I just sent a reply to Judy that included a link to the following notes. However, I don't expect to see that published as it has a link. To allow others to see my feelings on FTM-2014, I am including the notes I still use FTM-16 as my database is over 223,000 persons and FTM-2014 just cannot handle that number of people and have any speed of response. I only use FTM-2014 to see what others have on the family lines that I am searching. FTM-2014 This report will now be generated as I have received my release version of FTM-2014. I was a Beta tester and all of my experience has been with that Beta version. The items listed below show some of the short comings of FTM-2014: 1. This new family of FTM-20XX has a closed database and does not allow other programs to read from the database like FTM-2006/16 did. This does not allow programs like Legacy Charting to generate special charts for Y-Chromosome and mtDNA Chromosome carriers for families that I have in my FTM-2006/16 database. 2. The speed of import from a very large database of over 211,000 individuals is very good and a little faster than FTM-2012. the rate of import is about 282-296/sec or it takes a little less than 20 minutes to import the complete database. the new feature of having the sorted Index as a file is a great time saver when using the program. 3. When generating genealogy reports in books, the number of generations in the FTM-16 book are not carried forward into the FTM-2014 book. This is a real pain as every book has to be regenerated at a considerable cost in time. In my case, I will stay with FTM-16 until this is cleared up. 4. Adopted children in a family unit are treated the same as natural children as far as kinship is concerned. This is a huge oversight and needs to have an option that will not treat these adopted children as natural children. 5. There must be an option to allow sources to be shown as in-line rather than as end-notes. End-notes may be fine for short reports but any report needs to have in-line sources to allow the reader to see what the source is rather than trying to find the notes at the end of a chapter. Make this an option like in FTM-2006/16.. the Dev Team must have never read any large formal reports or they would never force a person to use the only method that is presently used in FTM-2014. 6. The errors in the import and export of GED files in the Beta version of FTM-2014 has now been cleared up. I did an export to GED then imported that GED file back into FTM-2014 and no error were reported, all media was present and the stats shown on import were as follows: Individuals: 211217, families: 71,641, Media: 69, rate of import was 780 records/sec. 7. When a GED file is produced that includes the Media, it appears that only the links to the Media may be exported and not the actual Media document. When using FTM-2014 it is impossible to determine if this is true or not but I have Legacy 8.0 and if I import that GED file into Legacy then some of the images are present but when the Legacy database is backed up then the Media portion of the backup contains the directory structure that is for the FTM files and not any new structure that Legacy created. The way to really test this would be to transfer the GED file that contains the Media to a different Computer that had FTM-2014 installed on it and see if the imported results contained the actual Media or are they missing. I was able to prove this when I did an import of the GED file into FTM-2014 after the original file that was used to produce the GED file had been deleted. The resulting FTM-2014 file had the Media items listed with the proper names but no images were present. If the original media still exists the they are transfered to the new Media directory making it appear that the Media was contained in the GED file. This is a disaster waiting to happen if anyone thinks that the GED file can be used to transfer their database to a new computer or different genealogy program. 8. One short coming that I noticed when doing the export to GED was that the data box that shows the number of individuals, families, sources, and media did not show the number of media and did not remain on the screen so that the user could see the results. It also appears that any information in this window is only the last update and not the final numbers. This needs to be fixed to allow a person to either do a screen snip of the information or have the date sent to a log file. 9. The information shown in the summary window when importing a file should have the time for each segment and not just the total time. Why should a person have to sit in front of their computer with a stopwatch to see how long each segment takes. the segments are for Individuals, families, sources, and writing to disk. Presently only the total time is shown. 10. Other items as I find them. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Arnold E. Krause 1611 Arlington Ave., Saskatoon, Sask., CANADA, S7H 2Y6 Tel: 306 374-3348 email address: <mailto:arnie-krause@shaw.ca> arnie-krause@shaw.ca Homepage: http://members.shaw.ca/arnie-krause/index.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Judy, I have had lots to say about the deficiencies of FTM-20XX over the years. Here is a link to my comments on FTM-2014: http://members.shaw.ca/arnie-krause/ftm_2009.htm#FTM-2014 Look at the previous reports on the earlier version, found in the same page for comments on what is wrong. I still use FTM-16 as my database is over 223,000 persons and FTM-2014 just cannot handle that number of people and have any speed of response. I only use FTM-2014 to see what others have on the family lines that I am searching. Cheers, Arnie ------------------------------------------------------------------- Arnold E. Krause 1611 Arlington Ave., Saskatoon, Sask., CANADA, S7H 2Y6 Tel: 306 374-3348 email address: arnie-krause@shaw.ca Homepage: http://members.shaw.ca/arnie-krause/index.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: ftm-tech-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:ftm-tech-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Judy in Ocala via Sent: 21 February, 2015 7:21 AM To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] FTM 16 v. 2014: The Great Debate Thank you all for your comments. I'm sure others will chime in as the Western Hemisphere greets the sun. What I'm looking for are specific examples of what doesn't work for you. If I were the programmer (heaven forbid!) what would you ask me to change? What's my punch list? What don't you like about the look of the interface, or the custom report, or whatever it is you don't like? And there's no reason to limit this discussion to v. 16 users. What about those who dumped FTM altogether and went to another program? What pushed you over the edge? Judy in Ocala On Feb 20, 2015, at 11:47 PM, Judy in Ocala <treewright@gmail.com> wrote: We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. Judy in Ocala ********************************** List information page http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I keep current with new versions and for the most part, I like the new version better or at least as well; however, there is one report function I keep hoping to find in each upgrade. I used to be able to add parents of spouse/partners to the Descendant and Outline Descendant reports. Some parents now show up in the Descendant report but not all. It seems to depend on what other data is present. (It's been a while since really looked at exactly what seemed to be happening, so please forgive me if I don't have it exactly correct now.) I can add parents' names as a note in the Descendant report, but there are no alternatives in the Outline Descendant report. My families have a lot of duplicate names. Being able to include parents' names tells me which Elizabeth or John is correct. -----Original Message----- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 23:47:13 -0500 From: Judy in Ocala <treewright@gmail.com> Subject: [FTM-TECH] FTM 16 v. 2014: The Great Debate To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <E9EEB6DF-F4CB-4045-84A1-B2BD152C5AB5@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. Judy in Ocala

Thank you all for your comments. I'm sure others will chime in as the Western Hemisphere greets the sun. What I'm looking for are specific examples of what doesn't work for you. If I were the programmer (heaven forbid!) what would you ask me to change? What's my punch list? What don't you like about the look of the interface, or the custom report, or whatever it is you don't like? And there's no reason to limit this discussion to v. 16 users. What about those who dumped FTM altogether and went to another program? What pushed you over the edge? Judy in Ocala On Feb 20, 2015, at 11:47 PM, Judy in Ocala <treewright@gmail.com> wrote: We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. Judy in Ocala

Hi CJ & Julia from one of the 'gals' on this list. Allie -----Original Message----- From: CJ & Dr Julia Edwards via Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 8:06 AM To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Subject: [FTM-TECH] The Not So Great Debate V16 v 2014. Hi Guys Long time since I posted anything. I stuck with V16 until last year. Since then I have TRYING to get 2014 up and running. My db has 130,000+ and almost 500k Facts. the max for V16. Initially I started on the older (new) versions and gave up - but I can see there is no way ahead without biting the bullet. Since I got back from my last cruise - London - Fremantle on Dec 12, I have spent every waking moment trying to work thru the "Places". I am starting to get the hang of it and have got sidetracked by trying to find all the cousins and rellies KIA in WW1. Not an easy job. Why they had to change to way the system works is beyond me. V16 did not "hang" and require compaction like this does. I see people complaining about it regularly. And you guys claim it is "more stable". I think the horse has bolted. Clearly there are advantages in using 2014, however I keep seeing MY work (and MY errors) replicated all over searches and real crumby research on trees submitted. I only look at historical records. I don't think we have much option but to switch - but I still backup and keep my old V16 up to date - but have to delete people from time to time to keep size down, Those are my opinions, Clem in Perth, Western Austrlia ********************************** List information page http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

> My db has 130,000+ and almost 500k Facts. the max for V16. I never had 500k facts, but 130K people is no where NEAR a limit in FTM 16. I have run trees provided by other people with 800,000 people and FTM 16 chugs along just fine. My current file is in FTM 2014 with 143,XXX people and it works well with a 64-bit operating system. > Since I got back from my last cruise - London - Fremantle on Dec 12, I > have spent every waking moment trying to work thru the "Places". There had been instructions out almost a decade ago on how to prepare one's database for the transition, but I didn't fix my file either. I spent 12 hours a day for many weeks fixing things using the Place Name Authority (PNA) and am VERY happy I did so. Besides the obvious corrections, I found multiple misspellings I wouldn't have caught otherwise. There are several trains of thought on how to fix one's places, so it you want suggestions, just ask others. I try the KISS method personally. John Okerson Lakeland, Shelby County, Tennessee, USA

I fully agree with Ole and Mary. It is sad that ancestry does not support v16.I hate v14 and the layout of it is not my cup of tea. I am a senior citizen and I for one do not like changes My problem with v16 can not be use with Apple computer. I have v14 on my apple computer, but I really don't like it. My two cents worth. I will stay with v 16 on my old computer. Enjoy your day. Connie P.S. Maybe if enough of us senior citizens complain enough, they will go back and support v16. ---- "Ole P. Bielefeldt via" <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com> wrote: Hi Mary, I fully agree, therefore I have stayed with v16. I have 2014 just to compare. Regards Ole 2015-02-21 9:18 GMT+01:00 Mary W. Ellis via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com>: > Judy, I'm using 2014, but the custom report in v16 had the one in 2014 > beat in all aspects, I can use the one we have now but it is harder to > get what you want out of it. > Mary Ellis > > > On 2/20/2015 11:47 PM, Judy in Ocala via wrote: > > We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a > new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was > lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. > > > > Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to > succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more > stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. > > > > But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal > users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the > reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 > are better. > > > > So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. > And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which > v. 16 is superior. > > > > Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. > > > > Judy in Ocala > > ********************************** > > List information page > > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > -- > If you don't know your family history, you are a leaf that doesn't know it > is part of a tree. ~ Michael Crichton ~ > Mary W. Ellis > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~mwellis/ > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncacgs/ > > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Ole P. Bielefeldt www.familytreemaker.dk ********************************** List information page http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- God bless America

Judy, I'm using 2014, but the custom report in v16 had the one in 2014 beat in all aspects, I can use the one we have now but it is harder to get what you want out of it. Mary Ellis On 2/20/2015 11:47 PM, Judy in Ocala via wrote: > We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. > > Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. > > But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. > > So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. > > Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. > > Judy in Ocala > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- If you don't know your family history, you are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. ~ Michael Crichton ~ Mary W. Ellis http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~mwellis/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncacgs/

Perhaps another way to ask my question is: if you could write a wish list for the next version of FTM, what would it include? Judy in Ocala Begin forwarded message: From: Judy in Ocala <treewright@gmail.com> Date: February 20, 2015 at 11:47:13 PM EST To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Subject: FTM 16 v. 2014: The Great Debate We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. Judy in Ocala

We V16 people hope for a program that enables straight-line input of data and straight-line retrieval and presentation of data. Minimal need to tweak, finesse, work around, creatively problem solve. Rather than process, we focus on data in, data out, basic data arrangement. I tried some of the later versions, but V16 is the last one that really works for me. Having said that, I thank those of you who are really gifted in understanding the programs and all their intricacies. I thank you for your dedication and endless patience with the rest of us. On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Judy in Ocala via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Perhaps another way to ask my question is: if you could write a wish list > for the next version of FTM, what would it include? > > Judy in Ocala > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Judy in Ocala <treewright@gmail.com> > Date: February 20, 2015 at 11:47:13 PM EST > To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com > Subject: FTM 16 v. 2014: The Great Debate > > We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a > new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was > lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. > > Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to > succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more > stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. > > But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users > of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the > reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 > are better. > > So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And > not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. > 16 is superior. > > Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. > > Judy in Ocala > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

We are coming up on 8 years since v. 16 was completely reprogrammed to a new database structure. In the beginning, we all felt that v. 2008 was lacking many of the features that we loved in 16. Over the years many improvements and enhancements have been made to succeeding versions and upgrades. As a result, version 2014 is a much more stable, robust, and versatile program than 2008 was. But in spite of the many improvements, there is an bedrock of loyal users of v. 16. One of the reasons often given for sticking with 16 is the reports, but there hasn't been much discussion about why the reports in 16 are better. So I'm asking those who are still using v. 16 to share their opinions. And not just about reports, but if you think there are other ways in which v. 16 is superior. Please give examples, and keep your comments constructive. Judy in Ocala

Custom report like in any versions af FTM, sorted by place of birth. Ole 2015-02-14 21:33 GMT+01:00 Nancy via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com>: > Is there a group for report questions? I would like a report that lists > persons and their place of birth, in order by place. > > Nancy > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Ole P. Bielefeldt www.familytreemaker.dk

> Is there a group for report questions? I would like a report that lists persons and their place of birth, in order by place. Which version of FTM are you using? You can get the report exactly as you want it under Publish, Person Reportsm Custom in FTM 2014 John Okerson Lakeland, TN

Is there a group for report questions? I would like a report that lists persons and their place of birth, in order by place. Nancy

Both FTM 11 and CD-ROM are old technologies. FTM 11 knows that the SSI Data base requires two CDs; consequently, it looks for separate header information for each CD. The header information for a CD-ROM is completely different from the directory for used for a read/write device such as a flash drive or hard disk drive. That is the reason you cannot simply copy the data base information to a hard disk or to a flash drive and have them read. The only way that you might be able to use a hard disk or flash drive is to make a ISO (CD image) file on a hard disk or Flash drive. You would then have to have Windows "mount" the ISO image as a device. Then Windows treats the Flash drive/hard disk as though it was a CD and FTM 11 might then be able to be read the data base. I have not done this so I'm not certain that it would work but I remember reading about it several years ago. You would need two ISO files - one for each CD. Hope this helps a bit. BJ On 2/13/2015 3:26 PM, Sue Alberts via wrote: > Husband tried a few things to make FTM ver 11 (yeah, the old one) be able > to recognize and search the FTM SSDI data base from 1) flash drive 2) hard > drive. No Joy. > > Discovered that the file names are identical in the two volume set. Vol 1 > being names A-L and Vol 2 being names M-Z. > > Was able to make copy of each cd onto individual dvd disks, so do not have > to worry any longer that handling the old cd rom will make it unusable. > > Maybe there is no way to tell FTM to look at a flash drive or a folder on > hard drive and see it as a cd rom and thereby be able to search it, but if > anyone has done this and can explain how it was done, it would sure be > helpful. Husband reviewed the FTW.ini file to see what line of code might > be altered, but could not see the light at end of tunnel. > Thanks to J Okerson for his suggestions earlier, and to Russ Worthington for > his comments - one of which was to 'rtfm', but alas my manual is not to be > found. If the directions on pg 152 are what I'm looking for, perhaps you > could send a scanned copy of the page(s) to me. > > The above is regarding my request for help on 2/4/15. > "2-4-15 I would like to copy the data from FTM cd rom and then be able to > search it. I am running FTM11 on a Windows VISTA desktop and a "Windows XP > laptop. The data is the SSDI 1937-1993 the 2 volume set called CD #110.

