John, I agree, if you want a program to be exactly (or very close to) TMG, then you want TMG, I seriously doubt any other program is going to do everything the same way. At a recent users group meeting, one of the sources of some of TMG's problems was that for many years TMG has been too many new features that didn't really fit its core goals and this has lead to some database instability. This was somewhat caused by TMG trying to meet the needs of the UFT refugees that migrated to TMG. They put forward that they hoped that what ever platform absorbs much of the TMG crowd doesn;t make the same mistake. The one hope I see for gettting a TMG "look-alike" would be if someone/group takes on a project of creating such a platform knowing it won't be a "financially viable" (and thus likely done under some open source banner). Such a project will likely take years, and very likely won't be as "polished" as a commercial platform. All the commercial platforms that I have seen seem to be based at least loosely on the GEDCOM model. Since one of the principals of TMG was to not be constrained to that model, we have ended up with features, that some have come to depend on, that don't mesh well with other programs. Some features that aren't directly supported by standard GEDCOM have been adopted by some programs, things like being able to attach additional participants to an event (and these were adopted in a way that worked with private extensions to GEDCOM, unlike the way TMG did). Perhaps some additional feature will work there way into some of the packages, but I surely don't expect all, or even most, of the features unique to TMG to make it into other programs. A few things that I think are unlikely to be added to other packages: * The rich multi-language capability of TMG. Many packages support multiple languages, but I don't see them supporting TMG's ability to support multiple languages in a single database, and selecting the language on a report basis. * Having a source definition as complicated at TMG. TMG has way more parameters on a source than any other program. GEDCOM supports only a few parameters for a source. While a program could define some extras as extensions, I can't see that many being added in a program, and with all the flexibility. * Having a large number (9) of Citation Details. Again, this makes source much more complicated that GEDCOM. * Multiple Memo Fields (9). GEDCOM lets you attach a note field to an event, but really only a single one. There are limited other fields for some tags, that might provide an additional field, but not the 9 fields of TMG.