Ya gots me

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

I think you pros have converted this amateur to RootsMagic.

I have been working with it for about a week now. I still don't like
the family navigation as well as Legacy but everything else seems
equal or far superior. I have updated a lot of info I would never have
found on Legacy.

And I thought I was too old to learn...

Hugh

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

Unfortunately, the train is already leaving the station. RM 8 is
perhaps weeks, at most months, away, and it's a completely new and
different interface. So far I don't like what I've seen in previews,
but then I'm old and pretty set in my ways.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 15:04:14 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:

>Unfortunately, the train is already leaving the station. RM 8 is
>perhaps weeks, at most months, away, and it's a completely new and
>different interface. So far I don't like what I've seen in previews,
>but then I'm old and pretty set in my ways.

I have been looking at that. Seems like Bruce is trying to make it
prettier. I'm not sure about efficient for my purposes.

Speed is a big advantage over Legacy. The list of names is a great
example.

Hugh

[Steve Hayes]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 19:25:37 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:

>I think you pros have converted this amateur to RootsMagic.
>
>I have been working with it for about a week now. I still don't like
>the family navigation as well as Legacy but everything else seems
>equal or far superior. I have updated a lot of info I would never have
>found on Legacy.

I used Rootsmagic and Legacy side-by-side until Legacy 9 came out. It
was too bloated for my computer, and Legacy 8 no longer works with
FamilySearch, so I use RootsMagic almost exclusively now. It also
loads in half the time that Legacy does, and I think SQLite is a
better engine than Jet.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

[Steve Hayes]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 15:04:14 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:

>>Hugh
>Unfortunately, the train is already leaving the station. RM 8 is
>perhaps weeks, at most months, away, and it's a completely new and
>different interface. So far I don't like what I've seen in previews,
>but then I'm old and pretty set in my ways.

I'm dreading it.

I fear a repeat of the Legacy 9 experience.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:50:37 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>I used Rootsmagic and Legacy side-by-side until Legacy 9 came out. It
>was too bloated for my computer, and Legacy 8 no longer works with
>FamilySearch, so I use RootsMagic almost exclusively now. It also
>loads in half the time that Legacy does, and I think SQLite is a
>better engine than Jet.

How much faith do you place in Family Search? I find a number of
errors so I am skeptical about filling in blanks with FS data.

What drawbacks do you and Charles see with the new RM? Looks like a
lot of cosmetic surgery to me but I have not examined in depth.

Too bad Bruce is not still on the genealogy news groups...

Hugh

[Denis Beauregard]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 19:54:45 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

>How much faith do you place in Family Search? I find a number of
>errors so I am skeptical about filling in blanks with FS data.

Family Search (and Ancestry and probably myHeritage) has 2 kinds
of informations : records and genealogy.

Records are documents, like vital records or census. Errors are
from reading but usually, you can verify the record (not always).

Genealogy are based from personal opinions. Family Search has
2 separate links : research documents or research genealogy.

Genealogy is for records provided by users.

They (FS) are back to the old integrated AF/Ancestral File
project, so besides records, there is now some small tree
icon to mean there is some (human made ?) link between
records. I have seen mistakes in this kind of link, so they
are a little better than basic users but less reliable than
actual records.

I use my own software and I keep some kinds of link to Family
Search.

For census, a link to the census as provided by FS when opening
the research entry (list of people in the family), not the URL
from the browser.

For records hard to find (not appearing when making a standard
research from names), I keep the URL.

Otherwise, the date and place is enough for me.

No idea why this can't be handled by a genealogy software.


Denis

--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - http://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/
French in North America before 1722 - http://www.francogene.com/gfna/gfna/998/
Sur cédérom/DVD/USB à 1790 - On CD-ROM/DVD/USB to 1790

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:04:22 -0400, Denis Beauregard
<denis.b-at-f...@fr.invalid> wrote:


>Genealogy are based from personal opinions. Family Search has
>2 separate links : research documents or research genealogy.
>
>Genealogy is for records provided by users.

Having just changed my main program from Legacy to RM I had not
realized the difference although it is obvious.

Thank you,

Hugh

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 19:54:45 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:50:37 +0200, Steve Hayes
><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>I used Rootsmagic and Legacy side-by-side until Legacy 9 came out. It
>>was too bloated for my computer, and Legacy 8 no longer works with
>>FamilySearch, so I use RootsMagic almost exclusively now. It also
>>loads in half the time that Legacy does, and I think SQLite is a
>>better engine than Jet.
>
>How much faith do you place in Family Search? I find a number of
>errors so I am skeptical about filling in blanks with FS data.

It's a mixed bag, but it contains an enormous lot of useful
information.

Example, This morning I looked at three baptism records, which had
both the index and an image of the original church register. There
were lots of mistranscriptions in the index, which showed the family
as residing in the church building itself, and gave theb place name as
Cornwall, Cornwall instead of tyhe name of the town. Sometimes there
is just the index and no image, so you have to look for clues. Quite a
lot of my time is spent in sorting out other people's errors.

>What drawbacks do you and Charles see with the new RM? Looks like a
>lot of cosmetic surgery to me but I have not examined in depth.
>
>Too bad Bruce is not still on the genealogy news groups...

I've not looked at it, perhaps I should. Do you have to sign a
Beta-tester non-disclosure thingy?

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:58:57 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>It's a mixed bag, but it contains an enormous lot of useful
>information.
>

>Quite a
>lot of my time is spent in sorting out other people's errors.

For a serious genealogist that is a fact of life.

>
>>What drawbacks do you and Charles see with the new RM? Looks like a
>>lot of cosmetic surgery to me but I have not examined in depth.
>>
>>Too bad Bruce is not still on the genealogy news groups...
>
>I've not looked at it, perhaps I should. Do you have to sign a
>Beta-tester non-disclosure thingy?

A beta-tester would see a lot more than I have. Several pics of the
update appear on the RM website. The only knock I ever see on program
ratings is that RM has antiquated screens The screenshots I see appear
to be cosmetic improvements.

I suspect Charles knows a lot more about important details than I.

Hugh

[Charlie Hoffpauir]

No, not really. I Beta tested for Bruce years ago in the very early
days of RM, but didn't find that activity useful at all. I suppose
it's because I rarely find anything new likeable. As for RM, the only
thing I'm hopeful for in ver 8 is a fix for the indexing problem that
I've complained about for several years.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 13:10:40 -0500, Charlie Hoffpauir
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:


>No, not really. I Beta tested for Bruce years ago in the very early
>days of RM, but didn't find that activity useful at all. I suppose
>it's because I rarely find anything new likeable. As for RM, the only
>thing I'm hopeful for in ver 8 is a fix for the indexing problem that
>I've complained about for several years.

I certainly get more comfortable with the status quo as I age.

That said there are 2 cosmetic changes I would like to see in RM.

I think the Legacy family screen is superior to RM.

I would like much larger navigation arrows (or triangles). They are
easier to hit when I have a Jack Black on the rocks because there are
2 of them. :)

Hugh