TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2004-10 > 1096774190


From: Don Park <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Prospective user wondering about conversion from othersoftware
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 21:30:00 -0600
References: <000001c4a8f6$e7ffaad0$1602a8c0@Lor>


Hi Laurie,

I am still in the process of validating and correcting for data integrity
my RootsIII import into TMG because none of these are ever seamless. I
would suggest you go ahead as I think TMG will be great once I get through
this effort. I would however suggest you do the conversion directly from
Roots III though if UFT is not a satisfactory database. Tech support at TMG
was VERY supportive and helpful to me in making the switch. Go For It and
best of luck.

One of these days I'll get back to research instead of just data entry!!
:-)


Don in Calgary
----- Original Message -----
From: "Laurie Taylor" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 9:13 PM
Subject: [TMG] Prospective user wondering about conversion from other
software


> Hi,
>
> I am considering The Master Genealogist to replace Ultimate Family Tree.
> I started out with Roots II and progressed through III, Virtual and UFT,
> along with so many other people. After struggling intermittently with
> UFT, I'm ready to get seriously back to building our family tree but
> cannot face the frustration of UFT.
>
> What I'm wondering is would I be better off using TMG to open up my old
> UFT files, which are the result of a gedcom conversion due to software
> and DOS issues a couple years back? Alternatively, should I pull out my
> Roots III files, which were quite footnoted and comprehensive but did
> not make it intact to UFT and figure out how to get them into order to
> use with TMG?
>
> Does this make any sense at all? I'm not sure how to explain it so if
> it needs clarification I'll sure understand.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Laurie Taylor
> Arizona
>
>
>
> "Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we are here we might
> as well dance." (author unknown)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teresa Ghee Elliott [mailto:]
> Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:04 AM
> To:
> Subject: [TMG] Census Name Styles and How they can be helpful
>
>
> One thing I do differently than Betty is each of my census names has a
> different name style. In the Picklist and PE, they show as
>
> John Jones (age 43) on the 1860 census
>
> John Jones (age 52) on the 1870 census
>
> John Jones (age 2) on the 1860 census
>
> John Jones (age 11) on the 1870 census
>
>
>
> As you can see, that easily helps me to pick out the right John Jones.
> While that may not seem like a big deal in my example, imagine that you
> have 14 Sarah Unknowns. One of them is the Sarah Jones you are looking
> for. So if you need to find the right Sarah Unknown, having her listed
> as Sarah Jones, (age 42) on the 1860 census, is more helpful than 14
> Sarah Unknowns.
>
>
>
> It also is helpful for analysis. Say I find a John Jones in 1920. He is
> 59. He is probably NOT my younger John Jones, since he would be about
> 62. Having the census names in the PV would make that more obvious. I
> am a little dense at noticing things like that, so the more things I
> have to remind me the better. <G>
>
>
>
> Teresa Ghee Elliott
>
> I'm getting organized this year. Join me in August.
>
> For Rutherford County TN Cemeteries
> <http://www.Rutherfordcemeteries.home-page.org>;
> www.Rutherfordcemeteries.home-page.org
>
> For TMG sentences
>
> <http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rutherfordcemetery/TMG.html>;
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> TMG v5.15 has been released. Check the Wholly Genes web Store
> <HTTP://store.whollygenes.com>; for more information.
>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 9/24/2004
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 9/24/2004
>
>
>
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> Send all messages and replies to <>.
>


This thread: