TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-02 > 1044807510


From: "Dennis Norton (PI)" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] tmg gold 5.04 reports
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:18:30 -0500
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030209074520.0402f250@localhost>


I too have not gotten into this discussion, mostly because I believe that
lists like this are for helping each other out, helping each other through
the development period and not whipping up dissension among the users.

I am new to the list and relatively new to TMG. I came over from UFT to
version 4. I moved right to 5 when it was available. I was completely
aware when I moved to 5 that it was not a complete product. The notices and
disclaimers were very clear. I had no misgivings about the "missing
reports" and was (and still am) willing to wait until they are completed. I
would actually prefer to have the "power users" get a product before it was
completed because the "power users" are the people who SHOULD be helping put
the final touches on the program. If that takes a little longer, so be it.
When the program is finally completed, it will be much closer to what those
"power users" want than what it would have been had it been kept under wraps
and released only when the developer was satisfied that it was a completed
program.

I have my complaints about it, but what software program do any of you have
that you don't have complaints about? There were genealogy programs I've
used in the past that I had far less complaints about, but they also did far
less. I'm very familiar with software development (I'm NOT a software
developer) and have participated in a number of beta tests over the years
for non-genealogy programs, and have always preferred to be using the latest
and greatest, even though they might not be completely finished. I think
that's the nature of genealogists also. I've compared a lot of Genealogy
programs in the past (having started long long ago with the very first
version of PAF for DOS) and keep moving onward and upward to the latest
developments. So far I have found nothing as complete as this program and
I'm now ready to quit migrating from program to program. I'm ready to
finally stick with one good program which is why I'm not moving away from
TMG. I'm sure there are many who prefer other genealogy programs for one
reason or another, but there are also many who are currently using other
programs who are ready to switch to TMG. Read some of the other user
forums and you'll see the same gripes about their programs (read this
sentence again!).

As my own disclaimer, I have never had any communication with Bob Velke (who
I assume owns the company), or anyone remotely related with Wholly Genes. I
have no reason to support or not support this company. I too wish the
program was completed and I too have things I would like to see that are not
here. I too get frustrated with this program, in large part because it IS
so all inclusive which makes it very complicated and there is SO MUCH STUFF
in the program that I don't know about yet. Where I part company with some
people is that I am willing to continue learning the program, getting help
from this list, and happily working on my genealogy projects with what I
think is probably the best genealogy program, or at least equal to a few
others that would probably be considered the best group of genealogy
programs while Wholly Genes continues to work on their software development.
I doubt that pushing them does any good, and it just mucks up this list.

And I went to take a look at the Genbox program. It looks pretty good. And
there are some reports I like, and would suggest for additions to TMG
(Convergent Report, Timeline Report, Everyone Report, Relatives Report)
(although as new as I am to TMG, I may find that some of these reports are
already (or planned to be) part of TMG).

But I do not intend to switch programs again for any number of reasons.
"The Grass Is Always Greener On The Other Side of the Road".

I wish TMG was complete, I wish they would get me the book etc etc. But I'm
happy with what I have right now. I can wait a few more months. I can wait
another year if that's what it takes. And I don't mind being the "Beta
Tester" if at the same time that is allowing this group of "power users" to
help finish the program and drive the changes/additions to the development
of the software. I consider that a positive rather than a negative.

If you don't like the program or don't want to wait, or don't want to "help"
with testing and driving the development of this product, I'm sure the
others on this list, (especially those who use the list a lot) would not be
offended if you went to another program. If you choose to stick with TMG,
send your gripes directly to TMG and let the users of this list work on
their genealogy.

Hopefully someday I can start "contributing" to this list rather than just
asking the questions.

Thanks.






----- Original Message -----
From: "Walt Newcomb" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [TMG] tmg gold 5.04 reports


> At00:03Sunday 2/9/2003 -0500, Bill Johnson said, in whole or in part, as
> follows:
> ----------<< Begin Quote >>----------
> >I have not gotten into this discussion before, but I have to say
something.
> >Some people have complained loudly about a number of writers to this list
> >who keep on 'defending' Bob Velke and Wholy Genes in this matter of the
> >delay in finishing up v.5 of TMG.
>
> My polite and fervent suggestion to these folks is that they do 3 things.
> First, find an alternative program that has all the functionality that
they
> need.
> Second, request a refund from WG.
> Third, move on with genealogy and life.
>
> >I want those reports just as much as
> >anyone. I particularly miss the List of People and List of events. I also
> >feel that the delay is inordinately long. I also know that while some may
> >feel that there is no good reason for it, there are very good reasons. I
> >though that I would hold off using v.5 as my main program until those
> >reports were in place. I experimented with it, and found that after
getting
> >used to it, it was so darn good in so many ways that I have stopped using
> >v.4
>
> The same feeling obtains here, in all respects.
>
> >The 'loyalty' that many users show is due to the fact that Bob V. has
always
> >shown a great deal of respect for his customers: witness the remarkable
> >technical support that he and his crew have given to the users of the
> >program -- note that this is 'users' rather than just 'customers'.
Another
> >well-respected genealogy program went down the tubes, as far as any
further
> >support is concerned, because the sellers of the program thought it was
too
> >big a job to do what Bob and WG are doing. The development of v.5 was set
> >back quite a bit by the WG effort to accommodate the users of that now
> >defunct program by adding features that were not previously present in
TMG,
> >and we have all benefitted from that effort.
>
> The WG support is unmatched in my experience. The enhancement of TMG to
> accommodate needs and wants of refugees from another program shows that no
> good deed will go unpunished...
>
> >Perhaps v.5 should not have been released when it was. It was in response
to
> >the clamor of TMG users to have that program in their hands, even though
it
> >was not finished. So maybe that was a mistake. It can't be withdrawn now.
> >But I am sure that there is no one who is more eager to get the finished
> >program into the hands of TMG users than Bob Velke. To think otherwise is
> >ludicrous.
>
> I'm sure this is exactly correct. We should remind ourselves to careful
> what we wish for. We may get it! If I were the WG enterprise, I would
> *NEVER* again succumb to customer clamor to release a new version before I
> was certain it was "ready". Some are doing exactly the same thing that
> originally lead BV to release TMG5. I doubt he'll [hope he won't] tumble
to
> that again.
>
> >If you want to know about companies that have no respect for their
customers
> >you can look at a very popular program, for which it is virtually
impossible
> >to contact anyone about problems, and which periodically comes out with
> >minor changes on a regular basis for a charge of only 20 or 30 dollars a
> >pop.
> >
> >Bill J.
>
> Bingo - exactly on target!
>
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Ron Bernier"
> >
> > > Parks,
> > >
> > > I think Bob Velke has made it very clear that he has absolutely no
respect
> > > for his customers. He wants people to buy his product, but then he
> > believes
> > > you, or I, or no one for that matter has any business whatsoever
> > questioning
> > > when or if TMG 5 will ever be completed.
> > >
> >
> >______________________________
> ----------<< End Quote >>----------
>
> Walt Newcomb - Idaho Falls, Idaho - - PGP
> Fingerprint: D515 ACD8 46B4 A657 48A9 9AF0 E269 EF51 BD08 D007
>
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________
>
>
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> Visit the TMG Tips web site <http://www.tmgtips.com>; for items of interest
to TMG users.
>
>



This thread: