BoricuaSeeker

You're reading something into 'small company' that I did not say. My point was that genealogy companies with the exception of FTM are not Microsoft. They are simply small companies that don't need a storefront or large staffed offices - not in these days of telecommuting. This has nothing to do with or implies anything about income or user base. As far as using volunteers (as another writer commented), it is normal practice - as most of us know - for software companies, including Microsoft, to use volunteer beta testers in the final stages of a new release. Volunteers staff the majority of the online forums and mailing lists. It makes no sense to link volunteerism to the viability of a company. Virginia Sorry if I read something into what you said that you did not mean.. You said: "We're not talking big business here. I think you will find that the majority of the popular genealogy software 'companies' (with the exception of FTM) consist of one or two owner-developer-programmers, often working out of their homes with a handful of staff, maybe holding a second job, heavily dependent on volunteers for testing and support. Consider the number of genealogy programs and the user base shared among them; look at the revenue stream - with a couple of years between major releases. For example, TMG does not charge for interim updates." To me what you said does talk about how much money WG makes.. Second Job? Heavily dependant on a QA team and support team that are not paid? One or maybe two developers working? Low user base shared between all the genalogy programs? revenue stream is low because there is too much time between major releases? I don't think I read too much into what was stated.

You are talking about a 16-bit library. That library is not used in TMG8 so it is a non-issue in the development of TMG8. The entire report manager/report output code has been written from scratch for TMG8. Once the loose ends are cleaned up, I would suspect that TMG8 will be released. The report issue specific to TMG 7 is a 16 bit issue but a quick search on the web on VFP 9 bugs will show a bunch of 32 bit issues with printing, and other 90's technologies..

How is that obvious? TMG 7 itself works perfectly on my 64-bit system, and has for well over a year. The only thing that doesn't work is the third-party code that produces reports to word processor files, and that has nothing to do with FoxPro. Since FoxPro uses old technology there are lots of jumping through hoops going on because of "3rd party interfaces/services". I should have reworded my sentence to "It is obvious that FoxPro is not fully compatible with Windows 7 64bit OS and in the future will slowly become less and less compatible." There are people already reporting issues with VFP9 and IE 9, 32 bit OLE DB interfaces, 32bit web interfaces.. pretty much a bunch of 32bit old interfaces to "3rd party apps/services". So yes VFP9 works in 64bit Windows 7 but does it work perfectly well? The answer is no. Will it work better in the future? The answer is no since there will be no more upgrades. Will VFP9 work worst in the future? The answer is yes because it's technology will become more and more obsolete as newer operating systems come out until there are no more work arounds. TMG/FoxPro is heading to a cliff, a dead end.. Unless TMG get's written in a new programming language that FULLY works with current technology. Can someone at least state that TMG will be rewritten in a new programming language? Is the new report writer at least being written in some new programming language that possibly they are planning to use for the TMG rewrite? I hope the answer is yes. With a yes answer I think so many people's worries would be over and TMG I suspect would probably even get some new and old users to come back.

Do you realize that you are using a write up from Ancestry that is from the year 2002? The write up is very old and has nothing to do with the state of affairs now in the year 2011, I do not see how this proves that TMG is a top contender today in 2011. TMG is currently very powerful but it is heading for a cliff, a dead end. FoxPro is as good as dead, in the year 2015 all support from Microsoft will stop. They no longer will make sure that Foxpro works. As it is obviously FoxPro is not working with 64bit platforms so already it is on its last breath. I have stated before the writing was on the wall when Microsoft bought FoxPro in the 90's to incorporate its features into Microsoft Access. Microsoft Access went through a bunch of great changes and killed Borland's Paradox and FoxPro. Yes Microsoft did some upgrades to FoxPro by bringing it into the Visual realm of their other products but it no longer was profitable enough and from a business sense was dead. The moment that Microsoft anounced that there would be no more upgrades to Visual Foxpro in 2007 anyone that had any type of application written in FoxPro that they cared about started jumping to another programming platform. Many started trying to push Microsoft into releasing FoxPro as Opensource because they were so emotionally attached to the language, those programmers held on and held on and held on. Many of them were so scared of the newer programming languages like Visual Basic .Net or Java because these languages are so so different, these languages are very modern with their full object oriented functionality and their syntax does not resemble FoxPro in much. The standard for development environments since 2007 has changed a lot also, actually we should say that the environments have changed a lot since 2004 which is when Visual FoxPro 9 was released. Just look up what has changed in the computing world since 2004 and you will clearly see that Foxpro is dead or on its last breath. If it has taken 2 years for a rewrite of the reporting function to make it compatible with 2010 technology, how long do you think it will take for a complete rewrite in a programming language that is nothing like the 2004 version of Foxpro? It has been stated that WG is a small company, does not make big bucks and is just a couple of guys with a hobby and a love for genealogy that wrote TMG. So if TMG is not a money maker then what is the drive to jump through hoops slaving over obsolete code? What is the payoff to rewrite all these years of code in a whole other programming platform? While other companies that are also very small, I am not talking about FTM, are able to add tons of bells and whistles WG has not and has slid way down from top contender http://www.gensoftreviews.com/ . Instead they depend on third party developers to write the addons that are built in to most of the competition. I believe that the state that TMG is in is directly related to FoxPro. If you want to know what the future of TMG is then just look at the future of FoxPro and the lack of communication from WG as to the rewrite of TMG in a new programming language.

I do not understand how I was not being Civil ( or maybe you did not intend that remark to be for me ). Anyway I am sure that WhollyGenes knows what the issues are ( since they have been the same ones for a few years ) and as for their only reply to be "We will not talk about it" means to someone on my side of the fence " I can't trust that you have a plan for my valuable data ". Thus my post was directed to those on my side of the fence who year after year have banged their head against the brick wall. My message is in a way just as you and many others have been saying, "Stop asking because you will not have a satisfactory answer so find a solution for yourself that will ease your worries but stop repeating the problem here and instead either call whollygenes yourself or use some other software." I really do not understand why a thread like this is even allowed to exist since the answer has been the same for a few years, should just quickly post a reply pointing to an existing thread and then lock it. I know that my stating this is the obvious but sometimes the obvious has to be verbalized as other's in this thread have stated they feel that the obvious is being ignored. My message was just that their are solutions.. hope I have not irritated anyone since it was not my intention. This will probably be my last post in these forums, I come by from time to time hoping that TMG has come out or will come out with a rewritten version. TMG is a powerful piece of software and I do hope that it makes a transition.

I have brought this topic up before about 2 years ago [edited... jeb]. I decided long ago that wholly genes not replying to this old beat up topic is an "Answer", you just need to accept it. Accepting that the company has no plans on upgrading the software from old 1990's technology that has been bandaided by Microsoft to work on new operating systems is a tough pill to swallow, especially when you have spent countless hours and years on inputting data. I saw the writing on the wall a couple of years ago and jumped onto a better platform ( Microsoft Access ), with a company that responds extremely fast with updates and patches [edited... jeb] Anyway.. go ahead and swallow the pill now and get your valuable data massaged into another platform is my suggestion. [edited... jeb] I did not write this to offend anyone but I will probably be flamed.. Have a great Christmas everyone. [edited... jeb]

Rootsmagic cannot save its Unicode data in Ansi format. I would not trust the data if it could.

