-
Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!
-
It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Family History software
- Thread starter AnneC
- Start date
If you are simply discounting Family Historian because of the My Heritage link facility, that's not really a good reason not to look at the software. The link can be disabled as part of the installation procedure, as long as you read each screen before clicking the buttons (something I know people have been caught out with), or it can be easily disabled after installation. You do NOT need to use My Heritage with the software and personally its far better and less bloated software than Family Tree Maker. I do not have the link enabled and have no intention of using MyHeritage. I moved from FTM to FH two years ago and wouldn't go back as FH is far superior, although I do have copies of the newer software for the free subscriptions.
Unlike FTM, there is a free 30 day trial available to test drive the software. Roots Magic also provide a trial, as others software may do. You just need to export your trees to Gedcom format to import into other programs. At least this way you could have a look at whether you think you could get on with it.
Family Historian is great for being 100% compatible with GEDCOM the issue is whether Reunion would have generated 100% compatible GEDCOM. Family Historian also benefits from having lots of addins/plugins and complex in-depth reporting. However as Chrissy has clearly indicated she is not that computer savvy then a program like Family Historian that benefits the user greatly when they have a degree of familiarity with writing queries etc may not be best suited for her. Although the support groups are excellent it might be a step too far. They also severely tarnished their reputation by the association with My Heritage although as you rightly say that's not a reason to ignore it. Family Historian is a great in depth tool it might be overwhelming for what Chrissy has stated her needs as though.
I've flirted with Family Historian but stayed with FTM because of the integration with Ancestry. BTW as a programmer of 30+ years I'm baffled by what you suggest as "less bloated than Family Tree Maker" by what technical criteria do you suggest FTM is "bloated", have you technical experience to back this up?
BTW on my various virtual machines I have installed most of the family history software packages out there and bought quite a few of them, this is so I can support users of FTAnalyzer so I do have a fairly detailed knowledge of what's available. I also know as a result of this experience that the key criteria is what people feel comfortable with far more than the features any package offers, and that means that for most users it's personal taste.
I've flirted with Family Historian but stayed with FTM because of the integration with Ancestry. BTW as a programmer of 30+ years I'm baffled by what you suggest as "less bloated than Family Tree Maker" by what technical criteria do you suggest FTM is "bloated", have you technical experience to back this up?
BTW on my various virtual machines I have installed most of the family history software packages out there and bought quite a few of them, this is so I can support users of FTAnalyzer so I do have a fairly detailed knowledge of what's available. I also know as a result of this experience that the key criteria is what people feel comfortable with far more than the features any package offers, and that means that for most users it's personal taste.
I'll give you an example of what I mean by bloated. I have an ancestry tree for a friend on my subscription, to which she has full access, and I synchronise it periodically with my FTM 2014 just in case of issues. The tree has just over 3,000 individuals but the FTM file is 40mb in size, this obviously does not include any media which are obviously stored separately. It's not though an isolated issue as I have seen this with other trees in 2014, having helped my Aunt out every so often with issues with her trees on ancestry. By contrast, one of my FH trees has about 25k individuals but the file size is 11mb. I've used FTM previously since the early 2000s and prior to ancestry purchasing it and rewriting, I always found it quick to open and small file sizes, which meant less issues with crashing. Albeit that there has been some improvement from crashes in FTM2014, both 2012 and 2014 are not the quickest programs to launch (and by default it is not set to open any file) and the 40mb file takes a few minutes to open each time. Considering I have 8gb of RAM in my laptop, I'm not that impressed with the software. This is what I mean about "bloated", it also seems to take more seconds that I would expect to save the file on closure. By contrast FH is quick to open the application, quick to open files and quick to save. Unlike your good self I am not a programmer, however I have worked in IT Infrastructure Support for over 15 years, and many at a fairly senior level, so I have seen out software has developed over time and not always for the better.
