Thanks, Tom. And thanks so much for writing so many useful routines for the use of RM users.
- RootsMagic Forums
- → robertjacobs0's Content
There have been 57 items by robertjacobs0 (Search limited from 18-October 18)
Isn't this a little silly? RootsMagic is castigated if they release nothing and again if they release some but not all, and still again if they don't adhere to a "schedule" established by the pace of their releases. They can't win.
That said, I've believed for years that software companies are insufficiently transparent regarding their plans. RootsMagic isn't alone in being secretive. It seems to be a shibboleth in the industry that disclosure will give competitors an advantage. Since that's the case, there little's point in inveighing against the practice and even less point in criticizing RM8 for its failings before we've seen it.
Did you check the index for the entries of people with missing surnames? RootsMagic, like every other genealogical program, would surely be making unwarranted -- and unwanted -- assumptions by assigning surnames automatically.
The father probably showed up on the pedigree screen as well.
I grant that single names are a problem; there are a few Native Americans in my wife's tree and I've entered their names as surnames. There may be other and better ways of dealing with those names, but I wouldn't expect much help or consistency from Ancestry trees in that regard.
I agree. I've thought -- going back to my TMG days -- that the distinction was artificial. It may have made more sense before Ancestry.com and other internet collections became the dominant research technique.
Similarly, while tracking repositories is suitable for identifying libraries, courthouses and the like, it doesn't really speak to the realities of internet research.
I think the idea is that one would have a "source" -- say a book -- and that subsequent citations of it would only involve typing in a page number.That is, it was supposed to be a time and effort saver. I fear that the source/citation bifurcation has mostly served to confuse thousands of people.
As I look at my own report footnotes I see that most of them can adequately guide researchers, but they are all higgledy-piggledy and inconsistent with one another.
I'm glad to learn that there will be words, and an option to abandon them and just show icons. However, my preference would be to bag the icons and just show text buttons. I hope it's not too late to offer this as an option. It should be a simple change.
I also hope it will be possible to show the icons/text horizontally at the top if the user so wishes.
I open RootsMagic 7.6.1, go to Tools/File Options/Ancestry and click on "Disconnect from Ancestry tree." RootsMagic locks up and I have to use the Task Manager to exit. The task manager reports "RootsMagic not responding." I'm actually not sure whether the Ancestry Tree is actually linked or not.
There's been so much trouble with Ancestry that I'm trying to disassociate RootsMagic completely from them although I plan to continue using Ancestry as a research tool.
I hope it isn't heresy to suggest that the best way to post your research on the web is to abandon Tree Share and use RootsMagic and GedSite together to put up the data in the form you prefer. Ancestry.com could still be used for research, of course. Ancestry Tree Share is rife with API problems, the necessity to bow to their formats, and constant repetitive web hints, many of which are duplicates, irrelevant, or just plain wrong.
It's only necessary to look at this forum's posts to see how much trouble Tree Share has caused and how much of your time and RM's time are wasted because of it.
>>>I believe you are refering to Famiy Historian<<<
Yes, of course. If their next version comes out soon and they have fixed that particular deficiency I'm going to have to make a difficult decision. The absence of italics, in particular, was a deal-breaker for me.
If I'm not mistaken, one of our competitors publishes a lits showing how many of their users have asked for each particular change. One of that program's deficiencies IMO is the want of bold, italic & underlining in the printed reports. Last time I looked that enhancement was very high on the list of desirable changes. Were I using that program I would be confident that the programmers would be considering the change seriously.
I'd like to see the RM8 wish list similarly set up. Users would be given a greater sense of participation and I cannot see that the company would be risking anything by the disclosure of what users are hoping for.
The load on the CPU is sometimes very high when the computer is just booting up and for a few moments afterward. does the slowdown occur after the machine is up for a while as well as when you're just starting?
The Windows task manager can show you the percentages of CPU times that are used by each of the running processes.
I too agree with Vyger's logic, but given that the user can set the sort date to the midpoint of two two end dates if desired, I wouldn't delay the release of RM8 by one microsecond for the proposed change.
Wherever the sort date is set, either by RM or by the user, the date itself will be displayed as entered.
In my own records (between 5800 and 5900 people, n=5851 ), a quick and dirty survey shows fewer than five "between x and y" sort dates which would materially affect the order of events in print reports or on my GedSite web site.
Orthography was not a primary concern for the immigrant generations. Moreover, immigrant Jews from Eastern Europe had only had names on the Western pattern since 1800 or 1810 when the Tsar promulgated a decree requiring that they adopt them. The decree's purpose was to regularize tax collection and military conscription.
Before that decree most Jewish names within the Pale, except perhaps for the most prominent Rabbinic families, were of the form x ben y: Isaac, son of David, etc.
An important tradition of Jewish naming is that an infant not be named after a close living relative. Thus family names tend to skip a generation — children often named after deceased grandparents for example.
That's a great site, Jerry. It should appeal to the more serious and scrupulous genealogists among us. As you've seen, I went in a different direction, in part because I felt the site had to appeal to my more elderly users, many of whom were not as much interested in documents as they were in pictures and stories. Now I've gotten into the more elderly class myself I wonder if I made the right choice.
Very nice work! Please accept my congratulations.
I seem to have "description" in my fact list, but I don't recollect whether it was built in or if I made it as a custom fact. Either way, you could use it and edit the sentence template to suit the information you hope to record.
The template in my machine is "[person] was described as [Desc]< [Date]>< [PlaceDetails]>< [Place]>."
In order to have the program run correctly from the external drive it would have to be installed in Windows anyway. Some program data (not your data) is held in the Windows registry and in C\Users\[your username]\Roaming. So you might as well have the program installed on your machines in its entirety and just move your data back and forth (or otherwise synchronize it).
Zhangrau is correct -- Windows is inflexible if it can't find what it expects.
There are some stand-alone programs (usually utilities like Autoruns.exe) which do not require Windows installation. RootsMagic to Go may partially do what you suggest (I'm not at all familiar with it), but I seem to remember that it doesn't provide the full RootsMagic facilities.