One good argument for gramps is the absence of risk of
vendor lock-in (or customer lock-in, see
Some genealogy programs have such a poor GEDCOM-support,
that the effort required to move the data to another
genealogy program is beyond the normal user.
A good example of a genealogy program with a strong lock-in
mechanism is MyHeritage. Its GEDCOM-data uses non-standard
tags (NAME__EN, PLAC__EN, etc.) which other programs are
unlikely to support, and which the normal user is unable to
repair. The main collaboration feature of MyHeritage is not
GEDCOM but its web-site, which is basically a proprietary
interface since only MyHeritage customers can use it.
Although this may seem academic to the typical gramps-user,
the consequences are significant. A user of genealogy software
with poor export support is not only cut-off from changing
software and from sending data to others genealogists, but
that experience will also cause them to advocate their own
software to others as a solution to the interface problem.
This accelerate the adoption of non-standard software,
making matters worse for everyone.
Open-source software such as gramps can never suffer from
this problem, because no one controls the source code so
any attempt at restricting the freedom of the user will
fail, in the worst case by somebody taking a copy of the
still-free code and maintaining that (a socalled fork of
Thanks for advocating GRAMPS and good luck with your talk.
GEDCOMP: An extensive and free database for genealogists with
interest in Denmark: http://www.lklundin.dk/gedcomp/english.php