Paul, I started using it because I know very little about databases (still don't). I used it to keep track of statistics on our 1100 churches and their monthly giving to missions (I spent the last 6 years doing communications to raise funds). Send me you email address and I'll send you some samples. I know it can do much more that I use it for. The great thing is I can add things to it myself or talk to our IT guys if I need help. It is also fully cross platform (MAC-PC) which is helpful for a MAC user like me in a PC office. I know you can get a server version to that multiple users can access the same database and you can also get a run-time engine. Jane Turner at U of Victoria Archives uses it. She sent me two sample databases. Here is her info: Jane Turner, University Archivist University Archives University of Victoria Libraries P.O. Box 1800 STN CSC Victoria, BC V8W 3H5 Help this is helpful. Jim > ---------- > From: Paul Henry > Reply To: A forum for discussion for the Archives Assoc. of > Ontario > Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 11:26 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Databases > > Jim, > > I've never used FileMaker in an archival environment, so I didn't try > to > speak to its usefulness. I've downloaded a trial copy off the web, for > comparison purposes, and will let you know. > > I'd be interested in learning how it's used at PAOC. > > Paul > > At 11:05 2001-05-28 -0400, you wrote: > >Paul, > > > >I believe you will find that FileMaker Pro can accomplish all of > these > >tasks including the relational ones and has the advantage of being > much > >easier to use. > > > >Jim Craig > >James D. Craig > >Archivist > >The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada > >[log in to unmask] > >905-542-7400 > > > > > >> ---------- > >> From: Paul Henry > >> Reply To: A forum for discussion for the Archives Assoc. of > >> Ontario > >> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 11:33 PM > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Re: new address > >> > >> At 15:01 2001-05-24 -0400, you wrote: > >> >I have been looking at Inmagic for archive software. Our school > >> supports > >> >Microsoft Access and the head of our IT department believes that > we > >> should > >> >use it. > >> > >> Here's a quick comparison between the two: > >> http://www.tdm.com.au/compare.htm > >> > >> While the seemingly trite "because it's Microsoft" may work for > some, > >> you'll note that DB/Textworks (Inmagic) has features better suited > to > >> archival tasks, such as: > >> > >> Indexing and browsing by field > >> Boolean searching > >> Stop words and other sorting functions > >> Indexing modes, logging, and reporting > >> > >> And most importantly: > >> Unlimited field lengths, all fully indexed by term and keyword. > >> > >> The DOS version is free. The Windows version is available under > >> various > >> licensing arrangements. > >> > >> The only serious bugaboo in Inmagic (also not available in Access > >> without > >> some programming) is the lack of recursively relational linking. By > >> this I > >> mean the ability to store multi-level descriptions (fonds, series, > >> file, > >> item) in the same database file and automagically display them > >> hierarchically in reports. For that, you need GenCat (Eloquent > >> Systems). > >> GenCat has its own problems, but I used it successfully at the > >> National > >> Archives for a number of years. > >> > >> I hope this helps you convince your IT department to let you use > >> Inmagic. > >> > >> Good luck. > >> > >> Paul > >> > > > > >