Jump to content


Photo

RM5 v RM4 - Experienced User Opinions


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:40 PM

I have had a quick look at RM5 Essentials, of course I cannot see or try the new features but I donít see some of the enhancements I and others had wished for so I wonít be opting in. I would however love to be wrong and I and doubtless other users would find opinions from experienced RM4 users who have opted in to the full version posting their comments on this thread.

My BIG wish was in Place Management and apart from a new pane containing pre existing information and a graphic I am not seeing any of the tools I and others were hoping for, am I missing something?. I am referring to the ability to reverse Place Names, a visual indication of Place Details Media, Geocode and Notes and the ability to search and filter the Place List to items that contain for example ďMethodistĒ which should be in Place Details.

I also donít see any additional help in splitting OLD style Places to Place & Place Details.

I do see that Dynamic Groups or any Refresh facility have NOT made it into RM5 even though they were theoretically part of RM4.

I cannot try mapping in Essentials to see if any useful enhancements have appeared there. I do note that a proximity report is available and grouping of family Place Details.

I also cannot test the lost data on merge issues like for like as drag & drop doesn't work in Essentials.

I will look forward to the webinar to see RM5 and the new features but as regards the polishing of the existing features I donít see much difference?. I also look forward to the user opinions of those on this forum who have been through the mill since the release of RM4.

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


#2 APerson

APerson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 267 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 04:48 AM

I have had a quick look at RM5 Essentials, of course I cannot see or try the new features but I don't see some of the enhancements I and others had wished for so I won't be opting in. I would however love to be wrong and I and doubtless other users would find opinions from experienced RM4 users who have opted in to the full version posting their comments on this thread.

My BIG wish was in Place Management and apart from a new pane containing pre existing information and a graphic I am not seeing any of the tools I and others were hoping for, am I missing something?. I am referring to the ability to reverse Place Names, a visual indication of Place Details Media, Geocode and Notes and the ability to search and filter the Place List to items that contain for example "Methodist" which should be in Place Details.

I also don't see any additional help in splitting OLD style Places to Place & Place Details.

I do see that Dynamic Groups or any Refresh facility have NOT made it into RM5 even though they were theoretically part of RM4.

I cannot try mapping in Essentials to see if any useful enhancements have appeared there. I do note that a proximity report is available and grouping of family Place Details.

I also cannot test the lost data on merge issues like for like as drag & drop doesn't work in Essentials.

I will look forward to the webinar to see RM5 and the new features but as regards the polishing of the existing features I don't see much difference?. I also look forward to the user opinions of those on this forum who have been through the mill since the release of RM4.


Vyger,

I'm in full agreement with you on just about everything. I'm also EXTREMELY disappointed in what has happened with the Edit Source Window in RM5 - existing data fields appear to have been combined or, even worse, eliminated entirely. I've also found many of the (often very small) errors that are incredibly easy to fix - which I reported TWO YEARS ago, that still exist in RM5 :(

As RM5 couldn't seem to import my RM4 file, I had to create a GEDCOM just to transfer data. If the Edit Source Window is not FIXED, I will have to continue using RM4. It is very disappointing to see that a fair amount of time was spent messing around with the Edit Source Window (I also can't recall any discussion or wishes about the changes that were made) and yet other, more important items were ignored. Don't even think about getting me started on the handling of PLACES :(

#3 RootsMagician

RootsMagician

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPip
  • 826 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 08:08 AM

APerson,

I answered your other thread on the Edit Source screen. Can you post an example of where fields are missing or combined in RM5 versus RM4?
RootsMagician

#4 APerson

APerson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 267 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 12:37 PM

Rootsmagician, I responded in the other thread. I continue to believe, however, that the new Edit Source Window took something that was very clear and useful in RM4 and turned into a mess that will now cause considerable inconsistency in data entry. It's such a MAJOR issue for me that I may continue to use RM4..

#5 Nevada Kid

Nevada Kid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 03:51 PM

I am using a small Data base with 4,450 people. I copied the file into a new file. Properties in RM4 the size is 1,678,273. The copied file under RM5 is 5,351,424. 7,029,697. 5 X larger.

This is after I rebuild and compacted the file.

Thinking about staying with RM4.

#6 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 04:06 PM

Thinking about staying with RM4.

Any improvement to the place list to stop all that having to click through screens and I would have been straight in but all I see is a bar between place and place details!.

The new source window works for me but i cannot understand how we have new features that I donít remember being discussed and the big discussion/wishes are not there maybe i needed to be on the board more?

There is nothing really there for me so I will stay where i am, i am thinking maybe the wishes were to ambitious for the developers of a relatively small company like RM, maybe i am wrong but what i have seen of RM5 lacks real vision just has no whaooh factor for me.

I'm sure the program will do well in the general market which is probably what is more important to RM.

MHO

#7 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 05:20 PM

Forgot to mention still no ability to merge place details and not easy to see what is attached to place details.

#8 Michael Jones

Michael Jones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 61 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 05:19 PM

I have to say, I used to be the most ardent of RootsMagic supporters, but I'm still using version 3 due to the many issues that have been reported (see Vyger's website). When I purchased RM4, I was greatly disappointed to see that the ease of data entry was not enhanced (please, can't we have a copy fact feature so we can enter all 15 children without all the clicking?), there were no dynamic groups and the ease of converting places/place details and existing sources was really not ever developed as promised. I felt like version 4 was released prematurely, made us all beta-testers and really wasn't worth it. It doesn't offer much more than RM3 aside from complicating features that for me were unimportant, while leaving other features undeveloped. RM5's surprise release seems to be a money grab, and I find that even more disappointing. I absolutely would love, love, love to love RootsMagic again, but reading this board off and on, it seems to me the priority is to ignore the dedicated users of this program at the expense of making money. I will probably buy RM5 to support Bruce and his team in hopes that faith will eventually pay some dividends --that RootsMagic can develop in a way that is more satisfying for everyone. Fix the bugs, developed what was promised, and listen to what the real requests are in the forum. The request for a "copy fact" feature has been around for at least six years and I can't think of anything that would be more useful.

#9 Jack

Jack

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 834 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 06:02 PM

I have to say, I used to be the most ardent of RootsMagic supporters, but I'm still using version 3 due to the many issues that have been reported (see Vyger's website). When I purchased RM4, I was greatly disappointed to see that the ease of data entry was not enhanced (please, can't we have a copy fact feature so we can enter all 15 children without all the clicking?), there were no dynamic groups and the ease of converting places/place details and existing sources was really not ever developed as promised. I felt like version 4 was released prematurely, made us all beta-testers and really wasn't worth it. It doesn't offer much more than RM3 aside from complicating features that for me were unimportant, while leaving other features undeveloped. RM5's surprise release seems to be a money grab, and I find that even more disappointing. I absolutely would love, love, love to love RootsMagic again, but reading this board off and on, it seems to me the priority is to ignore the dedicated users of this program at the expense of making money. I will probably buy RM5 to support Bruce and his team in hopes that faith will eventually pay some dividends --that RootsMagic can develop in a way that is more satisfying for everyone. Fix the bugs, developed what was promised, and listen to what the real requests are in the forum. The request for a "copy fact" feature has been around for at least six years and I can't think of anything that would be more useful.


Yeah, wouldn't it be nice if when opening a window to enter children one could enter all of the vital info (birth, death, places) on one line, tab to the next and continue until all children are entered.
Jack

a posteriori

#10 Jack

Jack

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 834 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 06:05 PM

Forgot to mention still no ability to merge place details and not easy to see what is attached to place details.



Something that should have been corrected long ago in RM4!
Jack

a posteriori

#11 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8447 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 10:31 AM

5.0.2 - 25 January 2012
New: Added ability to split a place into separate place and place details (on Edit Place screen)
New: Added Merge Place Details to place details list
Renee
RootsMagic

#12 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 10:56 AM

5.0.2 - 25 January 2012
New: Added ability to split a place into separate place and place details (on Edit Place screen)
New: Added Merge Place Details to place details list

For a lot of users these updates are really good news and for the record I personally like how Bruce took the split to another window rather than cluttering the existing PlaceEdit window. It's not often I welcome another window but I think it is very well placed in this instance. :)

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


#13 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 12:57 PM

I also like it that the user has the choice of where to split the place name between place and place details rather than RM doing it automatically by counting commas. :)

If you split the place name and already have the same place name in the list, you will have to merge the new place name with the old place name if you don't want two or more same name places. RM doesn't automatically merge the same name places.

Original place name: Cave City Cemetery, Cave City, Sharp County, Arkansas
New place name: Cave City, Sharp County, Arkansas
with place detail: Cave City Cemetery

New Place list shows:
Cave City, Sharp County, Arkansas [with place detail of Cave City Cemetery]
Cave City, Sharp County, Arkansas [original place name with any other existing place details]

Any media linked to either place name is linked to the one place name after the merge.

#14 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8447 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 01:02 PM

5.0.2.1 - 26 January 2012
Fixed: When splitting places into place / detail, the notes, lat/long, and pictures now go with the place detail instead of the place
Renee
RootsMagic

#15 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 02:46 PM

5.0.2.1 - 26 January 2012
Fixed: When splitting places into place / detail, the notes, lat/long, and pictures now go with the place detail instead of the place

All in all, 5.0.2 is a mighty fine update, I think most users will have got something out of it.

My hat is off to the Rootsmagician, if I get an update like that every two months I will be a very happy bunny :D

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


#16 Jack

Jack

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 834 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 02:46 AM

All in all, 5.0.2 is a mighty fine update, I think most users will have got something out of it.

My hat is off to the Rootsmagician, if I get an update like that every two months I will be a very happy bunny :D


Ditto!
Jack

a posteriori