Poll - Popularity of Family Tree softwares

[admin]

We would like to conduct a poll among the subscribers of this Forum to check about the popularity of the different software that are available for Family Trees.
This thread will also allow comments on them. If your software is not listed above, please chek "Other" and let us know in this thread.
Thank you

[GKBopp]

Test -
I submitted a reply and a comment lat night - but it does not appear here.
Did I goof?
Or is this standard for a poll?

[Jim Hull]

Re: Poll - Popularity of Family Tree softwares

Max:

I like PAF - Personal Ancestral File, which has a PAF Companion that permits other functions that I find useful and helpful in creating reports, etc. However there are features that I like in both that one or the other doesn't have.

jrh

[GKBopp]

OK - I see Jim's reply worked so I'll do this again.

I use Brother's Keeper - I've considered converting to PAF or FTM but there is one report on BK I can't live without. Also, I've been through conversations from DOS to Windows to upgraded, etc. and each conversion has been traumatic!

I'm surprised PAF is not on the list of choices. The main argument for PAF is ---- the other companies may come and go over the years --- but the Mormons will always be there to back up PAF.

[admin]

Originally posted by GKBopp
Test -
I submitted a reply and a comment lat night - but it does not appear here.
Did I goof?
Or is this standard for a poll?

Hi Georgia,
If other people's votes are in and there are other postings in this thread, I think you may have done something wrong... Please try it again.

[Kay Martin]

I had used The Master Genealogist for a few years and liked it very much, but on a lark downloaded Legacy a year or two ago and think it has most if not all of TMG's features in an easier to use format. I also have Famiy Tree Maker and use it occasionally, but find that it's too time consuming to keep the information in each of them current.

Kay

[Jim Hull]

Georgia,

You are right on with the PAF-Mormon comment. I failed to mention that I used their support service a couple of times and found it to be outstanding. But, likeswise for FTM.
My problem is that once I learn something, I'm always reluctant to change to something different. Must be the dog in me!
Do you know why FTDNA is running this survey? Are they planning on teaming up with one of the "most popular" companies and offering a DNA enhanced genealogy program?

Jim

[anita]

THE MASTER GENEALOGIST is the very best software available. All the others tell YOU what data to input and how much. TMG allows you to input as much as you like and customize to your heart's content. Also, the reports are unlimited. Support is great.
Anita Cooper

[GKBopp]

Max - purpose? See Jim's quote

Originally posted by Jim Hull
Georgia,

Do you know why FTDNA is running this survey? Are they planning on teaming up with one of the "most popular" companies and offering a DNA enhanced genealogy program?

Jim

Jim - that's a question for Max - not me. I don't have a clue . . . .

Do you suppose the day will come when the standard gedcom will include fields for DNA results . . . . . .

Aloha,

G.

[admin]

Re: Max - purpose? See Jim's quote

Originally posted by GKBopp
Jim - that's a question for Max - not me. I don't have a clue . . . .

Do you suppose the day will come when the standard gedcom will include fields for DNA results . . . . . .

Aloha,

G.

No need to speculate... mere curiosity...

[AnneWN]

I have been using WordPerfect and Word (no $ in budget for special software) and haven't really had problems....I just use indentations for generations and footnotes for sources and notes. I have recently downloaded a trial package (allows 50 entries) from Roots Magic for free, and it seems like a nifty little program. However, I don't like the report's format, as I prefer to see the tree in the format I use in WP/Word. this gives me a "visually scannable tree." Each entry has the format of the first line:

Fred flinstone (DOB,POB - DOD, POD) m (1) Wilma ___ (DOB, POB - DOD, POD) DOM, POM (2) Sugar Sweet (DOB, POB - DOD, POD) DOM, POM
->5(1) Kid one
->10Grandchild one
->15Greatgrandchild
->5(2) Kid two

Any items requiring more than one line, I indent the 2nd, 3rd etc to line up with the children of the couple (or where the children would be if there were any.)

Living persons can be listed as "living male m CROWSON" or "living female m SMITH" for use by future researchers.

Items such as burial place, Census data, etc. are handled with footnotes. So are sources and notes about contradictions and the like. For instance the footnote for Fred's burial would immediately follow his POD. Sugar Sweet's parents names and identifying information would follow her name. Footnote for Fred's birth certificate would follow POB and include whatever information. Where there is no birth certificate, I give the source(s) for the information. I have found this very handy when researching -- I have a printed copy to carry along and can immediately see what I need to research and document by scanning the top few pages of name entries. If I want to refer to the footnotes, I can, but all that verbiage doesn't have to be waded through and I don't have to think about "whose kid was the Sarah who married Ed Jones?" It can indexed as well, to get an alpha list of names.

[jablair]

Hi Max,

Your totals don't add up. You show 26 votes, I count 31 (13+1+1+4+2+3+1+3+3)

John

[admin]

Don't know where you see 26? I am seeing 31 in the total line.

[Jim Barrett]

Originally posted by max
Don't know where you see 26? I am seeing 31 in the total line.

I see 27 on the total line and count 32. I assume one has been added since the two messages above.

[admin]

hmmmmmm...
I'll check why the number that you are seing is different than the one I am.
Or maybe it's just how this program works ... to misleed the viewers and just give me the correct results?
Just kiddin'