entry you will add some errors too > auto search is OK > but check all you add > > Hugh W > > You have me curious now, Hugh. I'm still sorting out the auto-entry features of the current crop of software and I'm only roughly familiar with FTM 2008 and it's auto-entry/import from the Ancestry.com site (which I think is a GREAT feature, btw). Are you referring to errors originating with the source sites/cites, or with the software processes themselves (ie. user setup, templates, etc.)? And while on the subject, do you know of any current software that automatically "pulls" the additional relevant cite info. etc. from the web, other than FTM 2008?

Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: > >> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly >> disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've >> found there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using >> their site as a resource. > > The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste > of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. > It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. > > It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. Hugh's mention of the social networking value of the trees is something I overlooked/forgot about at first, but in retrospect it really IS a valuable asset. All of this really comes back to what I think I see as a good turn-around and new direction in software & sources.. It seems that it's going to be easier for people to use the new web resources and software to auto-record and pass on good, credible source citations in their trees. Wow. Imagine if all of the trees out there already had good sources/cites!!

Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote: > > useful for social networking > > eg > my late first wife's brother found me because I uploaded a gedcom to > worldconnect,rotsweb.com > > Hugh W > VERY good point, Hugh. How quickly I forgot that my "new" 3rd cousin contacted me through my submitted tree. And, she was the one that had found and pointed me to the baptism record that broke through a wall for me as well.

"jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> wrote in message news:bo8hj.9131$fj2.937@edtnps82... >I didn't get any answers here. Can any suggest a forum or mailing list >where I might find the information I am looking for? > John You might see what is available on the California GenWeb site at http://cagenweb.com/ Just click on the picture on the first screen. Sometimes you can find individuals willing to do lookups for you, if you can home in on a county or city. The US GenWeb site is at http://www.usgenweb.org/ in case you are interested in other states. Believe you mentioned Arizona in your first post. The site for it is at http://azgenweb.org/ Good luck. Joe

Ann Avery Hunter wrote: > I got my account after about 30 minutes. The OH death records alone are a > treasure! Ann: AMEN! (And thank you for the heads up!) I thought my Ohio stuff was in pretty good shape until I inserted some names! Now I have to go and fill in some hidden potholes. ecunningham@att.net

"Charani" <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote in message news:47849254$0$47162$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net... > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: > >> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly >> disappointing. >> What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've found there are sparse >> and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using their site as a resource. > > The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste > of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. > It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. > It depends what you're looking for. The IGI has actual extractions of the Church of Scotland parish registers plus scottish births & marriages to 1875 so, as long as you check the source, can make a useful (and free) preliminary index to focus down on records before heading for Scotlands People. They also have extractions from real records for 19th century expats in the Middle and Far East. As long as you are careful with the source of the info (I ignore all patron-submitted material since there's no way to sift the good from the imaginary), and treat it as a preliminary search, the IGI has its uses and can save one money! Lesley Robertson

In article <5uj321F1i3jqiU1@mid.individual.net>, Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't think Mac genealogy software is worth bothering with > after wasting about two hundred dollars in a MAc Store > > with an Intel Mac I run good old FTM 16 on WinXP sp2 on PAralles 3.0 on > Mac OS 10.4.1110.5.* OS intel macs are all dual boot if you pruchase an > OEM MS os and install it > > Hugh W I'm really curious...if you're so anti-Mac, why do you have one? I can't recall the last time you did *not* chime on any discussion of Mac genealogy software with your advice to run Windows on that Mac and use some other software. -- Steve W. Jackson Montgomery, Alabama