JD <jd4x4@ wrote: > "aspidistra" <aspidistra@x82md.com> wrote in > news:r9kTi.126313$1y4.119627@pd7urf2no: > >> "Sir Creep" <sircreep@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:1190293142.771487.142630@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >>> I bought FTM11 back 4 yrs or so ago (6? LOL)...have used it, but >>> honestly it seems cumbersome for having to click and open this and >>> that and try to remember where each intricate detail you want to >>> include is embeded. And then citations are a joke, unless I've no >>> idea how to use it properly (dar I say the company sent NO >>> instructions or manual with the software!). >>> >>> So....I am about to re-embark on the journey with my own family and >>> want a once-and-for-all software that is more user-friendly (if you > > <snipped a bunch> > >> I bought two softwares, Family Tree Maker and one other, and both were >> cumbersome and a pain. I am still using PAF, the free Mormon program, >> nearly 2 years later. It's not perfect but it's nearly perfect. It's >> easy. It's not a scam or a burden or full of ads or begging you to buy >> add ons. >> >> It just works and it's important that it be easy, fast, and not >> cumbersome. I didn't care if I spent a lot, I wanted the best. I got >> the best, so called, and I just didn't like them. But PAF works, and >> doesn't have gimmicks or annoying features, and that is the main >> reason I have for recommending it. >> >> As ancestry.com has a monopoly, I had no choice but to pay their fee >> and rejoin. I need the powerful database and search engine. Using this >> and their online family tree feature, along with my PAF file to create >> a GED, I have everything necessary. >> >> If and when I want to print a super duper report again I'll take out >> the Family Tree or Legacy or whatever else, and fool around with it. >> But as no one but me cares in the family, I think the plain family >> tree format is just fine. I do this for future generations. The >> current batch just live in the present and are bored of history. >> >> > > As many bad things that Ancestry.com can & have been said about it I agree > with this method, especially for beginners and people like me that only > just now want to REALLY start digging past the Ancestry databases. As long > as the user is aware (or cares) that some of the resources are poorly > documented or plain wrong (like most all of the trees) and trys to avoid > using them, you can't beat the speed of getting citations into your file > and the user interface is reasonably logical and speedy, I think. And the > evaluation of the citations (sources) is really what the decisions to link > or not link are or should be based on, yes? The most citeable and > electronically automated-entry data in one place seems to be Ancestry.com. > > I try to only add to my online tree work if the entry includes a decent > citation, and export-import into something on my PC that meets my basic > display and what-if needs. I'm only just now (after 5 or so years and am > happy with my "rough" tree) thinking about something better for the PC that > will help me as I hunt down the not-available-on-the-net data. Completeness > , ease of entry, & evaluation of citations is only just now what I want to > "work" for me. > I use FTM version 9 and it is ok. I can not see upgrading, I have not seen anything in the newer versions that I think is worth the cost or other software that would be that much better. I have not checked out PAF. Was wondering if anyone has set something up in Excel that works better. I have considered playing around with it, just have not taken the time to do it. Chris