<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Family Tree Maker: More about 2011</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=family-tree-maker-more-about-2011</link>
	<description>The official blog of Ancestry.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 03:10:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Burton</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50163</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Burton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50163</guid>
		<description>I can understand the web merge taking longer for document download and improvement, however it takes much longer for a merge with out a document download, the merge for Social Security and Family Tree take very long as well.  

Is something else happing with the web merge?

Is FTM 2011 passing information on my tree back to your server?


Seems like a programer could come up with a way to finish the web merge as I continued to work on another record.  

My productivity is much lower in 2011 than in previous versions of FTM.  

Is it the desire of your company to send long time users of FTM to programs that are more stable?

Please improve the speed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can understand the web merge taking longer for document download and improvement, however it takes much longer for a merge with out a document download, the merge for Social Security and Family Tree take very long as well.  </p>
<p>Is something else happing with the web merge?</p>
<p>Is FTM 2011 passing information on my tree back to your server?</p>
<p>Seems like a programer could come up with a way to finish the web merge as I continued to work on another record.  </p>
<p>My productivity is much lower in 2011 than in previous versions of FTM.  </p>
<p>Is it the desire of your company to send long time users of FTM to programs that are more stable?</p>
<p>Please improve the speed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Hatchett</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50161</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Hatchett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 04:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50161</guid>
		<description>Charles Re: #36

You don&#039;t have to do any of those things- it just makes it easier to find, record, and manipulate whatever genealogical you acquire.

There are still people who do it the old fashion way; pen, paper, and writing lots of letters and/or taking lots of research trips.

It really all depends on why you do genealogy and what you want to get out of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Charles Re: #36</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t have to do any of those things- it just makes it easier to find, record, and manipulate whatever genealogical you acquire.</p>
<p>There are still people who do it the old fashion way; pen, paper, and writing lots of letters and/or taking lots of research trips.</p>
<p>It really all depends on why you do genealogy and what you want to get out of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Swanson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50152</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Swanson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50152</guid>
		<description>Up front I apologize for my naiveté.

I, obviously, am new to genealogy, but so far I truly enjoy learning about the field and have already encountered two surprises in my initial research.

I use Reunion 9.0c for the Mac (I have an iMac and a MacBook).

But, my comment/question is, I think much more basic.

My comment/question:

Why, it appears to me, do I have to use Reunion, Ancestry, Family Tree Maker, etc., to do my research?  Why do I have to upload/download &quot;files&quot; to/from Reunion and Ancestry?

Why do I need to buy more and more software to supposedly enhance my genealogical experience?

Just askin&#039;

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Up front I apologize for my naiveté.</p>
<p>I, obviously, am new to genealogy, but so far I truly enjoy learning about the field and have already encountered two surprises in my initial research.</p>
<p>I use Reunion 9.0c for the Mac (I have an iMac and a MacBook).</p>
<p>But, my comment/question is, I think much more basic.</p>
<p>My comment/question:</p>
<p>Why, it appears to me, do I have to use Reunion, Ancestry, Family Tree Maker, etc., to do my research?  Why do I have to upload/download &#8220;files&#8221; to/from Reunion and Ancestry?</p>
<p>Why do I need to buy more and more software to supposedly enhance my genealogical experience?</p>
<p>Just askin&#8217;</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cneubie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50139</link>
		<dc:creator>cneubie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:22:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50139</guid>
		<description>I just upgraded to 2011.  I have been using it for 2 days and already I do not like it.  

It is riddled with errors.   

It is S-L-O-W.  

There is no way to tell is a record merge is in progress: no hour glass, no swirl, nothing.  Just when you think your &quot;click&quot; didn&#039;t &quot;take&quot;, and you start clicking again, there&#039;s a little screen flick and after a few additional seconds, you get the Merge OK message.  This is not acceptable.

If, on the person page, you open any fact drop-down and select a source that has an online link - click &quot;view source online&quot; it just searches and searches and searches..........  It never finds the source you have attached to your fact.  Eventually - perhaps 15 minutes later (maybe longer), you get an offer to &quot;kill&quot; pages.  That&#039;s the best you can do?

You used to be able to have a &quot;person note&quot; revealed (not open for edit) and &quot;copy&quot; text previously entered there for pasting elsewhere.  Now, 2011 lets you think you can do it, but it&#039;s a ploy.  Once you have it highlighted, the highlight turns off and you can&#039;t copy (you just can&#039;t be fast enough before the highlight turns off).

What have you folks done to this software?

