Jump to content


Photo

User Survey and some old Nuggets not to be forgotten

RM7 wish list

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 08:08 PM

I know the Rootsmagician is collecting some user feedback on the importance of features to the user base and I will submit mine in the next day or so.

 

However I am reminded of some old nuggets which I would very much hope have not been forgotten, they are not so much wishes and minor little functionality snags which hinder workflow. I have been working with a lot of Media over the past few weeks so I will start the ball rolling with this one which is a really simple functionality fix.

 

Please provide right click "preview" in Media Gallery and Media Album which would allow the file to be opened in Windows Explorer or other preferred external viewer. With that additional window now open it would be easy to reference the document/image and update RM with the details therein.

 

And why stop there also add "open with" so if one comes across an image needing enhanced they would be able to open it with their favourite image editing software.

 

BTW, I know I can achieve this by running RMtoGo and Desktop but it is such a simple enhancement and would make RM much more user friendly.

 


“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#2 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6173 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 08:47 PM

I filled in the user survey last night and was disappointed and dismayed that requests that you and I and other, shall I say, "power users" have been advocating for a long time did not make it into the form. All we can do is a write-in, which does not present them to others so they won't get supported nor will they be counted (at least in any meaningfully consistent way). And Bruce will be able to ignore them on the basis that the listed ones received greater user interest and development will respond accordingly.

 

It was my sense that the survey was more about strategy - where should RootsMagic fit in the broad spectrum? Should it embark on collaborative tools, enhanced web services, handheld editing (think Ancestry-FTM-mobile editor app or My Heritage-FTB-mobile editor app and I wonder if there is some potential web partner other than FamilySearch).

 

In restrospect, I wish I had screen-shotted the survey pages and had taken more time to review and identify what was omitted that would be important to me - as it was, my written suggestions were necessarily succinct because the form fields for them are very small. But you can wind back through the pages of the form before submitting it and edit your responses without losing anything from the subsequent pages.


Edited by TomH, 26 June 2014 - 08:49 PM.

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.


#3 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6173 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:15 PM

You can preview the survey questions at http://sqlitetoolsfo...tail/Survey.pdf


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.


#4 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:34 PM

It was my sense that the survey was more about strategy - where should RootsMagic fit in the broad spectrum? Should it embark on collaborative tools, enhanced web services, handheld editing (think Ancestry-FTM-mobile editor app or My Heritage-FTB-mobile editor app and I wonder if there is some potential web partner other than FamilySearch).

 

I did have a look and I would agree about strategy which is a necessary for survival.

 

Under the rumor of the re-write I decided to post this thread to remember those little functionality annoyances in the hope they disappear in the next version.

 

Recently Rootsmagic posted a short article dealing with place details in unknown places, the problem remains that there is no easy way to reassign a Place Detail to another Place when that information is found or a previous mistake is realized.


“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#5 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:36 PM

While I am in the groove, we do have association displayed through the Print button on the Place List but no easy way to show fact association of a Place Detail.

 

Would that fall under REPORTING <_<


“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#6 MVS

MVS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 07:15 AM

Well I was never asked to fill in a survey but I have looked at the PDF and could make the comments that I don't think it will enable people to articulate what they really think.

For example, a question of "How important or useful do you find each of these RootsMagic features?" gives the possible answers of "Unimportant,Somewhat Important, Important or Very Important". So, if I were to reply on the "Mobile Apps" would I answer Yes it is Very Important or "No" it is very unimportant -because the RM implementation does not allow update of data or automatic input of GPS information into records etc etc.

This whole section should clearly be split into two questions, one asking "is it important?" and the other "does our implementation satisfy your needs?" That way there would be a clear definition of what areas of the system people were actually using or interested in using, and in what areas the Users considered there were shortcomings.

My fear is. for example. that a User would probably answer "Very Important" to a feature such as Mobile and be denied the opportunity to say they think it is poorly implemented because there is no facility to do updates on the move.

MVS.

#7 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6173 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 08:45 AM

You may not have been invited if you do not subscribe to the newsletter nor have your current email address registered with your software key. However, it is an open invitation on the RootsMagic blog http://blog.rootsmagic.com dated 24 June. Also, it shows in Rootsmagic News when you open the program.

I agree with your observation that the design of the questions poses a dilemma for both the surveyed and the analyst. I answered that Mobile was Unimportant (not useful). If I answered that Editing capability in mobile apps was a Very important (useful) feature for future versions, what weight should the analyst apply to my response? Am I saying that the mobile app would become important and useful to me or that, because it is currently not, this development is of less importance to me than others for features that are already critical to my usage.

Perhaps we should design our own survey...

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.


#8 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8363 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 09:58 AM

I would suggest you answer the survey based on how important a feature is, even if it is not developed fully for your needs. Then in the comments add those thoughts. 

 

We wanted to keep this survey very short so not everything could be listed for FUTURE versions. The priority was given to items we currently don't support. If you feel strongly about an enhancement then add it to the comments. If you already know that item is in our development tracking system then mention what it is and keep your comments brief. Simply to make my life easier after the survey is done.  :)


Renee
RootsMagic

#9 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 10:24 AM

If I answered that Editing capability in mobile apps was a Very important (useful) feature for future versions, what weight should the analyst apply to my response? Am I saying that the mobile app would become important and useful to me or that, because it is currently not, this development is of less importance to me than others for features that are already critical to my usage.

 

Evolution is a funny thing and in the database world not always a good thing IMO. I personally see programs such as RM as database applications and primarily a desktop application and not a touch screen experience and I do worry about development towards catering for touch screen and tablet use.

 

I believe the revenue should come from a solid quality desktop database application with full functionality and quality utilities, a mobile app is a luxury for me and a replacement for carrying reports and paper. A mobile app provides a useful reference for me but not something I would want to be making edits on or updating apart from maybe on a very basic level.

 

Anyway me survey is now in, I live in the hope that right click functionality survives and the mouse and keyboard always continue long into the future.


“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#10 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3482 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 07:14 PM

I tend to hate all surveys because the questions never match my answers - my quaint way of saying that survey questions are never structured in a way that really lets me communicate what I want to communicate about the topic at hand. In that spirit, I found that the RM survey didn't really ask some of the right questions. But at the same time, it was a better survey than many I encounter and I provided copious comments as I was taking it. I would give it a grade of about C- rather than a D or an F, but that's a grade from somebody who has never given a survey a grade much higher than about a C+.

 

I do wish that it had more quesitions about needs than about features. Here are some questions I would quibble about.

  • How important is multimedia (pictures)? For me, multimedia for sources is extremely important. Multimedia for photographs is of virtually no value to me. I might not feel quite the same about photographs if they were better integrated into narrative reports. My favorite example of this goes back to when I first purchased Family Origins. I linked a photograph of a tombstone to a burial fact, fully expecting the photograph to appear in a narrative report. It didn't and still doesn't in RM6. So I just handle photographs as sources within RM when that's appropriate, or outside of RM when the photographs make no sense as sources.
  • How important is mapping and place handling? This is really two different questions. Mapping from within RM is not important to me at all because I can do so very much more with mapping outside of RM. (I do realize that mapping within RM is very important to many RM users. The survey should capture that information.)  But place handling within RM is very important to me. Just so you know where I'm coming from on mapping, I'm getting into layering of maps and geo-referencing and that sort of thing. It would just be nuts for RM to try to take on that task instead of sticking with its core mission of genealogy.
  • How important is the quality of printouts / reports. This is an excellent question because I took it to mean the quality of existing reports. It's of the highest importance to me. However, I wish there were a question that somehow or other got to the issue of printouts / reports not being live, and also a question about how I wish existing reports would be improved much more than I wish that fancy new reports would be added.
  • How important are named groups? Well, as far as it goes, the question is ok and named groups are very important to me. However, the question does not really get at the ways which named groups could benefit from some important enhancements.
  • How important is online publishing (creating Web sites)? This is really two different questions. The online publishing provided by RM is of no importance to me (I do realize that for many users it's very important). Creating Web sites is very important to me (I have my own Web site for the publishing). So how do I answer the question? Also, the question does not get at my extreme concern about the HTML web pages having been deprecated and with no obvious replacement in sight that would be satisfactory.
  • How important are Source templates (Evidence Explained style)? Again, two questions. The Source template facility is extremely important to me. The built-in Evidence Explained style source templates are of virtually no value to me.

There's more in this same vein, but I'll try to write shorter rather than longer in this particular case. I would finally finish by saying that in many cases it's not the feature that's so very important, but rather the details of how the feature works. RM already has a number of features that I would regard as extremely important, but where the functionality of the features is lacking. The survey doesn't get at that sort of issue. Nevertheless, upon further review of the survey I'm raising it's grade from C- to B-. It could have been much worse, and it really is better than most surveys.

 

Jerry