RootsChat.Com
General => Technical Help => Family History Programs, Tree Organisation, Presentation => Topic started by: jcsturgis on Tuesday 30 September 14 17:55 BST (UK)
-
Given the recent announcement of the demise of TMG, I am currently researching alternatives and not having much fun. The ones I am considering are Legacy, Family Historian, Family Tree Maker and Roots Magic.
Roots Magic is the only one that does a direct import from TMG project files, but doesn't having the geographic mapping that many of the others do. TMG allows 'family' events/facts to be created (with associated roles), but these don't seem to be included in GEDCOM files and the prospect of re-entering all that data (on the software that will allow it) is horrifying. Family Tree Maker doesn't provide a trial version, so I have no way of evaluating it.
Does anyone have any advice, suggestions or opinions ... any would be welcome, preferably before I have pulled all my hair out.
-
Family Historian does do a direct import from TMG, with certain limitations.
There is a detailed document and link to recent discussions on the Family Historian User Group Site.
http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:import_from_tmg (http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:import_from_tmg)
-
Thanks Jane, I'll have a look at that. :D
-
I have tried direct import into Family Historian and nothing happens ... I do have the demo version of Family Historian so presumably this feature isn't available on the trial version?
-
A couple of things to check, make sure you have V5.0.11 (use help>about) to check. If not download the latest trial from the Family Historian site and install it over the top.
Make sure you don't have TMG open when you do the import and run the database fixing options if you still have problems.
-
Thanks Jane. I've tried all these things, but it would appear (having re-read the discussion entry that you suggested) that my problem is to do with the fact that I am running Vista. Guess I'll take it up with them and see if there are any plans to rectify this ... makes it difficult to evaluate properly though. ???
-
My understanding of the problem is as long as you install and run FH under a Admin user just to do the import you should be able to import fine. It's a Windows Vista "Feature" which is the problem.
-
Just tried running it as admin and it makes no difference ... ???
-
Very strange, if possible I would contact support at family-historian.co.uk, if your tree is not too large if you attach a backup of your database they might be able to check if it's something in the database or a feature of your windows installation.
-
As a long term user I always recommend RootsMagic, which I found after trying everything available when I first started genealogy. The full version of RM does include mapping but I don't know if it accepts imported mapping data.
This link gives information of their direct import for TMG files: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/?p=2248
I have no connection with RM other than as a customer.
Mike.
-
That's probably a good idea and I'll do that ... fortunately I have a small database (that I did for a friend) that I can send. Another quick question ... does FH have the ability to merge different projects? In my wisdom (when I started this about 20 years ago!) I created separate projects for each of my main surname branches, as I thought this would be easier to manage ... I now want to merge them all together so I can get a proper 'ancestor' picture ... I can't seem to find a utility in FH to do this ... any ideas?
-
Mike ... yes, I'm looking at RootsMagic too ... same question applies regarding merging projects?
-
Of course, File>Merge Compare from the menu.
http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=glossary:merge_compare_files (http://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=glossary:merge_compare_files)
-
If you open 2 databases on the main screen RootsMagic allows you to copy people from one database to another by dragging and dropping them. You get the option to copy the whole database, or just an individual with or without their ancestors or descendants.
Mike.
-
Thanks Mike - it does indeed! Unfortunately, the actual operation is only available in the full version (and I only have a trial), so I can't see what it does. Understandable I guess, but pah! :)
-
Yes, it is frustrating not to be able to try out all the features before you buy.
Drag and drop is a feature I haven't used often, but basically you open two databases/projects and 'tile' the windows side by side within the main RM window. Then you select a person you want to copy to the other database and drag them across to that window, you then get the option to move just the individual or any combination of family members up to the entire database. If you drop the individual on an existing family you get further options to link or merge the person as a child of that family, which automatically links all the other relatives you import with them. There are also various 'Tools' to merge duplicate individuals, etc. which is useful because there can be a lot of tidying up to do if the same people appear in both databases.
Mike.
-
Mike,
That sounds a though it will do the job, so thanks for the explanation. The other thing I use (in TMG) is individual 'flags' (Y/N/X) typically in my case, to indicate whether a person appears on a particular census (or not). This makes it easy to produce reports based on them, as TMG doesn't allow filters on whether an event (fact) doesn't exist, only the data contained within if it does (if you get what I mean). It looks like the 'groups' feature of RootsMagic will do something similar but, short of going through and tagging all the people in my database (and there are a few thousand), it will also depend on whether existence/non-existence of a fact can be used as a criteria. Any thoughts?
-
Hi again, sorry it's a bit late but I haven't been online much today.
There are no permanent individual 'flags' in RM but there is a pretty comprehensive 'RootsMagic Explorer" which will filter and group individuals on up to 6 combined criteria, so you can print reports for them. There is also a persistent colour coding facility in which you can choose several different coloured fonts for different groups, which makes them stand out in listings, etc.
I have attached a screenshot of the filter box so you can get an idea of it.
Mike.
-
Thanks again Mike ... I've just been having a play with explorer and, on the face of it, there is an option to select the census fact along with a 'not exists', but it's not quite the full solution. The scenario is ... I have a spare hour and I want to produce a list of all the people who should be on the 1851 census, but I haven't found yet. In terms of the data, this means that there won't be a census fact containing 1851 in the date, but there may be others, for the other census entries that I may have found (1861, 1871 etc). Because, as I said, TMG doesn't have a 'not exists' condition, I've created a set of flags (which when you create them, are applied to everyone in the project and set to a default value) for each of the censuses, which I then set to 'Y' when I find someone. It's then very easy to produce a list based on 'On 1851 Census = N'.
I have looked at the possibility of designing a new 'fact type' for this purpose, but there doesn't appear to be a way of assigning this to everyone, so I don't really think it's an option as I have thousands of people that I'd have to go through individually, unless I'm missing something.
Any bright ideas would be very welcome. :D
-
Mike ... I've had another thought (difficult at this time of the morning) ... I could create a group (although I can't try this as it's disabled) containing all those people on (say) the 1851 census. Couple of questions: (1) Can I then produce a list using the selection criteria 'not in this group' and further refine it to also discount people who were born after 1851 and died before 1851? (2) When creating said group, is it necessary (as it seems to be) to individually tag each person (as I said I have a few thousand) based on the selection criteria, and continually using 'Next Record', or is there an easier way?
I think I've had enough thoughts for one day!! :o
-
I haven't done much complex filtering, but in the group selection box there is the option to either mark or unmark individuals. I would think you could start by marking everyone, then select the people on the 1851 census (with whatever other criteria you require) and unmark them, which would leave the group you need . . . probably :-\
I need to switch my brain back into genealogy mode for the winter months, having spent all my spare time over the summer removing a leylandii hedge and some trees and re-fencing my garden.
Mike.