On Saturday 18 June 2011 05:39, Ian Goddard ([email protected]) opined: > john wrote: >> On 18/06/2011 10:53, Ian Goddard wrote: >>> Bob Melson wrote: >>>> Notably missing from all this has been gramps, which just released >>>> it's 3.3.0 version. While originally a Linux/Unix app, it's available >>>> for Windows. See http://gramps-project.org/ for details. And, BTW, >>>> it's >>> >>> Thanks for that heads-up, Bob. I hadn't seen that. Now I need to find >>> time to back everything up & upgrade.... >>> >>> However, the .exe isn't very big so, unlike the all-singing all-dancing >>> installer project from some time ago, it seems unlikely that it will >>> install all the dependencies such as Python which are apt to be absent >>> from Windows. Looking back to the comments on the 2.6 release it seems >>> that as ever Windows users were finding it just too difficult to set >>> up. They really do need to build and keep up-to-date all-in-one >>> installer. >>> >> >> I just tried installing the Win 32 version. I needed to install: >> 1. python 2.72 (15 Mb) from python 2.7.2 http://www.python.org/download/ >> 2. gtk-2.12.9-win32-2.exe (7 Mb) from >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gladewin32/files/gtk%2B-win32-runtime/2.12.9/ >> >> 3. pygtk-all-in-one-2.24.0.win32-py2.7.msi (32 Mb) from >> http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/binaries/win32/pygtk/2.24/ >> >> before installing Gramps 3.3 (7 Mb) from >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gramps/files/Stable/3.3.0/ >> >> There is more information at >> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Windows_installer#Installation >> >> >> and more installation help at >> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GRAMPS_and_Windows >> >> When I ran Gramps for the first time it asked whether I wanted to >> install some additional components. All but one installed without >> problems after a program restart. >> >> With all the components and dependencies, I don't think most Windows >> users would be able to maintain/upgrade the Win version of Gramps with >> any ease. >> >> >> > > Quite. This was why someone started the project at > http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/gramps4win/index.php?title=Main_Page > > It's somewhat misleading in describing it as a beta in that the version > of Gramps installed wasn't, it's just the overall packaging which was > beta AIUI. I tried it on W2K under VirtualBoxand, beta or not, it > worked fine. But it's frozen as of two years ago at Gramps 3.1.1. > > It's quite likely that some later versions of Gramps could be used to > update it but without updating the dependencies I doubt it could have > been brought up-to-date. > > What's needed is to bring the installer up-to-date with current > dependencies and Gramps and then maintained. > > I wish open source developers would read the first chapter of The > Mythical Man-Month and understand the difference between a project and a > product. > > -- > Ian > > The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang > at austonley org uk I certainly can't argue with either of you - I don't run windows of any version/flavor. Following the gramps-users mailing list, however, I do see that there's an "aio installer" for gramps 3.2.1 and will soon be one for 3.3.0. As I understand it, the "aio installer" installs everything needed to run gramps on a windows box. Keep in mind, however, that the foregoing is worth exactly what you paid for it. Further deponent saith not. Strugglin' Ol' Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes -- Thomas Paine

Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 22:23:47 +0000 (UTC), Todd Carnes <[email protected]> >wrote: > >>On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:55:46 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote: >> >>> Some people seem to only keep their family history information on such >>> sites, and when I ask if we can share and compare information, they >>> offer access to their online tree, where there seems to be no >>> possibility of sharing GEDCOM files. Is it really as bad as it looks, or >>> am I missing something important? >> >>Ancestry.com has the ability to import and/or export via gedcom files, >>but most people don't seem to realize that. >> >>HOWEVER, having said that, the gedcom you get from Ancestry.com when you >>do an export is NOT clean. By that, I mean it has a lot of non-standard >>junk in it that either gets thrown away or ends up polluting your notes >>when you import it into a "real" genealogy program. >> >>But gedcoms CAN be done on Ancestry.com. > >Do you know how? > >Would you care to share your knowledge? You can do so for your own tree. Not someone else's. The following is for ancestry - I don't know how it might work under Mundia. If you have owner privileges for a tree, then the menu bar for ancestry has a drop down tab "family trees" just to the right of the "Home" tab. If you hover over it, it lists all your owned trees as well as others that you have been linked to by invitation, followed by "Start a new tree" and then "Upload a GEDCOM", which should be self-explanatory. If you use Legacy 7.5, the File menu has an "upload to Ancestry On Line Family Tree" which is what I use and know it is self explanatory. If you click on the dropdown tab itself, you get a screen with a list of your owned trees. For each tree you can view the tree, manage the tree, or invite people to access the tree (necessary to give selective access to others for your private tree, or to give someone else the ability to edit your tree). If you click on "manage tree" then the new screen allows you to change the name and description of the tree, select the home person for the tree, identify who you are in the tree, delete the tree irrevocably, or export the tree to a GEDCOM on your computer. >You can't even find whether the person who compiled the tree is actually >related to the family you are looking for, That is up to the person who compiled the tree. >or whether that have compiled the >material from their own research, or just copied and pasted from someone >else's tree. Copy and paste IS a form of research. Just not the most valuable to others, unless you are copying from things that others do not have ready access to. >You see this list of trees that all have things like "10472 >individuals" - so which one is the original and which ones are the copies? Why would it matter? The data is the same. >There is no point in trying to make contact with the "owner" of a tree that is >apparently exactly the same as five or six others if they have just copied the >whole thing and havent done the research. The obvious thing to do is to ASK them. The whole point of a social-network based genealogy system is to get people communicating, not just looking at other people's data and trying to read their mind to determine why they entered what they did before copying it. Ancestry has been trying to felicitate cooperative genealogy for years, not generally with much success. Older trees and those created solely by massive GEDCOM uploads (that frequently do not specify sources) will tend not to be designed for use by others. On the other hand, if the Mundia tree resembles the current Ancestry Public Tree, then there is a "facts and sources" tab on the profile which records whatever sources you have identified. If you copied a tree, it presumably would show that as a source. If it shows no sources at all, then take the data with the usual barrel of salt. Assuming that you can see the full range of ancestry trees, one of my trees is named "Burgess28" (I'm not the owner, but I did the work). It is essentially an upload of a Legacy tree, and has all the sources that I added via Legacy, insofar as ancestry was able to interpret the GEDCOM. I am not in the tree, and the "home person" is the tree owner, who because he is living is probably not visible except as a surname. lojbab --- Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist [email protected] Lojban language www.lojban.org

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:45:48 -0600, Bob Melson wrote: > Notably missing from all this has been gramps, which just released it's > 3.3.0 version. While originally a Linux/Unix app, it's available for > Windows. See http://gramps-project.org/ for details. And, BTW, it's > free. > > Surly Ol' Bob Sometimes you really do get what you pay for. While I do use Gramps (because I run linux and, unfortunately, there's not much else to choose from), I intentionally left it out because I hate everything about it. I'd rather go to the trouble of setting up WinXP in a VM just to run Legacy (which I did), rather than deal with Gramps and all it's idiosyncrasies and lack of "user-friendliness". Todd

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa >>1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been >>put >>off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in >>marketing rather than a step advancement. >> >>Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions >>and >>experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? >> >>I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. >> >>Running >>Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU >>4GHz Ram >>Vista Business 32 >> >>Many Thanks >> >>Dave > > I am not familiar with unique requirements for UK genealogy. That > said... > > Until a couple of years ago I had tried every known genealogy program. > The two programs you should try before you buy are Legacy and > RootsMagic - if you are a very sophisticated user you may wish to try > TMG. > > Hugh Thanks Hugh. I am definately tring NOT to become familiar with every known genealogy program <grin>. Appreciate your not toward Legacy and Rootsmagic. Will be looking at both. Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa >>1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been >>put >>off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in >>marketing rather than a step advancement. >> >>Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions >>and >>experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? >> >>I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. >> >>Running >>Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU >>4GHz Ram >>Vista Business 32 >> >>Many Thanks >> >>Dave > > I am not familiar with unique requirements for UK genealogy. That > said... > > Until a couple of years ago I had tried every known genealogy program. > The two programs you should try before you buy are Legacy and > RootsMagic - if you are a very sophisticated user you may wish to try > TMG. > > Hugh Thanks Hugh - I'm definately trying NOT to become familiar with every known genealogy program <grin>. Appreciate the nod towards Legacy and Rootsmagic. Will definately look at both. Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected]etfront.net ---