As to your comment that Calioe Pie, the producers of Family Historian, have tarnished their reputation rather with the tie up with My Heritage, I couldn't agree more. Thankfully, it is possible to avoid the facility being enabled but it shouldn't really be enabled by default anyway, which is something that caused a bit of a heated debated on the Family Historian Users Group Forum late last year. I suspect there were definite financial reasons for the tie-up, but in my opinion they should have chosen more wisely.
My reason for remarking that the My Heritage link-up shouldn't be a reason for looking at Family Historian was simply to emphasise that the facility can be disabled and doesn't have to be used, in case others reading the postings were completely put off by it.
I agree, though, that FH "straight out of the box" may be more complicated than Chrissy would desire, albeit that it depends to how she uses Reunion. Even FTM needs some changes when first installed, eg, to get screens showing the desired events for each individual. FH is no different and I don't use many of the facilities, I'm probably almost using it the same way I used FTM 2006 for storing common facts and details, plus notes, albeit I like the ability to connect media files to Event Facts. Not all of us maticulously source everything, I sometimes feel that this can be overkill (as I know where the information has come from anywhere and either have a copy of the individual document or a transcript I have made myself from the original document) but its up to everyone how they use the software. I often use notes to record the source of "secondary" information, such as transcripts not made by myself, but again that is my personal view on research. I know others won't agree but it is, as you say, each to their own.
From some of the more recent posts on the FHUG Forum, I don't think even Family Historian is completely 100% GEDCOM compliant but probably more so than others. Even if Reunion isn't, whichever program Chrissy chooses may through up a few errors on import but not necessarily anything which is that serious. I know I have had them when I've exported from FTM and imported into FH. Hence its useful to often trial a program to see how it behaves. Unfortunately FTM doesn't provide this facility.
Last edited:
A 3000 individual file shouldn't be anywhere near 40mb, that suggests the need to run the compact and repair functionality.
I've already run the compact facility, it only reduced it by 5%.
I'm starting to think a lot of the issues with FTM file size are connected to the synchronisation with ancestry itself. I've been playing with some of my old FTM 2012 files and in fact the import and conversion into FTM 2014 has reduced their size, which wasn't that large anyway. The large files I have are all those downloaded from ancestry itself and looks like something to do with how this works. As almost all of my trees are stored offline, its not something I've experienced much with either 2012 or 2014.
That said, on my old laptop which has 2gb of RAM, FTM 2012 used to take 5 minutes to just open the program and then an extra minute or two opening the files as I never set it to open a file by default. With my new laptop which has 8gb of RAM, FTM 2014 takes about a minute to launch, albeit that Family Historian is somewhat quicker. I still stand by my view that FTM as a program is somewhat more "bloated" in operations such as this compared to the versions that existed before ancestry purchased the software.
I'm starting to think a lot of the issues with FTM file size are connected to the synchronisation with ancestry itself. I've been playing with some of my old FTM 2012 files and in fact the import and conversion into FTM 2014 has reduced their size, which wasn't that large anyway. The large files I have are all those downloaded from ancestry itself and looks like something to do with how this works. As almost all of my trees are stored offline, its not something I've experienced much with either 2012 or 2014.That said, on my old laptop which has 2gb of RAM, FTM 2012 used to take 5 minutes to just open the program and then an extra minute or two opening the files as I never set it to open a file by default. With my new laptop which has 8gb of RAM, FTM 2014 takes about a minute to launch, albeit that Family Historian is somewhat quicker. I still stand by my view that FTM as a program is somewhat more "bloated" in operations such as this compared to the versions that existed before ancestry purchased the software.
Interestingly I've just exported to a backup of the same file but minus the media. The backup file totalled 10mb but contains all the same events facts and sources. This tends to suggest that the large file size appears to be caused by the synchronised downloading of media associated with various event facts even though these are not stored in the FTM file. I decided not to try exporting a backup with the media as I know there is about a 1gb or so in the media folder associated with that particular tree. As these are should really only be links to the media items, it does beg the question why a further 28mb (since compacting) of space is needed for the media associations.
