Thanks, Maggie, for expressing more precisely my feelings about UFT and other genealogy programs. I think it is unreasonable to expect any genealgy program to pick up the data from another program and use it the way you want. The only smooth migration I've seen is between Roots 4 and UFT - you can even go back from UFT to Roots 4, without changing the database (although some types of data may not be usable in Roots 4). The next closest transfer from UFT is done by TMG, which can read UFT databases, but it does not have the depth of detail (e.g. all the different roles) of UFT. Other programs which don't have the concept of events that are not closely tied to just one or two individuals would have even more difficulty. Given the freedom the user of UFT has to create new events, new roles, new source templates, etc., with user-defined GEDCOM tags, and the job of moving everything is even more difficult. And UFT lets you specify source data on just about everything, and in several different ways. The problem of defining the "best" way to move UFT data to another program is by itself complex, and I would not expect it to be perfect. To do that for different programs, and for different generations of these programs, and I think it is impossible to do everything right. And then different people will define the "best" way to do the transfer in different ways... Personally, I would much prefer genealogy.com to spend their time fixing the significant bugs in the current release, rather than trying to solve all the transfer issues.