Michael Vance Baker

Copy that, since I migrated from XP to Win 8.1 ,,, I never experienced the word processor failures. Thanks!!!

Help, I am trying to determine what can TMG v9 on a 64 bit machine do that the 32 bit cannot. From what I have read, the ability to generate some reports??? Could someone help discern the differences, advantages, pros and cons Thanks, Michael B

I am trying to print a descandant chart at my local Office Depot/Office Max using their large format HP Injet printer. The print shop technician is having trouble printing my .jpg chart. The chart is 25" x 151". I've taken the file there as a jpg file on a thumb drive. I've uploaded and converted it to a pdf using their ftp sites. No luck. Does anyone know a good method to print a chart at a local print shop. (price difference - local shop 21-25 USD ,,,,, www.gotcharts.com is 69.95 USD) Thanks, Michael

Success Thanks Terry.!!! The report(s) run flawlessly. Out of 72, 797 individuals I had a few thousand with Citation Source #21 a few thousand with Citation Source #70 a net difference of 229 This will narrow down my research time SIGNIFICANTLY. Just for fun, my Source 70 means that I have a copy of the person Death Certificate. I now have a list of 229 people for whom I still must attach a copy of their Death Certificate to their Death Tag Many Many Thanks Michael B

Getting closer,, my Filter Progress indicates that Clause 1: Tag Type ... Abbreviation = Death: 0 Clause 2: Date - Year < 1976: 100939 Clause 3: Any Citation... Src Number = Equals 21: 3608 Obviously Clause 1 is giving us a net result of Zero ,,,,,,,,,,,, DUH ,,,,,,,, after typing all of the above I figured I better go and find out what my "Abbreviation" for my Death tag is. For what ever reason,,, import from FTM, my abbreviation for death is [d.]

Maybe I am going at this Filter the wrong way. I am using the to write this Filter. Because I wanted a List of PeopleAfter reading some more, I am beginning to see that other Lists, like Lists of Citations, Events, or Sources may be able to generate the data by backing out from the Citation Source number then find everyone who is attached to those Citation Source numbers. Wow, my head is spinning. The light is on,,,, it's dim,,, but it is ON

================ For the writing of my filter, I will be more specific. All Tags below are Primary. Since Michael's reply, I have looked in the filters Field and can't see how to also include or exclude non Primary Tags. If possible perhaps a variation could be included in your reply. Birth Year > 1909 AND (no other birth filters required) Death Year < 1976 AND Death State = North Carolina AND (from this point down I am lost) Death has Citation Source #21 Death does not have Citation Source #70 ============ Michael and Terry, thanks for your help. I did not start a new Topic question, because this existing Topic seemed to most closely be inline with what I wanted to do...... "write a filter" in this case Birth's. In my case, it relates to Death Tags. But if I can learn how to delineate down to the Citation then Source, I or others could apply these techniques to any Tag The only choice I can find in the Subfield drop down box is [# of Citations] That does not help. I can't figure how to Select a missing or present Source number. Thanks, Michael Baker If necessary, I can post this question in a new Topic

I realize this topic was last updated in 2004. Hopefully someone will see this new post. I need help writing a query / filter. This is what I need to create. I need a list of people. Born >1908 Died < 1976 State = North Carolina I need to further delineate the filter to Citation (source #21 is present) Citation (source #70 is missing) Any thoughts or ideas would be greatly appreciated. Kind Regards, Michael B

