Hi,
I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
for my iPad.
Thank you for a great program!
Duane De Vries
> Hi,
> I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
> iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
> GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
> for my iPad.
> Thank you for a great program!
> Duane De Vries
> On May 15, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
> > iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
> > GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
> > for my iPad.
> > Thank you for a great program!
> > Duane De Vries
I have been researching a slightly different option to a stand alone application. How about using your iPad as a "Remote Terminal"? There are several applications that promote this venture though I have not looked into them at present. My original plan was to house my iMac onboard a small RV with an Airport (already in use) as the link point. This would allow me to work in remote locations directly to the iMac without having to worry about having a portable app then down/uploading (depends on your viewpoint) to the iMac and possible data transfer problems. The added plus here is because of the iMac's moderate portability (my VAN/SUV has several 110v outlets) and I took just the computer on vacation last year and used it in several locations with WIFI connections) all that is really needed is the WIFI external connection (either/both airport/WIFI cafe/relatives WIFI) to be both up and running in direct communications or standalone communications (no outside connection.)
My reasoning behind this is genealogical in nature as I was planning on selling my house (I am a widower with no one else at home), using some of the proceeds to purchase a small van type RV, installing my WIFI equipment (if not already onboard) with my iMac mounted in a stable location so I could visit any of several "Places of Interest" including cemeteries, probate archives, etc. in attempt to located additional information not available online while still having the remote capability of direct entry of data direct into my computer along with its camera for possible headstone/document photo capabilities.
Sparkgapper
On May 15, 2012, at 11:16 PM, George Weis wrote:
> Agree
> I would buy iPad and iPhone versions, even if read only.
> geo
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Geraldine Carlile <gcarlil...@cox.net> wrote:
> I agree!!!
> Sent from my iPhone
> On May 15, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
> > iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
> > GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
> > for my iPad.
> > Thank you for a great program!
> > Duane De Vries
We know the iPad is an intriguing device, and market. We have thought
about it quite a bit.
Several different product ideas are attractive. One set of
possibilities is to trim the feature set (to fit within Apple Store
restrictions, among other reasons) -- for example, the "read-only"
edition that George mentions. Another set of possibilities is to
focus on the complementary (and portable) benefits of the iPad, along
the direction that Sparkgapper suggests. Either case represents
hundreds of hours of engineering and testing, as the iPad is very
different from the desktop in many respects.
It strikes me that (a) typing, (b) copy-and-paste on the iPad are so
challenging that several use cases common on desktops are impractical
on the iPad.
I'm inclined to see a focus on:
1) Simple editing (birth, death, burial)
2) Scrollable charts
3) Field notes (notes that identify TODO entries or raw material for
the desktop edition)
4) Photo capture (and easy upload)
The simpler, the better, perhaps.
Read-only is already doable by "printing" to a PDF file that you
transfer to your iPad. Admittedly, it would be nice to add embedded
links to the PDF.
Kevin
P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is
not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought
go by unchallenged.
On May 15, 12:33 pm, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
> iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
> GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
> for my iPad.
> Thank you for a great program!
> Duane De Vries
On May 16, 7:48 am, "William G. Bates" <wg...@elp.rr.com> wrote:
> I have been researching a slightly different option to a stand alone application. How about using your iPad as a "Remote Terminal"? [...]
OMG! Sorry, I just had a flash back to the 1960's and 70's. You're
suggesting bringing back Timesharing! We've finally come full circle!
The current iCloud technology roughly equates to the old "service
bureau" concept, which were simply centralized computer systems that
occupied entire warehouses, and "timesharing" offered interactive
access to those computer systems. Wow! (To the younger folks, Mac and
PC didn't exist until the mid-80's. Computers were relatively
unreachable to most people before then.)
Ok, back to the future... Teamviewer is an app that allows secure
remote control of a distant computer (Windowns or MacOS), and it has
apps for Android and (I think) iPhone. I have already accessed my 21.5
inch iMac from my 4.5 inch Android phone. Scary. So, yes, you can run
GEDitCOM II from your smartphone (and likely your iPad), albeit with a
slight delay.
