Jump to content


Photo

Are we not due an Update


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:38 PM

The last MINOR update was around 10 weeks ago and if memory serves the update before was also MINOR. Are we not due or overdue a MAJOR update to address some of the shortcomings in place and media management?

#2 Alfred

Alfred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5734 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 10:08 PM

Either your arithmetic is lacking a bit of accuracy or you do not have the latest update.

RootsMagic 4.1.1.1 was released the 17th of March.
Alfred

#3 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 10:29 PM

The last MINOR update was around 10 weeks ago and if memory serves the update before was also MINOR. Are we not due or overdue a MAJOR update to address some of the shortcomings in place and media management?


By shortcomings you mean enhancements, I presume. They are in the "tracking system".

THUD

#4 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 10:51 PM

Here's one for you. At my second RootsMagic Wizards Guild Apprentice Workshop today :P , one of the participants could not see on the Media Gallery the Tools button and the Fix Broken Media Links action. Instead of Tools, she saw something like Show Media Usage - there was no Fix. On checking her RootsMagic version, it turned out to be two years old, ver 4.0.1.1. But she said she had recently updated and clicking Check for Updates reported that RootsMagic was up to date, even though About reported 30 Mar 2009. Now here's the twist. She has a desktop computer and a USB flash drive both with RootsMagic. The flash drive one is the latest version 4.1.1.1; I cannot say what version is on the desktop. But we had just previously sorted out a potential setback using RootsMagic-To-Go which showed her notebook having a later, smaller file than the older, larger one on her stick drive. We copied the one from the stick drive to the notebook and two year old RM 4.0.1.1 opened it without a squawk. I can only guess at how this came about:
  • Suppose the database was 4.1.1.1. Maybe program ver 4.0.1.1 had no database version control, unlike later versions which reject a database that has been operated on (opened) by a later program version
  • Suppose the db was 4.1.1.1. Maybe she installed the update to the flash drive directly, not using RM-To-Go, instead of to the notebook drive, and the Windows registry contains the software version which got updated to 4.1.1.1 even though the notebook drive was not and RootsMagic compares the database version number to the value stored in the Windows registry, not something that is stored in the program file
  • Suppose the db was 4.0.1.1. Maybe the desktop has 4.0.1.1 or has not opened the database since upgrading to 4.1.1.1, the database file was transferred to the flash drive and never opened by the flash drive install of 4.1.1.1

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.


#5 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3458 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 05:15 AM

Or most likely, she has two (or more) versions of RootsMagic installed and was still using the shortcut that opens the older version? If it is reporting that RM is up-to-date it's because there's been an installation of that version that has not been uninstalled yet. What <Check for Updates> seems to do is NOT check the currently running program against what the web says is the latest version, instead I believe it checks this registry key below for the most recent install information (version/location/date/ETC.):

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\{049D96D7-E082-4FB5-BF64-CD3460E6877C}_is1\

In my case the string value named -> DisplayName <- contains this string -> RootsMagic 4.1.1.1

...so even though a user may have installed an earlier version to some other folder location, that installation seemingly becomes obsoleted (for update purposes) when the user subsequently installs a newer version somewhere else that doesn't overwrite the original install directory.

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#6 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 08:31 AM

...so even though a user may have installed an earlier version to some other folder location, that installation seemingly becomes obsoleted (for update purposes) when the user subsequently installs a newer version somewhere else that doesn't overwrite the original install directory.

That was my theory #2, not as well stated as yours, that she installed it to the USB drive directly (not via RM To Go) and did not replace the desktop and quick start shortcuts, thus updating the registry but launching the old version from the shortcuts. I would have thought that the version is embedded in the software and stored in a persistent variable or register when running, as would necessarily be the case for the portable version of RootsMagic and there should be no comparison to a Windows Registry value.

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.


#7 RootsMagician

RootsMagician

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPip
  • 826 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 09:39 AM

I'm sure it must have been #2. Pretty early on we had to modify the installer to warn against trying to install to a removable drive. It doesn't completely disallow it, but it does warn that if you are trying to install to a flash drive you should run the RM To-Go program instead.
RootsMagician

#8 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 10:22 AM

Thanks, Bruce. Good to know you are monitoring!

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.


#9 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 06:08 PM

RootsMagic 4.1.1.1 was released the 17th of March.

I didn't count that one, it was below minor, I see February 12 when this little series or corrections came about http://blog.rootsmagic.com/?p=887

This is like déjà vu, I am now remembering why I dropped away from this forum before, effort in is far from equal to product out

#10 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3458 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 02:35 AM

I didn't count that one, it was below minor, I see February 12 when this little series or corrections came about http://blog.rootsmagic.com/?p=887

This is like déjà vu, I am now remembering why I dropped away from this forum before, effort in is far from equal to product out

I notice that 152 of your 180 posts, here, have been in the Wish List forum. I'm guessing it must be pretty hard for the programmers to reconcile all the wide variety of wishes by amateur program designers into some semblance that fits the current design philosophy. :)

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#11 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 01:26 PM

I notice that 152 of your 180 posts, here, have been in the Wish List forum. I'm guessing it must be pretty hard for the programmers to reconcile all the wide variety of wishes by amateur program designers into some semblance that fits the current design philosophy. :)

Thanks for the analysis, it would seem that you are some sort of administrator or statistician, however I do recognize what you are trying to say. I thought the forum was open to everyone whether that be wishers, problem finders or those looking help, maybe not. I have read that many common views have been put forward for enhancements in certain areas but they just seem to get added to the tracking system and end there. Maybe you know of another reason why the “common” views of many users have not become reality more than two years after release?
Btw, do you work for RM or have some insider insight?

