Since I posted my last message, I researched the OneDrive situation a little bit more. It first appeared in Windows 8 in 2015. But Windows 8 was very unsuccessful and I personally never installed it, holding out for something better. I only moved to Windows 10 about a year ago, and for whatever reason I only noticed  that OneDrive wasn't keeping files locally until three or four months ago. I've been phasing it out ever since. Of course, OneDrive is a part of a larger Microsoft strategy that I totally disagree with. Namely, put all your data in OneDrive and put OneDrive clients on all your devices. OneDrive of course is built in to Windows itself. Thus all your data is in OneDrive and isn't really on any of your devices. It's AVAILABLE to all your devices but it's not really ON any of your devices.

 

I think OneDrive was around before Win 8 / 2015 in the guise of SkyDrive but I seem to remember MS renamed it (perhaps because of clash with Sky?) and in the beginning you didn't need to install anything (and I think that's still the case?) you  just log in from your browser and use if that's what you prefer.

Like others mentioned it works as I expect it to, I use it to keep some files available anywhere, collaborate with others and on odd occasions when I have been away from home  backup files from my laptop. Its never been part of my home backup strategy.

One current negative, when first launched it came with 25GB of free storage but has been cut back to just 5 last time I looked :-(

I'm not keen on a lot of what MS has been doing but happy with OneDrive :-)

I was under the impression you can still get hints with just the 'free account' so you could perhaps 'pay per view' for the odd hint if that is cheaper? however I have not tested this!

Notes on the free account - https://www.findmypa...st-subscription

US centic because of the practice of publishing obituaries and funerals in newspapers which were used to inform the public at large.

I have found a number of newspaper articles in the UK listing funeral attendees or at least some of them, might be hard to tell if a complete list,  and some guest lists at weddings - all late-ish 19th century or  early 20th

If its just about 'sharing the info' rather than giving them a copy of the database to play with  then html is an option, on CD or via a cloud share (perhaps as an ISO) should be usable on most operating systems.

Groups do not update automatically if you add new people to your database who should be in the group. So you will periodically need to refresh your groups by running doing an Edit instead of a New on the groups to specify your marking criteria again. RM's users have much wished for a more automated way to refresh groups after adding people to your database.

 

Jerry

If Groups worked well / as it should it might overcome one of my problems with a 'single database' - if its a 'problem solved' in RM8 I will look at it again :-)

Perhaps to cut down on the 'waiting time' were going to skip RM8 and go straight to RM9

Joking aside sure it will be good news!

I guess I'm one of the few as I have kept my databases separate and this was particularly useful when my wife retired  as she just took over 'her databases' that I had been researching. I find it easier to concentrate on the individual lines and a 'test combine' I tried a few years was a backward step for me and I gave up on it. 'Separate' all seems much clearer and easier to me.

If separate databases work for you i would say go with it   :-)

In my view the current wish list is past its sell by date and I agree it would be a good idea to lock it.

A new and improved one for RM8 - voting for features is an appealing idea :-)

 

 

To me, this raises for the umpteenth time a genealogy issue I think about a lot. Namely, should you expect and require your main genealogy software to be extremely comprehensive in meeting all your needs, or rather should you expect to use a variety of outboard tools such as FTA to supplement your main genealogy software? Or more specifically, exactly what should you expect from your main genealogy software?

 

Jerry

 

When I started out, now more than 20 years ago I did expect one piece of software to 'do it all' but experience has shown me that's more a dream than reality (perhaps RM 8 will prove me wrong). That said I also think its sometimes nice to use other programmes, it keeps me aware of what is out there, often just does what I want where RM did not, and sometimes makes me think about things in a different way, which can be good! It was  mentioned recently on the forum about RM websites, I think RM is rather dated in this respect and likely heading in the wrong direction, so using a 3rd party utility is for me a simple solution,  I also use a word processor for some of my writing, can I ever expect RM to be as good as Word or LibreOffice?

I think the nearest a programme might come to meeting all my needs (and or doing things in the way I want) would be to allow 3rd party 'add ons' - (as some programmes do - eg Gramps & FH) the community can then take a stab at filling in some of the gaps.

All that said RM8 may still be my programme of choice when its released, after all none of the competition is perfect, its our choice where we spend our cash :-)

 

By the way, the reason that I prefer dd mmm yyyy is because it avoids this type of confusion:
 

    does 3-5-2017 represent 03 May 2017 or 05 Mar 2017 ?????

While personal preference might be OK elsewhere I believe the format  zahangrau cites is by far the best way to avoid confusion for for family history purposes.