Just in case nobody's fallen asleep from boredom
, I've just exported the same file with media to a gedcom. The gedcom file was 3.6mb in size. I then reimported it back into FTM and its now 14mb (although the last save on exit has increased it to 17mb). It reported no errors on import suggesting there isn't anything wrong with the original file. While I can kind of understand that the FTM format structure would generate a larger file, it doesn't explain why the original is 38mb in size even after it has been compacted (and checked for errors). It definitely would seem to be down to the synchronisation process with ancestry.
, I've just exported the same file with media to a gedcom. The gedcom file was 3.6mb in size. I then reimported it back into FTM and its now 14mb (although the last save on exit has increased it to 17mb). It reported no errors on import suggesting there isn't anything wrong with the original file. While I can kind of understand that the FTM format structure would generate a larger file, it doesn't explain why the original is 38mb in size even after it has been compacted (and checked for errors). It definitely would seem to be down to the synchronisation process with ancestry.
chrissy1
LostCousins Star
Alexander - MANY thanks for these clear instructions for transferring to a new machine. I have heard of Dropbox, as my husband uses it, though I wasn't quite sure what it did. I did have a memory stick, but never used it and have since mislaid it, so dropbox sounds like a sensible option, especially with the link you provided. I have heard someone else mention that if someone is recommended to dropbox, more space is allocated.......so I will hang fire temporarily.
The forum has inspired me to try out the demo programs on my old computer now, rather than wait until I buy a new one, as I have no idea what computer specification I would want etc....problem for another day!
If FTM doesn't have an free demo available, I probably won't risk purchasing that as I'd like to try before I buy. Shame as I would have liked to try out the links to Ancestry. However, I will see how I get on with Legacy and Roots Magic which I have now downloaded onto the old machine. I am utterly amazed that I have managed to install my tree onto the Roots Magic program via gedcom without any problems whatsoever as I have been dreading attempting this for years. I haven't seen any warnings yet..... and will now try the same with Legacy and poss Family Historian. No doubt it will take me a while playing with the programs to see which I prefer.
Nicola - just read your post - I am working on Vista, so unless I can trial FH on another computer with Windows7, FH isn't an option. Thanks for making me aware of this.
This may sound silly to experienced computer users, but I would have never had the courage to try out any of these programs on my own without personal recommendation, as I am terrified of unwittingly downloading something dodgy and wrecking my computer, so many thanks.
The forum has inspired me to try out the demo programs on my old computer now, rather than wait until I buy a new one, as I have no idea what computer specification I would want etc....problem for another day!
If FTM doesn't have an free demo available, I probably won't risk purchasing that as I'd like to try before I buy. Shame as I would have liked to try out the links to Ancestry. However, I will see how I get on with Legacy and Roots Magic which I have now downloaded onto the old machine. I am utterly amazed that I have managed to install my tree onto the Roots Magic program via gedcom without any problems whatsoever as I have been dreading attempting this for years. I haven't seen any warnings yet..... and will now try the same with Legacy and poss Family Historian. No doubt it will take me a while playing with the programs to see which I prefer.
Nicola - just read your post - I am working on Vista, so unless I can trial FH on another computer with Windows7, FH isn't an option. Thanks for making me aware of this.
This may sound silly to experienced computer users, but I would have never had the courage to try out any of these programs on my own without personal recommendation, as I am terrified of unwittingly downloading something dodgy and wrecking my computer, so many thanks.
Last edited:
It does sound like it creates a lot of redundant sync data and doesn't need it for actual operation. This makes the data file bloated it doesn't suggest that the program itself is bloated, which usually implies a lot of useless extra functions.
Chrissy if your husband uses Dropbox then the best idea is to get your husband to invite you to dropbox you will then both get extra space.
Margery
LostCousins Member
Chrissy, looks as though we are at about the same technical level
. My daughter has given me Family Tree Maker deluxe for my birthday (BTW it only has 3 month membership to Ancestry) and I downloaded the disc only to find that there is an update. The update wouldn't load (presumably because I had insufficiet data available or because the speed was too slow as I am on satellite broadband) so I tried again at the local library which has free WiFi and I got the message "RT Patch Error Failure opening New File". Back to square one. I must say that my enthusiasm is waning.I don't want to discourage you but just wanted you to know that there are others "out there" who are not computer experts. Alexander and Tim are very generous with their time and knowledge but I do find it very hard to follow the terminology sometimes.
