More like… RootsMagic doesn’t care to indulge users of competitor’s products coming in here to bash RM (FH and other competitors don’t want such folks either ~ it’s common sense). You stated that You “never looked back”, after switching, but You actually visit here frequently.
1 Like
Exactly my point - WHY do I need to add a plugin to do a task the original program was supposed to do out of the box? The function I need in RM7 I can get in RM9. Once I clean up the source citations and go back to RM7, the source citations added in RM7 will conform to the others. I like RM7 - I haven’t found any other program I want to use. It’s just too bad that RM didn’t realize that they had a great product in RM7 and instead, decided to abandon it for a less than satisfactory “upgrade.”
That is an innocent observation in a vacuum. Had there not been continuing change in their competition and newly-introduced availability of added online genealogy services, accompanied by ongoing forum requests to support another platform or to add new features or make it less this and more that… you’d be golden still… maybe.
1 Like
“That is an innocent observation in a vacuum.”
I disagree. If a company is going to update their product to incorporate all those things you stated, they should do it right. RM9 is an inferior product to RM7. Users should not have to add “work-arounds” to a program to get it to do what it was supposed to do out-of-the-box. Nor should users have to use plug-ins to get a desired result while they wait for an updated version that addresses the issues voiced in this forum - maybe.
Yes,
I do visit often to check in and see if the situation has improved, which it hasn’t. A lot of my comments are about genealogical research and not RM specifically.
You are making some assumptions that are not quite correct. Firstly, much of the core functionality that most people would want, it is there. But as you have seen, often people come up with brilliant ideas that a developer may never have thought was needed. Someone with a little skill can create a plugin to cover this. There was a discussion about what such a plugin system for RM might look like not that long ago. Unfortunately it would require RM developers to expose certain bits of the program for a plugin developer to hook on to. It is not very likely that RM will ever do such a thing so plugins are not likely.
To some extent this lack of an API is being worked around by some people by accessing and manipulating the RM database directly. That also has been brought up and is discussed frequently. @TomH and @thejerrybryan have both been known to write SQL scripts and share the with others that have the skills to use them.
Regrettably no program is ever going to have everything that everyone could possibly want, but having the ability to get most of that functioning and being able to get the rest by other means is still a very good thing.
They also apparently have no tolerance for products that are not a competitor such as their recent stealth deletions of anything having to do with Simple Citations. THese are source templates, not exactly competing products and those templates are available and can be used in RM7-9 and possibly any earlier versions that supported templates.
1 Like
We could go on beating this dead horse all day long. Nobody gets everything they want, granted. But when I pay for a product, I expect that product to do what it is supposed to do. Given the work-arounds (insert veiled insult here) shared with others “who have the skills to use them,” obviously RM9 does not function the way it is supposed to. Good on @TomH and @thejerrybryan for working free for RM to make their software function as it should function. I just want to do research and put it in a program for my family and RM7 works for me. It will probably be the last program I use.
Then you seriously need to spend more time examining the product that you purchase before you purchase it. Or you need to get a clue as to what goes into writing software. No developer on any program in the history of computers has ever included everything that everyone wants and as such people are going to whine that it didn’t include Feature X or Feature Y right out of the box. Many times it wasn’t meant to include said feature and many of those workaround features are things only wanted by a handful of people and development is NEVER going to waste time on them. Offering an interface for people to write a plugin is generally a positive in this case.
If RM7 offers everything you need, then you have no horse in this race, so why keep flogging the dead one? Just use 7 and be happy you found all that you need.
I never said the program should contain every little hope and dream that a user wants right out of the box. I said that a program should function the way the product developers advertise it will function without having to manipulate its functionality using scripts. BTW - back in the old days, I wrote code in COBOL, RPG, and FORTRAN to program main frame computers, IBM and Burroughs. We used punch cards to enter code and printouts to debug the programs before we ran the programs through the main frame. It wasn’t unusual to have a stack of 1,000 punch cards for a program. I worked in the IT department of a local college and thereafter in the IT department of several law firms. And if I have something to say, I will say it.
My earlier reference to plugins was in respect of RM’s competitor program which encourages the use of user plugins to get a desired result (i.e. the program being plugged by Rwcrooks)
You are right. I have been checking in. And for the last several weeks I haven’t, and I have recovered a ton of time that I have been able to put to productive genealogical uses.
I like to watch a slow-motion train wreck as much as the next guy (or girl) but this one looks like a never-ending one.
As someone who visits here more frequently than most, I’d say, minus the feature requests and wannabe programmers’ diatribes, the volume of distinct actual problems that require changes by the program authors is pretty miniscule.
2 Likes
It would be useful if contributors could stay on track on subject … RM7 Import Lists … rather than digress. The “crap UI” and “didn’t get what I paid for” complaints just create noise, notwithstanding validity in those sentiments that have been expressed many times already. I think those that continue to try and add value and assistance to others struggling with RM version “whatever” are very generous with their time and efforts. Everyone is certainly entitled to express an opinion, I just think more respect for a “time and a place” would benefit all.
3 Likes
a “Whiny” page is needed LOL (I’m never changing from v7, 9 doesn’t have xyz like some other program, why can’t they fix something cause I’m the only one who will use it, etc)
4 Likes