. I again think the static HTML approach is much better and I think that RM is kind of going in the wrong direction. I suspect I am in the minority with this view.

 

Jerry

Just in case votes count, I also think RM is heading in the wrong direction in this respect.

However I'm also inclined to the view whichever route RM takes it is unlikely to match the websites  of GedSite (or similar products) where producing  good websites is its primary business.

Its just one of those areas where I suspect I will always do better outside RM :-)

Does RM support the GEDCOM standard fact called: DSCR <PHYSICAL_DESCRIPTION>

PHYSICAL_DESCRIPTION:= {Size=1:248}
An unstructured list of the attributes that describe the physical characteristics of a person, place, or object. Commas separate each attribute.
Example:
1 DSCR Hair Brown, Eyes Brown, Height 5 ft 8 in
2 DATE 23 JUL 1935

Yes - can be selected from list by clicking 'Add a fact', although its not one I've used.

I think Jerry has covered all the points about the various options except perhaps RM8 - I am under the impression the RM6 and before type website options are not due to be included in RM8, may be worth keeping in mind when choosing which you want to go with. Or have I got this wrong Renee?

The value of transcriptions lies in their 'ease of searching' and I will continue to make good use of them,  in my opinion all of the big players are as bad as one another for errors. I often search multiple transcriptions looking for a person, particularly where unusual names are involved, but they are not new, Before there was much online I had bought numerous BMD certificates from the UK's GRO before the penny dropped they were transcriptions. Unfortunately getting originals from county record offices is not always so easy but getting your data from an 'original' is worth the effort! IMHO

Other peoples research is just the same, it might be a helpful research aid (and I regularly collaborate with cousins) but not substitute for my own research - again IMHO

I enter data from original records as it was recorded, mistakes and all, and if needed I add comments for calcification, often commenting on what was transcribed.

But of course its up to individuals how they progress their research and if someone is happy with an approach, that's fine :-) 

It obviously depends on how big your tree is but if its dating back to 18th century it sounds like it could be very large, are you talking about a 'graphical tree'? or 'book format' either way it could be a lot of paper! Do you intend to pass copies on to family members? If so it might it be worth considering a shareable CD instead of printing? Either the option offered by RM or with something like Jerry uses - gedsite - which should work ok from a CD on any modern PC with a CD drive, where no drive you could circulate via usb stick or cloud.You can include everybody in the database.

I have recorded 'marital status at death' for years - going way back to PAF I just used to add info to person notes - but I treat only as a 'guide' as in some cases it might cloud the issue of 'further research'  ie not married does not mean a person did not have children or  a long term 'partner' as is common today, perhaps very unusual in the past but it did happen. I also have a couple of instances where a divorcee was recorded as single at death and similarly I found a divorced cousin recorded as single in 1939 register, perhaps preferring not to admit to divorce?. None the less I think its useful info to record!

I agree with TheRev on much of his post, however, the pricing of RM is not an issue for me. I would gladly pay twice the price if current updates rolled out quickly (RM8), if compatibility for MacOS (Mojave) and future builds were moved to the forefront with Windows versions, if the vale of secrecy regarding their ongoing build changes (alpha/beta) were made known to their customers so we may follow their progress and expected rollout), and if RM actually answered directed requests to them.

 

I'm sure staffing, costs and a myriad of similar issues are in play, but if RM charged a little more for their product while providing better service, support, and compatibility within an acceptable time frame, then it would definitely be worth it. One usually gets what they pay for, IMHO.

I agree in principle but am also mindful of being careful what I wish for. I would  pay more than the current price of RM for software that suited my needs - RM or something else! But higher cost is a factor in the equation, what if 3 times the price or 10 times? I do use other software and would shift my main programme if I felt price outstripped value or if RM8 fell behind other offerings.

I am also well aware that some software has moved to a 'subscription service' (eg. Office 365) with gradual evolution of the product rather than periodic updates, good for a companies revenue stream but personally I'm not a fan of this model and would probably move elsewhere if this was the future of RM.

Given that there was a Demo of RM8 at Rootstech I'm a little disappointed that there has not been some solid news from RM of what we will see in RM8 on this forum, I want to be a loyal, happy RM user but its not so easy at the moment :-(

No, I've not run RM under Linux but I have been wondering if the 'rewrite' cpuld mean RM8 running under Linux? Might be a nice little USP :-)

 

I think "evidence" is a better word than "proof". I'm not sure you ever achieve actual "proof" in genealogy.

 

Some kinds of genealogical evidence is better than other kinds of genealogical evidence, but even the best genealogical evidence can sometimes include inaccuracy.

