Praise it might be, but begruding! Especially as she completely destroys her own argument by praising FH, and also saying "genealogy applications should really be using objectbases instead of databases". (I presume she means object vs relational databases). I don't know if any genealogy applications actually do use Object Databases? It's the design, what and how it is used for what purpose that matters. Not forgetting that the Gedcom file is a relatively small simple text file.
I find her comments on Zip files way out of date, perhaps she disagrees with Microsoft for using *.docx and *.xlsx files, which are simple zipped files (just try opening them with a zip program, very interesting) and many 'business' files will be way bigger than the biggest Gedcom files with a lot more to do in the zip extracting.
I remember when I was looking to move to FH (v5) from TMG and came across this
https://www.tamurajones.net/FamilyHistorian3.1.2.xhtml
Whilst the review was very extensive (but obviously out of date for my purposes), I was struck by the unnessesary slightly caustic and 'nitpicking' Style, e.g.
"It is rather annoying to get to see a patronising GEDCOM is... dialog box every time you import a GEDCOM. I know what GEDCOM is….."
to me this kind of comment spoils an otherwise 'much better than usual' in depth review.
Having said all that, Tamura is very much an online assett (taken as part of a controlled broad diet) that I like to read occasionally, and way way way better than most of the bland/gushing reviews, especially by a journalist with a good writing style but on a deadline; who plays with a product for a few minutes.