"Edward Feustel" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa >>1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been >>put >>off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in >>marketing rather than a step advancement. >> >>Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions >>and >>experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? >> >>I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. >> >>Running >>Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU >>4GHz Ram >>Vista Business 32 >> >>Many Thanks >> >>Dave >> > May I respectfully suggest that you look at The British Version of The > Master Genealogist and accessory programs: Second Site and the Android > version of Gedstar Pro. See http://www.whollygenes.com. > > TMG has an import agent that will accept your FTM database directly. > It is event oriented and has a data field for about anything you might > want to enter. It has a relational database with excellent search > capability. Version 8 which is imminent can produce its reports in > Word and Wordperfect format on the 64 bit version. Its charting > capabilities using Visual Chart Form can do things that are difficult > to describe. A full free 30 day trial is available for Version 7. > 4 Excellent DVDs can guide your use. > > Second Site uses the database and produces html so you can > crank out CD-ROMs of reports, charts, maps, indexes, all hyperlinked. > If you have an iPad, you can view the info on your private or public > website. > > Gedstar Pro puts a read-only version of the database on the Android > and provides an AP to search and display results. > > Questions? > > Ed Feustel > Plainfield, NH Thanks Edward - I have no experience of this one. Looks like another candidate to try. Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

"Todd Carnes" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, Dave C wrote: > >> I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) >> circa 1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially >> been put off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual >> exercise in marketing rather than a step advancement. >> >> Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions >> and experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of >> RootsMagic? >> >> I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. >> >> Running >> Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU >> 4GHz Ram >> Vista Business 32 >> >> Many Thanks >> >> Dave >> >> >> --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to >> [email protected] --- > > I really like Legacy. (They have a free version you can download and try > & the paid version is reasonably priced.) > > Todd Thanks Todd - I will have a look at Legacy. Hadn't heard of that one prior to asking the question here. Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

On 06-16-2011 14:45, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > I've heard that there is another social media site centered on > genealogy (though I've never looked), and Mundia may merely be geni.com -- Wes Groleau There are two types of people in the world … http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1157

Dave C wrote: > > "singhals"<[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected] > > <snip> > >> As a rule of thumb (and yes, some thumbs are shorter than others), if the >> box/ad doesn't specifically SAY it does x, y, or z, better assume it >> doesn't do it. (Possible exceptions would include the box not specifying >> you can SAVE or SAVE_As, but if it doesn't SAY you can import/export via >> GEDCOM, you can't; if it doesn't SAY you can color-code the data, you >> can't but even if it does say so, you may not be able to color-code the >> data you want color-coded). >> >> I've used PAF, Legacy, Roots/UFT, FTM, TFE, RM/FO, and others. Each >> had/has a feature the others lack. The "legacy" software from DOS-days I >> keep functional on an old computer; some of the newer ones I use at my >> FHC. >> >> If I were limited to /just/ one, it would be PAF because I'm used to it >> and it does a magnificent job of storing my factual data. I'll have to >> move to something else one day, because LDS is not developing it further >> and one day in the not-far-distant future it will quit running on new >> computers. At that time, I'll probably go to Ancestral Quest as it's what >> PAF3 et seq are based on. >> >> FWIW. Opinions of others will vary wildly. (g) >> >> Cheryl > > Thankyou Cheryl - I appreciate your response. You are right about the > feature spread among various packages, I also find that the (G)UI varies > from enabling to restrictive, or perhaps enabling to frustrating! (G) These days, I tend not to analyze WHY a program doesn't do what I want; it either does or doesn't; if it doesn't, I use a different program to do that. My crusader gene timed-out about in the Y2K non-crisis. (g) I find that it is a serendipitous side-effect of my minimalist approach to the use of nooks and crannies in any program is the ease with which I can bounce from program to program. Whatever floats your boat, as they say. I once found two reports really useful in FTM/W -- the age-at-death report and the print-everybody-whether-they're-related-or-not report. Now, just about every genie program does the first, and FTW quit doing the second. No one has yet mentioned The Master Genealogist. Stereotypically, anyone who likes FTM probably isn't going to go for TMG, but a lot of people really really like TMG, and it does permit/encourage thinking of events and roles within the event. You might check out their demo on the Wholly Genes website. Cheryl

