Ray, You wrote: >Of course, TMG won't do everything as well as UFT...
Each product has features that it is particularly good at, and others that it is not so good at. Those of us who use UFT features that TMG is not so good at obviously would find using it frustrating.
The feature that I most appreciate in UFT is the very flexible Event structure. With various predefined events and roles, the ability to use any, or several, roles as principal for the event, and the ability to define your own events, roles, and role sentences to allow you to present your database data the way you want, UFT is superior to TMG for organizing our data. Its Family Journal report is our favourite report, and if TMG does not have as good a report, as Bob said, then I'll await some additional improvements in TMG before I'll give it a try.
I have one major complaint about UFT3.0 (citations in text), which I get around using UFT 2.9. (Our other problem is with sending RTF files to WordPerfect, and I have WP6.1 to get around WP8's rtf difficulties.) Some users seem to have significant problems getting it to run on their machines, or with their data, but we normally don't have problems.
My only unease with UFT is the lack of support I (don't) see coming from Genealogy.com, in spite of the complaints on this board. I hope any long term direction the company has for its UFT users involves fixes and upgrades, and they don't let it die or dumb it down to be more compatible with FTM.