I&#039;ve checked already.  There are no upgrades available....which means no fixes to take care of my problems (this is just a start).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just upgraded to 2011.  I have been using it for 2 days and already I do not like it.  </p>
<p>It is riddled with errors.   </p>
<p>It is S-L-O-W.  </p>
<p>There is no way to tell is a record merge is in progress: no hour glass, no swirl, nothing.  Just when you think your &#8220;click&#8221; didn&#8217;t &#8220;take&#8221;, and you start clicking again, there&#8217;s a little screen flick and after a few additional seconds, you get the Merge OK message.  This is not acceptable.</p>
<p>If, on the person page, you open any fact drop-down and select a source that has an online link &#8211; click &#8220;view source online&#8221; it just searches and searches and searches&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.  It never finds the source you have attached to your fact.  Eventually &#8211; perhaps 15 minutes later (maybe longer), you get an offer to &#8220;kill&#8221; pages.  That&#8217;s the best you can do?</p>
<p>You used to be able to have a &#8220;person note&#8221; revealed (not open for edit) and &#8220;copy&#8221; text previously entered there for pasting elsewhere.  Now, 2011 lets you think you can do it, but it&#8217;s a ploy.  Once you have it highlighted, the highlight turns off and you can&#8217;t copy (you just can&#8217;t be fast enough before the highlight turns off).</p>
<p>What have you folks done to this software?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve checked already.  There are no upgrades available&#8230;.which means no fixes to take care of my problems (this is just a start).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Williams</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50125</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 00:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50125</guid>
		<description>Family Tree Maker 2011 IS SLOW VERY SLOW.
I just download 1900 Census with 3 names. It took 5 minutes and 10 seconds.
I just reload family Tree Maker 2010 it took 15 seconds to merge the info.
I will not use FTM 2011 until you allow me to TURN OFF YOUR IMAGE ENHANCEMENT.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Family Tree Maker 2011 IS SLOW VERY SLOW.<br />
I just download 1900 Census with 3 names. It took 5 minutes and 10 seconds.<br />
I just reload family Tree Maker 2010 it took 15 seconds to merge the info.<br />
I will not use FTM 2011 until you allow me to TURN OFF YOUR IMAGE ENHANCEMENT.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Bash</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50124</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Bash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 20:16:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50124</guid>
		<description>I really like the improved genealogy reports, especially the option of alternate number sequences.  But (didn&#039;t you just know that was coming), when I Share and export to RTF, the contents jump back and forth between being formatted as a text document, and using tables to force the alignment desired.  This is very irritating.  It seems to happen in NG sequence whenever it needs to insert the &quot;+&quot; sign in front of the number to indicate that this person appears later.  I believe if you used a decimal tab (instead of a left tab mark) to place the numbers, this problem disappears.  Can that be fixed as &quot;a bug&quot; instead of waiting for 2012?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really like the improved genealogy reports, especially the option of alternate number sequences.  But (didn&#8217;t you just know that was coming), when I Share and export to RTF, the contents jump back and forth between being formatted as a text document, and using tables to force the alignment desired.  This is very irritating.  It seems to happen in NG sequence whenever it needs to insert the &#8220;+&#8221; sign in front of the number to indicate that this person appears later.  I believe if you used a decimal tab (instead of a left tab mark) to place the numbers, this problem disappears.  Can that be fixed as &#8220;a bug&#8221; instead of waiting for 2012?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50113</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50113</guid>
		<description>I too am sorry I have wasted my money yet again in the vain hope that FTM had improved.
I have bought the previous 2 issues and should have known better, still glitchy, and even slower.
Looks like I will have to bite he bullet and try Roots Magic,at least you get to try the cut down version for FREE!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too am sorry I have wasted my money yet again in the vain hope that FTM had improved.<br />
I have bought the previous 2 issues and should have known better, still glitchy, and even slower.<br />
Looks like I will have to bite he bullet and try Roots Magic,at least you get to try the cut down version for FREE!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shasta</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50104</link>
		<dc:creator>Shasta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50104</guid>
		<description>I am using a very old version of FTM.  I really want to be able to have photos on descendant reports.  It is something I wanted ever since I bought my first software program decades ago.  If you had that, I would be willing to buy the new software.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am using a very old version of FTM.  I really want to be able to have photos on descendant reports.  It is something I wanted ever since I bought my first software program decades ago.  If you had that, I would be willing to buy the new software.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Wilmoth</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50083</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Wilmoth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Sep 2010 11:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50083</guid>
		<description>Why do you add more features to a program that only makes it slower????  Maybe you should try eliminating features and make it faster?

2010 was slow.  2011 is dismal.  I finished reading the analog Sunday newspaper while FTW 2011 merged a 6 member family tree, two death certificates and three census records.

It also does not help that you cannot tell when FTW 2011 is doing anything.  The only way I can tell is when it get the &quot;Not Responding&quot; message or the screen goes pale.

PLEASE address these issues without telling me to buy more memory, a faster processor or the next version. I did all that two years ago.  Still waiting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do you add more features to a program that only makes it slower????  Maybe you should try eliminating features and make it faster?</p>
<p>2010 was slow.  2011 is dismal.  I finished reading the analog Sunday newspaper while FTW 2011 merged a 6 member family tree, two death certificates and three census records.</p>
<p>It also does not help that you cannot tell when FTW 2011 is doing anything.  The only way I can tell is when it get the &#8220;Not Responding&#8221; message or the screen goes pale.</p>
<p>PLEASE address these issues without telling me to buy more memory, a faster processor or the next version. I did all that two years ago.  Still waiting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Knight</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2010/09/14/family-tree-maker-more-about-2011/#comment-50061</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Knight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/?p=4588#comment-50061</guid>
		<description>Tana

Thank you for the fast field information. Shame I no longer use FTM.

Why will no one say something about the speed issue. I find I can enter information at least 5 times faster in RootsMagic and it doesn&#039;t crash every session.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tana</p>
<p>Thank you for the fast field information. Shame I no longer use FTM.</p>
<p>Why will no one say something about the speed issue. I find I can enter information at least 5 times faster in RootsMagic and it doesn&#8217;t crash every session.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