"Harrison Genealogy" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > Dave > > I use a number of Progs myself. > > My main one is Legacy 7.5, I also use RootsMagic 4 FTM 2010 and Family > Historian 4. > > Rootsmagic is very good at searching your data and it will import from > various file formats incl Legacy without using a GEDCOM, so you don't get > any "missed" or unknown fields being reported. Also It has a programme > with > it called RootsMagic to Go which allows you to keep the Prog and your data > on a memory stick and use it with any Computer. > > Family Historian on the other hand uses GEDCOM files as its file format > and > will import with no problem. It used to have a quite different layout but > now has a more usual family one (ie Husband/Wife with children underneath > and Parents above) > > I tend to use Legacy purely because I have quite a few of the "add on"s > for > it (ie Genelines) and I've used it for a number of years and got used to > it. > > If I was starting again I think I would definitely use RootsMagic ....... > > Regards > > Bill > Thanks for the response Bill. It is difficult to decide even between the more common possibilities with only the advertised features to go on. Actual user experience is so much more valuable. Regards Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

On Friday 17 June 2011 18:45, Bob Melson ([email protected]) opined: > On Friday 17 June 2011 18:35, Dave C ([email protected]) opined: > >> >> "Steve Hayes" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected] >>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:39:47 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>Thanks Todd - I will have a look at Legacy. Hadn't heard of that one >>>>prior to asking the question here. >>> >>> I'm quite surprised at that, since the basic version is free, so you >>> can try >>> it to see if you like it, and paqy for the additions if you need them. >>> >>> I've been using it since 2002 as my main program, and find it adequate >>> for my >>> needs, so try it and see if it meets yours. >>> >>> >> Definately going to do that Steve. Thanks >> >> Dave >> >> >> --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to >> [email protected] --- > > Notably missing from all this has been gramps, which just released it's > 3.3.0 version. While originally a Linux/Unix app, it's available for > Windows. See http://gramps-project.org/ for details. And, BTW, it's > free. > > Surly Ol' Bob I should add that I've been using it for 4-5 years now, primarily as a backup for phpGedView, and have found it to be capable and competent. Like all the others, it does have its quirks, but it's capable of exporting either gedcom or xml, will produce (static) web-pages from a database and doesn't whimper much when importing a gedcom from another app. Has a full range of text and graphic reports, does maps when suitably configured and has a number of useful 3d-party add-ons that extend its usefulness/utility. I haven't played with the latest'n'greatest just yet, but it promises to push the envelope. For a current review, see Eastman's Online Genealogy Newsletter at: http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2011/06/gramps-330-is-now-available.html SOB -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes -- Thomas Paine

On Friday 17 June 2011 18:35, Dave C ([email protected]) opined: > > "Steve Hayes" <[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected] >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:39:47 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>Thanks Todd - I will have a look at Legacy. Hadn't heard of that one >>>prior to asking the question here. >> >> I'm quite surprised at that, since the basic version is free, so you can >> try >> it to see if you like it, and paqy for the additions if you need them. >> >> I've been using it since 2002 as my main program, and find it adequate >> for my >> needs, so try it and see if it meets yours. >> >> > Definately going to do that Steve. Thanks > > Dave > > > --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to > [email protected] --- Notably missing from all this has been gramps, which just released it's 3.3.0 version. While originally a Linux/Unix app, it's available for Windows. See http://gramps-project.org/ for details. And, BTW, it's free. Surly Ol' Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes -- Thomas Paine

