TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-09 > 0968214476

From: "Ray & Mary Green" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Point of Reference
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:27:56 -0700
References: <> <>

And my two cents!

> Also agree with Don's philosophic concerns and feelings here. Some of the
> folks call themselves "UFT refugees", but I've begun to feel like a "TMG
> refugee", grappling with features from another program that I chose to
> behind when I switched to TMG. Although I think there are some instances
> which things like the roles may enhance TMG, I'm moving with caution on
> adapting changes into my dataset under an "If it ain't broke, don't fix
> and keep it simple philosophy. Many of the "extensions" or "enhancements"
> have been made, in my opinion, to accomodate our new group of users, and
> it possible for them to import their datasets. I'm not sure yet if they
> significantly to an established TMG dataset.

Boy, do I NOT like the tone of these messages. ""As long as I'm having
trouble please help me but, when others have trouble, look the other way.""
We have the TMG product that we do have because of the dedication, efforts
and brilliance of Bob Velke - whom we often choose to praise. Now, cause we
aren't the center of attention for the moment, we suggest that he went off
the deep end and destroyed the product he spent years developing just to
make a few sales. If you think through the features which have been added
in 4.0a, they are almost all a form of answer to features which have been
requested on this list long before UFT thought of demising (and, I feel
quite confident, of the form in which he had intended to implement them in
some future version). Like all of Velke's work, these appear to be pretty
much dormant until activated - thus, if you don't want them don't use them.
And, I might add, these features are coming from the program which was rated
#2. So when you merge #1 and #2 using the best of both you should really
have the best. And, while 4.0a was clearly a crash effort on Bob's part,
think of the advantage to version 5 of having these in use for a while and
seeing how they might be polished to make them even better.

Personally, I think the UFT discussions have brought focus to the changes of
4.0a and what they accomplish (and why) and how they can/should be used.
While it may be a cram course it sure shortens the learning curve. And, in
all fairness, most of the UFT messages do contain UFT in the subject (maybe
not the first three letters). And, if one is really afraid of 4.0a then
just keep using 4.0 until 5.0 comes along (and suffer the learning curve of
both together) or else just keep on using 4.0 for ever. Change and
improvement are inevitable and I think we can depend on Bob to do what is
right for the serious genealogy community - and not sell us out to a toy

And one other thing which truly impresses me is the number of UFTers who
have made a committed effort to learn TMG and then to provide most of the
help on this list to the UFT people (and to the rest of us).

To the UFTers, I say "keep the questions coming and they will be answered
and we'll all be better off for it". I don't believe the "sour grapes"
being expressed speak for very many of us. And, no, I have never used UFT -
not even once.

Sincerely, Ray Green

This thread: