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/

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

I forgot to mention, the Outline report no longer marks second or third spouses. You have to go through and look them up and mark them before you can sent the report to anyone. Even if they are familiar with your database it would be very hard for them to figure it out. It's hard for me to, I have to go back and look up what looks like a stray person to see who they belong to. It's really crazy to leave that very important part out of the report. Mary Ellis On 2/21/2015 3:18 AM, Mary W. Ellis via wrote: > 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/