Heather
LostCousins Member
I'll second that Margery.
Bob Spiers
LostCousins Superstar
As we must all speak from experience, all I can say is that from the moment I learned of the Calico Pie/Family Historian (FH) tie in with My Heritage (MH) that was the end of the road for me with FH and any recommendation to use same.
Why? Because years previously quite happy and content to have latched on to Pearl Street Software’s (PSS) flagship Family Tree Legends (FTL), and many years of use, I learned that PSS had sold out to MH; but things would continue as normal!! Only after getting snarled up with MH (recorded copiously in the Forum before) did I learn that MH had bought PSS for its brilliant Gen-circles data and its Smart Matching technology (the latter will be very familiar to anyone who has used MH, indeed it became their main ‘raison detre’ and has been incorporated into their own Family Tree Builder (FTB); also to be avoided.
So how did I become embroiled in MH? Shortly after the acquisition FTL provided an additional ‘Save to’ (in addition to save to file, disc) there was now a new (recommended of course) “Save to the Internet”. The new save meant (in their words) ‘your data will never be lost in the event of a computer failure’. Made sense, so I did. The rest is history.
What you have to realise when advising newcomers either to Genealogy or to seasoned family historians new to the computer is that it is not enough to say ignore this or that link after install because by one route or another they will try to obtain your data by some (perhaps innocuous) means or another.
To be fair the much loved Family Search (FS) site has a partnership with MH as they have incidentally with both Ancestry & FMP but partnership is not the same as ownership. It just means they all have access to each other’s data bases and facilities of one form or another. My own recommendation to play safe would be Roots Magic as that as far as I know, is an independent company; for now at least.
Why? Because years previously quite happy and content to have latched on to Pearl Street Software’s (PSS) flagship Family Tree Legends (FTL), and many years of use, I learned that PSS had sold out to MH; but things would continue as normal!!
Only after getting snarled up with MH (recorded copiously in the Forum before) did I learn that MH had bought PSS for its brilliant Gen-circles data and its Smart Matching technology (the latter will be very familiar to anyone who has used MH, indeed it became their main ‘raison detre’ and has been incorporated into their own Family Tree Builder (FTB); also to be avoided.So how did I become embroiled in MH? Shortly after the acquisition FTL provided an additional ‘Save to’ (in addition to save to file, disc) there was now a new (recommended of course) “Save to the Internet”. The new save meant (in their words) ‘your data will never be lost in the event of a computer failure’. Made sense, so I did. The rest is history.
What you have to realise when advising newcomers either to Genealogy or to seasoned family historians new to the computer is that it is not enough to say ignore this or that link after install because by one route or another they will try to obtain your data by some (perhaps innocuous) means or another.
To be fair the much loved Family Search (FS) site has a partnership with MH as they have incidentally with both Ancestry & FMP but partnership is not the same as ownership. It just means they all have access to each other’s data bases and facilities of one form or another. My own recommendation to play safe would be Roots Magic as that as far as I know, is an independent company; for now at least.
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
I think it's still independent but it has a similar kind of partnership with My Heritage to FH, offering hints & links etc. So it may not be such a "safe" option.
Bob Spiers
LostCousins Superstar
Thanks Pauline (this time I do mean you and not Gillian
) my research did not reveal Roots Magic having any sort of partnership tie in with MH; indeed it was shown as one of the few remaining independents without MH links. I don't doubt for a minute what you say and perhaps its of more recent date than the other 'tie-ins'. Either way it only goes to show the ever increasing influence of MH!
At least that's one thing FTM has going for it Ancestry will never sell out to MH, whereas the independents seem to be pressured into doing so.Thanks Pauline (this time I do mean you and not Gillian