The way I see it the clock is ticking for the time when FoxPro will just not run on the latest Operating System. I dare to say that within 4 years FoxPro will not be able to run on the latest OS especially when the extended support ends in I believe 2014, regular microsoft support for foxpro has already ended. In another couple of years the majority of people will be on 64bit windows or some other OS. FoxPro will never natively support unicode and Microsoft will never add any more features to FoxPro which means no native web services, no 64bit support, only certified to run on Vista 32bit and earlier, I can go on and on if you want... I think these are reason's enough for TMG to be written in another development environment. As for the concerns with the ability to see all the data that you currently see on the screen in TMG, that can all be done in any programming language.. If Wholly Genes wants to get a good jump on the market they could rewrite TMG in Java using MySQL on the back end so that it would be compatible with Mac OS/LINUX and Windows. The bigger issue to worry about is that if whollygenes does not start a rewrite now (which will take about 4 years) then TMG will reach a dead end not being compatible with operating systems coming out in a couple of years from now. This is a very scary scenario since your data from TMG does not really transfer cleanly to other genealogy programs if you are using certain advanced features like witnesses ( no fault of TMG ).

Hello Everyone I have a few questions. I have used a few other products and once used TMG primarily. 1. When is TMG V8 coming out? 2. Will it be a rewrite bringing TMG onto a newer development platform? 3. Are there plans for shared/witness events to be exported like in genbox and RM? Edit: I stumbled on the following thread and it pretty much answered all my questions. I was hoping that TMG was going to get off of FoxPro and get with a more modern look and feel. Also the exporting of shared events is a big issue when you are trying to share data. Unicode is needed by a lot of us. RM4 now has shared events that do export out and they rewrote the application to give it a more modern look and feel but still kept all the interface items that everyone enjoyed. Edit 2: For some reason I cannot reply to topics in this forum it says that I do not have the right. Thanks for your response Jim. Yes I am talking about witnesses to an event for instance the people living at a location or people on a census only export for the principle people for that event but not for the witnesses. Maybe I was using the witness function in the wrong way and they should not be used to show that children lived at a certain location with their parents or that they were all in the same census record. This information is important and when exporting to services similar to ancestry.com or sharing with a family member it disappears. Also many people use multiple genealogy software and the witnessed event data does not transfer when creating a gedcom, the most you can hope for is that the program can convert TMG's data directly. All that is required on TMG's part is to export those events as if they belonged to the witnesses also with maybe some added verbage specifying the role they played. Thanks for your time Jim. http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index...nternal+exhibit

Something that you can try that has worked for me in the past on similar issues is to backup your data in TMG and do a restore. Then Reindex, Optimize and Validate..

I would like to know what are the Pro's and Con's of Internal and External exhibits? What are most of you using and why? I like the fact that with internal exhibits a copy is saved in the database and when you backup your database you have all your exhibits and data in the sqz file.

MinWin does not seem to be related to Vista at all. It is a new kernel method in the OS... Wiki says: The MinWin development efforts are aimed towards componentizing the Windows kernel and reducing the dependencies with a view to carving out the minimal set of components required to build a self-contained kernel as well as reducing the disk footprint and memory usage. I am sure that even though FoxPro is almost dead Wholly Genes must have some plan for porting to another programming language that does support all features of the latest Windows OS, like Unicode and standard GUI dialogue boxes.

Microsoft is not replacing Foxpro, it is currently dead with no future growth. The only thing that microsoft is saying is that they will support it until 2015 to keep it Vista compatible... and guess what is coming in about a year and a half in 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7 . Vista was a small jump into new technology and Windows 7 will be the Vista killer just like Windows XP killed Windows ME quickly because ME was a small jump into new technology.

Here is a related thread that a couple of people helped me out on. http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index...?showtopic=9517

<br /><br /><br /> Right click on Project explorer and select Link Project Explorer to Other Windows.

I just backup to a sqz file and email it to myself then copy it down to my other computer. I use gmail so I have plenty of email space and since my backup file is not to big yet gmail ends up housing all my backup files.

<br /><br /><br />Yep... but then it *is* only eye-candy <GRIN><br /><br />I'll take function over form ever time.<br /><br /><br /><br /> Functionality should always be before eye candy, that is why I am using TMG 7 but all work and no play is a big drag at times.

