Jump to content


Photo

Funny!


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Jack

Jack

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 834 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 02:27 PM


Issues
Report problems or bugs with RootsMagic 4 on this message board. While the RootsMagic developers monitor this board it is impossible for them to personally respond to every report.

Please keep in mind that RootsMagic 4 is a complete rewrite and we are working full time squashing these bugs as they are reported.





This late in the game, isn't the bolded line a tad out of date!?


Jack

a posteriori

#2 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2068 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 02:38 PM

First half of bolded line is still obviously the case, but yes, I suspect that the second half is now outdated -- "full time" can probably be removed.

#3 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 03:24 PM

dupe

#4 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 03:28 PM

First half of bolded line is still obviously the case, but yes, I suspect that the second half is now outdated -- "full time" can probably be removed.


With the number of still-outstanding bugs 2 years 6 months 24 days after release, there is a lot that is obvious.

And by the way, Jack - there is really nothing "Funny" about it.

#5 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 08:46 PM

And by the way, Jack - there is really nothing "Funny" about it.

I have to agree and I am currently beyond hoping for some redemption at this point. I have made my feelings clear on other posts in that I will not shelve out money to RM for any product in the future until I know for sure that it is bug and problem free, in other words the trust has gone.

I am also not prepared to invest further time of my own in concisely describing RM problems and behaviours to a “development team” that appear to be either not listening or unable to programme solutions to the current bugs never mind the missing or lacking programme functionality.

I can only hope and continue to hope that RM will get back on track with its primary genealogy program, eradicate the remaining bugs, completing the functionality of those new features introduced in RM4 and restore the confidence of its loyal users.

To return to the original post, I agree the statement in bold under the Issues thread needs to be removed as it is no longer accurate and RM are certainly not working “full time” on squishing bugs, otherwise they would be history. It remains disappointing to me that such simple programming solutions have not yet been forthcoming and that my confidence in the company’s ability to deliver has been so diminished.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#6 Candy

Candy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 09:44 PM

I have to agree and I am currently beyond hoping for some redemption at this point. I have made my feelings clear on other posts in that I will not shelve out money to RM for any product in the future until I know for sure that it is bug and problem free, in other words the trust has gone.
....
I can only hope and continue to hope that RM will get back on track with its primary genealogy program, eradicate the remaining bugs, completing the functionality of those new features introduced in RM4 and restore the confidence of its loyal users.

To return to the original post, I agree the statement in bold under the Issues thread needs to be removed as it is no longer accurate and RM are certainly not working “full time” on squishing bugs, otherwise they would be history. It remains disappointing to me that such simple programming solutions have not yet been forthcoming and that my confidence in the company’s ability to deliver has been so diminished.


I purchased the RM4 edition about a year after it was released, but other than importing my information and 'playing' with the program, I have not used RM4 for any active research. Instead, I am using RM3 which is much more stable in my opinion than RM4. I have even gone so far as to create new facts that have the capabilities that RM4 offer, just so I can use a program without issues.

I observe and watch the various posts, just to see what is happening, but other than that, stay with the tried and true RM3. To me, the total rewrite seems to be a waste.
Candy

~~ In a perpetual state of not knowing if I'm coming or going.

#7 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2068 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 01:02 AM

To me, the total rewrite seems to be a waste.

Ouch! What are the issues that are affecting you and cause you not to use RM4 and conclude it to be a waste?

#8 Candy

Candy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 08:21 AM

Ouch! What are the issues that are affecting you and cause you not to use RM4 and conclude it to be a waste?


The issues are all very general, Romer. To me, it is a major hindrance to data entry and research if the program has a lot of bugs...still after this length of time. (According to my RM4 program, the copyright dates state 2001-2011...10 years). While there are a lot of features that are great (and I have found some to be really beneficial while playing with a test database), I want something that is going to be stable and perform the way it should with regard to entry, reports, etc. I don't want to be trying to create a report and then end up very frustrated because of a 'bug' that hasn't been fixed or have issues with the way a report turns out because of something that has been reported quite awhile ago and is still not corrected.

The fact that attention seems to have been redirected to PH2 rather than concentrating on getting RM4 up to speed with everything fixed makes me wonder if RM4 will ever be finished.

I guess I am a person who wants a product as close to being 100% before using it and there seem still be a lot of things that are on the 'to-do' list that Renee has been keeping that have not been addressed. For this reason, I generally will not purchase a program until it has been established at least 18 months or more. RM had been out for nearly 2 years before I upgraded from FO10. I had even talked with Bruce about RM when he was here in the Milwaukee area for the Genealogy Conference many years ago, about the possibility of bugs/issues when doing the switch. Understandably at that time, FO was no longer going to be supported and he was on his own with regard to writing RM, which was very similarly written to FO.

As an example of other 'new' software, I have worked with programs while doing my horse show business that have come out brand new and everything works correctly. These programs are such that take entries and payment, deal with scoring, as well as reporting the necessary information per various organization's requirements. Rarely are there updates other than a yearly one and that one is due to any rule changes.