I whole heartedly agree. That is why I wrote,,,,,,, "There is no disgrace in not being an advanced computer user. We each have our areas of expertise." The more folks use computers AND TMG the better the everyone's research becomes. I sincerely expect no one read into my post a disparaging remark. None were intended!! Every day I try and find ways to improve myself and the genealogy work I've done and I am hopeful that others do the same. I honestly do not see a negative stigma associated with the adjectives like beginner, intermediate, or advanced. I've spent 30 to 40 hours a week for the last 20 years doing genealogy work. I only consider myself to be at the intermediate level. I used FTM from 1995 to 2005, I know what I mean when I write garbage in, garbage out. In Sept 2005 I genbridged my file into TMG. It took me a few weeks to REALLY clean up the Master Place List. A lot of my cemetery names in FTM read exactly alike but were not. e.g. Goodwin Family Cemetery, Hertford, Perquimans County, North Carolina, USA. I've since gone back and named each place with a specific name, address, and when able GPS coordinates. I have plotted nearly 4,000 cemeteries, (thus no confusion directions like go down the dirt road till you see the thicket, turn left and go about 150 yards into the field) I've used TMG since Sept 2, 2005. It is far and above the most comprehensive Family Genealogy research tool available,,, in my opinion anyways. It's ability to link people to events is what I consider to be its forte. I link folks to Wills, Census's, Death Certificates, address's/residences, newspaper articles, obituaries. It really helps to find missing data. I am still looking for my great grandmothers sisters date of death. My last recorded event for her is that she appeared in the 1900 census. No record,,,, thus far,,,, exists after that for her. I have her in the 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, and 1900 census's. To get back on topic, yesterday I downloaded Legacy 7.4. I imported a new gedcom from my data into it. The few hours I spent working with it did not impress me. I've tried several programs over the years, Family Tree Maker, Brother's Keeper, Roots IV, Ultimate Family Tree, and Family Access. each may have had their own niche, TMG however,,, does it all with finesse. I liken TMG to that of an fine automobile or bottle of wine. It's not expensive, it's not just good, it's great. But you have to have an afinety for it and understand why it's as good as it is. Once you experience it greatness you'll never go back to "simpler" programs. Simpler does not indicate a negative connotation. It is what it is. Simpler, easier. Lastly, the intent of my other posting was to promote creative analytical thinking of what TMG can or could become. Before Google came along, we used search engines like Excite, AltaVista, Ask Jeeves, etc. So what can we as provocative TMG user do to stimulate future versions of TMG. Is online collaboration an effective tool. Someday I would hope so. My reasoning is simple. End redundant reseach. End duplicate databases from being published. Share all, with all, what we find. Link and unite our kin. Imagine other possibilities of TMG. We already have last edited date. But unless the research log is used, we may not know the last event edited. Now, imagine a snap shot taken of what person with id number 1234 looks like right now. If we add a date of death, the last edit date changes to today. The program could be set up to show what the file looked like before and after the edit. AND if in a multi-user world, the id of the person who completed the edits/additons/deletions could be recorded. In an online world, you want help with adding a census tag, you could right click and links to either TMG help or Terry's Tips or both, could be part of the drop down menu. You want to publish to the web,,, third party app, Second Site. And in my humble opinion, that is why others want SIMPLE. If others are jumping shipping for simpler programs that are "almost" as comprehensive as TMG. Then TMG may go the way of the dodo bird. AND I don't want to see that happen. My goal is to push forward while keeping an eye on the past. After all, if you don't know where've been. How can you be expected to know where to go next? Thanks, Michael B

Beginner vs. Advanced Mode, in comparison to Begginer and Advanced Genealogist, in my opinion go hand in hand. Folks that use find Family Tree Maker easy to use often times fail to site their sources. The just add Mother, Father, children, and their bmdb dates and use the garbage in garbage out principal of computing. I am grateful for much of their leg work. It helps me with a at least a starting point to go looking for clues to rebuild and reverify what "could" have been done the first time through.

Sorry folks,, after rereading Terry's answer, to use the Add button at the top to create a new new report. In the past, whenever I selected Add at the top, drop down of configuration *.rpt files appeared. I am,,,,, was leary about changing any Configuration_files so I always used the middle Add button, since the config name at the top read List of People,,,,, AND that's what I was working on tweaking,,,,, List's of People, I then used the middle drop down to select which Filtered Group I wanted to report or update. Again, please accept my apology. Michael

OK, I still can't get this to work. I am using ver7.04. Today I created a new report of a I have selected Filtered Group and [Added] a new report. I named the report "test1" I set the flag function of secondary output to trigger my flag called AmerRev to Y. I clicked on Save Settings. I then started a new report , Filtered Group, named it "test2", clicked on options, set the flag output to CivWar to Y, clicked on Save Settings. I then went back to reports, list of people, then dropped down to test1, selected options, selected Tab Secondary Output and the Change Flag value is that of what I had selected for test2. As of yet, I have not tried the {Add} button at the top

That is what I am trying to do. But each time I save the new report definition, it overwrites the Second Output check box Change Flag. Thanks for the tip on Custom Tool Bar. As of today, I run about 6 querries before I publish. One for folks of whom I have added an obituary tag, and one for folks who have tags for some of the military campaigns that I have created. Each time I run the report I have to manually change the Flag change check box drop down to ensure the correct flag gets changed.

