Yes, I have only 1 database for PAF5 and both PAF and ANQ read the same data and when changed that database is updated by either program. It is interesting that since I have input my DNA test results using ANQ they are stored on the same database but since PAF does not have a feature that reads the DNA, only the ANQ can read those records. The reason I have not switched over already is I am not used to the layout of the data on the page. Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 Skype me at - Cottonian Library Genealogy of the Cotton surname is my Enigma I haven't sent an attachment if the details aren't mentioned above GOONS member responsible for tracking the surname COTTON, #1437 Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide See http://home.comcast.net/~Cottondna/ -------------------------------------------------- From: "Mika Bilich" <mika_bilich@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 10:12 AM To: <paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > I have asked before but never got an answer to my question that I recall. > Ross > are you saying that AQ and PAF will read off the same database? They did > several > years ago and then with changes made they wouldn't. I also like to have a > few > different programs to use for different things. I just didn't want to take > up > room having more than one database. > Thanks, Mika > > > > ________________________________ > From: Ross G. H. Cotton <rgcotton@skylinc.net> > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Sent: Sun, February 20, 2011 2:06:46 PM > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > I have many genealogy programs available on my computer and I am sure, > that > if > and when I change from PAF it will be to Ancestral Quest. I use it now > as > a extra facility or subordinate program with my PAF data for any of its > additional features, as it saves any changes I make to the data as, a PAF > file. > > The only thing I use Roots Magic for is when I want to make an excellent > large Wall Chart. However to my knowledge they still haven't mastered the > problems of using it with Windows 7. > > > Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 > Skype me at - Cottonian Library > Genealogy of the Cotton surname is my Enigma > I haven't sent an attachment if the details aren't mentioned above > > GOONS member responsible for tracking the surname COTTON, #1437 > Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide > See http://home.comcast.net/~Cottondna/ > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "B.H. Kemp" <bkgenea@yahoo.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:37 AM > To: <PAF-5-USERS@rootsweb.com> > Subject: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > >> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. >> >> It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their new >> Program...... >> >> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read reviews >> on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, requiring >> many manual corrections. >> >> Betsy Hare Kemp >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Bea wrote: > Somewhere in this collection of messages was one that said the person was not LDS, so had no need to use nFS. > > She/he may be surprised to know that it is being opened to the public soon. A test run has already begun on a limited basis. They will have access to all the data there. > > Can't remember where I found this yesterday when I was surffing the LDS sites. Yes, that is true, eventually. Still, as I've said before and often -- he-who keeps his ONLY copy of his genealogy in an on-line database on someone else's computer will get what he deserves. IOW: we will still need our own personal computer program resident on our own personal computer to hold our own personal data. Cheryl

Lorac wrote: > Re: PAF-5-USERS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 30 > > I have been off line and unavailable for about 5-6 months and wonder in the > past two days all this talk of PAF, Brothers Keeper and FTM, etc. I guess > I've missed something. Is PAF-5 not going to be supported? Will it still > be workable? Sorry to be so in the dark. > PAF hasn't been updated in about 5 years; they first announced its imminent demise back in the 1990s. They moved all their time/effort/attention out of the commercial market into what became newFamilySearch, their on-line database. So long as your personal computer will run PAF5x, no need to change just because SLC isn't "supporting" it. > Also, a question. I have all these back-ups in my back-up folder and on my > PAF flash drive. If I am confident that my data and program > is correct, when can I delete 'some' of these back-ups. Or is it imperative > that I keep them all? Each time I backed up, was because I made or added > changes in people or sources, etc. So each back up is different. I hope... Hypothetically, you could delete every 2nd one. However, Hypos don't live long at my house. Back a decade or so ago, I was entering the content of a genealogy book (at the request of the author) into PAF 2.31. I backed up daily, and once more at the end of each chapter. In Chapter 8 --the longest in the book, the system kept giving me a bad pointer around 2/3 to 3/4 of the way through. When I finally gave in and went to backups, I ended up having to go back 8 backups (the first one I had from Ch.7) to find one that wasn't alleged to be corrupted. So, if you were to trudge over to a friend's place and try to restore each of your backups (starting with the most recent), you could find out if they are good. If they're not, you may as well delete them; if they are, then you could, maybe, feel safe deleting the older ones. /I/ wouldn't, but once-burnt=twice shy. (g) Cheryl