My comments about RM4 are just that...my comments and my opinion. I still observe the various areas of the forum and get the necessary updates to my copy of RM4, but as far as using it as my 'main' program, no. I'll stay with RM3.
Candy

~~ In a perpetual state of not knowing if I'm coming or going.

#9 Jack

Jack

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 834 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 11:26 AM

I didn't realize I was going to generate this much traffic writing about the "bug" line. But, I'm glad it did.

Perhaps the gurus at RM will wake up and realize they've left a lot of their customers a bit irate by failing to produce promised fixes and timely updates.

Think I'll head out to the book store and buy myself a C++ programming book and see what I can come up with. (just kidding, but it would be nice if I had that sort of talent)




Jack

a posteriori

#10 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6251 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 01:22 PM

Bring it on! Maybe a chorus of complaints will get somebody to 'grease the wheel'. OTOH, if sales are seemingly unaffected by bug squishing and enhancements, why would they bother? Feature completion and additions seems to have taken a back seat to multi-lingual development (whatever happened to that?), New Family Search sync, a still-unintegrated Personal Historian 2, and maybe others. The product seems to be in limbo with occasional minor updates that might account for a day's work.

I was very tempted to take up the FTM 2012 pre-sale offer and have a good look at what it is all about - syncing with Ancestry.com looks good, an app for iPhone and iPod already exists, and a Mac version coming soon all testify to serious development effort going on behind it while that for RootsMagic 4 seems seriously underpowered. Saw a presentation by a power user of The Master Genealogist who uses Second Site to publish a website. Those looked interesting - the control one can exercise over output is incredibly rich. Is RootsMagic stuck at some impasse?

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#11 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 01:50 PM

I am happy that Candy took time to post her views, the same old dozen or so posters regurgitating the same issues could easily fool RM into thinking they only have a dozen dissatisfied customers, not so.

I posted before how I felt and things are no different now. Renee does a good job of entering and confirming items are in the dreaded tracking system, the problem is the tracking system does not get any smaller; each release should deal with all known BUGS and not allow them to simply drag on.

BUGS should equal ZERO and we still have MANY, to me that is not acceptable THREE years after the features of RM4 started to be proudly blogged!!. Unbelievably we still have data loss issues during merge operations, a simple auto save when tabbing out of the Place field would restore the missing suggestive PD listing, missing birth dates in the sidebar, the “click to add” problem and despite the Dynamic Group functionality being temporarily backed away from in October 2008 due to some difficulties it has never been returned.

INCOMPLETE items regarding reporting holes, merging PD’s, merging Freeform and Template sources, better Place List management, better Media management including merging of duplicate thumbnails etc etc. I must say many people liked the concept of the new Media Gallery but having tried to work with it they were soon frustrated.

I’m not sure about greasing the wheel and I am always in favour of fixing things rather than replacing so hopefully the wheel we have can be fixed, it always worked well in the past.

For me, and it would many other users, to be trusting their main data to RM3 at this stage almost three years on is a major slap in the face for RM and its programmers. I also am looking at FTM, and never thought I would say so, and moving my main data from RM3 to FTM will not be too difficult and we all need to look at where development in modern genealogy is happening rather than being promised. RM appears to have placed too much emphasis on NFS which is still not available to the masses, perhaps Ancestry links would be more effective to the majority.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#12 Miranda

Miranda

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 40 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 03:01 PM

I haven't really run into any bugs in my use of the program, but there are a TON of places where data entry is incredibly frustrating and tedious. I have seen posts in the past on here about putting it on the TODO list to make things less painful, but it is still pretty awful to do some things.

I have been seriously stagnating in my research simply because I don't want to enter my citations in because I know how painful it's going to be. There is inevitably some change I need to make to a citation (usually either something to do with Source Media or updating the transcription in the Source Details) after I've entered the original one and memorized it and pasted it in 15 different places, and then I need to go through and click through what feels like a dozen buttons/screens (yeah I'm exaggerating... a little) to fix each one, one by one. Or I need to memorize the updated one, remember everywhere that I used it, paste in the new one and delete the old one, one by one.

And using anything in the Media Gallery, oh my goodness... so frustrating.

#13 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2068 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 01:55 AM

I agree and encourage that people should speak up if they're not satisfied, but it needs to be as specifically stated and backed up with information as possible for best effect, or it may simply be dismissed by some (rightly or wrongly, informed or uninformed) as unsupported whinging.

Bugs are more likely to be addressed if posted about specifically (whether in this thread or in the Issues subforum and as a ticket). It's important to make them known here on the boards for that reason, as well as to allow users to adjust their work patterns where they can until those issues have been fixed.

I remember the original bug-reporting aspect of the tracking system going down some time back. Were things eventually recovered?

As to suggested enhancements, they should also be reported with specifics (but in the Wish List vs. Issues subforum). Whereas the expectation to bugs is that they should be addressed as soon as possible if legitimate, wish list items are more subjective as to whether or not they should be incorporated (and in some cases, exactly how with respect to design principles) and timeframe, if so. These items, then, are more up to the discretion of the RM development staff in numerous ways. General direction and pace of that development relative to expectations can certainly be a basis for contentment or discontentment with the product.