I don't understand what you want to do that you can't. As Michael was trying to explian, when in the tree view, double-clicking on a person displayed in the tree makes that person the focus. You can move back one generation by clicking on the arrows to the right of the last generation. That sounds like what you are asking for, best I can understand. No? When you double-click on a person in the tree, the view stays as the tree view. If you want to make a person in the tree the focus of the Person or Family views, click once on that person, then either click the Person or Family tab, or use the Ctrl-P or Ctrl-F keys to simultainousely change focus and views. I guess I am not explaining myself well. If I go down my tree to the right there is no way for me to go to the left without clicking on a name on some other data window. You would have to mess with Legacy or FTM 2008 to understand what I am saying. With this ability you get the feel like you are surfing your tree. Anyway my point is that I don't like the tree in TMG compared to Rootsmagic, Legacy or FTM 2008, it is a personal preference not that TMG is broken, it is just not graphical on screen like the others.

The problem I mentioned with the Tree View is that it is not graphical enough, I love the way FTM 2008 has the tree view. You can go forward or back multiple generations by clicking an arrow on the tree view and then change focus to a person by double clicking on him in the Tree View. I know that you can change the tree view by double clicking a name on one of the many data windows on the screen but I would like the reverse available also, to be able to navigate the tree and change focus by the tree. Every genealogy application has this ability now. This is the only eye candy that I have enjoyed from the other genealogy programs that is not in TMG.

Great!! Thanks for the replies. I will stick to external exhibits.

I have taken a look at Legacy, Rootsmagic, FTM 2008 and TMG 7. I have been running and using all of these to get a good evaluation of the products. Some of these products have more bells and whistles like Legacy but I always return to TMG 7 for great data recording. In Legacy it seems your data is hidden, you cannot see it all in one place. Since TMG 7 is event driven you can record every single bit of information. The other thing that I love about TMG 7 is all the information you can see on the screen in one place with its layouts. None of the other programs give you this ability to be able to see Siblings and their spouses birth and death dates, Children and their spouses birth and death dates, Parents and Associates - People associated in some way like witnesses to an event. You can quickly focus on any of these people by simply double clicking on their name and bam all your data windows update and you see everything about them The only feature that I see missing from a data entry stand point is the Tree View, you cannot navigate back and forth through it. You are stuck on the person you were seeing in person view and his immediate ancestors that fit on the screen so you cannot use it to get a bigger picture, you will have to print some reports. I also have the concerns about it being on Foxpro which is close to being dead. I never could get a reply from the developers on this forum as to what plans they have in the future. All I can hope for is that the developers have a plan for getting it off of Foxpro in a couple of years. Legacy 7 is coming out soon so I will be looking at that version to see if it gives me what TMG 7 gives me. Rootsmagic is about to come out with version 4 but it kind of scares me when it seems like everything is being done by one programmer and he has not come out with a version upgrade in 3 years. That is an eternity in the software world where people expect upgrades around every 12 months.

I am hispanic and I have family with long names. For instance: Maria Irizarry Y Feliciano De Rodriguez . Irizarry is Maria's father's Surname, Feliciano is Maria's Mothers Maiden Surname, and Rodriguez is her husbands Surname. How should I enter this information into TMG V7? Is there a good website for a beginner Genealogist that lists best practices and standards?

What I have started doing according to Ken's example is put Maria = Given Name, Irizarry Y Feliciano = Surname and De = Name-Mar pre-surname, Rodriguez Name-Mar Surname. But on the screen you loose the De Rodriguez and for outputing to GED you would loose the De Rodriguez, so I am wondering if there are any negatives to putting De Rodriguez also in the Suffix field so it will look correct on screen and in exports. This way no styles need to be created. I have learned that messing with Styles messes up even more the ged exports.

One more question on this topic of how to enter names. Would it be safe in the example we are using here for me to put ' De Rodriguez ' in the Suffix field? The reason that I ask is because I am interested in the names appearing correctly when I export to Gedcom for upload to a website. Thanks for your help Ken.

I think I figured out this error, at least for me. If you enter a person's Surname all in caps then you get this message when you click ok. As long as I don't have Surname entered in all caps when I click the ok button I will not get the error message.