That is what I was referring to Rich. And yes, you have to think about transmission time, lookup time, and reception time whenever you are thinking about WIFI (now retired from 43 years in Radio Frequency communications-Very Low Frequencies (18KHZ-3MHZ) to Light (fiber optics). An YES, light is considered a Radio Frequency and is just an extension of the Ultra High Frequencies (old television up through Micro Waves).
WIFI/Cell phones are nothing more than a sophisticated application of Radio Frequency usage whereby output power is one of the determining factors of direct reception distance with the highest frequencies also being considered "Line of Sight", highly directional in a STRAIGHT line (does not follow the Earth's curvature or refracted in the upper atmosphere). Of course, the highest frequencies (light) can be partially blocked by a thin sheet of paper, tree leaves, buildings, etc which is why they are only used in the Fiber Optic arena.
Present day cellphones actually operate in the marginal region (well below light) such that it radiates in all directions with a marginal directionality of a slightly flattened donut around the antenna (some are inside the case and some are the proverbial "Antenna" styling). IF you could provide a directionality to the cellphone, it would increase its output/reception distance by about four-eight times the present.
Sparkgapper (an ancient CW radioman)
On May 16, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Rich Laniewski wrote:
> On May 16, 7:48 am, "William G. Bates" <wg...@elp.rr.com> wrote:
>> I have been researching a slightly different option to a stand alone application. How about using your iPad as a "Remote Terminal"? [...]
> OMG! Sorry, I just had a flash back to the 1960's and 70's. You're
> suggesting bringing back Timesharing! We've finally come full circle!
> The current iCloud technology roughly equates to the old "service
> bureau" concept, which were simply centralized computer systems that
> occupied entire warehouses, and "timesharing" offered interactive
> access to those computer systems. Wow! (To the younger folks, Mac and
> PC didn't exist until the mid-80's. Computers were relatively
> unreachable to most people before then.)
> Ok, back to the future... Teamviewer is an app that allows secure
> remote control of a distant computer (Windowns or MacOS), and it has
> apps for Android and (I think) iPhone. I have already accessed my 21.5
> inch iMac from my 4.5 inch Android phone. Scary. So, yes, you can run
> GEDitCOM II from your smartphone (and likely your iPad), albeit with a
> slight delay.
Hi Kevin,
Certainly did not mean to slight any one. My abject apologies!
By the way, I am a retired senior systems programmer (retired in August
of 2000) that spent 35 years in the care and feeding of the company's
'Big Iron' (very LARGE IBM main frame systems). I recall using TSO (Time
Sharing Option) with text only terminals. These were terminals that were
80 characters wide and perhaps 12 lines up and down. These would have
been considered 'card image' devices if you recall the tab cards we used
to store programs on. (Key punching ... a trade that came into existence
and disappeared during my tenure.)
The first computer I worked on was an IBM 1401. It was a box about three
feet wide, five feet tall and perhaps five feet long and weighed in
around half a ton. It had 8K (that's NOT a typo) of memory and I had
been with the company three months when we upgraded it to 12K. I could
hardly imagine what we were going to do with all that memory! (how times
have changed).
Then in February of 1966 we moved to an IBM S360 which had 32K of
memory. I did all my programming for it in assembler language which is
only one step removed from actual machine code. We had to write
efficient code because there was not much memory.
Duane
--
On Wed, May 16, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Gartner wrote:
> Hello Duane (and others),
> P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is
> not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought
> go by unchallenged. Kevin
Hay Duane: Remember Eniac? It took up three floors of the RCA building and only had 2K of memory. I remember the 64 Thousand Dollar Question (game show of the late fifties) where a programmer's final question included programming Eniac to produce a particular output. Of course, Eniac did NOT have a keyboard of any kind but was programmed using a Telephone type (60miliamp) panel using patch cords for electrical directivity and they showed him actually making the patches - the game show was also in the RCA building.