I'm getting old and don't want to change from PAF, but I have just introduced it to my niece. Perhaps it would be wise for her to start her recording in a new program rather than having to learn how to gedcom (I still haven't learnt that in ????? years!) Two listers have given Ancestry Quest a plug so that's sounding good. Does anyone know what Brothers Keeper is like and any others. I tried a program years ago and hated it - could have been FTM - from memory it came up in yellow. Marg ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Maxwell" <smaxwl@earthlink.net> To: <paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 8:31 AM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > I'm so sorry...I forget! Not everyone agrees with me that FTM isn't one > of the majors. haha. I totally agree with you on that one. They are very > proprietary in what they do and how they work. I gave up on FTM many, > many years ago. And I don't think they have changed their focus either. > > Sue > > On 2/20/2011 3:09 PM, Ross G. H. Cotton wrote: >> I don't think Sue has ever used a GEDCOM file with Family Tree Maker. >> Believe me it doesn't move the Notes and other non basic data to the >> proper >> location. For that reason I don't use FTM as I know they developed their >> own version for GEDCOM files. >> Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> >> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 PM >> To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> >> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF >> >>> There are several great genealogy data managers out there. All of the >>> major ones (if not all of them) follow the current gedcom standards. I >>> think most of us know that genealogy has surpassed the existing gedcom >>> restrictions. FamilySearch as well as another group of genealogists are >>> now working on updating the gedcom standards. I'm sure that as soon as >>> that happens all the vendors will implement those new standards into >>> their existing software programs. They ALL transfer data that are >>> covered in the gedcom standard. >>> >>> Genealogy has been moving at such lightening speed that we get >>> frustrated when parts don't move as fast as we want them too. I guess >>> it's a test of our patience! >>> >>> When it comes to passing data back and forth between different software >>> packages the problem usually lies in the new bells and whistles we all >>> want, but not every program has the ability to handle every other >>> software's new features. It takes time and cooperation between them all. >>> So the fact that new gedcom standards are being developed will move us >>> closer to having better collaboration between programs and each other. >>> >>> I don't think the issue is necessarily which program you choose to >>> migrate to, but rather acquiring the patience to look at each one and >>> determine which one meets the majority of your needs. And today, it >>> costs nothing to check out the other major programs. They each have a >>> free version and all the family history centers have the full programs >>> for you to test your data on. So, take your data and test it with each >>> of the software programs. Just remember to use a copy of your data to do >>> the testing. You will always have your original. >>> >>> Sue >>> >>> On 2/20/2011 9:37 AM, B.H. Kemp wrote: >>>> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. >>>> >>>> It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their >>>> new >>>> Program...... >>>> >>>> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read >>>> reviews >>>> on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, >>>> requiring >>>> many manual corrections.

In addition to gedcom problems exporting to FTM, it was stated at one of our GS meetings that exporting to Legacy 7 was also unreliable; is loses parts of the Data. Betsy Hare Kemp

I have asked before but never got an answer to my question that I recall. Ross are you saying that AQ and PAF will read off the same database? They did several years ago and then with changes made they wouldn't. I also like to have a few different programs to use for different things. I just didn't want to take up room having more than one database. Thanks, Mika ________________________________ From: Ross G. H. Cotton <rgcotton@skylinc.net> To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com Sent: Sun, February 20, 2011 2:06:46 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF I have many genealogy programs available on my computer and I am sure, that if and when I change from PAF it will be to Ancestral Quest. I use it now as a extra facility or subordinate program with my PAF data for any of its additional features, as it saves any changes I make to the data as, a PAF file. The only thing I use Roots Magic for is when I want to make an excellent large Wall Chart. However to my knowledge they still haven't mastered the problems of using it with Windows 7. Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 Skype me at - Cottonian Library Genealogy of the Cotton surname is my Enigma I haven't sent an attachment if the details aren't mentioned above GOONS member responsible for tracking the surname COTTON, #1437 Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide See http://home.comcast.net/~Cottondna/ -------------------------------------------------- From: "B.H. Kemp" <bkgenea@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 11:37 AM To: <PAF-5-USERS@rootsweb.com> Subject: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. > > It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their new > Program...... > > Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read reviews > on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, requiring > many manual corrections. > > Betsy Hare Kemp > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Somewhere in this collection of messages was one that said the person was not LDS, so had no need to use nFS. She/he may be surprised to know that it is being opened to the public soon. A test run has already begun on a limited basis. They will have access to all the data there. Can't remember where I found this yesterday when I was surffing the LDS sites. Bea

