Catherine, I'm sorry you feel that UFT is too complex for your needs, because I think that the extra detail you can add to your UFT database will in fact help you in your research, if you make a point of trying to use it. I also think that you can use UFT in a simpler way that does not take up much more time (or even as much time) as entering the same data in other programs. It's a question of knowing just what information is important to you and then finding the efficient way of entering it. However, I admit I have only really tried to work with a few other programs (including FTM 6.0), and I was having to deal with my frustration of not having a "proper" place to put the data I wanted in the database. But when entering a new family to UFT with minimal BMDB data, I could not see where I could save many keystrokes or mouse clicks. Regularly transferring data to another format, for use by other people, is, I admit, a problem. The best I can suggest is trying to "dumb down" your UFT data to a level that can be handled by the other program. Obviously that is not a very productive use of your time, but it is something you can do over time as you continue to add the results of your recent research. On the other hand, I don't think anyone should add data to their main databases from someone else's GEDCOM. New data should only be added manually from hardcopy documentation, where you can ensure that it is done to your standards and where you can note the quality of the incoming data. I think the UFT Family Journal (from UFT 2.8 or 2.9, if you use citations within text), in paper and/or electronic form, is the best method. FTM, if that is your target system of choice, may well develop a better method of transferring UFT to FTM. They've got to, if they have decided to abandon UFT and hope to keep many of the UFT users as customers.