 

Jerry

Jerry is correct I should have used 'evidence' rather than 'proof'  - my intended meaning though remains the same I prefer to record the source! but its a personal choice :-)

Proof is a tough word to define specifically. Primary sources have a high degree of validity but are not proof without a doubt, this is why you should look for other sources when you can and when you run out you don’t say you have “proof”, but you have a “preponderance of evidence”. Just saying! :-)

Amateurs generally don’t care about sources and the value of good scientific methods, but that’s not why we do this is it? I have this issue with my wife’s family. They have stories that are gospel in the family, and will not believe DNA evidence, or that babies can’t be born to a man that was dead for 11 months. People will believe what they want to believe!

I am an amateur genealogist (never been paid for my hobby!) but I do care about proof!

In my own experience I have found some books relating to parts of my family that are a mix of 'research' and 'rumour' separating one from the other means doing my own research, of course they are still of great interest and I seek to record the information along with my own research,  differences would prompt me to check my own research and correct if I'm wrong. For me its part of the process for others not.

In the end its entirely a personal choice rather than right or wrong and if you happy with an approach - I say go with it!

I saw this post and IMMEDIATELY thought of this thread.

https://www.geneamus...e-maker-is.html

 

It seems the guys that took over the FTM project have a vision for what I am looking for, and it seems to be what Wayne would be happy about as well. Online storage and sync of your family tree - like the Dropbox concept, or the way Zotero works. Update the data whenever and wherever you are, using whatever tool you have to hand, and that data is synced with your other devices.

 

I do hope that the rest of the genealogy software vendors catch on to this idea.

I have just had a quick read to the post linked above and it sounds like a nice feature, assuming it works well! I can imagine it would work particularly well for those who regularly access their tree from multiple computers without the need for something like 'to go' versions of software. Of course security and integrity of the data would be important (as Jerry suggests). Perhaps it would allow researchers like Wayne work the way they prefer but also leave the desktop application for those of us that prefer it. Will be interested to see how it develops :-)

Just a footnote:- the UK GRO has started supplying 19th century Birth and Death certificates as pdf files, and I guess some will want them to print in reports? That said the layout is not ideal with a lot of 'white space' so it may just be worth 'clipping' the info an saving as an 'image file'?

While interested in your comments and comparisons with other sectors like banking (where  I enjoy the protection of the UK's FCS, is there any protection for my data?)

I am not sure you have listed any real advantages to moving my hard researched data online, only reasons why it might be done. Once surrendered what protection would I have that RM wouldn't seek to charge a per month or per Mb fee? What would happened if I did not pay, deletion?  If RM went bust would the administrators be contacting me to return my data or would they just send the servers off to auction?

I disagree with your idea but that's life :-)  perhaps the best option would be if both routes were available but personally  I would need a lot more convincing to move my research online :-)

I've already said my piece about wanting to stay on the desktop, and I won't repeat myself about that. But there is another interesting issue where I would be supportive if there were a good way to do it, and the other interesting issue almost certainly would involve "the Web" or "the cloud" or something of that nature. Namely, I think it would be nice to have better collaboration tools, where multiple people could work on the same RM database either "at the same time" in a safe fashion, or even "one at a time" in a safe and easily synced fashion.

 

I don't think it's a very easy problem to solve, and it would be easy to put together a fairly poor solution that would be a disaster. I think it would be really hard to put together a really good solution. I can safely give my opinion now that RM's ShareMerge isn't such a solution, RM's TreeShare isn't such a solution, RM's RM-to-Go isn't such a solution, and RM's use of the FamilySearch API isn't such a solution.

 

I guess I might picture something that's sort of like TreeShare except that sync would be automatic, no data would be lost between the RM desktop and the cloud storage in either direction, and multiple users would be prevented from stepping on each other. The last condition would be the hardest to fulfill. For example, what would happen if two different users started editing the same person at the same time? Or the same item in the source list? Or the same item in the place list? And what about global changes to things like the place list? And what about media files that might not have identical file strings on each user's computer? It's a very non-trivial problem.

 

Jerry

 

I have mentioned on this forum before that I wonder if RM's current 'publish to the web' on RM servers only is a step towards an online vision? I prefer to stay with the desktop for the main part. However Jerry's suggestions for collaboration options via the web would be a welcome addition, assuming it worked well!  I guess the long wait for RM8 will keep our imaginations occupied in the mean time:-)

I'm also very much in the 'desktop camp' ! I'll share a lot of my research online but I cannot see it being main storage / work place.

Seem to remember there was some discussion of this topic on another recent (ish) thread.