Jump to content


Photo

How useful is the Wish List


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 miguelk

miguelk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 07 September 2005 - 12:14 PM

Many of us have posted requests for significant enhancements to RootsMagic, but we never receive any feedback. And now you announce RootsMagic 3, and in the list of enhancements, I see very few of the items that could be really useful to the amateur genealogist. Yet you make a "big deal" of minor enhancements such as backing up directly to a CD (something we can easily do with the current version of RootsMagic - it just takes one additional step...).

I, for one, would rather see a serious attempt on the parts of RM to respond to the cries for improvement visible on the Wish List before putting more $$ into a new version of RM. But I can imagine we'll find that in the near future, you will announce some bug-fix that can only be obtained by buying RM 3, so we will then be forced to buy RM3 anyway!

#2 Marge

Marge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 94 posts

Posted 07 September 2005 - 12:58 PM

I just checked the detail listing of improvements and there are improvements that were initiated from the wish list. My favorite: merging sources from the master source list.

#3 BarryEvans

BarryEvans

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 07 September 2005 - 08:43 PM

I too am a bit puzzled by the RM3 update, given the amount of wishing going on! I am all too aware how much work Bruce et al have to put in to implement changes and test them; that's why they need prioritising. For many years MS and others piled upgrade after upgrade in to their programs to outflash competitiors until the programs became obese Hollyware (all flash, no substance). RM has a very sound foundation, so we are a long way from that, but some fundementals need to addressed before bells and whistles (graphics, graphs, reports etc) go on.
Having not done any genealogy for a year I have found it an interesting excercise coming back to RM. The good news is that it took me very little time to get back to speed. Testimony to how good and intuitive RM is. But where it really lacks is the research side of things. The lack of integration between ToDos (you can't even archive completed ToDos), Correspondence, Addresses etc is a major flaw and a hinderence to good cold systematic research. (And yes, I have tried Gensmarts and no I didn't like it (US-orientated and stating the obvious)).
I really hope the new RM3 interface/fonts/style didn't take too much programming time, because it adds very little to the functionality of RM. Just being able to, for example, archive ToDos would have been much more useful.
Just my 02 worth.
Barry


#4 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 873 posts

Posted 07 September 2005 - 09:39 PM

I have to agree, 100%. I feel that RM3 provides the least value of any upgrade I've seen of either FO or RM. I can live the rest of my life without cute updated icons and multiple toolbar styles, but what has been requested and seconded hundreds of times over the years is the ability to save multiple search criteria, and the ability to define/edit source templates. Why is it that these requests aren't being addressed in "upgrade" after "upgrade" after "upgrade"? Does this company WANT us to switch to The Master Genealogist or some other competitive product?

On a positive note, the ability to privatize facts and notes is great. The rewritten source automerge would be great except it doesn't work correctly.

#5 Guest_Jim Evans_*

Guest_Jim Evans_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2005 - 06:45 AM

I agree with Ludlow. I almost didn't buy the upgrade because my one wish was not included.

The one thing that I wanted to see was the ability to click on the name/born/died column in RM explorer and have it sort by name or date.

#6 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 873 posts

Posted 10 September 2005 - 09:30 AM

QUOTE(Jim Evans @ Sep 10 2005, 05:45 AM)
I agree with Ludlow. I almost didn't buy the upgrade because my one wish was not included.


And therein lies the beauty of commerce - we buy based on "hype" and pressure to have the "latest and greatest" regardless of whether the product is worthy of the cost.

The solution? Return the inferior product for a refund. THAT gets the attention of commerce-mongers.

#7 Guest_Jim Evans_*

Guest_Jim Evans_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 September 2005 - 01:48 PM

QUOTE(Ludlow Bay @ Sep 10 2005, 08:30 AM)
QUOTE(Jim Evans @ Sep 10 2005, 05:45 AM)
I agree with Ludlow. I almost didn't buy the upgrade because my one wish was not included.


And therein lies the beauty of commerce - we buy based on "hype" and pressure to have the "latest and greatest" regardless of whether the product is worthy of the cost.

The solution? Return the inferior product for a refund. THAT gets the attention of commerce-mongers.

View Post



Ludlow, I perhaps worded that poorly. What I ment to say was I almost didn't buy the upgrade even though my wish was not included, but there were a couple of other items that I liked.

One of the reasons I bought RootsMagic was that constant send me more money for a new upgrade, every 6 months or so.

#8 Guest_Douglas Duncan Meredith_*

Guest_Douglas Duncan Meredith_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 September 2005 - 07:46 AM

[But where it really lacks is the research side of things. The lack of integration between ToDos (you can't even archive completed ToDos), Correspondence, Addresses etc is a major flaw and a hinderence to good cold systematic research.]

Barry -- I agree with you that the ToDo list needs some work. Perhaps you can start a detailed posting on the ToDo items, correspondence and addresses that will get the attention of Bruce for the next version likely released in the fall of 2006.

I have wished for a more sortable and workable ToDo list. In particular, I would like to be able to sort and have view options of my ToDo list. Right now, we have the ability to PRINT only active ToDO items, but when we view these items in the program, I can't figure out how to supress the view of completed items. I know one option is to delete the action, but then I lose the work product history of my research. Is this what you descrive as archive? I personally feel that archive would be too far separated from the ToDo list itself. Rather, I would suggest, and have suggested that the ToDo list should have filtering abilties for the various fields that are available.

I would enjoy helping Bruce out by providing specific recommendations on the ToDo list so that we can get it off the Wish List and onto the Feature List for 4.0!




#9 Canyon Wolf

Canyon Wolf

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 180 posts

Posted 16 September 2005 - 05:57 PM

I to am disappointed with this new release. Too much fluff and not enough real functional improvement! If the cost were any higher, I would not be interested in the upgrade at all. But I guess the new source merge will save me enough time to pay for the upgrade.

Unless the next version has more substantial improvements, I will not be spending any more money on RM.

Canyon Wolf