Wow! That's good news. I asked that AQ, when printing to file, would print to file and open in Word instead of creating a .pdf file, and I think that may have been fixed. I like to edit PAF's pedigree charts. Maybe I'm the only one doing so, but I've needed that capability. If one enlarges the report to about 150% it's fairly easy to move the cursor to where one wants to edit. Lila ---------------------------------------- > From: wompjm@ida.net > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:58:31 -0700 > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > In fact Ancestral Quest recently announced that they have support for > working in French, German, Spanish, Norwegian, Swedish and Chinese. When > you start Ancestral Quest it comes up on the opening announcements screen. > There is also information about it here: > > http://www.ancquest.com/LangList.htm > > It says that the German language version costs $7.95 to add on but all other > languages are free. > > Warren > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Lila Garner > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 6:17 PM > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > > When I downloaded a trial version of AQ a year or so ago, it didn't have any > language capability except English. That's what PAF does that, as far as I > know, AQ doesn't do. Lila > > ---------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 01:03:09 +0000 > > From: fec33@comcast.net > > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > > > I've been using AQ for nearly 2 years. At first I used PAF and would > switch to AQ to check things or reorganize source lists. More recently I'm > using it almost exclusively. If you join the AQ list, they are extremely > helpful (just as the PAF list members are). It seems that there isn't > anything that PAF does that AQ can't do, and then some!!!! It just takes a > bit of learning to figure out how to do something with different commands. > I'm still learning. > > > > If you go to this AQ web page: > > http://www.ancquest.com/CompareAQVersions.htm > > there is a comparison of the features in the paid versus the 'Basic' > versions of AQ. > > > > Ellen > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear PAF list, Don't panic. Nothing has really changed for those of us who use PAF. We have gotten along for the past several years knowing that PAF would not be upgraded. We also know that it will not interface with new FamilySearch. We have been perfectly happy with the version available to us. In fact the only shortcoming I feel that PAF has is the handling of the new temple codes. The recent announcement has not changed anything for us. PAF will not suddenly quit working. The only change is that new users will not be able to download PAF from the familysearch site. The LDS church will probably quit marketing it on CD also. So there may be fewer new PAF users but for all of the current users nothing has changed. We only need to change to a new program if we want all the bells and whistles they offer. I have used PAF as my main program since DOS version 2.0. When PAF 2.31 came along so did an early version of Ancestral Quest. I bought Ancestral Quest because it would read my PAF data file and print reports using a windows print driver so the reports looked much nicer than the same report printed from PAF. Since then I have maintained a current copy of AQ as well as PAF. So I have already made my decision. If and when I give up on PAF I will move to AQ. It has the shortest learning curve for me of any of the programs. One of the reasons I stick with PAF is that a PAF 5 data file is the only type of file that can be read by the GenCharts for PAF program. I like the reports that I can get from this printing utility program. I can't get them anywhere else. I know the programmer of this program is now looking at developing a version of GenCharts that will read an AQ file and print reports directly from an AQ data file just like it does now from PAF. When that version of GenCharts is brought forth I may then change completely over to AQ. Until then I will continue to use both programs. Lynn -----Original Message----- From: Sue Maxwell <smaxwl@earthlink.net> To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com Sent: Sat, Feb 19, 2011 1:07 pm Subject: [PAF-5] Life of PAF This may be of interest to all of you. In this morning's LDS Church News here is an article from the RootsTech Conference. Elder Scott responds o a question about the life expectancy of PAF. http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/60513/RootsTech-Conference-Blessing-invoked-upon-family-history-consultants.html Sue -- ue Maxwell ttp://granitegenealogy.blogspot.com/ ice President - Utah Genealogical Association ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

When I downloaded a trial version of AQ a year or so ago, it didn't have any language capability except English. That's what PAF does that, as far as I know, AQ doesn't do. Lila ---------------------------------------- > Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 01:03:09 +0000 > From: fec33@comcast.net > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > I've been using AQ for nearly 2 years. At first I used PAF and would switch to AQ to check things or reorganize source lists. More recently I'm using it almost exclusively. If you join the AQ list, they are extremely helpful (just as the PAF list members are). It seems that there isn't anything that PAF does that AQ can't do, and then some!!!! It just takes a bit of learning to figure out how to do something with different commands. I'm still learning. > > If you go to this AQ web page: > http://www.ancquest.com/CompareAQVersions.htm > there is a comparison of the features in the paid versus the 'Basic' versions of AQ. > > Ellen > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I've been using AQ for nearly 2 years. At first I used PAF and would switch to AQ to check things or reorganize source lists. More recently I'm using it almost exclusively. If you join the AQ list, they are extremely helpful (just as the PAF list members are). It seems that there isn't anything that PAF does that AQ can't do, and then some!!!! It just takes a bit of learning to figure out how to do something with different commands. I'm still learning. If you go to this AQ web page: http://www.ancquest.com/CompareAQVersions.htm there is a comparison of the features in the paid versus the 'Basic' versions of AQ. Ellen

