TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1013827825


From: Richard Brogger <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Longevity
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 20:50:25 -0600
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020215005117.00a0e7f0@pop.sprynet.com><5.1.0.14.0.20020215170130.00a83ec0@mail.fscv.net><5.1.0.14.0.20020215195643.0331d210@mail.fscv.net>


Hi Walt,

Darrell has covered the FoxPro portion. I will add that the TMG data base
structure was available for download from www.whollygenes.com but may have been
removed with all the revamping that is occurring.

If you have not spent time at the Whollygenes site, you really should. There is
a demo made with TMG 3.? that will give you an idea of what your Version 4.0d
will be like. There is a lot of information about Family Tree SuperTools and you
can get an idea from that what TMG5 will be like. There are also links to tables
comparing some common genealogy software's features.

Some might consider me a TMG fan. They couldn't be less right. There are things
about TMG I really don't like but I am loyal to TMG because I don't know of any
better genealogy program. If you receive your copy of TMG tomorrow, it will be
weeks before you know if it is right for you. Many people buy TMG but are not
willing to learn TMG and never really become TMG users. Some find TMG very
intuitive, some don't. Everyone finds TMG to be complex. If it were not complex,
it would not be as good as it is.

There are features in TMG about which I know little or nothing. After two years
I am still learning but I learn what I need as I need it. Sometimes I find that
I can not do what I want to do but that is the exception. Most often there is a
way, or several, but you may have to use the TMG-L knowledge base to get the
answer(s).

Richard Brogger

Walt Flory wrote:
>
> Richard
>
> This is very reassuring.
>
> Please elaborate a little on what you were saying about the data base
> language, structure, et cetera. What language is TMG written in? Is the
> structure of the data base public? Anything you can tell me along that line
> will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Walt Flory

This thread: