In the beginning, there was genealogy, but there were no computers to help with the research. It seems such a long time ago that they were introduced, yet it’s been scarcely twenty years. The very first home computers available in assembled form were announced in the spring of 1977. Within two or three weeks of each other, the Apple, the TRS-80, and the Commodore PET appeared. Orders were taken, but it was about a year before any of them were actually delivered.

I remember the day my husband and I first purchased one. I was teaching math, and the school administrators decided that all math teachers would teach computer programming the following school year. My school was using Commodore computers, so we purchased a Commodore 8032 computer, a dual disk drive, an MX-80 dot-matrix printer, and a word processor. The total price came to just under $4,000, and the year was 1980. That was the hottest summer on record in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, and we stayed inside studying that computer all summer long.

By the time school started that fall, I had learned to program in BASIC, had learned to use the word processor, and had written a crude textbook to get me through that first year’s classes. There was nothing I knew of at that time to help me with my genealogy. My filing cabinet full of genealogy notes was indexed only by my memory.

In 1981, I found Genealogical Computing. At that time, it was edited and published by Paul and Sara Andereck who also did much of the writing. In Genealogical Computing 2:3 (November 1982), the lead article was about portable computers. None was really suitable at that time, but the Osborne and Kaypro luggable computers were just coming out. However, there was not genealogy software for them yet. Then, genealogy programs were advertised, most of them marketed by the programmer, and most written in BASIC. Most ran on the Apple II or the TRS-80. One writer stated that newer computers were choosing the CP/M operating system and Microsoft BASIC in order to have better transportability for software. Another discussed the need for standardizing the screen width on various machines; the standard width then ranged from 22 characters on the Commodore VIC20 to 80 characters on the “business machines,” with 40 characters on most, and 64 on others.

Most issues of GC had a BASIC program you could enter. Each issue had a survey of some kind: what genealogists would like in their software; which machines were being used by the readers; what features were available in the software then for sale. The surveys were important to programmers, in particular, and the entire journal was useful to all because it was the only one available dealing with genealogical computing. It kept its readers informed about all the new developments.

Like many other genealogists who were early users of home computers, I used my word processor to make a timeline of each ancestor’s life. It wouldn’t compare well with a modern genealogy program, but since I could edit and print it without retyping, it seemed wonderful at the time. There were other genealogists with access to mainframe computers at work, who used punch cards to set up genealogy databases, perform searches, and print reports. Most of the people using computers could see the genealogical potential they offered, and were trying any way they could to make use of them.

I knew of no commercial software available until 1982 when I learned of a program called ROOTS/M from CommSoft. It ran on the CP/M operating system. I learned of another called Family Roots, from Steve Vorenberg of Quinsept, available only on the Apple II at that time. I read every word I could find about these programs, for I was sure this was the way to manage genealogical projects, although there was still nothing available for the Commodore computer that I owned. These two programs are very important to the history of genealogical computing, for they led the way and set the standards for genealogy software. For a long time, each had a large following, and each was very popular.

I believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints first introduced Personal Ancestral File (PAF) in 1983. ROOTS II was available by then, and there were a number of other products, most of them long forgotten by now. I moved to an Amiga computer in 1985, and there were two or three packages available for it, but they were not really satisfactory. Although I worked with the program authors, beta testing and advising, each author seemed to be writing for himself or for a family member; if he saw no need for a feature, he wouldn’t add it. And that was the state of genealogical software until about 1985 or 1986.

ROOTS III—Where It All Really Started
About 1987 or 1988, I learned about ROOTS III, though it had been around since 1984. It was written to run on PC-compatible computers. Of course, I didn’t have one of those, but I bought one. I chose a Toshiba laptop, and began the long struggle to learn to use ROOTS III. It was a wonderful program, with all sorts of desirable features, but it was very hard to learn. By then, the genealogy forum on CompuServe had opened, and many of the members there were using ROOTS III and were willing to help. Had the manual been well-written, the program might have seemed easier. I eventually learned, and I loved ROOTS III so much that I still keep it on my computer. Even now, when I’m asked to review new software, I import my ROOTS III GEDCOM into it.