"Tom Perrett" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, Dave C wrote: > >>I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa >>1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been >>put >>off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in >>marketing rather than a step advancement. >> >>Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions >>and >>experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? >> >>I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in >the UK. > > Dave, > > The only software that I know of that is > designed in the UK around UK research > is Family Historian > > http://www.family-historian.co.uk/ > > > Cheers, > > Tom [Tom Perrett] <[email protected]> > Thanks Tom - I will have a look. Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa 1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been put off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in marketing rather than a step advancement. Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions and experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. Running Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU 4GHz Ram Vista Business 32 Many Thanks Dave --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to [email protected] ---

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:31:45 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote: /snip/ I use Family Historian 4 having tried every one of the programmes mentioned. I came to this decision for a number of reasons. (a) it has some very good charts qhich met my needs perfectly. (b) it's native file format is GEDCOM so it imports into any other programme almost seamlessly (although I have only regularly do this into FTM because some of the family use this software) (c) you can adapt the fields to suit your own use if you need anything non regular (d) There is a very active User Group, frequented by the authors and several add on writers where custom charts, diagrams, searches and reports are uploaded and free. (www.fhug.org.uk) (e) it has a graphical query page which does what looks like SQL on the database and generates data subsets. This is very powerful and just about the main reason I bought the software. (f) There is an add on called Ancetral Sources which makes entering censuses (the UK, Canada Ireland & USA ones at present), and has just been upgraded to also enter baptisms. The author has stated plans to include all BMD events. (g) Output can be sent to the in built pdf writer so sending diagrams to others is a doddle. (h) Unfortunately, the web site generator uses HTML which is good for CD's but a bit clunky if you have many thousands of people and families. But as the file format is Gedcom it can be read by phpgedview which makes a relational database which is both small, quick and works well. For the record, I found FTM very easy to use but you have to do things the Ancestry way. It is great if you want to interface with Ancestry but only did what it says on the box. No real customisation available. Legacy works but was clunky nh my opinion. Again I prefered the queries in FH4. The others lacked the output in terms of customisable diagrams that FH does and always felt the need to transfer datat from prog to prog to get the features I needed. As already stated, data transfer is rarely faultless so the less you do it the better. Hope that helps.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:39:47 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> wrote: >Thanks Todd - I will have a look at Legacy. Hadn't heard of that one prior >to asking the question here. I'm quite surprised at that, since the basic version is free, so you can try it to see if you like it, and paqy for the additions if you need them. I've been using it since 2002 as my main program, and find it adequate for my needs, so try it and see if it meets yours. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Hugh et al I only tend to import my Legacy file into Rootsmagic because I love RM's search facilities ... any changes or additions I make to Legacy only. I keep this procedure with all other Progs I use ! Bill PS I use the de-luxe edition of Legacy 7.5 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J. Hugh Sullivan Sent: 17 June 2011 13:18 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Advice on replacement Software Please On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:58:32 +0100, "Harrison Genealogy" <[email protected]> wrote: >Dave > >I use a number of Progs myself. > >My main one is Legacy 7.5, I also use RootsMagic 4 FTM 2010 and Family >Historian 4. > >Rootsmagic is very good at searching your data and it will import from >various file formats incl Legacy without using a GEDCOM, so you don't get >any "missed" or unknown fields being reported. I suggest you try one evolution with RM and Legacy. Legacy allows one to "source" a name. RM copies the info from a GEDCOM and shows the name sourced on printouts. But when you GEDCOM back to Legacy the name source is listed under "unassigned". That certainly was the case before info could be transferred without a GEDCOM. Should you find out how to eliminate or correct that problem, please tell me. It would prevent my having to move almost 7,000 sources from unassigned to name. When using both programs, as I do, it's important to keep the data separate vice porting from one to the other. Hugh ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:58:32 +0100, "Harrison Genealogy" <[email protected]> wrote: >Dave > >I use a number of Progs myself. > >My main one is Legacy 7.5, I also use RootsMagic 4 FTM 2010 and Family >Historian 4. > >Rootsmagic is very good at searching your data and it will import from >various file formats incl Legacy without using a GEDCOM, so you don't get >any "missed" or unknown fields being reported. I suggest you try one evolution with RM and Legacy. Legacy allows one to "source" a name. RM copies the info from a GEDCOM and shows the name sourced on printouts. But when you GEDCOM back to Legacy the name source is listed under "unassigned". That certainly was the case before info could be transferred without a GEDCOM. Should you find out how to eliminate or correct that problem, please tell me. It would prevent my having to move almost 7,000 sources from unassigned to name. When using both programs, as I do, it's important to keep the data separate vice porting from one to the other. Hugh

On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:24:01 +1200, "Dave C" <[email protected]> wrote: >I am currently running an anchient version of Family Tree Maker (V7) circa >1999. I have started to look at newer offerings and have initially been put >off the latest version of FTM which seems to be an annual exercise in >marketing rather than a step advancement. > >Having now decided to cast the net wider than an "upgrade" your opinions and >experiences would be appreciated. What do people think of RootsMagic? > >I'm in New Zealand, but most current research is focussed in the UK. > >Running >Dual Core 2.7Ghz CPU >4GHz Ram >Vista Business 32 > >Many Thanks > >Dave I am not familiar with unique requirements for UK genealogy. That said... Until a couple of years ago I had tried every known genealogy program. The two programs you should try before you buy are Legacy and RootsMagic - if you are a very sophisticated user you may wish to try TMG. Hugh

Dave C wrote: > > "Harrison Genealogy"<[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected] >> Dave >> >> I use a number of Progs myself. >> >> My main one is Legacy 7.5, I also use RootsMagic 4 FTM 2010 and Family >> Historian 4. >> >> Rootsmagic is very good at searching your data and it will import from >> various file formats incl Legacy without using a GEDCOM, so you don't get >> any "missed" or unknown fields being reported. Also It has a programme >> with >> it called RootsMagic to Go which allows you to keep the Prog and your data >> on a memory stick and use it with any Computer. >> >> Family Historian on the other hand uses GEDCOM files as its file format >> and >> will import with no problem. It used to have a quite different layout but >> now has a more usual family one (ie Husband/Wife with children underneath >> and Parents above) >> >> I tend to use Legacy purely because I have quite a few of the "add on"s >> for >> it (ie Genelines) and I've used it for a number of years and got used to >> it. >> >> If I was starting again I think I would definitely use RootsMagic ....... >> >> Regards >> >> Bill >> > Thanks for the response Bill. It is difficult to decide even between the > more common possibilities with only the advertised features to go on. Actual > user experience is so much more valuable. As a rule of thumb (and yes, some thumbs are shorter than others), if the box/ad doesn't specifically SAY it does x, y, or z, better assume it doesn't do it. (Possible exceptions would include the box not specifying you can SAVE or SAVE_As, but if it doesn't SAY you can import/export via GEDCOM, you can't; if it doesn't SAY you can color-code the data, you can't but even if it does say so, you may not be able to color-code the data you want color-coded). I've used PAF, Legacy, Roots/UFT, FTM, TFE, RM/FO, and others. Each had/has a feature the others lack. The "legacy" software from DOS-days I keep functional on an old computer; some of the newer ones I use at my FHC. If I were limited to /just/ one, it would be PAF because I'm used to it and it does a magnificent job of storing my factual data. I'll have to move to something else one day, because LDS is not developing it further and one day in the not-far-distant future it will quit running on new computers. At that time, I'll probably go to Ancestral Quest as it's what PAF3 et seq are based on. FWIW. Opinions of others will vary wildly. (g) Cheryl