Viewing LDS Ordinance info in Internet IGI

[server]

message unavailable

[singhals]

Robert M. Riches Jr. wrote:

On 2004-08-11, 0_Qed <[email protected]> wrote:

Martha,

Ok ... I'll quit after 'this' one.

Below ...
raises the <?> ... whatza "member' ; whatza 'ward clerk' ???

Ed

singhals wrote:

Marina Garrison wrote:


Anyone know how to view LDS ordinance info in the online version of the IGI?

Marina

If you are a member, ask your ward clerk. If you are not a member, it
is not possible.

Cheryl


(Bottom posting, because that's the convention in most/all
newsgroups for which I know the convention. Leaving
previous top-posted reply as is lest I mess up an attempted
correction.)

I believe the person (Cheryl?) who wrote, "If you are a
member, ..." meant "If you're a member of the LDS church,
..." A "ward" is the term for a local congregation. A
"ward clerk" is the person in such a local congregation who
has been asked to perform the record-keeping duties for that
congregation. It would appear the assumption was made that
the person asking how to view LDS ordinance info would
likely be acquainted with LDS terminology.

Robert Riches
[email protected]
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

Actually, I sort of thought the "if you're not a member..." part covered
the question. No, I'm not LDS, I just hang out a lot at the FHC. (g)

Cheryl

[0_Qed]

singhals wrote:

HINT: I'd expect, this time like the previous times, that until the new
format is formally released, anyone who knows enough about it to write
such a program has signed a confidentiality agreement.
Cheryl

A 'fair' comment ...
One "Yermat" , in a later post, apparently hasnt considered the LDS
proprietary
mark-up language used in a GEDCOM 5.2.
( I 'thimk' its' "proprietary" ... )

'True', that the GEDCOM(XML) 6.0 language is public ...
BUT ....
I'm not so sure about the 5.2 language .
"Someone" knowledgable mite comment.

obtw,
a) I'm a newcomer to PAF, but a DB jock of "old" ;
b) I have not yet 'peeked' inside , anywhere, at all.
.. the LF dove in, head 1st, I got 'volunteered' to help )

I'd opine that once you have the ability to make use of both 'specs',
its' a "not_quite", trivial excercise to write(code) a conversion pgm
twixt the two(2), either way ... ardious, maybe.

Generally, the 'problem(s)' in writing a conversion pgm can be ;
..
.. a) verifying that the 'export' file( content & structure ) truely
reflects
.. the content/structure of the internal DB 'gizzmo' ...
.. to a =precise= "T" ...
..
.. any ambiguity(ies) leads to problems henceforth. Any.
..
.. b) verifying that each, comparable language 'element',
.. in each of the two(2) language 'sets' is a precise =match=
.. for the "other" ...
.. to a =precise= "T" ...
.. "each" gotta be a one_to_one relationship ...
.. =NOT= a one_to_many , or a many_to_one 'element' relationship.
..
.. any ambiguity(ies) leads to problems henceforth. Any.

My 'guess',
is that the LDS folks are doing "this" ...
hopefully in a 'both_way" manner.

....??
btw ... I've yet another, related <?> ( havent looked "inside" yet )

Does the PAF 'package' provide a method to neatly =re_organize= the
internal DB ?

I have seen 'NG" suggestions to export a GEDCOM, then import 'same' ,
in an effort to ?cure? a/some internal DB coruption ...
I've never seen that kinda "magic" really work well, at all.

A smart 're_org' is a tough thing to write, but required of a 'package'
which claims to be 'robust' .

Even a "plain" re_org would be nice ... stop, mark the hiccup 'point',
quit.
Hopefully , hand-bash(edit) the 'point', re_start the re_org.

Anyway ... 'good' point, Cheryl.
Be 'advised" ... I follow your "stuff". <VBG>

Qed.

Reply yo 'NG", email is munged.

[Steve Hayes]

On 11 Aug 2004 14:12:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:56:16 GMT, Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10 Aug 2004 15:14:25 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:51:48 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:
Where the blue blazes did IE hide the option that controls how long
it'll wait for the page to serve? I keep timing out on one site and
it's driving me crazy.

Firefox, from http://www.mozilla.org is most decidedly less sucky than IE.
Give it a try, it's worth the download. Blocks popups, too...

How does it differ from plain mozilla?

Slimmed down, faster renderer, and last I checked Mozilla didn't block
popups. Same code base, different add-ons. When the next version of
Netscape comes out, it'll also be the same code base but with more stuff
added on.

My Mozilla certainly blocks popups.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Bob Melson]

On 11 Aug 2004 14:12:43 GMT
Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:56:16 GMT, Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10 Aug 2004 15:14:25 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:51:48 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:
Where the blue blazes did IE hide the option that controls how long
it'll wait for the page to serve? I keep timing out on one site and
it's driving me crazy.

Firefox, from http://www.mozilla.org is most decidedly less sucky than IE.
Give it a try, it's worth the download. Blocks popups, too...

How does it differ from plain mozilla?

Slimmed down, faster renderer, and last I checked Mozilla didn't block
popups. Same code base, different add-ons. When the next version of
Netscape comes out, it'll also be the same code base but with more stuff
added on.

Pretty sure firefox just does web browsing, not newsgroups and email,
which is fine since I use other tools for that anyway.

Dave

Bro Dave:

What version of mozilla are you using? As of the current version (1.7x on FreeBSD), mozilla blocks popups and, if I'm not terribly mistaken, has done so for the last several releases. Dunno for certain how long firefox has done so but, as you point out elsewhere, it's the same code base, so I'd assume -- always dangerous! -- that mozilla has had the capability for at least as long. IMO, the major advantage of 'fox is that it doesn't drag around the other baggage that mozilla does: chatzilla, calendar, mail/news, etc. Even granting those are configurable at compile time, they can represent a major source of bloat.

Regards,
Bob Melson


--
Robert G. Melson Nothing is more terrible than
Rio Grande MicroSolutions ignorance in action.
El Paso, Texas Goethe
melsonr(at)earthlink(dot)net

[Ian]

Well, as far as I can see the only major change to the program from previous
versions is "the look"

The ability to merge people into your family tree directly from Ancestry.com
is in my humble opinion downright dangerous! No mention either of the cost
of joining Ancestry.com to get access!

The bookmarks and history" are an excellent idea, but why has it taken until
version 12 to come up with the idea?

No sign of a demo version yet?

The cost is reasonable ($30US) though in my opinion the FREE versions of
Legacy, PAF etc are a MUCH better option.


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
| if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[Ron O'Neill]

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Ron O'Neill wrote:
Following an enquiry from a third party to which I don't know the
answer,
is there any free F.H. software that will run on a Mac. I know Reunion
does but it's a bit expensive.

There are several listed here ...
http://www.cyndislist.com/software.htm#Mac

HTH
Peter

Thanks Peter, I did visit that URL prior to your posting and found quite a

list which I have passed on.

Thanks again
Ron

[Patscga]

The bookmarks and history" are an excellent idea,

What are these?


Pat

[Ian]

Quote from the FTM site..... "Now you can quickly jump to the people in your
tree that you view most frequently by creating bookmarks or viewing your
editing history. Bookmarks are set by you to identify the individuals you
access frequently. The History feature automatically tracks the last 30
individuals you edited, enabling you to jump to recently changed people. You
can use bookmarks and history in both the Family View and the Pedigree
View."

These are things that other programs have had for years!

I used FTM from version 3 until version 9 (FTM 2005 is really v12) but gave
up and changed to another program in frustration at the lack of significant
additions to the program in what they called "new versions" when in actual
fact all they are is minor tweaks.


"Patscga" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| >
| >The bookmarks and history" are an excellent idea,
|
| What are these?
|
|
| Pat

[Charlie]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:54:20 +0800, "Ian"
<[email protected]> wrote:

Well, as far as I can see the only major change to the program from previous
versions is "the look"

Well, for dedicated FTM users, that alone might be worth the purchase.

The ability to merge people into your family tree directly from Ancestry.com
is in my humble opinion downright dangerous! No mention either of the cost
of joining Ancestry.com to get access!

FTM has never been known for encouraging "good" genealogy, rather for

collecting as many names as possible (ie, World Family Tree project).

The bookmarks and history" are an excellent idea, but why has it taken until
version 12 to come up with the idea?

I can remember when using Version 4 this was asked for on the old FTM

users list.

No sign of a demo version yet?

The cost is reasonable ($30US) though in my opinion the FREE versions of
Legacy, PAF etc are a MUCH better option.

I don't think $30 is at all reasonable, considering the caliber of the

competition at similar or lower prices.

"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
| if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

[Dave Hinz]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:36:55 GMT, Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

On 11 Aug 2004 14:12:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

Slimmed down, faster renderer, and last I checked Mozilla didn't block
popups. Same code base, different add-ons. When the next version of
Netscape comes out, it'll also be the same code base but with more stuff
added on.

My Mozilla certainly blocks popups.

Well that's certainly good to know. Good thing I qualified that with
a "last I checked" then, isn't it.

[Dave Hinz]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:43:12 GMT, Bob Melson <[email protected]> wrote:

On 11 Aug 2004 14:12:43 GMT
Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

Pretty sure firefox just does web browsing, not newsgroups and email,
which is fine since I use other tools for that anyway.

What version of mozilla are you using? As of the current version (1.7x on FreeBSD), mozilla blocks popups and, if I'm not terribly mistaken, has done so for the last several releases.

The last time I installed Mozilla it's version 1.4. I use other things
for mail & news, so I didn't see any point in upgrading a tool I don't
use. My firefox is probably a rev or two behind too, but I'm not
stressing about it.

Most of my computer time at home is on the Mac these days, and Safari
does the trick just fine (also blocks popups - when I get on a raw IE
machine it's amazing how much crap people apparently just tolerate).

Dave

[the Wiz]

I'm coming back to genealogy as my hobby after a 3 year break, and
I'm interested in finding out information on the descendants of some
older cousins/great-aunts/great-uncles who were dead by the time I
was born.

What complicates my search is that I'm the only child of older
parents--my father was born in 1905, and my mother in 1915, and as a
result, my first cousins and uncles/aunts, especially on my father's
side, are either dead for between 15 and 30 years (or longer), or in
their 70's or older now.

I have information on some of the relatives, but nothing on others,
for example, on the siblings/descendants of my paternal grandmother,
who lived from 1872 to 1963. She had many brothers and sisters for
which I have their names and basic birth/death info, but no
information at all on their children, grandchildren, and so on until
the present. Obviously, being an *out of generation* individual
complicates my search--for example, if I ever met my father's
cousins and their families, I was quite young and of course wasn't
able tp get genealogical information from them.

My long-term goal is to organize a family reunion back in Upstate
New York for these relatives--or perhaps even a *virtual reunion*
online as a start before actually having a *real* reunion. I'm just
curious as to who these relatives of mine are and I'm interested in
documenting the family tree to the present as completely as
possible. My *ancestry* up to about 100 years ago on my father's
side is well documented, and the lines break down from then till
now.

Only one other person on my father's side is even remotely
interested in genealogy--a cousin's (1X removed) wife--and her
research was largely destroyed in a house fire in 1991, and she has
no desire to start her research again, although she would probably
help with the logistics of a family reunion, since she still lives
in the area. So, there are few/no family members I can ask for
help.

[ All, if you can, please be cautious in discussing methods for
finding *living* people. There are obvious privacy issues ...
- Mod ]

"Jean S. Barto" <[email protected]

Cultivate the relatives you know.

Make copies of any family pictures you have, then arrange a visit
(maybe take them out to eat). Ask them about the people in the
pictures.

My wife and I spent the past week with her mother (age 84). We
looked at pictures that had belonged to *her* mother and I made
notes as she talked about the people. I did some Census research
along the way to fill in some missing names/dates and she could then
build on what I had found. (I also scanned the pictures (front &
back) and made notes as appropriate.)

I had to ask for numerous clarifications because learning that
"Uncle Bill and Aunt Lizzie were killed in a buggy accident" doesn't
magically match a couple named William and Harriet (but the
tombstone with the same date of death ties them together).

The caption on one picture led to an Internet search for a unique
name, which led to a descendant of my wife's great-grandaunt, who
knew the name of my wife's great-great grandfather and a couple more
of his children - and had a picture of the great-grandaunt. The
combined name information meant that I could find the
g-g-grandfather in the 1860 and 1870 Census records and find their
marriage record.

And the more we talked about people, the more she remembered. The
family tree now has a couple more direct ancestors correctly
identified and a number of their relatives.

John

More about me: http://www.jecarter.com/
VB3/VB6/C/PowerBasic source code: http://www.jecarter.com/programs.html
Freeware for the Palm with NS Basic source code: http://nsb.jecarter.com
Drivers for Pablo graphics tablet and JamCam cameras: http://home.earthlink.net/~mwbt/
Email here: http://www.jecarter.com/contactme.htm

the Wiz <[email protected]>

[W. E. Cole]

On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy program
features and their cost?

WEC


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[Ian]

Try the following...

http://www.genealogy-software-review.com
http://www.lkessler.com/gplinks.shtml

The program that I use is Legacy v5. The is a FREE version which is
excellent and a Deluxe version with a few more bells & whistles. As you say
it takes a lot of work to transfer data between programs even using a GEDCOM
transfer but I've found it well worth the effort.

Have a look at Legacy at
http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/Index.asp?mid=3AFLKJi



"W. E. Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| On a simular note-
| I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change
my
| genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
| disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a
pop!)
| and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with
Ancestry.com
| (reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll
take
| a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth
the
| effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there
a
| website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy
program
| features and their cost?
|
| WEC
|
|
| "icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
| news:[email protected]...
| > I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
| > if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!
|
|

[Corse]

This site is somewhat dated but is still helpful, I think.
http://www.mumford.ca/reportcard/index.htm

Corse


"W. E. Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy program
features and their cost?

WEC


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[Pam]

You've already been referred to some sites to check. You might look into
The Master Genealogist. It will import your FTM data directly rather than
through GEDCOM. There is a RootsWeb TMG list (TMG-L) which has a number of
old FTM users who could help you with suggestions on importing your data if
you run into any problems. The updates to the program (unless major like
going from version 4 to 5) are free and the developer really listens to
suggestions from users and tries to add them if possible. You can download
a demo at http://www.whollygenes.com I've been a VERY satisfied user since version
1.0 and they're now on version 5.15.

--
Pam
http://www.pamsgenealogy.net

"W. E. Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change
my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a
pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with
Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll
take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth
the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there
a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy
program
features and their cost?

[bigM]

I'm pretty much in the same boat... Have been working with FTM for a
while and not too satisfied with it's offering with it's continual
upgrades. I'm gonna check out that Master Genealogist pgm, as well...
and get back to ya'll...

-Malik


On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:43:12 -0500, "W. E. Cole" <[email protected]>
wrote:

On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy program
features and their cost?

WEC


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[Charlie]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:43:12 -0500, "W. E. Cole" <[email protected]>
wrote:

On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy program
features and their cost?

WEC


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

As others have said, both Legacy and TMG are good alternatives to an
upgrade of FTM. I'm not real familiar with Legacy, but I do use TMG.
Although TMG does a great job of directly importing your FTM data,
it's not all automatic. You have to set your transfer up correctly or
you can lose a lot, expecially if you have set up user-defined "facts"
in FTM. But give it a decent amount of attention, and you'll get it
all transferred.

I also recommend you look into RootsMagic, You must do a GEDCOM
transfer from FTM to RM, and a few of the items (Jr's & Sr.s on names,
for example) don't transfer over properly.... but these are easily
corrected by doing a global edit once in RM. In fact, the entire
process from FTM to RM takes about 1/10 the time for the process from
FTM to TMG. Of course that isn't too significant if you only to make
the transfer "once".

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

[The Hemmelman's]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:43:12 -0500, "W. E. Cole" <[email protected]
wrote:

On a simular note-
I've decided it's time to either upgrade my FTM to v12 (2005) or change my
genealogy software to something else altogether. Frankly, I'm a little
disappointed in the weak "upgrades" each FTM version offers (at $20 a pop!)
and I'm really sick of the heavy handed integration of FTM with Ancestry.com
(reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer). It'll take
a lot of work to switch software and I want to make sure it'll be worth the
effort, otherwise I'll just bite the bullet and upgrade to 2005. Is there a
website that gives good product comparisons of the various genealogy program
features and their cost?

WEC


"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!


As others have said, both Legacy and TMG are good alternatives to an
upgrade of FTM. I'm not real familiar with Legacy, but I do use TMG.
Although TMG does a great job of directly importing your FTM data,
it's not all automatic. You have to set your transfer up correctly or
you can lose a lot, expecially if you have set up user-defined "facts"
in FTM. But give it a decent amount of attention, and you'll get it
all transferred.

I also recommend you look into RootsMagic, You must do a GEDCOM
transfer from FTM to RM, and a few of the items (Jr's & Sr.s on names,
for example) don't transfer over properly.... but these are easily
corrected by doing a global edit once in RM. In fact, the entire
process from FTM to RM takes about 1/10 the time for the process from
FTM to TMG. Of course that isn't too significant if you only to make
the transfer "once".

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

I too am a frustrated FTM user. I'm on v10 at the moment. It appears
between both version 11 and now 12 (2005), there's barely enough
enhancements to call it v10.5. There's a couple of reports in FTM that
a lot of folks in my family prefer, thus I keep my data maintained in
it, but I learned awhile back to stop playing the nickel & dime upgrade
game with FTM. It's just not worth it to upgrade every version and is
better to generally skip 2 versions or so to wait for enough
enhancements actually worth buying.

Quite sometime ago, I set out to find a single replacement program for
FTM. In the end, I have four programs that I use for a variety of
reports, etc. TMG imported the data the most complete. Legacy and
Rootsmagic did ok through the GEDCOM route, but lost some stuff that FTM
must export in a non standard way. But after a lot of editing, I
believe I have my data as complete as I can in all programs.

From my own personal experience, I feel that TMG, Legacy, and Rootsmagic
are all better programs than FTM and are much more responsive to user
submitted requests for enhancements than the developers of FTM ever will
be. Many folks, including myself got tired of sending in enhancement
requests to FTM and just gave up asking. I swear they have the
"enhancement request" link on their site for strictly appearances!

Anyway, back when I converted I put up a short webpage of my experience
of converting from FTM to Rootsmagic at
http://pie.midco.net/hemmelman/FTMtoRM.html that may or may not be
helpful to someone looking to switch from FTM to RM. I did the
conversion into v1 of RM and it is now v2 so I don't know if it would be
different or not. I suspect not. It's been sometime now since I did it
and have forgotten some of that experience, but I do remember the
tedious checking of the GEDCOM file to find those lost data fields and
type them into RM. It turned out to actually be a lot more work than to
do the direct import to TMG due to the lost data through the GEDCOM
export/import. I'm glad I did the conversion though, but I'll never go
through it again!

--
Keith Hemmelman
---------------
mail - khemmelman
domain - pie.midco.net
(Reassemble for mail)

[Charlie]

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:10:29 -0500, The Hemmelman's
<[email protected]> wrote:

<snip>

I too am a frustrated FTM user. I'm on v10 at the moment. It appears
between both version 11 and now 12 (2005), there's barely enough
enhancements to call it v10.5. There's a couple of reports in FTM that
a lot of folks in my family prefer, thus I keep my data maintained in
it, but I learned awhile back to stop playing the nickel & dime upgrade
game with FTM. It's just not worth it to upgrade every version and is
better to generally skip 2 versions or so to wait for enough
enhancements actually worth buying.

Quite sometime ago, I set out to find a single replacement program for
FTM. In the end, I have four programs that I use for a variety of
reports, etc. TMG imported the data the most complete. Legacy and
Rootsmagic did ok through the GEDCOM route, but lost some stuff that FTM
must export in a non standard way. But after a lot of editing, I
believe I have my data as complete as I can in all programs.

From my own personal experience, I feel that TMG, Legacy, and Rootsmagic
are all better programs than FTM and are much more responsive to user
submitted requests for enhancements than the developers of FTM ever will
be. Many folks, including myself got tired of sending in enhancement
requests to FTM and just gave up asking. I swear they have the
"enhancement request" link on their site for strictly appearances!

Anyway, back when I converted I put up a short webpage of my experience
of converting from FTM to Rootsmagic at
http://pie.midco.net/hemmelman/FTMtoRM.html that may or may not be
helpful to someone looking to switch from FTM to RM. I did the
conversion into v1 of RM and it is now v2 so I don't know if it would be
different or not. I suspect not. It's been sometime now since I did it
and have forgotten some of that experience, but I do remember the
tedious checking of the GEDCOM file to find those lost data fields and
type them into RM. It turned out to actually be a lot more work than to
do the direct import to TMG due to the lost data through the GEDCOM
export/import. I'm glad I did the conversion though, but I'll never go
through it again!

Keith,

I used the information on your page a year or two ago, when I was
using RM1. I think RM2 does a much better job importing FTM data than
did RM1. Unfortunately (for me) I've had to maintain my data in FTM
because of my commitment to continue supplying updates of the family
"tree" that I produce for the reunion each year.... but it really
looks like I can convert that project over to RM this year. So maybe
this year's conversion is the last one I'll have to do.

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

[The Hemmelman's]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:10:29 -0500, The Hemmelman's
[email protected]> wrote:

snip


Keith,

I used the information on your page a year or two ago, when I was
using RM1. I think RM2 does a much better job importing FTM data than
did RM1. Unfortunately (for me) I've had to maintain my data in FTM
because of my commitment to continue supplying updates of the family
"tree" that I produce for the reunion each year.... but it really
looks like I can convert that project over to RM this year. So maybe
this year's conversion is the last one I'll have to do.

Yeah, I have some relatives using FTM but we exhange things less and
less as we get all the same data in. I still keep my FTM file up to
date and periodically update the FTM software to stay fairly current,
but hopefully someday I can get rid of FTM.

--
Keith Hemmelman
---------------
mail - khemmelman
domain - pie.midco.net
(Reassemble for mail)

[D. Stussy]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, it was written:

It seems lately that the Roots Web (Ancestry.com) SS DI
information cuts off about Jan 2004, using "SMITY" names
as a guide. Does anyone have a URL for a source with later
information? I'd like to be able to search by dates as
we can with the Roots Web (Ancestry.com) version.

I have noticed that too. I have also noted that at least for the surnames I
have been interested in lately, the ancestry.com SSDI count from their search
page matches the rootsweb.com count, so they don't appear to be (and/or I
haven't discovered that they are) updating one version without updating the
other.

I doubt that no one has died since....

[Neil Rogers-Davis]

TWR Computing's website http://www.twrcomputing.freeserve.co.uk/ftm.htm has
a good description of all the changes in FTM 2005 and several screenshots.
Generally, as usual, there does not appear to be too many innovations but
the main Family View has significant alterations which will make inputting
and people identification much easier. This page will show three
generations with far more data visible for the listed children, all of which
will make it easier to identify families. It will not therefore be quite so
necessary to navigate up and down. For this reason alone I would purchase
FTM 2005 when the UK version is released in October. Other than that, the
new Pedigree View and the Bookmarks seem to be the only other useful
improvements.

Neil

"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[W. E. Cole]

On alt.geneaolgy, one user said he made the change to FTM 2005 and found out
that the ability to print out notes was removed in the new version. Might be
something to check into before money changes hands....

WEC

"Neil Rogers-Davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

TWR Computing's website http://www.twrcomputing.freeserve.co.uk/ftm.htm
has
a good description of all the changes in FTM 2005 and several screenshots.
Generally, as usual, there does not appear to be too many innovations but
the main Family View has significant alterations which will make inputting
and people identification much easier. This page will show three
generations with far more data visible for the listed children, all of
which
will make it easier to identify families. It will not therefore be quite
so
necessary to navigate up and down. For this reason alone I would purchase
FTM 2005 when the UK version is released in October. Other than that, the
new Pedigree View and the Bookmarks seem to be the only other useful
improvements.

Neil

"icefox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I'm considering making the upgrade. Anyone made the change yet? And
if so, what's your opinion on FTM's "new" look? Thanks!

[Robert M. Riches Jr.]

On 2004-08-21, Bahujnana Legg <[email protected]> wrote:

Interesting newsgroup!


Bahujnana Legg
Tel. +1 763 533 7489
[email protected]
[email protected]

It appears you (or one of your aliases) has been making the
rounds of large numbers of newsgroups, saying basically the
same thing in each one. Why?

Oh, the phone number is in Qwest territory in Twincities,
MN. I had thought the phone number might be a trap to an
island in the North American calling plan with enormously
high per-minute charges, but that's evidently not the game.

Being as different names (and presumably email addresses)
appear in different newsgroups, perhaps the game is to see
which newsgroups are being harvested by spammers. Hmmm...

Robert Riches
[email protected]
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[Patscga]

Osama Bin Ladin Found Hanged

Again?
Pat

[Trafficman]

Osama seems to get hanged about once a week. He is apparently one tough
guy. Also, you will note that any photos?? are likely on a porn site.
Bob
..
"Patscga" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Osama Bin Ladin Found Hanged

Again?
Pat

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:39:00 +0100, "Clare L" <[email protected]> wrote:

Can anyone (and I sure many of you can) point me in the direction of some
good advice about how to organise one's paper records.

I number each document, put it in a lever arch file, and index it using the
Research Data Filer that came with earlier editions of PAF.

But you could use any good database program to index them.

The RDF has two files, .DOC and .DAT

The .DOC file has a description of the document itself.

The .DAT file is a personal index, of persons mentioned in the document. If
they have been definitely identified as people in your maine genealogy
database, you can put in their RIN top identify them.

So a search in the .DAT file can show every document that provides evidence
for the birth of John Doe or whoever.

[ Crossposted to soc.genealogy.computing ]


--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/

[Lesley Robertson]

"Tarapia Tapioco" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

On decent quality paper.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM,
but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.

But you seem to be assuming that you're going to make the file and leave it
untouched - surely you'll be updating it regularly? They do say that DVDs
will last longer.

I'm about to get some very valuable papers in the archive I curate copied
to microfilm - the Dutch National (or Royal) Library insists on film for all
master copies as it has a survival of at least 200 years, and is realtively
simple to read, even if partly damaged. For example, I don't have a magic
lantern, but I'm busy scanning glas negatives from the 1880s - they're a
little damaged in places, but still superb.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases,
what
other choices do we have.

For the long term, keep things as simple as possible. Paper and film will

always be readable, as long as they're stored correctly and even (as in the
case of some of my glass negs) if they are stored badly they should be
recoverable.
Lesley Robertson

[singhals]

Tarapia Tapioco wrote:

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM, but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.
Obviously technology changes as time progresses, but in only a short time
things change don't they, I mean it doesn't seem that long ago that we were
using five & a quarter floppy discs. You'd be lucky to find one of these
floppies anywhere now, let alone locate a machine that'd read them.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases, what
other choices do we have.


Thanks
Fred

Ink (not toner) on archival quality paper.

Cheryl

[Tarapia Tapioco]

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM, but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.
Obviously technology changes as time progresses, but in only a short time
things change don't they, I mean it doesn't seem that long ago that we were
using five & a quarter floppy discs. You'd be lucky to find one of these
floppies anywhere now, let alone locate a machine that'd read them.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases, what
other choices do we have.


Thanks
Fred

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 08:42:30 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Ink (not toner) on archival quality paper.

How so? Toner is iron oxide and/or carbon; ink may or may not fade
almost immediately. I thought "laser printer, not inkjet" was the
normal standard?

Dave Hinz

[futureworlds]

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM, but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.
Obviously technology changes as time progresses, but in only a short time
things change don't they, I mean it doesn't seem that long ago that we were
using five & a quarter floppy discs. You'd be lucky to find one of these
floppies anywhere now, let alone locate a machine that'd read them.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases, what
other choices do we have.


Thanks
Fred

[Fritz Wuehler]

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM, but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.
Obviously technology changes as time progresses, but in only a short time
things change don't they, I mean it doesn't seem that long ago that we were
using five & a quarter floppy discs. You'd be lucky to find one of these
floppies anywhere now, let alone locate a machine that'd read them.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases, what
other choices do we have.


Thanks
Fred

[singhals]

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 08:42:30 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Ink (not toner) on archival quality paper.


How so? Toner is iron oxide and/or carbon; ink may or may not fade
almost immediately. I thought "laser printer, not inkjet" was the
normal standard?

Dave Hinz

(G) but what comes out of an inkjet isn't "ink", you see? (g) I was
thinking more printer's ink of the sort that is used by expensive,
exclusive print-shops using a mechanical press.

Toner will separate from the paper if said paper is placed under
pressure while either warm or damp. Best glue I've ever used. If it
comes in contact with photographs, it will migrate TO the photo ruining
it. Under pressure includes such tactics as standing the book upright
on a bookshelf between other books.

Inkjet liquid fades when exposed to light, but doesn't seem to migrate
under pressure as easily. Given that few books will be left open on the
table for prolonged periods of time, fading is a secondary issue, IMO.

Still, I was thinking of the good stuff that McMillian and Co. or Random
House uses in their $100 publications, not the stuff NEWSWEEK or TIME is
printed with. (g)


Cheryl

[Doug McDonald]

singhals wrote:

(G) but what comes out of an inkjet isn't "ink", you see? (g)

Of course it is ink.

The question is, what kind of ink?

Some is pigment based. If it is a carbon or
phthalocyanine ink, the ink itself will last forever
(at least 200,000,000 years).

Doug McDonald

[Doug McDonald]

Doug McDonald wrote:


one other thing: if you data is full of mistakes,
just send it to Genealogy.com ... it is sure to
be preserved, at least the mistakes, forever. (Sorry,
I could not resist).

You could also send it to the Mormons.

Doug McDonald

[Allen]

singhals wrote:

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 08:42:30 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Ink (not toner) on archival quality paper.



How so? Toner is iron oxide and/or carbon; ink may or may not fade
almost immediately. I thought "laser printer, not inkjet" was the
normal standard?

Dave Hinz


(G) but what comes out of an inkjet isn't "ink", you see? (g) I was
thinking more printer's ink of the sort that is used by expensive,
exclusive print-shops using a mechanical press.

Toner will separate from the paper if said paper is placed under
pressure while either warm or damp. Best glue I've ever used. If it
comes in contact with photographs, it will migrate TO the photo ruining
it. Under pressure includes such tactics as standing the book upright
on a bookshelf between other books.

Inkjet liquid fades when exposed to light, but doesn't seem to migrate
under pressure as easily. Given that few books will be left open on the
table for prolonged periods of time, fading is a secondary issue, IMO.

Still, I was thinking of the good stuff that McMillian and Co. or Random
House uses in their $100 publications, not the stuff NEWSWEEK or TIME is
printed with. (g)


Cheryl

I still have a copy of a manual that I wrote in 1962, which was done

partly on a mimeograph and partly on a Xerox (902, as I recall), which
had been installed during the course of my writing. The Xerox portion
is stll in perfect condition 42 years later. However, putting any
xerographic material, including from copiers and laser printers, into
contact with vinyl is death.
Allen

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 17:02:33 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz wrote:

How so? Toner is iron oxide and/or carbon; ink may or may not fade
almost immediately. I thought "laser printer, not inkjet" was the
normal standard?

(G) but what comes out of an inkjet isn't "ink", you see? (g) I was
thinking more printer's ink of the sort that is used by expensive,
exclusive print-shops using a mechanical press.

OK, that's fine, just wanted to be clear that what a home user has as
"ink" isn't going to be as good as what they might have as laser printed.

Toner will separate from the paper if said paper is placed under
pressure while either warm or damp. Best glue I've ever used. If it
comes in contact with photographs, it will migrate TO the photo ruining
it. Under pressure includes such tactics as standing the book upright
on a bookshelf between other books.

I've seen it do that, but not recently. Maybe it's a binder issue.
I wonder if Cynthia Van Ness is around...

Inkjet liquid fades when exposed to light, but doesn't seem to migrate
under pressure as easily. Given that few books will be left open on the
table for prolonged periods of time, fading is a secondary issue, IMO.

Well, is it only light that makes it fade? Many are water-soluble
(trust me on this one...), and I pretty much wouldn't trust inkjet
printed stuff for anything other than temporary.

Still, I was thinking of the good stuff that McMillian and Co. or Random
House uses in their $100 publications, not the stuff NEWSWEEK or TIME is
printed with. (g)

You know, Apple offers a "print me a book from (this)" type service, I
wonder if that's done with archival quality inks and papers. Worth
looking into; you upload your files (PDF or whatever) and they ship you
the book. Not sure if you need to have a Mac to use it, but if they're
smart they're doing it like they are the iTunes and iPod stuff.

Dave Hinz

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 18:46:44 -0500, Doug McDonald <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

Doug McDonald wrote:
You could also send it to the Mormons.

Well, that's actually a very good suggestion. genealogy.com may (heck,
"probably will") get bought out at some point, and _whiff_ there goes
your data. They're driven by profit; they're a business. That's what
they're for. If someone buys them that wants one part of the business
but not "this big old database of other peoples' names and stuff", they
could easily dump it, regardless of promises made or implied today.

The LDS, on the other hand, is keeping the data intact and available
for reasons that aren't driven by profit, and your name will forever
be attached to that information as it's source. Also, everyone who
gets into genealogy will, at some point, learn that the LDS has a ton
of data and will look there for it. So, it's going to be there, it's
going to be attributed to you, and it's going to be somewhere people are
going to look for it. Seems like a win-win to me.

Dave Hinz

[Dale Hammer]

A place to check out for research on print longevity with inkjet and laser
printing is at the website:

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

You might want to read some of the recent PC and Byte Magazine articles
referenced on this website.

Regards,
Dale Hammer



"Tarapia Tapioco" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

After many years researching various lines of my family I'm now wondering
how to preserve this data at least until my children reach a mature age.

Yes I could create a Gecom and place the file on a good quality CD-ROM,
but
how long will this last? Some folks are telling me 10 years will be tops!
And I'm assuming a DVD wouldn't be any longer.
Obviously technology changes as time progresses, but in only a short time
things change don't they, I mean it doesn't seem that long ago that we
were
using five & a quarter floppy discs. You'd be lucky to find one of these
floppies anywhere now, let alone locate a machine that'd read them.

I'd be interested to hear how others would deal with this issue. Apart
from waiting until the technology of long term data storage increases,
what
other choices do we have.


Thanks
Fred

[Steve Hayes]

On 06 Oct 2004 23:19:31 +0100, [email protected] (Hedley Hunnisett)
wrote:

In article <[email protected]> "Stephen Hayes" wrote:

Are you reading this on your BBS?

Yes indeed. As far as I'm aware I have never missed any messages.
I download everything, e-mails and newsgroup messages, which takes
1 to 2 minutes, then log off automatically and use an off-line reader
to go through them.

I tried the internet briefly but soon went back to the BBS as it was
so much simpler and quicker.

Interesting - these two messages DID appear in my newsreader, but none of the
eariler one. Also, I noticed that on the BBS your messages was not
automatically linked to the earlier ones in the thread.

I wonder how many others may not have seen them on the NNTP side. I replied
specifically to a message from Dave Hinz, and though others have comented, he
didn't, so I wondered if he had seen it.

Cross-posting to soc.genealogy.computing, since Dave Hinz does hang out there.


--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/

[Dave Hinz]

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 17:18:40 GMT, Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

On 06 Oct 2004 23:19:31 +0100, [email protected] (Hedley Hunnisett)
wrote:

Yes indeed. As far as I'm aware I have never missed any messages.
I download everything, e-mails and newsgroup messages, which takes
1 to 2 minutes, then log off automatically and use an off-line reader
to go through them.

I wonder how many others may not have seen them on the NNTP side. I replied
specifically to a message from Dave Hinz, and though others have comented, he
didn't, so I wondered if he had seen it.

I don't recall seeing it, was that the message where I asked what format
that post was in? But, just because I didn't see it doesn't mean it
didn't make it to my server, sometimes I just read messages with subject
lines that look interesting and miss a thread where I've participated.
I could turn on scoring in slrn in a different way to avoid that; maybe
I should (in my copious spare time)...

Cross-posting to soc.genealogy.computing, since Dave Hinz does hang out there.

I'll probably be hanging out a bit less for a while, as arrival of a
new family member is forthcoming in the very near-ish future.

Dave

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:00:43 +1000, "tim sewell"
<[email protected]> wrote:

"Steve Hayes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:27:09 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
[email protected]> wrote:


I think I've missed something here - I use Nero and copy stuff over file
by
file - just by means of copy and paste. Are you doing something that
needs
special formatting?

I want to be able to do

copy *.doc I:




Steve,

Doesn't your new Nero software also include INCD (which appears to be the
"Nero" component which does the disk formatting)?
I have just executed "copy *.* H:" from a Command Prompt. The result was
success, whether I had a DVD-RW or CD-RW in my drive. Both disks had
previously been formatted with INCD, which I had understood to be an
integral part of the Nero software. Perhaps you just need to reinstall INCD
from the CDrom that came with your new drive?

Yes, it works, but only with R/W discs, not with CD-R discs.

My old adaptec software would format CD-R discs, and I had a batch file that
would automatically back up all my important data files on to CD-R discs.

It made making regular backups easy. But the new drive with Nero software
makes it a huge schlepp.

Here is part of it:

@echo off
cls
C:
cd \
ECHO Backing up data files to CD-WORM
ECHO Make sure blank FORMATTED CD/R disc is in CD Writer drive
ECHO Press Enter to continue or Ctrl-C to quit
PAUSE
ECHO Backing up askSam files
cd \asksam
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
xdel *.sav /s /n
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\ASKSAM\*.* I:\ASKSAM\ /E /Y
ECHO Backing up Inmagic files
c:
cd \inmagic
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\INMAGIC\*.* I:\INMAGIC\ /E /Y
ECHO Backing up HTML files
c:
cd \html
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\HTML\*.* I:\HTML\ /E /Y
ECHO Backing up Family History System files
c:
cd \family
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
cd famhist
move *.fil f:\tempback\
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\FAMILY\*.* I:\FAMILY\ /E /Y
ECHO Backing up PAF 2.2 files
c:
cd \paf
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\PAF\*.* I:\PAF\ /E /Y
ECHO Backing up Family Edge files
c:
cd \f-edge
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
cd \
XCOPY32 C:\F-EDGE\*.* I:\F-EDGE\ /E /Y

and so on.

I could type one command and go off and make a cup of coffee instead of all
that click, drag, jiggle, drop stuff, which is time consuming, and so
discourages the making or regular backups.

Oh yes, I CAN and do back up on to CD R/W discs, but they generally can't be
read except on the computer that created them, so they are not much use in
the case of a hard disk crash, are they?





--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/

[Denis Beauregard]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

Oh yes, I CAN and do back up on to CD R/W discs, but they generally can't be
read except on the computer that created them, so they are not much use in
the case of a hard disk crash, are they?

Actually, your PC can be destroyed (current surge) or stolen, and in
that case, backup that can only be read on the same PC is useless.
CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

I perform my self 2 kinds of backup: the dataset on which I work most
time to a CD-ROM (that I read and compare file by file with the
copy on the hard disk), and the whole disk to a removable disk.
The drawier is not expensive ($25) and a standard disk will do
the job (actually, 2 disks, one stored in a remote place and the
other in the computer since DOS will set up the 2nd disk as D:
and the other partitions of the 1st disk as E: F: etc.).


Denis

[Charles Conlow]

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis

Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude? Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.

[Denis Beauregard]

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 00:06:27 -0700, "Charles Conlow" <[email protected]>
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis


Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude? Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.

I have seen a diagram on the new dual-sided DVD-ROM burner and it is
exactly that: a small laser beam that makes holes.

Why do you think they call them optical devices ?


Denis

[Charles Conlow]

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 00:06:27 -0700, "Charles Conlow" <[email protected]
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:


"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis


Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude?
Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.


I have seen a diagram on the new dual-sided DVD-ROM burner and it is
exactly that: a small laser beam that makes holes.

Why do you think they call them optical devices ?


Denis

Well, they are optical devices because the data stored on the disc is
accessed optically, ie. with light. But here's more information...

excerpted from http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question287.htm

How do CD-R discs work?

If you have read the HowStuffWorks article How CDs Work, you know that the
basic idea behind data storage on a normal CD is simple. The surface of the
CD contains one long spiral track of data. Along the track, there are flat
reflective areas and non-reflective bumps. A flat reflective area represents
a binary 1, while a non-reflective bump represents a binary 0. The CD drive
shines a laser at the surface of the CD and can detect the reflective areas
and the bumps by the amount of laser light they reflect. The drive converts
the reflections into 1s and 0s to read digital data from the disc. See How
CDs Work for more information.
Normal CDs can not be modified -- they are read-only devices. A CD-R disc
needs to allow the drive to write data onto the disc. For a CD-R disk to
work, there must be a way for a laser to create a non-reflective area on the
disc. A CD-R disc therefore has an extra layer that the laser can modify.
This extra layer is a greenish dye. In a normal CD, you have a plastic
substrate covered with a reflective aluminum or gold layer. In a CD-R, you
have a plastic substrate, a dye layer and a reflective gold layer. On a new
CD-R disc, the entire surface of the disc is reflective -- the laser can
shine through the dye and reflect off the gold layer.

When you write data to a CD-R, the writing laser (which is much more
powerful than the reading laser) heats up the dye layer and changes its
transparency. The change in the dye creates the equivalent of a
non-reflective bump. This is a permanent change, and both CD and CD-R drives
can read the modified dye as a bump later on.

It turns out that the dye is fairly sensitive to light -- it has to be in
order for a laser to modify it quickly. Therefore, you want to avoid
exposing CD-R discs to sunlight.

[Denis Beauregard]

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:48:53 -0700, "Charles Conlow" <[email protected]>
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

Normal CDs can not be modified -- they are read-only devices. A CD-R disc
needs to allow the drive to write data onto the disc. For a CD-R disk to
work, there must be a way for a laser to create a non-reflective area on the
disc. A CD-R disc therefore has an extra layer that the laser can modify.
This extra layer is a greenish dye. In a normal CD, you have a plastic
substrate covered with a reflective aluminum or gold layer. In a CD-R, you
have a plastic substrate, a dye layer and a reflective gold layer. On a new
CD-R disc, the entire surface of the disc is reflective -- the laser can
shine through the dye and reflect off the gold layer.

When you write data to a CD-R, the writing laser (which is much more
powerful than the reading laser) heats up the dye layer and changes its
transparency. The change in the dye creates the equivalent of a

what did I say ? While it is not a "physical" hole, it is an
optical hole.

non-reflective bump. This is a permanent change, and both CD and CD-R drives
can read the modified dye as a bump later on.

It turns out that the dye is fairly sensitive to light -- it has to be in
order for a laser to modify it quickly. Therefore, you want to avoid
exposing CD-R discs to sunlight.

Now, how do you explain most CD R/W can't be read on many other
similar (CD R/W) drives ?


Denis

[Gjest]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:00:43 +1000, "tim sewell"
[email protected]> wrote:


"Steve Hayes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:27:09 +0200, "Lesley Robertson"
[email protected]> wrote:


I think I've missed something here - I use Nero and copy stuff over file
by file - just by means of copy and paste. Are you doing something that
needs special formatting?

I want to be able to do "copy *.doc I:"


Steve,

Doesn't your new Nero software also include INCD (which appears to be the
"Nero" component which does the disk formatting)?
I have just executed "copy *.* H:" from a Command Prompt. The result was
success, whether I had a DVD-RW or CD-RW in my drive. Both disks had
previously been formatted with INCD, which I had understood to be an
integral part of the Nero software. Perhaps you just need to reinstall INCD
from the CDrom that came with your new drive?

Yes, it works, but only with R/W discs, not with CD-R discs.

My old adaptec software would format CD-R discs, and I had a batch file that
would automatically back up all my important data files on to CD-R discs.

It made making regular backups easy. But the new drive with Nero software
makes it a huge schlepp.

Here is part of it:

@echo off
cls
C:
cd \
ECHO Backing up data files to CD-WORM
ECHO Make sure blank FORMATTED CD/R disc is in CD Writer drive
ECHO Press Enter to continue or Ctrl-C to quit
PAUSE
ECHO Backing up askSam files
cd \asksam
xdel *.bak /s /n
xdel *.tmp /s /n
xdel *.sav /s /n
cd \

<big snip>


Now why didn't I think of that? I'm writing one as I type...

Don

and so on.

I could type one command and go off and make a cup of coffee instead of all
that click, drag, jiggle, drop stuff, which is time consuming, and so
discourages the making or regular backups.

Oh yes, I CAN and do back up on to CD R/W discs, but they generally can't be
read except on the computer that created them, so they are not much use in
the case of a hard disk crash, are they?

--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/

--
MS IE/OE users: PLEASE use Text message formatting rather than HTML for personal e-mail.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Gjest]

Charles Conlow wrote:

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis


Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude? Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.

Sheeze, what book you read? Better go get another book that was written
after lasers were developed!


--
MS IE/OE users: PLEASE use Text message formatting rather than HTML for personal e-mail.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Charles Conlow]

<Don.> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

Charles Conlow wrote:

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis


Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude?
Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.


Sheeze, what book you read? Better go get another book that was written
after lasers were developed!


--
MS IE/OE users: PLEASE use Text message formatting rather than HTML for
personal e-mail.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

So, you are telling me that your CD Writer in your computer actually BURNS
PITS into the medium when it's writing? Must be some machine you got there,
dude.

[Charles Conlow]

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:48:53 -0700, "Charles Conlow" <[email protected]
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

Normal CDs can not be modified -- they are read-only devices. A CD-R disc
needs to allow the drive to write data onto the disc. For a CD-R disk to
work, there must be a way for a laser to create a non-reflective area on
the
disc. A CD-R disc therefore has an extra layer that the laser can modify.
This extra layer is a greenish dye. In a normal CD, you have a plastic
substrate covered with a reflective aluminum or gold layer. In a CD-R, you
have a plastic substrate, a dye layer and a reflective gold layer. On a
new
CD-R disc, the entire surface of the disc is reflective -- the laser can
shine through the dye and reflect off the gold layer.

When you write data to a CD-R, the writing laser (which is much more
powerful than the reading laser) heats up the dye layer and changes its
transparency. The change in the dye creates the equivalent of a

what did I say ? While it is not a "physical" hole, it is an
optical hole.

non-reflective bump. This is a permanent change, and both CD and CD-R
drives
can read the modified dye as a bump later on.

It turns out that the dye is fairly sensitive to light -- it has to be in
order for a laser to modify it quickly. Therefore, you want to avoid
exposing CD-R discs to sunlight.

Now, how do you explain most CD R/W can't be read on many other
similar (CD R/W) drives ?


Denis

Explain what? "...most CD R/W can't be read on many other..."

Not my experience. .>MOST<- no, an occasional one, maybe. ->MANY<- again,
no, and again an occasional one. I do backups to CDR and CDR/W everyday.
Your experience is not shared by me.

[Denis Beauregard]

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 11:11:50 -0700, "Charles Conlow" <[email protected]>
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

So, you are telling me that your CD Writer in your computer actually BURNS
PITS into the medium when it's writing? Must be some machine you got there,
dude.

They can't burn pits, i.e. the holes are not physical, but that
corresponds to the concept of a hole (burning the plastic to change
its transparency). It is was physical and the disk was not balanced,
then the disk would vibrate and made some whistle at some speed.
But talking about the sizes of holes makes it easier to explain the
difference between a CD-R and a CD-RW.

As for the incompatibility of CD R/W, this was common at the beginning
of the technology. Now that the CD are spinning 52 faster than
originally (and may even explode at that speed) and that DVD have
about 7 times more data than CD on the same size, that you can even
find new dual-layered DVDs (and both layers are on the same side of
the disk), it is obvious the technology was improved and the new
burners are more accurate.

But if you want to save your data for the longer time, then it is
better to use the safer method.


Denis

[singhals]

Denis Beauregard wrote:

As for the incompatibility of CD R/W, this was common at the beginning
of the technology. Now that the CD are spinning 52 faster than
originally (and may even explode at that speed) and that DVD have
about 7 times more data than CD on the same size, that you can even
find new dual-layered DVDs (and both layers are on the same side of
the disk), it is obvious the technology was improved and the new
burners are more accurate.

I've got me a pair of old old movies on one of those dual-layered DVDs
-- it's heavier than your average DVD, and it won't spin up on any
player we've tried, ranging from the $49 kids' DVD player to the
if-I-have-to-ask... at the professional shop. Bah-humbug.

Cheryl

[Doug McDonald]

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 18:46:44 -0500, Doug McDonald <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:


Doug McDonald wrote:
You could also send it to the Mormons.


Well, that's actually a very good suggestion.

....

So, it's going to be there, it's
going to be attributed to you, and it's going to be somewhere people are
going to look for it. Seems like a win-win to me.

Yes, but ... it will also preserve, forever, mistakes.

I have not sent my Gedcom to ANYBODY. It is on several
CD-Rs and I have printed the ahnentafel of it, less notes.
I have considered printing the Gedcom itself, which contains all
the info and is human readable. But this would be over 1000 pages.

While I am quite confident of its accuracy, within the bounds
of present-day knowledge, medieval genealogy ... and most
of my known ancestors lived before 1600 ... is still a
field where changes of opinion do occur regularly. Most of
but not all the medieval part is on Leo van de Pas's web site,
and I disagree with him on only a few points.

I suppose I should make up a Gedcom of just the New World part
and print that. A laser printout should at least last my lifetime.

Doug McDonald

[Denis Beauregard]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:04:52 -0400, singhals <[email protected]>
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

Denis Beauregard wrote:

As for the incompatibility of CD R/W, this was common at the beginning
of the technology. Now that the CD are spinning 52 faster than
originally (and may even explode at that speed) and that DVD have
about 7 times more data than CD on the same size, that you can even
find new dual-layered DVDs (and both layers are on the same side of
the disk), it is obvious the technology was improved and the new
burners are more accurate.

I've got me a pair of old old movies on one of those dual-layered DVDs
-- it's heavier than your average DVD, and it won't spin up on any
player we've tried, ranging from the $49 kids' DVD player to the
if-I-have-to-ask... at the professional shop. Bah-humbug.

You mean those 2-layer DVD are junk ?


Denis

[Hugh Watkins]

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Dave Hinz wrote:

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 18:46:44 -0500, Doug McDonald
mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:


Doug McDonald wrote:
You could also send it to the Mormons.


Well, that's actually a very good suggestion.


...
So, it's going to be there, it's
going to be attributed to you, and it's going to be somewhere people are
going to look for it. Seems like a win-win to me.


Yes, but ... it will also preserve, forever, mistakes.

I have not sent my Gedcom to ANYBODY. It is on several
CD-Rs and I have printed the ahnentafel of it, less notes.
I have considered printing the Gedcom itself, which contains all
the info and is human readable. But this would be over 1000 pages.

While I am quite confident of its accuracy, within the bounds
of present-day knowledge, medieval genealogy ... and most
of my known ancestors lived before 1600 ... is still a
field where changes of opinion do occur regularly. Most of
but not all the medieval part is on Leo van de Pas's web site,
and I disagree with him on only a few points.

I suppose I should make up a Gedcom of just the New World part
and print that. A laser printout should at least last my lifetime.

no genealogy can be 100% accurate
put it on the web as it is
I mark assumptions or speculations in any convnenient filed

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... assumption

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl ... tnG=Search

when you have a better version update the site

delete the old gedcom first

Hugh W

[singhals]

Denis Beauregard wrote:

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:04:52 -0400, singhals <[email protected]
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:


Denis Beauregard wrote:


As for the incompatibility of CD R/W, this was common at the beginning
of the technology. Now that the CD are spinning 52 faster than
originally (and may even explode at that speed) and that DVD have
about 7 times more data than CD on the same size, that you can even
find new dual-layered DVDs (and both layers are on the same side of
the disk), it is obvious the technology was improved and the new
burners are more accurate.

I've got me a pair of old old movies on one of those dual-layered DVDs
-- it's heavier than your average DVD, and it won't spin up on any
player we've tried, ranging from the $49 kids' DVD player to the
if-I-have-to-ask... at the professional shop. Bah-humbug.


You mean those 2-layer DVD are junk ?


Denis

IMO, yes. But then again, if mine had worked ...? (g) Seriously, I
don't know that I'd go that far. But, I did try mine on about 7 or 8
machines, none of which could access it. When I took it back to the
store where I bought it, they tried a couple more machines, and it
wouldn't spin up; vendor said he couldn't exchange it because he no
longer carried the line, since so many people had had problems with it.

At the pro shop, they were trying to simply copy each of the two movies
onto separate DVDs for me. Couldn't access _anything_ -- and at the
price they'd've charged me for success, I believed 'em. (g)

Still, assuming there was something on it in the first place SOMEONE had
a machine that could/did access it for writing.

Cheryl

[Dave Hinz]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 02:40:10 -0400, Denis Beauregard <[email protected]> wrote:

Actually, your PC can be destroyed (current surge) or stolen, and in
that case, backup that can only be read on the same PC is useless.

That would be true if it were true.

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Never heard of anything vaguely similar to that. The reason CD-RW disks
can't be read on other computers sometimes is because that other computer
doesn't have a CD-RW drive so it doesn't know the file system on the CD.
ROxio has a download for just that; has nothing to do with pit size or
hardware.

[Gjest]

Charles Conlow wrote:

Don.> wrote in message news:[email protected]...


Charles Conlow wrote:

"Denis Beauregard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Steve Hayes)
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

CD R/W can usually be read on the same drive because they are made
of smaller holes (this is why they can be erased). Smaller holes
means the adjustment of the disk is very critical; if for some reason
the head of the driver is moved aside, you can't read back on the same
drive.

Denis


Holes? What the heck kinda CD drive you got in your machine, dude?
Consumer
class CD writing is achieved by thermo-chemical mechanics, NOT by laser
beams burning holes into the medium.


Sheeze, what book you read? Better go get another book that was written
after lasers were developed!

So, you are telling me that your CD Writer in your computer actually BURNS
PITS into the medium when it's writing? Must be some machine you got there,
dude.

Why should you listen to me, even my wife doesn't!
Bop over to the Alt.comp.perphs.cdr and pose the same question. That's my
understanding, and is hinted to by the term "burn" a CD. ;=)


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Doug]

Helping Hands wrote:

Please Help Us - Families in Desperate Need!
Go to:
http://www.geocities.com/please_help_th ... _donations
Please Help if you can - We will be thankful for any amount, even a dollar!
100% of all Donations are used for housing expenses!
Pass the Word!

I don't know if this is legit or not, but after a variety of Google and
other searches, I couldn't find anything on a "Help the Homeless"
organization in Jesup, GA, which is cited on the linked web page.

[Donna]

Looks suspicious to me.

Donna


"Doug" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Helping Hands wrote:
Please Help Us - Families in Desperate Need!
Go to:
http://www.geocities.com/please_help_th ... _donations
Please Help if you can - We will be thankful for any amount, even a
dollar!
100% of all Donations are used for housing expenses!
Pass the Word!


I don't know if this is legit or not, but after a variety of Google and
other searches, I couldn't find anything on a "Help the Homeless"
organization in Jesup, GA, which is cited on the linked web page.

[Steve Hayes]

On 23 Oct 2004 08:11:40 -0700, [email protected] (Helping
Hands) wrote:

Please Help Us - Families in Desperate Need!
Go to:
http://www.geocities.com/please_help_th ... _donations
Please Help if you can - We will be thankful for any amount, even a dollar!
100% of all Donations are used for housing expenses!
Pass the Word!

Certainly, but first you need to identify the family. Showing your lines of
descent from your 16 great great grandparents shopuld do it.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[The Hemmelman's]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

I found this great little site. I signed up two weeks ago and got 2 Disney tickets and this week they are sending me 2 Universal Studios tickets. Here's the link http://66.219.102.40/ and by the way I am a real person, this is my real email address. I'm not a spammer and didn't appreciate the nasty email I got last time I tried to post this link.
Thanks, Lisa

http://66.219.102.40/

http://66.219.102.40/

This person has posted this exact same message in several other
newsgroups. This is obvious spam and probably an attempted scam. The
website has no contact info and asks to fill out personal info,
including what type of credit card you have.
--
Keith Hemmelman
---------------
mail - khemmelman
domain - pie.midco.net
(Reassemble for mail)

[Dave Hinz]

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:54:51 -0600, The Hemmelman's <[email protected]> wrote:

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
I found this great little site. I signed up two weeks ago and got

This person has posted this exact same message in several other
newsgroups. This is obvious spam and probably an attempted scam.

....and in many of those newsgroups, the spam was cancelled, but people
quoted it in it's entirity. So, the anti-spam mechanisms in place are
defeated. I'm sure this wasn't your intent.

[The Hemmelman's]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:54:51 -0600, The Hemmelman's <[email protected]> wrote:
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
I found this great little site. I signed up two weeks ago and got

This person has posted this exact same message in several other
newsgroups. This is obvious spam and probably an attempted scam.


...and in many of those newsgroups, the spam was cancelled, but people
quoted it in it's entirity. So, the anti-spam mechanisms in place are
defeated. I'm sure this wasn't your intent.

No, not my intent. Over the years I've been criticized more for
clipping posts than not clipping them, so my habit is to generally leave
the orignal post in my replies so everyone knows what I'm replying to,
but probably not the best choice with this message.

--
Keith Hemmelman
---------------
mail - khemmelman
domain - pie.midco.net
(Reassemble for mail)

[LW (Bill]

Can anyone tell me how to extract and convert burial entries
using csv or dbf format so that the date field is in a
format that can be sorted? It seems like day, month, and
year data should be in separate fields, or some sortable
composite number for date should be available.

I must be missing something; I can't believe it was planned
that such an important field not be sortable.

Thanks,

_Bill

--
L W (Bill) Bunning / Bunning One-Name Study
Irvine CA, USA
Guild of One-Name Studies Member 1325

[Robert G. Eldridge]

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:22:35 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] ("LW
(Bill) Bunning") wrote:

Can anyone tell me how to extract and convert burial entries
using csv or dbf format so that the date field is in a
format that can be sorted? It seems like day, month, and
year data should be in separate fields, or some sortable
composite number for date should be available.

I must be missing something; I can't believe it was planned
that such an important field not be sortable.

Thanks,

_Bill

1. Open the .dbf file created from an export from the NBI2 in Excel
2. Add two columns to the right of the DATE column.
3. Select the whole of the DATE column then using the menu function
Data/Text to Columns use the Delimited option option selecting a
Space as the delimiter and finish.
4. Add heading to the columns you added at 2. named MONTH and YEAR and
rename the DATE heading to DAY
5. Do a Data/Sort on the whole set of data making sure that the Header
row option has a bullet and sort descending on the DAY column
6. Select all the values in the sorted DAY column greater than 31, ie
they will be the Years where there was no day and month, and move the
data across to the YEAR column
7. Tidy up any entries where there was a month and year but no day so
the data is in the correct columns.

You now have all the dates in 3 separate fields and you can sort by
years. To sort the months you may want to use Search and Replace on
the month column to replace Jan with 1, Feb with 2, Mar with 3 etc

Cheers,
--
Robert G. Eldridge Cardiff NSW Australia
http://www2.hunterlink.net.au/~ddrge/
Researching ancestors & descendants for all Australian ELDRIDGE families
1000's at my Web site * Wanted * Any Eldridge related information

[William R. McMahon]

You might try Brother's Keeper version 6.1. It's a shareware program, and you
can check out its features at:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... rs_Keeper/

I have no association with Brother's Keeper, but have used the DOS version
of the program since 1991. A friend recommended it when I was just getting started in genealogy.

Bill McMahon
Ocean Springs MS

[Charliec]

Thanks,
Will take a look at it.
Charlie

[email protected] ("William R. McMahon") wrote:

You might try Brother's Keeper version 6.1. It's a shareware program, and you
can check out its features at:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... rs_Keeper/

I have no association with Brother's Keeper, but have used the DOS version
of the program since 1991. A friend recommended it when I was just getting started in genealogy.

Bill McMahon
Ocean Springs MS

******************************************************
Charliec

[Gjest]

I did the same think in the late 80 early 90s have yet to get the data
out to use in new programs. The export is to an older GEDCOM version.
Someone sugested trying PAF2.3.1 DOS version to see if it will read
Tracer's GEDCOM export, but I am waiting to find a copy of the older
PAF to try that.

Have you had any lucks since your post?

[Gjest]

On 18 Dec 2004 09:45:55 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

I did the same think in the late 80 early 90s have yet to get the data
out to use in new programs. The export is to an older GEDCOM version.
Someone sugested trying PAF2.3.1 DOS version to see if it will read
Tracer's GEDCOM export, but I am waiting to find a copy of the older
PAF to try that.

Have you had any lucks since your post?

Tracer was a rip-off of the original DOS Ancestral Quest.

In fact, if I remember correctly, both PAF DOS versions and the old
Ancestral Quest DOS will read its files directly with no export. it's
the old PAF data file format.

Contact Gaylon Findley at AQ or the Mormons for help.

You are by no means totally screwed.

[Steve Hayes]

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 03:54:02 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

On 18 Dec 2004 09:45:55 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

I did the same think in the late 80 early 90s have yet to get the data
out to use in new programs. The export is to an older GEDCOM version.
Someone sugested trying PAF2.3.1 DOS version to see if it will read
Tracer's GEDCOM export, but I am waiting to find a copy of the older
PAF to try that.

Have you had any lucks since your post?


Tracer was a rip-off of the original DOS Ancestral Quest.

In fact, if I remember correctly, both PAF DOS versions and the old
Ancestral Quest DOS will read its files directly with no export. it's
the old PAF data file format.

I've got a copy of Tracer.

For what it's worth, here's the beginning of the documentation:

TRACER version 2.2

* * * * * "DOCUMENTATION" * * * * *

Tracer is a PAF file-compatible system for people who want
to use the LDS PAF system, but have only one drive, or can't stand how
slow it is. If you want to know the details of how it works, refer to
your original PAF documentation. Several new features have been added
to enhance you work environment.

To run this program, you must have certain equipment:

A: An IBM PC or compatible machine.

B: at least 256K of memory

C: At least one disk, hard or floppy, upon which reside the program files.
Once you have reached the MAIN MENU, there is no further reason to have
the program disk in the system (if you are using floppies) so the
history notes diskette can go in one drive and the data diskette in
another, if you have more than one. The entire program is memory-
resident.

D: A place to put the data files, such as the same hard disk, or a few
more floppies.

E: An optional printer for the optional printed reports.

F: All the program files. Here's the list you should have:
TRACER.COM
TRACER.OVL
TRACER.CNS
IDXEDIT.COM

<rest snipped>

From what I could see it is designed to use PAF 1.0 files (INDIV.DAT, not
INDIV2.dat etc).

I may have a program somewhere that could ingest an old PAF GEDCOM and spit
out one that can be read by more recent programs. Willing to give it a try,
no guarantees.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Gjest]

There was a Lister having trouble opening a FTM file. I deleted the message
before I thought of this point, which may be too trivial to mention but I have
been caught by it myself.

Make sure that you are not trying to open just dot FTW files (.ftw). Backup
files are stored with other suffixes, such as dot FBK and dot FBC. Try opening
file with "Family Tree Maker All types" by clicking on the down arrow in the
"Files of Type" in the Open Family File box.

All the best,

David (Beecham) PA-USA.

[Bill Harrison]

Hi Steve and Listers

I have been using Custodian from version 2 now got version 3 ..... also got
Clooz but couldn't get that to do what I wanted it to do.

If you use two other packages LDS Companion and GenMap you can really make
Custodian come alive.

LDS Companion can turn saves from FSearch 1881 census (either online or CD)
into a DBF file - it strips off multiple duplicates from any LDS save. (ie
if you have tagged say 4 people and they ALL reside in the same house it
saves them 4x4 equals 16 times.) also it can convert rtf saves from VRI
into DBF format. Simlarly it can convert IGI entries for direct import into
Custodian.

GenMap allows you to see your info from say the IGI spacially .... after
doing a select and sort from Custodian's name index Custodian can create a
GenMap file (dbf) using only the fields necessary and allows you to start
GenMap from within Custodian - you then load the DBF file and all the
selected data can be seen spacially on a map of the British Isles. Very
useful to see hotspots of certain names etc GenMap also has a facility to
see Registration Districts of the UK as well as County Boundaries.

Custodian will import AND export in Excel format so you can either ADD
specific fields / standard field entries before you import it into
Custodian. Also you can import into Palm's when the Palm will except xls
files......

I have learnt my lesson though when it comes to importing from the IGI etc
..... I ended up with over 1/2 millon entries in my name index which slowed
my machine up just a tad. So now I make specific datasets for the IGI 1881
census etc and then transfer the data I want to my default dataset when
needed.

Custodian also allows you to link people together in Family Groups ... so it
is very useful if you have a one name study and lots of small family trees.

In the latest version there is a Form Designer programme and also a free
viewer called Custodian Publisher which you can send to people to allow them
to view/print out your data etc.

Hope this helps

regards

Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Hayes" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 2:21 AM
Subject: Clooz vs Custodian

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as
the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

Now, however, thanks to the practice of popular magazines like "Family
Tree
magazine" and "Your Family History" including software in cover CDs, I've
got
demo versions of both Clooz and Custodian II on my computer (one came with
Custodian III, but that wouldn't run on my machine). So at last I can
compare
them.

Initially I was prejudiced in favour of Clooz, because Legacy can export
data
in Clooz format, though the demo version doesn't support the import.

Both programs allow you to enter data from source documents, and then
index
the data to let you get a clearer picture of what you have, and where your
research should go next. Both use MS Access databases for storing the
information. Clooz actually runs under MS Access (or a run-time version),
while Custodian seems to be compiled into a stand-alone program.

From what I've seen of them so far, Custodian is more comprehensive and
more
versatile than Clooz, as it has special entry forms for a much wider
variety
of source documents -- birth marriage and death certificates, census data,
church records, monumental inscriptions etc. Clooz seems to major on
census
records, and has a few generalised entry forms for other types of
documents.
It also requires people to be entered separately before they can be linked
to
the documents -- which is one reason why the export feature in Legacy
could be
useful. Custodian, however, picks up "people" data from the entry forms.
On a
birth certificate, for example, it picks up the names of the father and
mother
for the index.

In Custdian, too, the screen input form (at least for BMD certificates) is
laid out like the document itself, which makes data entry easier and more
intuitive.

Each one seems to be fairly country-specific. Clooz is more oriented to US
genealogy, though it does have input forms for UK censuses. Custodian is
better for British genealogy, having specific entry forms for English,
Scottish and Irish BMD certificates and other documents. It would
certainly be
very useful to anyone who had ancestors or relatives in the British Isles
after 1837, though less so for those who didn't.

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems
may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.




--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.5 - Release Date: 26/12/2004

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.5 - Release Date: 26/12/2004

[BE Kelly]

[email protected] wrote:

I did the same think in the late 80 early 90s have yet to get the data
out to use in new programs. The export is to an older GEDCOM version.
Someone sugested trying PAF2.3.1 DOS version to see if it will read
Tracer's GEDCOM export, but I am waiting to find a copy of the older
PAF to try that.

Have you had any lucks since your post?

If Tracer will export to the PAF 2.3 format you can download the

free version of Legacy 5 from LegacyFamilyTree.com which will
import your PAF files directly. Then use Legacy to export a
standard GEDCOM to import into any other Genealogy program.

Note also that if Tracer does export to GEDCOM this is a text
file. I don't think the GEDCOM format has changed that much that
the file cannot be imported by a genealogy program that can
import GEDCOM files. I suspect instead that Tracer is exporting
the native PAF 2.3 format which is NOT a GEDCOM file.

Brian Kelly
Rockland, ON, CA

[Robert Heiling]

Steve Hayes wrote:

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

SNIP

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Steve, I'd like your clarification on something so that I can better understand
the recent shenanigans of which your thread here was a victim. About an hour after
you made this post, did you reply to it yourself to add additional "Clooz vs
Custodian" material? I was following the posts during that time period, but can't
recall whether I opened that second post and looked at it at the time or not, so I
would appreciate your response.

i.e. Is the post I am responding to your only post so far on this "Clooz vs
Custodian" thread?

Thanks
Bob

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:01:08 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

SNIP

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Steve, I'd like your clarification on something so that I can better understand
the recent shenanigans of which your thread here was a victim. About an hour after
you made this post, did you reply to it yourself to add additional "Clooz vs
Custodian" material? I was following the posts during that time period, but can't
recall whether I opened that second post and looked at it at the time or not, so I
would appreciate your response.

i.e. Is the post I am responding to your only post so far on this "Clooz vs
Custodian" thread?

It was until I replied to yours, now.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Robert Heiling]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:01:08 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

SNIP

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Steve, I'd like your clarification on something so that I can better understand
the recent shenanigans of which your thread here was a victim. About an hour after
you made this post, did you reply to it yourself to add additional "Clooz vs
Custodian" material? I was following the posts during that time period, but can't
recall whether I opened that second post and looked at it at the time or not, so I
would appreciate your response.

i.e. Is the post I am responding to your only post so far on this "Clooz vs
Custodian" thread?

It was until I replied to yours, now.

Thanks, Steve. I simply couldn't remember whether I had looked at the reply post
shortly after it was posted or not. It makes a difference and your answer means that
the culprits were simply forging headers. The other way, they would have had to change
the message body on an existing post which would be quite a feat as far as I know.

Bob

[Shane Badham]

Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

Now, however, thanks to the practice of popular magazines like "Family Tree
magazine" and "Your Family History" including software in cover CDs, I've got
demo versions of both Clooz and Custodian II on my computer (one came with
Custodian III, but that wouldn't run on my machine). So at last I can compare
them.

Initially I was prejudiced in favour of Clooz, because Legacy can export data
in Clooz format, though the demo version doesn't support the import.

Both programs allow you to enter data from source documents, and then index
the data to let you get a clearer picture of what you have, and where your
research should go next. Both use MS Access databases for storing the
information. Clooz actually runs under MS Access (or a run-time version),
while Custodian seems to be compiled into a stand-alone program.

From what I've seen of them so far, Custodian is more comprehensive and more
versatile than Clooz, as it has special entry forms for a much wider variety
of source documents -- birth marriage and death certificates, census data,
church records, monumental inscriptions etc. Clooz seems to major on census
records, and has a few generalised entry forms for other types of documents.
It also requires people to be entered separately before they can be linked to
the documents -- which is one reason why the export feature in Legacy could be
useful. Custodian, however, picks up "people" data from the entry forms. On a
birth certificate, for example, it picks up the names of the father and mother
for the index.

In Custdian, too, the screen input form (at least for BMD certificates) is
laid out like the document itself, which makes data entry easier and more
intuitive.

Each one seems to be fairly country-specific. Clooz is more oriented to US
genealogy, though it does have input forms for UK censuses. Custodian is
better for British genealogy, having specific entry forms for English,
Scottish and Irish BMD certificates and other documents. It would certainly be
very useful to anyone who had ancestors or relatives in the British Isles
after 1837, though less so for those who didn't.

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.

Steve,

There is another program, which I use, called Bygones. This is written
in FileMaker, but is standalone (you dont need FileMaker). It is
available for Macintosh and Windows.

I have investigated Clooze and Custodian is used by my one name society.
The former I threw out in favour of Bygones, Custodian is BIG and more
suited to a one name study.

In Bygones you can create your own source templates and import them into
your research extract, so although you have US Census formats as
standard, you can replace them with UK formats. Same for any other
sources.

The interface is easier to use than the documentation suggests, e.g. you
can call up a form to enter a new source format with one click on your
research extract and then use it imediately. It also supports email and
you can import outgoing and incoming replies into a reserch extract. It
maintains your contact lists including any repositories you visit.

No connection with the author, just a satified user - oh BTW, its free!
http://home.utah-inter.net/bygones/index.htm

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:06:39 +0000, [email protected] (Shane Badham)
wrote:

Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

Now, however, thanks to the practice of popular magazines like "Family Tree
magazine" and "Your Family History" including software in cover CDs, I've got
demo versions of both Clooz and Custodian II on my computer (one came with
Custodian III, but that wouldn't run on my machine). So at last I can compare
them.

Initially I was prejudiced in favour of Clooz, because Legacy can export data
in Clooz format, though the demo version doesn't support the import.

Both programs allow you to enter data from source documents, and then index
the data to let you get a clearer picture of what you have, and where your
research should go next. Both use MS Access databases for storing the
information. Clooz actually runs under MS Access (or a run-time version),
while Custodian seems to be compiled into a stand-alone program.

From what I've seen of them so far, Custodian is more comprehensive and more
versatile than Clooz, as it has special entry forms for a much wider variety
of source documents -- birth marriage and death certificates, census data,
church records, monumental inscriptions etc. Clooz seems to major on census
records, and has a few generalised entry forms for other types of documents.
It also requires people to be entered separately before they can be linked to
the documents -- which is one reason why the export feature in Legacy could be
useful. Custodian, however, picks up "people" data from the entry forms. On a
birth certificate, for example, it picks up the names of the father and mother
for the index.

In Custdian, too, the screen input form (at least for BMD certificates) is
laid out like the document itself, which makes data entry easier and more
intuitive.

Each one seems to be fairly country-specific. Clooz is more oriented to US
genealogy, though it does have input forms for UK censuses. Custodian is
better for British genealogy, having specific entry forms for English,
Scottish and Irish BMD certificates and other documents. It would certainly be
very useful to anyone who had ancestors or relatives in the British Isles
after 1837, though less so for those who didn't.

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.

Steve,

There is another program, which I use, called Bygones. This is written
in FileMaker, but is standalone (you dont need FileMaker). It is
available for Macintosh and Windows.

I have investigated Clooze and Custodian is used by my one name society.
The former I threw out in favour of Bygones, Custodian is BIG and more
suited to a one name study.

In Bygones you can create your own source templates and import them into
your research extract, so although you have US Census formats as
standard, you can replace them with UK formats. Same for any other
sources.

I've tried Byegones, but couldn't make head or tail of it, and kept entering
data in the wrong places. Perhaps I should try again and ame a fresh start.

Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data Filer that
came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still use it. It is much
simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that very reason is more
effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print to file
with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files, and it does that
very well indeed.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:06:39 +0000, [email protected] (Shane Badham)
wrote:

There is another program, which I use, called Bygones. This is written
in FileMaker, but is standalone (you dont need FileMaker). It is
available for Macintosh and Windows.

I have investigated Clooze and Custodian is used by my one name society.
The former I threw out in favour of Bygones, Custodian is BIG and more
suited to a one name study.

In Bygones you can create your own source templates and import them into
your research extract, so although you have US Census formats as
standard, you can replace them with UK formats. Same for any other
sources.

How does one do that?

The interface is easier to use than the documentation suggests, e.g. you
can call up a form to enter a new source format with one click on your
research extract and then use it imediately. It also supports email and
you can import outgoing and incoming replies into a reserch extract. It
maintains your contact lists including any repositories you visit.

Again, I'm not sure how one does that.

It's main function seemed to be similar to the "To-Do" function in Legacy, but
I found the Legacy version easier to use (it lets me print a list of things to
look up at a particular repository, or a town when I'm visiting there).

It seemed to me that Bygones ought to be able to do that, but I was never able
to work out how, and kept entering things in the wrong places.

Perhaps I should give it another try.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[singhals]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:06:39 +0000, [email protected] (Shane Badham)
wrote:


Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:


Some time ago I asked if any users had experience in source recording
programs, like Clooz and Custodian. It seemed there were no takers, and as the
programs were expensive, I wasn't keen to buy a pig in a poke (having been
bitten by paying for TMG, which then didn't work as advertised).

Now, however, thanks to the practice of popular magazines like "Family Tree
magazine" and "Your Family History" including software in cover CDs, I've got
demo versions of both Clooz and Custodian II on my computer (one came with
Custodian III, but that wouldn't run on my machine). So at last I can compare
them.

Initially I was prejudiced in favour of Clooz, because Legacy can export data
in Clooz format, though the demo version doesn't support the import.

Both programs allow you to enter data from source documents, and then index
the data to let you get a clearer picture of what you have, and where your
research should go next. Both use MS Access databases for storing the
information. Clooz actually runs under MS Access (or a run-time version),
while Custodian seems to be compiled into a stand-alone program.

From what I've seen of them so far, Custodian is more comprehensive and more
versatile than Clooz, as it has special entry forms for a much wider variety
of source documents -- birth marriage and death certificates, census data,
church records, monumental inscriptions etc. Clooz seems to major on census
records, and has a few generalised entry forms for other types of documents.
It also requires people to be entered separately before they can be linked to
the documents -- which is one reason why the export feature in Legacy could be
useful. Custodian, however, picks up "people" data from the entry forms. On a
birth certificate, for example, it picks up the names of the father and mother
for the index.

In Custdian, too, the screen input form (at least for BMD certificates) is
laid out like the document itself, which makes data entry easier and more
intuitive.

Each one seems to be fairly country-specific. Clooz is more oriented to US
genealogy, though it does have input forms for UK censuses. Custodian is
better for British genealogy, having specific entry forms for English,
Scottish and Irish BMD certificates and other documents. It would certainly be
very useful to anyone who had ancestors or relatives in the British Isles
after 1837, though less so for those who didn't.

I haven't finished playing around with them yet, so this is more "first
impressions" than a full-blown review, but since the Custodian II demo was
included with the November 2004 issue of "Family Tree magazine", perhaps
others have been trying it, and those with more advanced operating systems may
even be able to compare Custodian II and Custodian III.

Steve,

There is another program, which I use, called Bygones. This is written
in FileMaker, but is standalone (you dont need FileMaker). It is
available for Macintosh and Windows.

I have investigated Clooze and Custodian is used by my one name society.
The former I threw out in favour of Bygones, Custodian is BIG and more
suited to a one name study.

In Bygones you can create your own source templates and import them into
your research extract, so although you have US Census formats as
standard, you can replace them with UK formats. Same for any other
sources.


I've tried Byegones, but couldn't make head or tail of it, and kept entering
data in the wrong places. Perhaps I should try again and ame a fresh start.

Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data Filer that
came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still use it. It is much
simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that very reason is more
effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print to file
with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files, and it does that
very well indeed.

Didn't much like RDF myself -- particularly after it overwrote one
alpha.dat with a different one. (g)

However ... won't it print to the generic text printer in Win9x?

Cheryl

[Steve Hayes]

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:
Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data Filer that
came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still use it. It is much
simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that very reason is more
effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print to file
with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files, and it does that
very well indeed.

Didn't much like RDF myself -- particularly after it overwrote one
alpha.dat with a different one. (g)

However ... won't it print to the generic text printer in Win9x?

I'm not sure what that is.

I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

I had a program that captured printer output to a file, but it doesn't work
with Win 9x.

There has neen no replacement for PAF RDF as a program for indexing paper
documents, which is why I continue to use it. Neither Custodian, Clooz nor
Bygones does that.




--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Paul Blair]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:


Steve Hayes wrote:

Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data Filer that
came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still use it. It is much
simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that very reason is more
effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print to file
with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files, and it does that
very well indeed.

Didn't much like RDF myself -- particularly after it overwrote one
alpha.dat with a different one. (g)

However ... won't it print to the generic text printer in Win9x?


I'm not sure what that is.

I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

Where did you get *that* idea from? DOS still hides behind XP, and the
PRINT command is still there! Just as it was for 9x.

Paul

I had a program that captured printer output to a file, but it doesn't work
with Win 9x.

There has neen no replacement for PAF RDF as a program for indexing paper
documents, which is why I continue to use it. Neither Custodian, Clooz nor
Bygones does that.

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:21:04 +1100, Paul Blair <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:


Steve Hayes wrote:
I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

Where did you get *that* idea from? DOS still hides behind XP, and the
PRINT command is still there! Just as it was for 9x.

I got it from typing

print autoexec.bat

at the C\> prompt

and getting the message "Bad command or filename".





--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[singhals]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:


Steve Hayes wrote:

Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data Filer that
came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still use it. It is much
simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that very reason is more
effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print to file
with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files, and it does that
very well indeed.

Didn't much like RDF myself -- particularly after it overwrote one
alpha.dat with a different one. (g)

However ... won't it print to the generic text printer in Win9x?


I'm not sure what that is.

I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

AFAIK, RDF used the printer installed via PAF. I never installed PAF to
run thru WIN3x, so I'm a little shaky on the details here ... however,
under WIN open your control panel, goto PRINTERS, and ADD PRINTER.
Scroll through the list to find Generic Text Printer and install it.

Then when you want to print RDF to file, set Generic Text as your
WIN-Default printer, and away you should go.

I had a program that captured printer output to a file, but it doesn't work
with Win 9x.

There has neen no replacement for PAF RDF as a program for indexing paper
documents, which is why I continue to use it. Neither Custodian, Clooz nor
Bygones does that.

Skye Index is a good indexing program; pricey, but good. Written, I'm
told, by the son of a well-known Virginia Genealogist so she could index
all her papers. (g) But it is STRICTLY an indexer.

Cheryl

[Paul Blair]

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:21:04 +1100, Paul Blair <[email protected]> wrote:


Steve Hayes wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:



Steve Hayes wrote:

I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

Where did you get *that* idea from? DOS still hides behind XP, and the
PRINT command is still there! Just as it was for 9x.


I got it from typing

print autoexec.bat

at the C\> prompt

and getting the message "Bad command or filename".





PRINT writes to the screen or a file

LPRINT writes to device LPT1: - so maybe try that?

Paul

[Paul Blair]

Paul Blair wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:21:04 +1100, Paul Blair <[email protected]
wrote:


Steve Hayes wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]
wrote:



Steve Hayes wrote:


I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in
Win 9x
and above.


Where did you get *that* idea from? DOS still hides behind XP, and
the PRINT command is still there! Just as it was for 9x.



I got it from typing
print autoexec.bat

at the C\> prompt

and getting the message "Bad command or filename".





PRINT writes to the screen or a file
LPRINT writes to device LPT1: - so maybe try that?

Paul

Oooops... sorry, forgot you were using Windows 9.x. LPRINT came later.

In that case, the syntax would start PRINT /d:lpt1 drive:path:filename

The last 3 items take the info from disk, but if the file is already
open, leave the items out.

Paul

[Steve Hayes]

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 07:31:21 +1100, Paul Blair <[email protected]> wrote:

Paul Blair wrote:
I got it from typing
print autoexec.bat

at the C\> prompt

and getting the message "Bad command or filename".





PRINT writes to the screen or a file
LPRINT writes to device LPT1: - so maybe try that?

Paul

Oooops... sorry, forgot you were using Windows 9.x. LPRINT came later.

In that case, the syntax would start PRINT /d:lpt1 drive:path:filename

Bad command or filename.

The last 3 items take the info from disk, but if the file is already
open, leave the items out.

Bad command or filename .

If I type "dir /?"

I get a help screen.

If I type "print /?" I get "Bad command or filename"

THAT is what gives me the idea that the PRINT comand is mising from Windows
9.x.





--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Charlie]

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 12:14:46 -0000, "Trent SC" <[email protected]>
wrote:

I have an old genealogy database which was created in .dbf format which has
a very simplistic DOS front-end and an nightmarish navigation.

I'd like to extract the data from the database and either import it into a
GED-compliant application, or convert it, dump the old .dbf thing and work
on the new version. Is there an application that will help me do this? I
presume I would need to identify the relevant fields as well as how the
relationships are defined (at the moment, father/mother/spouse etc are
referenced to by line numbers).

And it goes without saying that I'm horribly poor, so a free conversion
utility, or a family tree program which has a time-limited free trial would
be marvellous!

Many thanks in advance.

There may be utility programs out there that will do a database to GED

conversion, (I have one that goes the other way), but they will
require you to organize the data in a certain exact way. If you're
going to do that, it seems to me that a better approach would be to
download a free copy of Legacy (which uses Access as it's database
file structure), study the files, and then convert tyour dbf files to
Access. Once in Access, it's then necessary to build the file
srructure exactly like the Legacy files, at which point Legacy should
read the files. Once in Legacy, simply generate the GED file.

Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

[Trent Chelano]

Some additional things you can try:

1. go to http://www.visuged.org and download transged
this will, with a bit of work convert csv files to ged format.

2. go to http://website.lineone.net/~d.j.cooke/wintree.htm and download
acc2ged (link for the lazy: http://website.lineone.net/
~d.j.cooke/acc2ged.zip )read the notes included and convert your database
to ged.

Trent...

[Trent SC]

Some additional things you can try:

1. go to http://www.visuged.org and download transged
this will, with a bit of work convert csv files to ged format.

2. go to http://website.lineone.net/~d.j.cooke/wintree.htm and download
acc2ged (link for the lazy: http://website.lineone.net/
~d.j.cooke/acc2ged.zip )read the notes included and convert your database
to ged.

Thanks, I'll give them a try.

[Shane Badham]

Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:09:03 -0500, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Steve Hayes wrote:
Perhaps I should have mentioned another program, the Research Data
Filer that came with PAF 2.x. it takes a lot of beating, and I still
use it. It is much simpler than any of the others, but perhaps for that
very reason is more effective.

The only problem is that with Windows 9.x and greater one cannot print
to file with it. It is primarily intended as an index to paper files,
and it does that very well indeed.

Didn't much like RDF myself -- particularly after it overwrote one
alpha.dat with a different one. (g)

However ... won't it print to the generic text printer in Win9x?

I'm not sure what that is.

I think it relied on the DOS Print command, which is non-existent in Win 9x
and above.

I had a program that captured printer output to a file, but it doesn't work
with Win 9x.

There has neen no replacement for PAF RDF as a program for indexing paper
documents, which is why I continue to use it. Neither Custodian, Clooz nor
Bygones does that.

I cant speak for Custodian or Clooz, but Bygones will support a Document
table within the database, with Doc numbers for each paper file

I dont use Doc numbers, because I file all paper docs by family, so the
doc tables are not relevant to my way of working. Families are named by
head, i.e SMITH, John and include details of the family from the
marriage of the parents, births of their children, to the deaths of the
parents.

Each child will start their own family when they marry. Families may be
filed in alphabetical order, e.g. SMITH, John / BLOGGS, Freda - or vice
versa depending on the significance of my research.

HTH

Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

[Shane Badham]

Steve Hayes <[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 21:06:39 +0000, [email protected] (Shane Badham)
wrote:

There is another program, which I use, called Bygones. This is written
in FileMaker, but is standalone (you dont need FileMaker). It is
available for Macintosh and Windows.

I have investigated Clooze and Custodian is used by my one name society.
The former I threw out in favour of Bygones, Custodian is BIG and more
suited to a one name study.

In Bygones you can create your own source templates and import them into
your research extract, so although you have US Census formats as
standard, you can replace them with UK formats. Same for any other
sources.

How does one do that?

Just create a new source, in the source table, that is relevent to your
needs. I have even added a source for baptismal certificates. Some are
already included in the database but, as I said, you can change them or
replace them.

The interface is easier to use than the documentation suggests, e.g. you
can call up a form to enter a new source format with one click on your
research extract and then use it imediately. It also supports email and
you can import outgoing and incoming replies into a reserch extract. It
maintains your contact lists including any repositories you visit.

Again, I'm not sure how one does that.

It's main function seemed to be similar to the "To-Do" function in Legacy, but
I found the Legacy version easier to use (it lets me print a list of things to
look up at a particular repository, or a town when I'm visiting there).

It seemed to me that Bygones ought to be able to do that, but I was never able
to work out how, and kept entering things in the wrong places.

Perhaps I should give it another try.

There is a To-Do list too. I use it as one would do when I plan to do
research. however, one can also print blank (or semi-blank) Research
Extracts to take with you and enter your research successes in pencil.

The ideal is a laptop on which one would enter ones outcomes directly -
I dont have a laptop.

I found that I started to understand the power of Bygones when I entered
a Reserch Extract. Try this with some of your early researches and add
any source or other support lists as you go. You can go straight to the
other tables from the Research Extract by clicking on the relevant
circular button on the form.

Dont forget that some of the text boxes are entered as drop-down lists
and you can modify and add to these lists.

Also, if you want to reproduce the script of the original source text,
you can do superscripted text and italic text, etc. Tabstops, TABS,
indents, and margins, etc. are also supported. They are there if you
want them.

HTH

--
Regards, Shane
"A closed mouth gathers no feet!"
Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

[singhals]

Phil Wright wrote:

Hi

I am a professional programmer with an interest in geneaology. I want
to spend time working on a utility/application that will be really
useful in the geneaology community and so am looking for ideas. The
utility/application will be free and will be a spare time activity
only.

So far I have noticed that none of the well known geneaology
applications has really top notch tree drawing capabilites. They are
ok but nothing special or particularly professional. Would a utility
that imported GEDCOM, PAF and produced professional pictures be of use
to people? Are there cool features that would make your life easier
that you would like to see?

Any ideas/discussion welcome...
Phil Wright

1. Something that would automatically calculate the Modified Register #
of each individual and insert it into the Custom ID field would be nice.

2. A program that copied the content of any specified field into the
NOTES/MORE-ABOUT/narrative would be VERY useful.

Since I don't use the box-charts or drop-charts for much of anything,
the one in one of my programs is adequate for my needs. Although I have
a friend who wants to include alternate parents in his box chart ...

Cheryl

[Doug McDonald]

The main "add-on utility" I would like is a
"compare by ahnentafel" one. The idea is that it would
check to see if all the cases of multiple connections
to the same ancestor were exactly the same in two files.
In other words, say in one file person A is person
B's sixth and seventh grandfather, while in the second
file person A is person B's sixth and eighth grandfather, this
would be flagged as a difference.

Doug McDonald

[Hugh Watkins]

"Phil Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

Hi

I am a professional programmer with an interest in geneaology. I want
to spend time working on a utility/application that will be really
useful in the geneaology community and so am looking for ideas. The
utility/application will be free and will be a spare time activity
only.

So far I have noticed that none of the well known geneaology
applications has really top notch tree drawing capabilites. They are
ok but nothing special or particularly professional. Would a utility
that imported GEDCOM, PAF and produced professional pictures be of use
to people? Are there cool features that would make your life easier
that you would like to see?

Any ideas/discussion welcome...

To convert a gedcom to a csv data base
listing all events for import into a one name study for example

Hugh W