FTM 2005 Opionions please

[BasketWeaver]

I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike? What is
your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam

[Gjest]

BasketWeaver wrote:

I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and
previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike?
What is
your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam

If you have an old car that is woefully out of date and doesn't have
the "tools" new cars do, then putting a new coat of paint on it might
make it look better but it will still perform like an old car. IMO,
that pretty well describes FTM 2005. I use it for communication with
my research group so I have to have it but I would certainly never
recommend it as a serious researcher's tool. There are numerous free
programs out there that do a better job.

Jim

[BasketWeaver]

Jim, thanks so much for your response. From your comments, I gather
you don't think much of earlier versions of FTM either. Is this the case?
What program(s) do you prefer over FTM? I'm been using FTM for
many years and quite like it, but as it is the only genealogy program
I have used, I have no point of reference. I'd appreciate hearing more
from you on the subject. Thanks again, Pam

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

BasketWeaver wrote:
I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and
previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike?
What is
your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam

If you have an old car that is woefully out of date and doesn't have
the "tools" new cars do, then putting a new coat of paint on it might
make it look better but it will still perform like an old car. IMO,
that pretty well describes FTM 2005. I use it for communication with
my research group so I have to have it but I would certainly never
recommend it as a serious researcher's tool. There are numerous free
programs out there that do a better job.

Jim

[f/f george]

PAF is one!

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 05:39:20 GMT, "BasketWeaver" <[email protected]>
wrote:

Jim, thanks so much for your response. From your comments, I gather
you don't think much of earlier versions of FTM either. Is this the case?
What program(s) do you prefer over FTM? I'm been using FTM for
many years and quite like it, but as it is the only genealogy program
I have used, I have no point of reference. I'd appreciate hearing more
from you on the subject. Thanks again, Pam

[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

BasketWeaver wrote:
I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and
previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike?
What is
your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam

If you have an old car that is woefully out of date and doesn't have
the "tools" new cars do, then putting a new coat of paint on it might
make it look better but it will still perform like an old car. IMO,
that pretty well describes FTM 2005. I use it for communication with
my research group so I have to have it but I would certainly never
recommend it as a serious researcher's tool. There are numerous free
programs out there that do a better job.

Jim

[BasketWeaver]

Thanks, George.

"f/f george" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

PAF is one!

[Sharon]

I started off with probably the first version of FTM and still have it on
one of the computers but changed to PAF as I was sent a file using it and
found it very good except for the "box printout" so I eventually got FTM2005
and I think it is great.

Sharon

"BasketWeaver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike? What
is your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam

[BasketWeaver]

Thanks, Sharon. I appreciate your opinion. Pam

"Sharon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1105790072.534435@teuthos...

I started off with probably the first version of FTM and still have it on
one of the computers but changed to PAF as I was sent a file using it and
found it very good except for the "box printout" so I eventually got
FTM2005 and I think it is great.

Sharon

"BasketWeaver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I have still not decided if I want to upgrade to FTM 2005.

I would love to hear from others who have upgraded.
What are the most significant differences between FTM 2005 and previous
edition(s)?
What feature(s) do you like most? What feature(s) do you dislike? What
is your
general feeling about the new version?

Thanks for sharing your experiences.
Pam