#12 Romer

Romer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2069 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 01:44 PM

I'm no insider, either, but it seems to me that a number of the update items have necessarily had to address issues due to the program rewrite. As these continue to become fewer in number, more significant and substantial wish-list enhancements would be expected to be seen.

There seems to have been a wide variety of wishes expressed, so it's difficult to predict whether or not any relating to place and media management will be among the first to be incorporated.

#13 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 03:01 PM

I'm no insider, either, but it seems to me that a number of the update items have necessarily had to address issues due to the program rewrite. As these continue to become fewer in number, more significant and substantial wish-list enhancements would be expected to be seen.

There seems to have been a wide variety of wishes expressed, so it's difficult to predict whether or not any relating to place and media management will be among the first to be incorporated.

Thanks, i realise getting rid of the problems has to happen first, that has taken a long time and if I am correct links still get dropped during merge in the current version. I also hope I am right in saying that some features are less friendly than rm3 reporting being one. I would hope that after such a long wait we would not be far away from getting the program that was blogged back in 2009 with the new features fully functional. As you say hopefully it will not be long b4 we start seeing some real improvements.

#14 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3458 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 04:30 PM

Thanks for the analysis, it would seem that you are some sort of administrator or statistician, however I do recognize what you are trying to say. I thought the forum was open to everyone whether that be wishers, problem finders or those looking help, maybe not. I have read that many common views have been put forward for enhancements in certain areas but they just seem to get added to the tracking system and end there. Maybe you know of another reason why the “common” views of many users have not become reality more than two years after release?
Btw, do you work for RM or have some insider insight?

I'm just a longtime user. I come here to keep in touch with what is going on and to offer what help I can when I can.
The post count comes from your profile:

http://forums.rootsm...082-john-james/

"Active Posts:180 (0.11 per day)
Most Active In:Wish List (152 posts)"

I am of the belief that the forum is open to everyone for any purpose. You did recognize what I was trying to say. Basically your body of work is just one of many who put forth ideas. Collectively that is a lot of thoughts. Adding Rene has helped to synthesize down both shortcomings and potential new features. I'm just unsure how one determines that they can now feel satisfied that their input has been heard. Is it implementation of one (or more) thing(s) suggested by them? Does implementation of a change suggested by someone else lessen the angst of others whose ideas have not yet been implemented? Does not knowing that there suggestion isn't plausible or possible count? ETC. Does anyone really think the authors wouldn't implement suggested improvements if they were easy and made sense within the program design and direction? I'm just looking at this and wondering whether feedback from the authors would even be a good thing? Suppose the authors responded and we didn't like the answer(s). But, I feel for you. Everybody wants their program to do things the way they envision it. I could offer hundreds of ideas in fifteen minutes... BUT they might not be practical, possible or others might not like them. :)

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#15 John James

John James

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 05:04 PM

:D

Everybody wants their program to do things the way they envision it. I could offer hundreds of ideas in fifteen minutes... BUT they might not be practical, possible or others might not like them. :)

Maybe I didn't understand your previous. I am not disgruntled by not having the program work MY way and although I have not posted a lot recently I have tried to keep in touch with feelings of users. I can't single all the items out now but I rewmember that places, media G, merging etc were all virtually discussed to death with some good ideas and a common consensus on how the program should be. I know thoses users who agreed might onlt be ~5 out of thousands but it was agreement of folk who knew the program well, I also agreed with those thoughts otherwise I probably would have posted. My point is that with a common agreement on how things "should" work why is it taking so long to impliment the changes, is it lack of resources, lack of interest or a banking of ideas for a future version?, I don't count difficulty into what has been generally agreed as it's not.

I don't want to attempt to change your way of thinking, in fact I value it and I would also like to say that many of the best visions for rm have come from new forum users with relatively little experience of the program, and those are the most valuable opinions in my opinion. :D

#16 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3458 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 07:30 PM

:D
Maybe I didn't understand your previous. I am not disgruntled by not having the program work MY way and although I have not posted a lot recently I have tried to keep in touch with feelings of users.

Perhaps you didn't understand. I did not want to imply that you were disgruntled by not having the program work YOUR way. Actually, you've mentioned in your reply what "my take" is about the Wish List forum ...a "bank of ideas" ...PERIOD. It just seems a bit of a folly to presume ANY implementation based merely on number of ideas put forth or even a "consensus" amongst some number of forum participants. That is why I asked those questions in my last post. Their context was aimed at discussing the reasonableness of ANY expectations, beyond having the ability to suggest (or "wish"). The same would seem to apply for "when" program updates are issued... should users' demands force some expected frequency of update, regardless of the program authors' progress? (again, merely a hypothetical question). I've just observed some users so heavily "invested" in the program ideas & design ...that they have left or expressed discontent at expectations that may be too optimistic and presumptive. Surely a "lack of resources" is always applicable ...with more programmers & employees, it would seem reasonable that more could be accomplished quickeror in the case of some users' expectations ...the program could become a full word processor like MS Word with full browser capabilities, ETC. :). Presuming a "lack of interest" doesn't seem logical from a business financial model perspective and reeks more of users frustrated by their expectations. I think anyone who discounts the difficulty in having to redesign or integrate new ideas as bound to become a part of the "frustration" crowd. I don't want to change your way of thinking either, because I agree that user input is valuable ...to me and to the authors.

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N