#14 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 07:27 AM

Bugs are more likely to be addressed if posted about specifically (whether in this thread or in the Issues subforum and as a ticket). It's important to make them known here on the boards for that reason, as well as to allow users to adjust their work patterns where they can until those issues have been fixed.

It's nice that you are being kind Romer, but most users seem to be realizing that things are now dragging on a lot. A small selection of issues below from my own submissions, there is a much larger list of wishes which I fully realize are at Bruces discretion.

You will notice that there are three bugs which exceed 2 years old which cannot be right, these have all been submitted as tickets and email again to RM following the ticket system problem back in March this year.

1EE-148A8B52-FCBA 02/12/2010 [Open] [BUG] Media Gallery corruption
363-13E42616-32B3 29/07/2010 [Open] [BUG] Place Details suggestive list does not appear
0FC-13CDEB76-3C0E 12/07/2010 [Open] [BUG] Merging issues lost and duplicated information
02F-12CA257F-E245 27/12/2009 [Open] [BUG] Sharemerge creating excessive Duplication
194-12B3F3DF-7FE0 10/12/2009 [Open] [BUG] RM not providing Place Details suggestions
15C-12B3EE7A-D388 10/12/2009 [Open] [BUG] RM Explorer stops of wrong name alphabetically
0E5-12A4B140-B1DF 28/11/2009 [Open] [BUG] Shared Fact Select People displaye many BLANK birth dates (4.0.7.1)
056-12A4B0A5-1069 28/11/2009 [Open] [BUG] Shared Fact Select People does not Sort correctly. (4.0.7.1)
14B-129DA737-D383 23/11/2009 [Open] [BUG] RM4 Media gallery displays duplicate thumbnails for the same file
136-12462878-1BB2 18/09/2009 [Open] [Bug] To-Do Items window screen position not remembered
245-11FB04E8-9709 23/07/2009 [Open] [Bug] Problem of duplicate parents when they are not duplicate individuals
143-11FAFA2F-2BFD 23/07/2009 [Open] [Bug] Column size on People Screen not remembered or autosized

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#15 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 11:56 AM

Vyger,

143-11FAFA2F-2BFD 23/07/2009 [Open] [Bug] Column size on People Screen not remembered or autosized

Do you mean autosized as automatically changing the width of a column to match the length of the entry for that column like the Problem search does with the name column?

#16 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 06:23 PM

Vyger,

143-11FAFA2F-2BFD 23/07/2009 [Open] [Bug] Column size on People Screen not remembered or autosized

Do you mean autosized as automatically changing the width of a column to match the length of the entry for that column like the Problem search does with the name column?

Laura, it's two fold, firstly when I switch to the people view even standard date fields need to be resized and I am not using large fonts, neven mind dates with bef and abt prefixes and full date thereafter.

Secondly after I customize the people view to my liking and resize the columns, they only remain as so in that session, in other words after closing and re-opening the file I have to resize again.

Autosize IMO should be an ption as one very long field could skew a persons view beyond their liking, of course there is also the dynamic autosizing which works with the size of the field on those records only being viewed. In other words the column width varies to match the contents of the data currently in the view so column widths vary as you scroll up and down.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#17 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 07:14 PM

In other words the column width varies to match the contents of the data currently in the view so column widths vary as you scroll up and down.


And I absolutely HATE that. In Descendant view, for example, it is infuriating to watch the columns jump left-to-right as I try to scan down a particular column on the screen.

#18 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 05:30 AM

And I absolutely HATE that. In Descendant view, for example, it is infuriating to watch the columns jump left-to-right as I try to scan down a particular column on the screen.

I agree that functionality is irritating but I hate having to resize columns just to see the complete data, therefore I think the option to autosize by "complete" data should be one fix and without doubt once the column size is manually adjusted then that should be remembered.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#19 MVS

MVS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts

Posted 24 October 2011 - 08:58 AM

I wish to be part of the chorus.

I am prepared to say that I do not have too much experience of bugs but that is probably because I have been so dissappointed by the way the new functioanility has been implemented that I gave up using the "new" features a long long time ago; they are just not properly thought out - or incompletely implemented. Ubnfortunately I spent 6 months with RM4 before I realised it was a backward step overall - and it became too late to return to RM3.

And when I saw all the new announcements about Family History I realised where the programming effort was being spent.


MVS.

#20 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8453 posts

Posted 24 October 2011 - 09:39 AM

Laura, it's two fold, firstly when I switch to the people view even standard date fields need to be resized and I am not using large fonts, neven mind dates with bef and abt prefixes and full date thereafter.

Secondly after I customize the people view to my liking and resize the columns, they only remain as so in that session, in other words after closing and re-opening the file I have to resize again.

Autosize IMO should be an ption as one very long field could skew a persons view beyond their liking, of course there is also the dynamic autosizing which works with the size of the field on those records only being viewed. In other words the column width varies to match the contents of the data currently in the view so column widths vary as you scroll up and down.

I am confirming that this feature is working as designed. You may not like the design so we add it as an enhancement request in our tracking system. Just because it not working the way you want it doesn't mean it's a bug.
Renee
RootsMagic