Jump to content


Personal Historian & Family Atlas survival outside Rootsmagic?

family atlas personal historian

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Vyger


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3502 posts

Posted 23 September 2018 - 12:20 PM

This further discussion has been brought about by a post by sandrabartman, so how do others see the continuation of Personal Historian and Family Atlas as separate programs outside of Rootsmagic?

Whilst Genealogy might be defined as the core purpose of Rootsmagic, Family History encompasses the publishing of quality reports and the mapping of family events. Whilst I am consumed by accurate mapping of communities and their movement I have not purchased Family Atlas as it is standalone and has no reverse interaction with the RM database, same with Personal Historian if I am not mistaken.

Family atlas seems a very competent program encompassing many wishes I have made for RM but I would not like to see the development of those areas within RM hindered by the fact they are in a companion program. It also seems from posts that Family Atlas development has been stalled since 2009 but despite that it can export to Google Earth and display timeline events through a date slicer and also has a pane for the facts associated with selected place.

Personally I would like to see the full features of PH and FA available in one deluxe program and also willing to pay extra for that program. I don't believe my dislike for fragmentation within a common project and data set is unique, jumping back and forward to achieve a reasonable related goal is not logical imo.

I wonder how others feel, I know there has been discussion before on an experts version of RM and I would never expect RM to provide all that functionality and quality for a $20 upgrade fee.

Customers should never be frustrated by things they cannot do - demand better


User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.3, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5


Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here



#2 Trebor22


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts

Posted 24 September 2018 - 08:49 AM

A 'one programme to do it all' is I think a long way off but perhaps PA and FA intergeneration with RM would be a step in the right direction? In the end though there will always be a desire from some users to 'do it a different way', you cannot please all of the people all of the time :-). I often step outside RM and I don't see that changing in the short term - indeed RM seems to be dropping  website creation (except on its own servers) rather than enhancing it, so that's one bit of my wish list gone.

While I think  its an unlikely future, 3rd party 'plugins'  might bring us nearer towards a 'one for all' solution.

I'm looking forward to RM8 and will be interested to see what's new, and after we have played with it for a while we will also see what is still missing. I resigned using other programmes for the foreseeable future but that means keeping an eye on compatibility (that seems to be my soapbox these days!)

Will be interested to read others views :-)

#3 keithcstone


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 25 September 2018 - 02:48 PM

I'm not sure about integrating them into one product as that means someone using a different genealogical software couldn't effectively use either. That said, closer integration would be nice. 

#4 NEreswearcher


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts

Posted 24 November 2018 - 11:06 AM

For me shared facts are used to include all the people that actually shared a particular fact or event.  There are some family facts built into RM7 such as marriage and divorce that work well. I have found that I really want to use shared facts in several other instances. Census records come to mind where you have the head of household and people living at that site at a particular time.  It seems very logical to me to include the fact at the head of household and include all the members of the family as shared facts. I have read that many people use a different approach and add the census information for each individual but that can be a problem if you need to update the data and must now change several facts and trust you don’t make an error from one to another where with a shared fact I only need to change a single entry. Family census only includes a spouse si if I report on a child the data from the census is lost unless I add a second census event for the child.


I also have a situation where a family began in New Hampshire, Moved to Michigan, then to Iowa, then to Kansas and finally back to New Hampshire.  I use shared facts so I don’t have to enter essentially the same data multiple times and any changes to that fact only need to be changed in one place.


I have also used both PE3 and FA in my work. I can use PH to integrate certain people into a timeline. I wanted a chronological story of five family members as they moved west in the 1850s. RM7 does not do that and I developed a sequence of using RM7 and PH3 to accomplish what I want. All the changes to a story are done in RM7 and then re imported into PH3. Cumbersome but it works and I avoid having multiple copies of my data.


I have also used a time capsule function in another, now defunct, software package and found the potential of Life Capsules to be very great but lacked some refinement. For instance I could create my own Life Capsule but if I included it in my work it appeared for everyone. This needed to be fixed so that a particular Life Capsule could be included by individual if desired so that my local history for Boston Massachusetts does not appear in the genealogy of someone who was never ever even  near Boston.


I also should be able to attach any or all of these Capsules to any individual or group.


I think that for shared events or life Capsules it should be decided to either keep them or not, but if they will be kept then all the issues people have found using shared events or Life Capsules should be addressed by RM.


I would like integration to be closer. I should be able to have both RM open and PH open at the same time and the PH data would be a direct real time look at my RM database. I could then make changes to RM and have it appear in PH without the re-importing of the data. Rm and PH currently do something like this by allowing updates to my PH3 data. However at some point you can make changes in PH that are not in RM and that may make the process a little more difficult.


Just my thoughts