Re: FH7 stand alone

Mike Tate

Adrian, you are absolutely correct. It would be a nightmare.
Some products only support a few file types, c.f. MS Word/Excel, but FH is very different.

-----Original Message-----
From: <> On Behalf Of Adrian Bruce
Sent: 17 December 2020 20:54
To: Family Historian mailing list <>
Subject: Re: [family-historian] FH7 stand alone

... As I bought full versions, the new version did not over-write the other. In my opinion, Calico Pie have not followed an established software convention here. ...
I'm not so sure how universal that convention is. I know that people have said that they do use software where they can happily install old and new at the same time and run them in parallel. No doubt from this that it can be made to work. Sometimes. However, for starters, you need to install the software into different directories (e.g. FH6 and
FH7) - that's an extra something that can go wrong, especially if you follow convention and allow people to decide where to install the software.

Secondly, if you think how the file association works, right now .GED files are opened by FH.EXE in C:\Program Files (x86)\Family Historian\Program (or whatever your "Program Files" is called). If the
v7 is installed in a new folder, then, by default, all .GED files will be opened by C:\Program Files (x86)\Family Historian v7\Program\FH.EXE (say). That means that if you try to double click your GEDCOM 5.5 file, it *will* be opened by your v7 program and get converted to GEDCOM 5.5.1. So if you're in a situation where both are installed, you have to remember to open FH v6 first, then open the 5.5 file. And heaven help you if, as Lorna says, you open a 5.5.1 file in v6.

Furthermore, file association knock-ons *probably* go on and on. I suspect you'd not be able to download and install a new query into the
v6 FH because the extension .FHQ (is it?) will be pointing at the v7 FH. And LUA, as used by the plug-ins? That probably goes through similar linkages that start with a versionless LUA key in the registry. That's certainly what stuff looked like in the days when I could read Windows Registries. Or thought I could.

Certain standalone software items, running on an unchanged and unchangeable file format, clearly can be made to work in parallel on one machine (I'm guessing that the file format for Adobe Elements didn't change between those versions, e.g.. Or if it did, the file extension changed - cf .DOC versus .DOCX). But anything with a wider ecosystem requires a lot more hard work to have this sort of capability. In my professional career, we certainly never had - never paid for - bespoke software with that capability. Use 2 PCs would be the answer to running in parallel.

Sorry if this sounds a lot - I'm just trying to emphasise that this is not a trivial task, without a massive change to configurations - and I'd rather pay for a massive change in usable abilities.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.