INKOSCIU-L Archives

From: <>
Subject: [INKOSCIU-L] Re: INKOSCIU-D Digest V98 #138
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 13:20:52 EDT

Dear Kosciusko Digest,

A "review" of Broderbund's genealogy software program, Family Tree Maker,
appeared in the San Jose, CA, Mercury News on 21 June. The author of the
article stated, "my favorite overall remains Family Tree Maker, mainly for its
extensive research materials". (italics mine) I was so annoyed with what I
considered to be more free advertising for a product whose marketing success
appears to be heavily based on other people's work that I fired off a letter
to him expressing my views on the subject. To paraphrase, I made the
following points:
1.) Most of the "research material" Broderbund offers is a matter of public
record; Social Security indexes, census records, "published family histories"
(his words), and all the rest of these so-called "exclusive" offerings can be
found, even by novice reseachers, in many different archives, libraries, LDS
Family History Centers, local/regional genealogical/historical societies, etc.
Broderbund is not the exclusive source/provider of these records.
2.) Genealogical data sent in to Broderbund - to be packaged on CD and sold -
apparently has no requirement for documentation of sources; as I understand
it, whatever is sent in becomes part of the next software "edition" or
supplemental CD.
(Why someone would apparently voluntarily send in his/her often hard-won
research, apparently without much, if any, compensation, to benefit a
company's bottom line is incomprehensible to me.)
3.) Most, at least the major family history software programs, offer the same
features for organization of data that FTM does, and some do it better. Any
family history software program is primarily an organizational tool; research
is up to the researcher. In my opinion, Broderbund's phenomenal success is
based on two factors: its wide availability - discount office supply houses,
bookstores, computer stores, etc. - and its representation of itself as a
source of "original" and other research material rather than an
organizational tool. Broderbund has done its homework, and uses very "savvy"
marketing techniques; "millions of names" (and all the other claims) can be
very seductive, especially to a novice researcher or one who is looking for a
quick and painless way to instant success. This ploy may sell product and
fatten the bottom line, but it does not encourage sound research and
documentation.

The author of the article e-mailed a response to my letter; he said that he
agreed that a software program was primarily an organizational tool, but he
still thought that easy access to "extensive research materials" were FTM's
main value. I guess some folks just don't get it, and that, in my opinion, is
just what Broderbund (and others) are counting on.

Thank you.

Joan C. Taylor

This thread:

• [INKOSCIU-L] Re: INKOSCIU-D Digest V98 #138 by <>

  • [INKOSCIU-L] Re: INKOSCIU-D Digest V98 #138 by <>