ROOTS III set high standards for other genealogy programs to follow. It made security checks on things like age at the time of marriage or at the birth of a child. It offered real footnotes and a database for sources and for places. It allowed for keeping several events in a person’s life, and the names of the events could be changed to fit an individual’s records. Nothing was really simple to do, but ROOTS III had the ability to store everything one might have collected.

I spent at least a year going through my filing cabinet and entering all the information I’d gathered over the years. I found many errors that had crept in, and that only a computer could point out to me. I saw that I had duplicated research because I had forgotten what I’d done. As I entered data, I frequently saw links that had escaped my attention for many years. Though ROOTS III allowed only two text files for each person, each could be of great length. I entered every scrap of information into those text files, keeping the information in date-order and always embedding the documentation into the text, since the footnoting provided for events did not apply to the text files. In some cases, I was able to import my old word-processor timeline files into these notes without retyping.

I eagerly looked forward to ROOTS IV and ordered it before it was even ready for distribution. When it came, I was terribly excited, but I was never able to get it to run on my laptop, and I had nothing else on which to use it. I went to the National Genealogical Society conference that year, and took my laptop along. At the CommSoft booth, I asked for help, but they couldn’t make ROOTS IV work, either. In fact, it never ran on that machine so I continued to use ROOTS III. I was able to get ROOTS V to run when it was released, but it was entirely different from ROOTS III, and just as hard to learn. By this time, other people were writing genealogy software that was much easier to learn and use. After ROOTS V, I began looking elsewhere for the right program for my computer.

I’ve tried many of the programs that are available now (in some cases through several generations of the software; in others, only one or two versions). Now, we can almost certainly depend on any genealogy software to provide for keeping and printing out sources. Most programs now provide for multiple events. All will print the basic reports and charts such as pedigree charts (usually in several varieties) and family group sheets. Almost all of them will print a register report that is similar to a book. Most permit the inclusion of photographs and other illustrations, and the majority of programs will now allow you to save sound files and video clips. You will usually find some sort of research log in your program—a feature unheard of only a few years ago. Most programs can find and merge two entries for the same person, and some can do this for places or sources. Each program has some features that it incorporates very well, and some that need more work. I’m always seeking the perfect program and I’ve yet to find it.

Dreams for the Future
What would you like your genealogy software to do? I would like for data to be more transportable than it currently is. The Master Genealogist (TMG), with its ability to import directly from the other genealogy software, is on the right track. I’m sure that if TMG can import such files, it could also export to all those formats if desired. If these features were widely available, it would permit us to easily change between software packages. But even more importantly, it would make it really worth our while to have several good programs available on our computers. We could run the data into one program for a particular report we wanted to use, into another for a special graphic feature, into yet another for an especially nice merge feature, and then put the enhanced file back into our usual program for further use. That is not practical today, because every program has its own format for data; even TMG cannot import without errors, data loss, and clean-up afterward.

What will the future hold for GEDCOM? I don’t think it will ever be satisfactory. I’ve never used GEDCOM without losing some of my data, and I don’t trust it for anything but the most basic facts. A movement has been afoot for several years to make GEDCOM work better, but nothing much seems to happen. I despair of its ever being a suitable means of moving data from program to program.

I would like programs to notify me if I appear to be duplicating an individual at the time of data entry and to do the same with obviously impossible dates. Several programs will run an audit and point out such errors, but few give warning at the time of entry. I’d like to be warned if I’m entering a place that seems to duplicate another. There is much room for improvement in watching for errors.

We have probably only begun to see the wonders of multimedia for our genealogies. I can see future software that will take our files and create a CD-ROM presentation of the data, complete with music and titling. I believe that eventually we will be able to scan even a badly damaged old photo, hit a button, and get a corrected photo that will look far better than the original. We can already attach photos, videos, and sound files, but these abilities will grow as technology improves.

Today’s genealogy software is beyond the dreams we had ten years ago. In ten more years, this wonderful software will seem almost primitive. I can hardly wait!

Betty Clay is an experienced computer author and a sysop for the CompuServe genealogy forum. She can be reached by e-mail at bclay@cis.compuserve.com.