I retired from Telecommunications (all types of RF & landline usage) in 2005 with midterm (20 year CG retirement) sojourn getting an Associate of Science degree in Computer Programming, Scientific that included the primary high level languages (Cobol, RPG, Fortran, etc) in 1983 plus Basic (used as introductory) and Assembler. I still have a copy of a calendar program I built in AppleBasic in 1985 but it did not have appointment capability, just output any calendar, both before and after the present day's calendar that included the 12 day update if needed.
Sparkgapper
On May 16, 2012, at 1:54 PM, guvad...@fastmail.fm wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> Certainly did not mean to slight any one. My abject apologies!
> By the way, I am a retired senior systems programmer (retired in August
> of 2000) that spent 35 years in the care and feeding of the company's
> 'Big Iron' (very LARGE IBM main frame systems). I recall using TSO (Time
> Sharing Option) with text only terminals. These were terminals that were
> 80 characters wide and perhaps 12 lines up and down. These would have
> been considered 'card image' devices if you recall the tab cards we used
> to store programs on. (Key punching ... a trade that came into existence
> and disappeared during my tenure.)
> The first computer I worked on was an IBM 1401. It was a box about three
> feet wide, five feet tall and perhaps five feet long and weighed in
> around half a ton. It had 8K (that's NOT a typo) of memory and I had
> been with the company three months when we upgraded it to 12K. I could
> hardly imagine what we were going to do with all that memory! (how times
> have changed).
> Then in February of 1966 we moved to an IBM S360 which had 32K of
> memory. I did all my programming for it in assembler language which is
> only one step removed from actual machine code. We had to write
> efficient code because there was not much memory.
> Duane
> --
> On Wed, May 16, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Gartner wrote:
>> Hello Duane (and others),
>> P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is
>> not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought
>> go by unchallenged. Kevin
Wouldn't Famviewer (available from iTunes Store for $9.99) do much the same? It reads gedcom files and displays attached multimedia. It works on iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/famviewer/id294379138?mt=8
Les Tate
==================
On May 16, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Gartner wrote:
> We know the iPad is an intriguing device, and market. We have thought
> about it quite a bit.
> Several different product ideas are attractive. One set of
> possibilities is to trim the feature set (to fit within Apple Store
> restrictions, among other reasons) -- for example, the "read-only"
> edition that George mentions. Another set of possibilities is to
> focus on the complementary (and portable) benefits of the iPad, along
> the direction that Sparkgapper suggests. Either case represents
> hundreds of hours of engineering and testing, as the iPad is very
> different from the desktop in many respects.
> It strikes me that (a) typing, (b) copy-and-paste on the iPad are so
> challenging that several use cases common on desktops are impractical
> on the iPad.
> I'm inclined to see a focus on:
> 1) Simple editing (birth, death, burial)
> 2) Scrollable charts
> 3) Field notes (notes that identify TODO entries or raw material for
> the desktop edition)
> 4) Photo capture (and easy upload)
> The simpler, the better, perhaps.
> Read-only is already doable by "printing" to a PDF file that you
> transfer to your iPad. Admittedly, it would be nice to add embedded
> links to the PDF.
> Kevin
> P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is
> not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought
> go by unchallenged.
> On May 15, 12:33 pm, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
>> iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
>> GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
>> for my iPad.
>> Thank you for a great program!
>> Duane De Vries
I already have GedView, a $4 app, on my iPad and have used it in
conjunction with GEDitCOM II, with mostly positive results. It allows me to
display, edit and add to my GEDCOM file, and I can import the new material
back to GEDitCOM, and I don't manage to mess up doing so, too often.
*BUT*, it would be much cooler to have something that was really designed
to work with GEDitCOM, which integrated more smoothly. The ridiculously
cool fantasy would be an iCloud-ready iPad app that could share with
GEDitCOM, but there are a lot of intermediate steps between the craftiness
of using GedView with GEDitCOM exports to the iCloud that would be very
valuable.
John (and Kevin, etc), if you haven't seen GedView, take a look at it and
think about how you could do that, but a bit better, and serif that doesn't
spark the creative juices. I know I would hop to a GEDitCOM-tied equivalent
in a heartbeat!