On 02/20/2011 07:33 PM, Lorac wrote: > Re: PAF-5-USERS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 30 > > I have been off line and unavailable for about 5-6 months and wonder in the > past two days all this talk of PAF, Brothers Keeper and FTM, etc. I guess > I've missed something. Is PAF-5 not going to be supported? Will it still > be workable? Sorry to be so in the dark. > > Also, a question. I have all these back-ups in my back-up folder and on my > PAF flash drive. If I am confident that my data and program > > is correct, when can I delete 'some' of these back-ups. Or is it imperative > that I keep them all? Each time I backed up, was because I made or added > changes in people or sources, etc. So each back up is different. I hope... > > Carol PAF 5 is not changing. There is nothing that will stop the copy you have from working. But in a future version of familysearch.org it will no longer be available for download. So if you want to have a copy available to install on some new PC someday down the road you should save a copy of the install file. The only thing that might prevent you from using PAF in the future is if some future version of Windows causes it to misbehave. But that is probably unlikely. ---------- As for backups -- the only thing you would need a very old copy of your back up for is if you discovered that some part of your current data was corrupted, and as you search your recent backups you find that they are all corrupted in the same way. In that case you would be wanting to search back until you find the last version that isn't corrupted. But then you have the problem of rebuilding all the changes you have made since that time. There isn't a simple solution for that kind of situation. If you found that data for 5 families got messed up a year and a half ago, would you go back to your saved back-up from 1.5 years ago and then try to update that saved data with all the changes you have made in the last 1.5 years? Or would you be more inclined to take what you've got and just fix the damaged data? What if you found that certain aspects of 2000 individual records got messed up 2 years ago. Would you want to rebuild from the last good backup? Or would you prefer to patch up the current data? Anytime you revert to a very old backup you are faced with the challenge of redoing all the changes and additions you made since that back-up date. These are some of the factors a person might consider when they are deciding how long they should keep their backups.

I asked a research pal for a printed Pedigree Chart. She uses FTM, and what I received was nothing like what I needed. Maybe she didn't understand what I wanted, but when we discussed it, she couldn't find any other report that seemed to fit the bill. I tried FTM and hated it. One reason: no way to put a family's children in order, without birthdates (which I didn't have, but knew birth order). Lila ---------------------------------------- > From: rgcotton@skylinc.net > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 17:09:02 -0500 > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > I don't think Sue has ever used a GEDCOM file with Family Tree Maker. > Believe me it doesn't move the Notes and other non basic data to the proper > location. For that reason I don't use FTM as I know they developed their > own version for GEDCOM files. > > > Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 > Skype me at - Cottonian Library > Genealogy of the Cotton surname is my Enigma > I haven't sent an attachment if the details aren't mentioned above > > GOONS member responsible for tracking the surname COTTON, #1437 > Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide > See http://home.comcast.net/~Cottondna/ > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Sue Maxwell" > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 PM > To: > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > > There are several great genealogy data managers out there. All of the > > major ones (if not all of them) follow the current gedcom standards. I > > think most of us know that genealogy has surpassed the existing gedcom > > restrictions. FamilySearch as well as another group of genealogists are > > now working on updating the gedcom standards. I'm sure that as soon as > > that happens all the vendors will implement those new standards into > > their existing software programs. They ALL transfer data that are > > covered in the gedcom standard. > > > > Genealogy has been moving at such lightening speed that we get > > frustrated when parts don't move as fast as we want them too. I guess > > it's a test of our patience! > > > > When it comes to passing data back and forth between different software > > packages the problem usually lies in the new bells and whistles we all > > want, but not every program has the ability to handle every other > > software's new features. It takes time and cooperation between them all. > > So the fact that new gedcom standards are being developed will move us > > closer to having better collaboration between programs and each other. > > > > I don't think the issue is necessarily which program you choose to > > migrate to, but rather acquiring the patience to look at each one and > > determine which one meets the majority of your needs. And today, it > > costs nothing to check out the other major programs. They each have a > > free version and all the family history centers have the full programs > > for you to test your data on. So, take your data and test it with each > > of the software programs. Just remember to use a copy of your data to do > > the testing. You will always have your original. > > > > Sue > > > > On 2/20/2011 9:37 AM, B.H. Kemp wrote: > >> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. > >> > >> It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their new > >> Program...... > >> > >> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read reviews > >> on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, requiring > >> many manual corrections. > >> > >> Betsy Hare Kemp > > -- > > > > Sue Maxwell > > http://granitegenealogy.blogspot.com/ > > Vice President - Utah Genealogical Association > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Carol, I expect PAF to be supported for a few years to come. (After all, FamilySearch is still providing support for the DOS version of PAF.) And PAF will continue to work as it always has. But it will not do anything new. The good news is that when you some day decide you really need genealogy software that does new things, some of the best new programs can import your PAF files directly without needing to go through gedcom. (i.e. Instead of opening the file with PAF, you open it with AncestralQuest, RootsMagic, or Legacy.) If your PAF file has no problems, you can probably get rid of the oldest backups. They likely don't have anything that the newer backups don't have. Maybe firstly run Check/Repair 3 or 4 times, or until PAF finds no further errors. (If you restore a backup, I suggest you restore it to a different folder so that it doesn't overwrite your current data file, in case you want to compare them.) These are just a few thoughts. Others in this group may have other insights. Bill Buchanan On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Lorac <radford2@bellsouth.net> wrote: > Re: PAF-5-USERS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 30 > > I have been off line and unavailable for about 5-6 months and wonder in the > past two days all this talk of PAF, Brothers Keeper and FTM, etc. I guess > I've missed something. Is PAF-5 not going to be supported? Will it still > be workable? Sorry to be so in the dark. > > Also, a question. I have all these back-ups in my back-up folder and on my > PAF flash drive. If I am confident that my data and program > > is correct, when can I delete 'some' of these back-ups. Or is it imperative > that I keep them all? Each time I backed up, was because I made or added > changes in people or sources, etc. So each back up is different. I > hope... > > Carol > > > > > > >

Thank you, of course I AM that old, that's why I make so many typos, OLD EYES! : > )) Don Boudreaux B:28 Apr 1932 On 2/20/2011 8:19 PM, Wayne Jones wrote: > So -- if you started genealogy in your 20's like I did, if you started in > 1885 as you said, you must be close to being an ancestor yourself -- and the > oldest person Alive -- some where about 140 years old<G> > > Aloha and long life! > Wayne, NH6K > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Don Boudreaux > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 3:01 PM > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > Hi: > I have been doing genealogy since about 1885, I started out with PAF-2.1 and > progressed to PAF 3.0 which I still use as my primary program. I have > tried dozens > of other programs, including PAF-4 and PAF-5 and can't find an easier or > simpler > program that works closer to the way I think. I also have Roots Magic,. > which has a > lot of great features, such as you can color code a person's ancestors > or descendants > with one click. That is a very handy feature in order to find who are > all the descendants > of your progenitor ancestor. In order to do this I just make a gedcom > and import it to > Roots Magic and check them. I have used Brothers Keeper, Legacy, Family > Tree Maker > and dozens of other programs over the years but stick with old 1997 > PAF-3. If you > want a program to be able to handle pictures and documents you need a > more advanced > program. I have not used Ancestral Quest in a long time, but it has a > great advantage in > that your data is compatible with PAF. There are free versions available > of most of the > above programs, it would be worth while to try them with just adding a > couple dozen of > your ancestry in them and see how you like them. > > Don Boudreaux > Lafayette, La. > > > On 2/20/2011 6:16 PM, Marg& Neil Andrews wrote: >> I'm getting old and don't want to change from PAF, but I have >> just introduced it to my niece. Perhaps it would be wise for her >> to start her recording in a new program rather than having to learn >> how to gedcom (I still haven't learnt that in ????? years!) >> >> Two listers have given Ancestry Quest a plug so that's sounding good. >> Does anyone know what Brothers Keeper is like and any others. >> >> I tried a program years ago and hated it - could have been FTM - >> from memory it came up in yellow. >> Marg >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> >> To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 8:31 AM >> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF >> >> >>> I'm so sorry...I forget! Not everyone agrees with me that FTM isn't one >>> of the majors. haha. I totally agree with you on that one. They are very >>> proprietary in what they do and how they work. I gave up on FTM many, >>> many years ago. And I don't think they have changed their focus either. >>> >>> Sue >>> >>> On 2/20/2011 3:09 PM, Ross G. H. Cotton wrote: >>>> I don't think Sue has ever used a GEDCOM file with Family Tree Maker. >>>> Believe me it doesn't move the Notes and other non basic data to the >>>> proper >>>> location. For that reason I don't use FTM as I know they developed > their >>>> own version for GEDCOM files. >>>> Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 >> >> >>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>> From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> >>>> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 PM >>>> To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> >>>> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF >>>> >>>>> There are several great genealogy data managers out there. All of the >>>>> major ones (if not all of them) follow the current gedcom standards. I >>>>> think most of us know that genealogy has surpassed the existing gedcom >>>>> restrictions. FamilySearch as well as another group of genealogists are >>>>> now working on updating the gedcom standards. I'm sure that as soon as >>>>> that happens all the vendors will implement those new standards into >>>>> their existing software programs. They ALL transfer data that are >>>>> covered in the gedcom standard. >>>>> >>>>> Genealogy has been moving at such lightening speed that we get >>>>> frustrated when parts don't move as fast as we want them too. I guess >>>>> it's a test of our patience! >>>>> >>>>> When it comes to passing data back and forth between different software >>>>> packages the problem usually lies in the new bells and whistles we all >>>>> want, but not every program has the ability to handle every other >>>>> software's new features. It takes time and cooperation between them > all. >>>>> So the fact that new gedcom standards are being developed will move us >>>>> closer to having better collaboration between programs and each other. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think the issue is necessarily which program you choose to >>>>> migrate to, but rather acquiring the patience to look at each one and >>>>> determine which one meets the majority of your needs. And today, it >>>>> costs nothing to check out the other major programs. They each have a >>>>> free version and all the family history centers have the full programs >>>>> for you to test your data on. So, take your data and test it with each >>>>> of the software programs. Just remember to use a copy of your data to > do >>>>> the testing. You will always have your original. >>>>> >>>>> Sue >>>>> >>>>> On 2/20/2011 9:37 AM, B.H. Kemp wrote: >>>>>> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. >>>>>> >>>>>> It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their >>>>>> new >>>>>> Program...... >>>>>> >>>>>> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read >>>>>> reviews >>>>>> on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, >>>>>> requiring >>>>>> many manual corrections. >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ----- >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3456 - Release Date: 02/20/11 >> >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3456 - Release Date: 02/20/11 > >

Re: PAF-5-USERS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 30 I have been off line and unavailable for about 5-6 months and wonder in the past two days all this talk of PAF, Brothers Keeper and FTM, etc. I guess I've missed something. Is PAF-5 not going to be supported? Will it still be workable? Sorry to be so in the dark. Also, a question. I have all these back-ups in my back-up folder and on my PAF flash drive. If I am confident that my data and program is correct, when can I delete 'some' of these back-ups. Or is it imperative that I keep them all? Each time I backed up, was because I made or added changes in people or sources, etc. So each back up is different. I hope... Carol

Gosh, pretty much said what I was thinking word for word, Earl. Thanks! I have only used PAF - it's done for me what I need it to and after several years why mess with it. I've never even had to give it an oil change :) Like Earl, any new information I add by hand. I tend to just enter people, link photos, scanned documents, etc. I manage some information by simply adding it in the notes. But the comments being posted have me curious and many of you, no doubt, are interested in using a program with more bells and whistles, but I have to say I'm content with PAF-5 so will continue to use it and this wonderful list. Thanks everyone for all of your contributions...I learned a few new things today. Jayne Madison, WI ----- Original Message ----- From: Earl Park To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 7:57 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF I started with PAF, and have stayed with it. I have a bunch of other genealogy software like FTM 2008, FTM 2009, Ancestral Quest, Family Insight and some others. I enter information and people every day and I use PAF 5.2.18 exclusively. The reason I have the other genealogy programs is so I can read other peoples files. I do NOT import anything into my data base, I add everything by hand only after I verify that information. Just a personal preference I have nothing against importing stuff I just like to "trust but verify", if you know what I mean. I can also say that this board has taught me more than one person or book could ever do. I thank you all for that. I have no plans on moving my data to other programs permanently. I, like others use other programs to look at my data and in some cases fix my data, but I always come back to PAF to do my real work. I have no plans of moving to any other board either. I hope I have been of some help like this, in the past, adding my 2-cents worth. I would truly be saddened if PAF and this board were to be no more. I will be loyal as long as my backup of my PAF program holds up. I will always be looking for that perfect software to compare to my PAF program until then I'm PAF all the way. Aloha, Earl in Hawaii ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marg & Neil Andrews" <margay@tadaust.org.au> To: <paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 2:16 PM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > I'm getting old and don't want to change from PAF, but I > have > just introduced it to my niece. Perhaps it would be wise > for her > to start her recording in a new program rather than having > to learn > how to gedcom (I still haven't learnt that in ????? > years!) > > Two listers have given Ancestry Quest a plug so that's > sounding good. > Does anyone know what Brothers Keeper is like and any > others. > > I tried a program years ago and hated it - could have been > FTM - > from memory it came up in yellow. > Marg > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sue Maxwell" <smaxwl@earthlink.net> > To: <paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 8:31 AM > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > >> I'm so sorry...I forget! Not everyone agrees with me that >> FTM isn't one >> of the majors. haha. I totally agree with you on that >> one. They are very >> proprietary in what they do and how they work. I gave up >> on FTM many, >> many years ago. And I don't think they have changed their >> focus either. >> >> Sue >> >> On 2/20/2011 3:09 PM, Ross G. H. Cotton wrote: >>> I don't think Sue has ever used a GEDCOM file with >>> Family Tree Maker. >>> Believe me it doesn't move the Notes and other non basic >>> data to the >>> proper >>> location. For that reason I don't use FTM as I know >>> they developed >>> their >>> own version for GEDCOM files. >>> Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 > >> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> >>> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 PM >>> To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> >>> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF >>> >>>> There are several great genealogy data managers out >>>> there. All of the >>>> major ones (if not all of them) follow the current >>>> gedcom standards. I >>>> think most of us know that genealogy has surpassed the >>>> existing gedcom >>>> restrictions. FamilySearch as well as another group of >>>> genealogists are >>>> now working on updating the gedcom standards. I'm sure >>>> that as soon as >>>> that happens all the vendors will implement those new >>>> standards into >>>> their existing software programs. They ALL transfer >>>> data that are >>>> covered in the gedcom standard. >>>> >>>> Genealogy has been moving at such lightening speed that >>>> we get >>>> frustrated when parts don't move as fast as we want >>>> them too. I guess >>>> it's a test of our patience! >>>> >>>> When it comes to passing data back and forth between >>>> different software >>>> packages the problem usually lies in the new bells and >>>> whistles we all >>>> want, but not every program has the ability to handle >>>> every other >>>> software's new features. It takes time and cooperation >>>> between them >>>> all. >>>> So the fact that new gedcom standards are being >>>> developed will move us >>>> closer to having better collaboration between programs >>>> and each other. >>>> >>>> I don't think the issue is necessarily which program >>>> you choose to >>>> migrate to, but rather acquiring the patience to look >>>> at each one and >>>> determine which one meets the majority of your needs. >>>> And today, it >>>> costs nothing to check out the other major programs. >>>> They each have a >>>> free version and all the family history centers have >>>> the full programs >>>> for you to test your data on. So, take your data and >>>> test it with each >>>> of the software programs. Just remember to use a copy >>>> of your data to >>>> do >>>> the testing. You will always have your original. >>>> >>>> Sue >>>> >>>> On 2/20/2011 9:37 AM, B.H. Kemp wrote: >>>>> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. >>>>> >>>>> It would be interesting to know what the List members >>>>> chose for their >>>>> new >>>>> Program...... >>>>> >>>>> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and >>>>> I have read >>>>> reviews >>>>> on several programs that they don't convert/accept >>>>> Gedcom well, >>>>> requiring >>>>> many manual corrections. > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3455 - Release > Date: 02/20/11 > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In fact Ancestral Quest recently announced that they have support for working in French, German, Spanish, Norwegian, Swedish and Chinese. When you start Ancestral Quest it comes up on the opening announcements screen. There is also information about it here: http://www.ancquest.com/LangList.htm It says that the German language version costs $7.95 to add on but all other languages are free. Warren -----Original Message----- From: paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:paf-5-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Lila Garner Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 6:17 PM To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF When I downloaded a trial version of AQ a year or so ago, it didn't have any language capability except English. That's what PAF does that, as far as I know, AQ doesn't do. Lila ---------------------------------------- > Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 01:03:09 +0000 > From: fec33@comcast.net > To: paf-5-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > I've been using AQ for nearly 2 years. At first I used PAF and would switch to AQ to check things or reorganize source lists. More recently I'm using it almost exclusively. If you join the AQ list, they are extremely helpful (just as the PAF list members are). It seems that there isn't anything that PAF does that AQ can't do, and then some!!!! It just takes a bit of learning to figure out how to do something with different commands. I'm still learning. > > If you go to this AQ web page: > http://www.ancquest.com/CompareAQVersions.htm > there is a comparison of the features in the paid versus the 'Basic' versions of AQ. > > Ellen > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi: I have been doing genealogy since about 1885, I started out with PAF-2.1 and progressed to PAF 3.0 which I still use as my primary program. I have tried dozens of other programs, including PAF-4 and PAF-5 and can't find an easier or simpler program that works closer to the way I think. I also have Roots Magic,. which has a lot of great features, such as you can color code a person's ancestors or descendants with one click. That is a very handy feature in order to find who are all the descendants of your progenitor ancestor. In order to do this I just make a gedcom and import it to Roots Magic and check them. I have used Brothers Keeper, Legacy, Family Tree Maker and dozens of other programs over the years but stick with old 1997 PAF-3. If you want a program to be able to handle pictures and documents you need a more advanced program. I have not used Ancestral Quest in a long time, but it has a great advantage in that your data is compatible with PAF. There are free versions available of most of the above programs, it would be worth while to try them with just adding a couple dozen of your ancestry in them and see how you like them. Don Boudreaux Lafayette, La. On 2/20/2011 6:16 PM, Marg & Neil Andrews wrote: > I'm getting old and don't want to change from PAF, but I have > just introduced it to my niece. Perhaps it would be wise for her > to start her recording in a new program rather than having to learn > how to gedcom (I still haven't learnt that in ????? years!) > > Two listers have given Ancestry Quest a plug so that's sounding good. > Does anyone know what Brothers Keeper is like and any others. > > I tried a program years ago and hated it - could have been FTM - > from memory it came up in yellow. > Marg > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> > To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 8:31 AM > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > >> I'm so sorry...I forget! Not everyone agrees with me that FTM isn't one >> of the majors. haha. I totally agree with you on that one. They are very >> proprietary in what they do and how they work. I gave up on FTM many, >> many years ago. And I don't think they have changed their focus either. >> >> Sue >> >> On 2/20/2011 3:09 PM, Ross G. H. Cotton wrote: >>> I don't think Sue has ever used a GEDCOM file with Family Tree Maker. >>> Believe me it doesn't move the Notes and other non basic data to the >>> proper >>> location. For that reason I don't use FTM as I know they developed their >>> own version for GEDCOM files. >>> Ross GH Cotton Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 > >> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "Sue Maxwell"<smaxwl@earthlink.net> >>> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 PM >>> To:<paf-5-users@rootsweb.com> >>> Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Life of PAF >>> >>>> There are several great genealogy data managers out there. All of the >>>> major ones (if not all of them) follow the current gedcom standards. I >>>> think most of us know that genealogy has surpassed the existing gedcom >>>> restrictions. FamilySearch as well as another group of genealogists are >>>> now working on updating the gedcom standards. I'm sure that as soon as >>>> that happens all the vendors will implement those new standards into >>>> their existing software programs. They ALL transfer data that are >>>> covered in the gedcom standard. >>>> >>>> Genealogy has been moving at such lightening speed that we get >>>> frustrated when parts don't move as fast as we want them too. I guess >>>> it's a test of our patience! >>>> >>>> When it comes to passing data back and forth between different software >>>> packages the problem usually lies in the new bells and whistles we all >>>> want, but not every program has the ability to handle every other >>>> software's new features. It takes time and cooperation between them all. >>>> So the fact that new gedcom standards are being developed will move us >>>> closer to having better collaboration between programs and each other. >>>> >>>> I don't think the issue is necessarily which program you choose to >>>> migrate to, but rather acquiring the patience to look at each one and >>>> determine which one meets the majority of your needs. And today, it >>>> costs nothing to check out the other major programs. They each have a >>>> free version and all the family history centers have the full programs >>>> for you to test your data on. So, take your data and test it with each >>>> of the software programs. Just remember to use a copy of your data to do >>>> the testing. You will always have your original. >>>> >>>> Sue >>>> >>>> On 2/20/2011 9:37 AM, B.H. Kemp wrote: >>>>> Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. >>>>> >>>>> It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their >>>>> new >>>>> Program...... >>>>> >>>>> Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read >>>>> reviews >>>>> on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, >>>>> requiring >>>>> many manual corrections. > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PAF-5-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3456 - Release Date: 02/20/11 > >

It's a shame that they aren't going to support PAF and update it. What other program comes with extra languages? I can switch to German with PAF and send reports (FGS, Pedigree Charts) to cousins in Germany with the clue words in German. Since my own German is weak, with PAF I don't have to read all the words about creating the report--just create it in English and then click the corresponding blanks when I switch over to German. Yes, I can buy a program in the German language (and possibly install it, with its installation instructions in German) and GedCom my databases into it, but the screen won't look the same and creating reports won't be nearly as straightforward. I'm not LDS so using new.familysearch (or its successor) is not an option at this time--or maybe I don't understand correctly that members can use it in place of a program installed on their own computers. Lila ---------------------------------------- > Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:37:03 -0800 > From: bkgenea@yahoo.com > To: PAF-5-USERS@rootsweb.com > Subject: [PAF-5] Life of PAF > > Thank you, Sue Maxwell, for the info. > > It would be interesting to know what the List members chose for their new Program...... > > Roots Magic is being pushed hard by our local GS, and I have read reviews on several programs that they don't convert/accept Gedcom well, requiring many manual corrections. > > Betsy Hare Kemp