Sue, When you insert the Flash Drive into your computer, what is the Drive Letter? Russ ___________________________ Mailto:rworthington@att.net ________________________________ From: Sue Alberts via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com> To: ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 3:26 PM Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] How to upload cd - revisited Husband tried a few things to make FTM ver 11 (yeah, the old one) be able to recognize and search the FTM SSDI data base from 1) flash drive 2) hard drive. No Joy. Discovered that the file names are identical in the two volume set. Vol 1 being names A-L and Vol 2 being names M-Z. Was able to make copy of each cd onto individual dvd disks, so do not have to worry any longer that handling the old cd rom will make it unusable. Maybe there is no way to tell FTM to look at a flash drive or a folder on hard drive and see it as a cd rom and thereby be able to search it, but if anyone has done this and can explain how it was done, it would sure be helpful. Husband reviewed the FTW.ini file to see what line of code might be altered, but could not see the light at end of tunnel. Thanks to J Okerson for his suggestions earlier, and to Russ Worthington for his comments - one of which was to 'rtfm', but alas my manual is not to be found. If the directions on pg 152 are what I'm looking for, perhaps you could send a scanned copy of the page(s) to me. The above is regarding my request for help on 2/4/15. "2-4-15 I would like to copy the data from FTM cd rom and then be able to search it. I am running FTM11 on a Windows VISTA desktop and a "Windows XP laptop. The data is the SSDI 1937-1993 the 2 volume set called CD #110.

Husband tried a few things to make FTM ver 11 (yeah, the old one) be able to recognize and search the FTM SSDI data base from 1) flash drive 2) hard drive. No Joy. Discovered that the file names are identical in the two volume set. Vol 1 being names A-L and Vol 2 being names M-Z. Was able to make copy of each cd onto individual dvd disks, so do not have to worry any longer that handling the old cd rom will make it unusable. Maybe there is no way to tell FTM to look at a flash drive or a folder on hard drive and see it as a cd rom and thereby be able to search it, but if anyone has done this and can explain how it was done, it would sure be helpful. Husband reviewed the FTW.ini file to see what line of code might be altered, but could not see the light at end of tunnel. Thanks to J Okerson for his suggestions earlier, and to Russ Worthington for his comments - one of which was to 'rtfm', but alas my manual is not to be found. If the directions on pg 152 are what I'm looking for, perhaps you could send a scanned copy of the page(s) to me. The above is regarding my request for help on 2/4/15. "2-4-15 I would like to copy the data from FTM cd rom and then be able to search it. I am running FTM11 on a Windows VISTA desktop and a "Windows XP laptop. The data is the SSDI 1937-1993 the 2 volume set called CD #110. Sue A.