________________________________ From: Les Tate <lrt...@live.com> To: geditcom-ii-discussions@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, 16 May 2012, 21:33 Subject: Re: iPad version desired
Wouldn't Famviewer (available from iTunes Store for $9.99) do much the same? It reads gedcom files and displays attached multimedia. It works on iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch. http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/famviewer/id294379138?mt=8
Les Tate ================== On May 16, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Gartner wrote:
> We know the iPad is an intriguing device, and market. We have thought > about it quite a bit.
> Several different product ideas are attractive. One set of > possibilities is to trim the feature set (to fit within Apple Store > restrictions, among other reasons) -- for example, the "read-only" > edition that George mentions. Another set of possibilities is to > focus on the complementary (and portable) benefits of the iPad, along > the direction that Sparkgapper suggests. Either case represents > hundreds of hours of engineering and testing, as the iPad is very > different from the desktop in many respects.
> It strikes me that (a) typing, (b) copy-and-paste on the iPad are so > challenging that several use cases common on desktops are impractical > on the iPad.
> I'm inclined to see a focus on:
> 1) Simple editing (birth, death, burial) > 2) Scrollable charts > 3) Field notes (notes that identify TODO entries or raw material for > the desktop edition) > 4) Photo capture (and easy upload)
> The simpler, the better, perhaps.
> Read-only is already doable by "printing" to a PDF file that you > transfer to your iPad. Admittedly, it would be nice to add embedded > links to the PDF.
> Kevin
> P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is > not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought > go by unchallenged.
> On May 15, 12:33 pm, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> Hi, >> I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my >> iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on >> GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license >> for my iPad. >> Thank you for a great program! >> Duane De Vries
What I like is that I can build/buy a light folding desk for field
work, I also have a wand scanner (VuPoint) the get a WIFI keyboard/
mouse for the iPad and would have all my tools regardless of what is
needed at any particular time and use the iPad as a remote terminal
(it has a miniUSB for connecting the scanner).
On May 16, 3:50 pm, Edward Connolly <eddie...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> ________________________________
> From: Les Tate <lrt...@live.com>
> To: geditcom-ii-discussions@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 May 2012, 21:33
> Subject: Re: iPad version desired
> Wouldn't Famviewer (available from iTunes Store for $9.99) do much the same? It reads gedcom files and displays attached multimedia. It works on iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch.http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/famviewer/id294379138?mt=8
> Les Tate
> ==================
> On May 16, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Kevin Gartner wrote:
> > Hello Duane (and others),
> > We know the iPad is an intriguing device, and market. We have thought
> > about it quite a bit.
> > Several different product ideas are attractive. One set of
> > possibilities is to trim the feature set (to fit within Apple Store
> > restrictions, among other reasons) -- for example, the "read-only"
> > edition that George mentions. Another set of possibilities is to
> > focus on the complementary (and portable) benefits of the iPad, along
> > the direction that Sparkgapper suggests. Either case represents
> > hundreds of hours of engineering and testing, as the iPad is very
> > different from the desktop in many respects.
> > It strikes me that (a) typing, (b) copy-and-paste on the iPad are so
> > challenging that several use cases common on desktops are impractical
> > on the iPad.
> > I'm inclined to see a focus on:
> > 1) Simple editing (birth, death, burial)
> > 2) Scrollable charts
> > 3) Field notes (notes that identify TODO entries or raw material for
> > the desktop edition)
> > 4) Photo capture (and easy upload)
> > The simpler, the better, perhaps.
> > Read-only is already doable by "printing" to a PDF file that you
> > transfer to your iPad. Admittedly, it would be nice to add embedded
> > links to the PDF.
> > Kevin
> > P.S. Though John is the only one writing code for the desktop, he is
> > not alone in this project by any means. I could not let that thought
> > go by unchallenged.
> > On May 15, 12:33 pm, Guva <guvad...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I would like to add my support to making a version that will run on my
> >> iPad. I realize that John is essentially the only person working on
> >> GeditCom and I would certainly be willing to pay an additional license
> >> for my iPad.
> >> Thank you for a great program!
> >> Duane De Vries