Dynamic data, Family Search Certified, the internet, TMG vs. 'others' TMG is one of the best programs on the market. In my opinion, all genealogist have the same common goal. Build their trees, verify it's accuracy with sources, and share thier work with family. The best feature of TMG is its flexability. I tell my cousin's, if you can think it, TMG can do it. And there in lies the problem for beginners and some intermediate users that are genealogically savvy but not "computer literate". There is no digrace in not being an advanced computer user. We each have our area's of expertise. The question is,,, How to get users up to speed using the advanced features of TMG. I guess the answer is simple. Use the beginner mode and ,,,,,,, be happy they can eventually turn on the advanced mode. Family Search Certified, sounds GREAT. But does it provide new data. Or does 'just' link you to someone else research. From someone else's reseach I think is the crux in genealogy research. I we think about it. All the research we do has been "done" by someone else. It is our job to record what we found and where we found, the weigh it against the preponderance of the evidence. I have relatives in my database whose tombstones read that they were born in 1881, yet I have found them on the 1880 census 6/12 months old, born Nov. Thus I record both dates and where I found each one. In this example, I use the census that was enumerated in 1880 as my evidence to prove (at least to myself) the the more correct date of birth should be recorded as __ Nov 1879 After we cite our sources, other can site our work as having credibility. Dynamic data, that in my opinion is where Genealogy is and should be headed. [bC] - Before Computers, genealogy was completed on paper. A cousin of mine has one 10x12 room of her home designated for genealogy. Three walls are lined with legal size file cabinets filled with 60 years of her own research. But with no easy way to share,,, or sell her work. Share our work, that is how I have grown my database and how I think others do too. We add relatives then we publish our findings in hopes of making links/connections wth fellow researchers with common interests. Thus the proliferation of genealogy on the web in the last 10 to 15 years and the growth of sites like FamilySearch, Ancestry, Rootsweb, One Great Family, etc. So how do we get TMG and Second Site, and Terry's Tip's to become one all encompassing entity. I don't know!! My own database has grown so much in the last few years that I can no longer keep up with requests to add folks when descendants provide me with updated names, dates and places. With updating data in mind, and looking back at the evoltution genealogy software, the explosion of internet grow and web enabled devices what Wholly Genes, IMHO, must do to remain a viable contender in the geneaolgy area is to move ahead of the pack. That is, be able to sell their wares. (Nobody works for free) and still have the best, most flexible software available. The last thing that I would like to see happen is for anyone to work themself right out of a job. We need them, and they need us. I've subscribed to Ancestry because they have an incredible amount of data available for my areas of interest. I post my [gedcom] on their World Family Tree, but refuse to "house" my data soley on their servers. I have keep soft copies of my tomstone pics, census's, death and marriage certificates, etc. on my local hard drive. If we look at Google, specifically Google Docs, I notice that many users still want to "own a copy" of the file on their own hard drive. How do we get genealogy on the web,,, so it's Dynamic. How do we "get it out there" but still feel like we are the "owners" of the data. How do we enable data owners to share/give edit rights,,, but still feel in control of the final product. I worked with one group who housed TMG on their server and allowed access to those who wanted or needed edit rights. I believe the next jump in the evolution of the genealogy, the web, and TMG could be data set owners and online colaborators. One thing that I dislike about sites like Rootsweb is some of the redundant information. Sometimes due to users uploading newer copies of their data and failing to overwrite or remove their older datasets. And the second problem is multiple users submitting their own files. You must exclude users too find new connections. In a perfect online world, once two dataset owners agreed that two individuals where one and the same, they could be merged. After all we are trying to build connections and share resources,,,,,,, in my opinion anyways. I have no less than a half dozen folks that I regularly share data with. Unfortunatley each data owner must update their own work. If everything was in a central repository, and each user had their own id, then everyone could see who edited/added what. And when the edit was completed. So how do we get TMG to be web based, user id's, report writing capabilities, then publish to a dynamic web site. We still need the ability to use double -- to hide that of which we do not want published. And still make the owner of the data feel like if the pulled it all off the web the could have an unaltered copy of all the data on their local drive. Thanks, Michael B

Is there a method where as I can may create different reports and have the Secondary Output section data be saved too. Specifically, I have several different reports that I run to update flags before I publish data. I would like TMG Report Options to remember my Secodary Output selection for each report. As it now, I must edit the Change Flag option each time a run a different report.