Thanks for the suggestion, Judy. Unfortunately, this did not fix the problem either. It's interesting that, if I can't paste directly to a particular person, I can select another family member to paste to and then check off the problem person's name in the box that appears. Bill From: treewright@gmail.com Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] FTM-TECH Digest, Vol 9, Issue 17 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 10:42:25 -0500 To: wmayrose@hotmail.com; ftm-tech@rootsweb.com Bill, have you tried a deep compact? As its name suggests, it does a more thorough job of compacting, resetting pointers, etc. Close out of all your data files but leave FTM open. Then do the following.Press Ctrl+Alt+Shift+C and FTM will prompt you for the file you want to compact. Judy in Ocala On Feb 11, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Bill Mayrose via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com> wrote: Russ and BJ, Thank you for the responses and suggestions. Unfortunately, neither of the suggestions have corrected the problem. I ended up deleting the most recent problem person and then re-entered her. I can now paste copied facts to her without any problems. Hopefully, there won't be too many more of these problem people. Bill -------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 07:35:18 -0800 From: H R Worthington <rworthington@att.net> Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? Bill, When you see this again, Please Compact and Back Up your file, then try to duplicate the problem. How much of this do you do? I don't think I have every done the copy a fact and paste it to someone else. Russ -------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:04:04 -0700 From: BJ <oldtrails@gmx.com> Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? I use the copy and paste fact feature quite a bit. So far I have not experienced any problems such as you describe. Since you say that compacting the file does not help, the only other thing I can suggest is to 1. Create a new file with only one person in the file. You can either use the home person in your current file, yourself or some completely unrelated name. You are looking to create a new file which requires at least one individual record, basically a Name and Sex record. It may be easiest to use an unrelated individual who can be easily deleted at a later time. 2. Once you have the new file created, open it. 3. Click File and Merge and select your old file. You want to create a new file which has no problems. You then want to merge everyone from your old file into the new file. 4. If the new file was created using yourself or someone else from your old file, you can let FTM merge the information. If you used an unrelated individual who is not in the old file, you can delete that unrelated individual. 5. Hopefully this will resolve all addressing problems. 6. Try the copy/paste fact feature to see whether it has been resolved. 7. Once you have tested the new file and ensured it is OK, perform a manual backup of the new file. You can then either retain the old file or delete it. Hope this helps. BJ On 2/10/2015 7:51 AM, Bill Mayrose via wrote: Greetings, A little over a year ago I posted the email below regarding my FTM software occasionally freezing when I tried to paste a copied fact to another person. I received a number of responses and eventually isolated this problem to copying facts from a few select people. After deleting these people and then re-entering them, the problem appeared to go away. After a bit of a break from genealogy, I began working with my FTM data a few weeks ago. About a week ago I began experiencing the same freezing problem once in a while. After some testing with different people, I find that the problem is the same as the last time - pasting to certain people, regardless of which person from which I copied the fact. I have compacted the file and this has not helped. I am still using FTM 2014 but it is now on a new computer - Windows 8.1 with 8GB RAM. I really don't want to go through deleting people and the re-entering them and all their info as I did the last time. Hoping that someone will have a better solution. Thanks in advance. Bill Mayrose 12/30/2013 Greetings, I am using FTM 2014 (Windows 7; 64-bit). Recently been adding facts (such as residence) to one person and then copying this fact to other family members. When I click on "paste", the program often freezes. I've tried compacting the file and have also uninstalled and then reinstalled FTM. Any thoughts on resolving this problem? Could the 32-bit option help? Thanks for any ideas. ********************************** List information page http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Bill, have you tried a deep compact? As its name suggests, it does a more thorough job of compacting, resetting pointers, etc. Close out of all your data files but leave FTM open. Then do the following. Press Ctrl+Alt+Shift+C and FTM will prompt you for the file you want to compact. Judy in Ocala > On Feb 11, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Bill Mayrose via <ftm-tech@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Russ and BJ, > > Thank you for the responses and suggestions. Unfortunately, neither of the suggestions have corrected the problem. I ended up deleting the most recent problem person and then re-entered her. I can now paste copied facts to her without any problems. Hopefully, there won't be too many more of these problem people. > > Bill > > -------------------------------------- >> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 07:35:18 -0800 >> From: H R Worthington <rworthington@att.net> >> Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? >> >> Bill, >> >> When you see this again, Please Compact and Back Up your file, then try to duplicate the problem. >> >> How much of this do you do? >> >> I don't think I have every done the copy a fact and paste it to someone else. >> >> Russ > -------------------------------------- >> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:04:04 -0700 >> From: BJ <oldtrails@gmx.com> >> Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? >> >> I use the copy and paste fact feature quite a bit. So far I have not >> experienced any problems such as you describe. >> >> Since you say that compacting the file does not help, the only other >> thing I can suggest is to >> >> 1. Create a new file with only one person in the file. You can either >> use the home person in your current file, yourself or some >> completely unrelated name. You are looking to create a new file >> which requires at least one individual record, basically a Name and >> Sex record. It may be easiest to use an unrelated individual who >> can be easily deleted at a later time. >> 2. Once you have the new file created, open it. >> 3. Click File and Merge and select your old file. You want to create a >> new file which has no problems. You then want to merge everyone >> from your old file into the new file. >> 4. If the new file was created using yourself or someone else from your >> old file, you can let FTM merge the information. If you used an >> unrelated individual who is not in the old file, you can delete that >> unrelated individual. >> 5. Hopefully this will resolve all addressing problems. >> 6. Try the copy/paste fact feature to see whether it has been resolved. >> 7. Once you have tested the new file and ensured it is OK, perform a >> manual backup of the new file. You can then either retain the old >> file or delete it. >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> BJ >> >>> On 2/10/2015 7:51 AM, Bill Mayrose via wrote: >>> Greetings, >>> >>> A little over a year ago I posted the email below >>> regarding my FTM software occasionally freezing when I tried to paste a >>> copied fact to another person. I received a number of responses and >>> eventually isolated this problem to copying facts from a few select >>> people. After deleting these people and then re-entering them, the >>> problem appeared to go away. >>> >>> After a bit of a break from genealogy, I began working with my FTM data a few weeks ago. About a >>> week ago I began experiencing the same freezing problem once in a >>> while. After some testing with different people, I find that the >>> problem is the same as the last time - pasting to certain people, >>> regardless of which person from which I copied the fact. I have >>> compacted the file and this has not helped. >>> >>> I am still using FTM 2014 but it is now on a new computer - Windows 8.1 with 8GB RAM. >>> >>> I really don't want to go through deleting people and the re-entering >>> them and all their info as I did the last time. Hoping that someone >>> will have a better solution. >>> >>> Thanks in advance. >>> >>> Bill Mayrose >>> >>> 12/30/2013 >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I am using FTM 2014 (Windows 7; 64-bit). Recently been adding facts >>> (such as residence) to one person and then copying this fact to other >>> family members. When I click on "paste", the program often freezes. >>> I've tried compacting the file and have also uninstalled and then >>> reinstalled FTM. Any thoughts on resolving this problem? Could the >>> 32-bit option help? Thanks for any ideas. > > > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Russ and BJ, Thank you for the responses and suggestions. Unfortunately, neither of the suggestions have corrected the problem. I ended up deleting the most recent problem person and then re-entered her. I can now paste copied facts to her without any problems. Hopefully, there won't be too many more of these problem people. Bill -------------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 07:35:18 -0800 > From: H R Worthington <rworthington@att.net> > Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? > > Bill, > > When you see this again, Please Compact and Back Up your file, then try to duplicate the problem. > > How much of this do you do? > > I don't think I have every done the copy a fact and paste it to someone else. > > Russ -------------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:04:04 -0700 > From: BJ <oldtrails@gmx.com> > Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Copy/Paste Fact Freezes Program? > > I use the copy and paste fact feature quite a bit. So far I have not > experienced any problems such as you describe. > > Since you say that compacting the file does not help, the only other > thing I can suggest is to > > 1. Create a new file with only one person in the file. You can either > use the home person in your current file, yourself or some > completely unrelated name. You are looking to create a new file > which requires at least one individual record, basically a Name and > Sex record. It may be easiest to use an unrelated individual who > can be easily deleted at a later time. > 2. Once you have the new file created, open it. > 3. Click File and Merge and select your old file. You want to create a > new file which has no problems. You then want to merge everyone > from your old file into the new file. > 4. If the new file was created using yourself or someone else from your > old file, you can let FTM merge the information. If you used an > unrelated individual who is not in the old file, you can delete that > unrelated individual. > 5. Hopefully this will resolve all addressing problems. > 6. Try the copy/paste fact feature to see whether it has been resolved. > 7. Once you have tested the new file and ensured it is OK, perform a > manual backup of the new file. You can then either retain the old > file or delete it. > > Hope this helps. > > BJ > > On 2/10/2015 7:51 AM, Bill Mayrose via wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > A little over a year ago I posted the email below > > regarding my FTM software occasionally freezing when I tried to paste a > > copied fact to another person. I received a number of responses and > > eventually isolated this problem to copying facts from a few select > > people. After deleting these people and then re-entering them, the > > problem appeared to go away. > > > > After a bit of a break from genealogy, I began working with my FTM data a few weeks ago. About a > > week ago I began experiencing the same freezing problem once in a > > while. After some testing with different people, I find that the > > problem is the same as the last time - pasting to certain people, > > regardless of which person from which I copied the fact. I have > > compacted the file and this has not helped. > > > > I am still using FTM 2014 but it is now on a new computer - Windows 8.1 with 8GB RAM. > > > > I really don't want to go through deleting people and the re-entering > > them and all their info as I did the last time. Hoping that someone > > will have a better solution. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Bill Mayrose > > > > 12/30/2013 > > > > Greetings, > > > > I am using FTM 2014 (Windows 7; 64-bit). Recently been adding facts > > (such as residence) to one person and then copying this fact to other > > family members. When I click on "paste", the program often freezes. > > I've tried compacting the file and have also uninstalled and then > > reinstalled FTM. Any thoughts on resolving this problem? Could the > > 32-bit option help? Thanks for any ideas.