TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1013625129

From: Lee Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Death to GEDCOM
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 13:32:09 -0500
References: <><><><001f01c1b426$1c4fbff0$9c6c323f@custom><>
In-Reply-To: <006001c1b4b6$9ead4e50$6064323f@custom>

Cheri Casper wrote:
>The fact that no other software companies have picked up on the GenBridge
>technology is indicative of the fact that they feel there already exists
>adequate means to transfer data and/or the cost involved to use GenBridge is
>prohibitive for them. We can argue all we want that their position is
>incorrect and *ours* is best, but the fact remains that they if they haven't
>adopted GenBridge by now, they are probably unlikely to in the future.

Probably the biggest argument for these vendors is that they would need to
publish their file structures and layouts as Wholly Genes has done. Many
vendors seem to be afraid to publish their file structure because they are
afraid that they would lose some of their customer base. Why they feel
this way, I do not understand. Personally, I would feel that there is just
as many that would move to another program as would move to their
program. If anything, I would venture that more users would buy multiple
programs than do presently.

No one genealogy program does everything. Each has one or more features
that others do not. Also some users would prefer certain reports from one
program over similar reports of another program. This is noted here often
when someone wants a slightly different format for some report more like it
was in their prior program. So if GenBridge were implemented in other
programs, we users would have the best of all worlds without losing data.

Lee Hoffman/KY
TMG Tips: <>;
My website: <>;
A user of the best genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG)

This thread: