Ancestry.com

Family Trees: New Tree Viewer Launch

Posted by jhodnett on January 5, 2011 in Ancestry.com Site, Family Trees

Last November, we launched a new tree viewer in an optional preview.  If you chose to view your tree using the new view, we gave you the opportunity to tell us what you thought of the changes we’ve made.  Based on the overwhelmingly positive feedback, we’re turning off the old view and making the new tree viewer a permanent part of our site tonight at 2am MST in conjunction with the scheduled tree maintenance that was blogged about yesterday.

For those that haven’t tried the new viewer and want to know more about the  changes, you can click here to read the blog post from November that details all the great new features.  Here are some highlights:

  • We increased the number of generations you can view at one time in the pedigree view
  • We made it possible to drag your tree around the screen to view more of your tree
  • We adjusted the borders so the view will expand to the full width and height of your monitor
  • We built a new family view so you can see more of your extended family like siblings, aunts and uncles.

We did receive a couple of suggestions from you that we felt would improve the experience and have included those changes in this new feature.  One of the most requested changes was to bring back what was formerly called the “Show immediate family” link on the person’s profile page. It’s now called “view family members” but has the same functionality as it did before.

We’ve made a couple of other minor tweaks here and there to make the family view more stable and improve the layout to be more user friendly.  We hope you are as excited about this new feature as I am and as so many of our other members. We hope this will help with your genealogy research.

140 comments

Comments
1 Janice HansenJanuary 5, 2011 at 12:27 pm

I love Ancestry.com – am addicted and learning.
I do wish when I print up a family profile page that the print were larger – for those of us with old vision a magnifying glass is a necessity.
Am anxious for the 1911 English census – and can we expect more Norfolk England parishes included.
I need Bunwell Norfolk and Horsford Norfolk.
Keep up the good work – and THANK YOU

2 Barbara Turner-HartmanJanuary 5, 2011 at 12:36 pm

As a user of FTM and then ancestry I understand that changes may be necessary. But, this new way of showing the WHOLE TREE is for the birds!!!
My monitor and/or printer will not print as the OLD WAY. I LIKE THE OLD WAY and thank goodness I have prints of MY 22 generation family the old way.
This will make ancestry unworkable for me and this is not fair after so many years.
You are probably pretty new to genealogy and do not understand the problem (which I have addressed several times with technical support).
WE SHOULD BEABLE TO USE EITHER VIEWS not your new idea!!!

Barbara Turner-Hartman

3 JA CampbellJanuary 5, 2011 at 12:36 pm

We appreciate all you are doing to make our family tree history more usable.

In the process, please do not forget those ADA members that depend on large letters to see content. The new view somehow makes my family tree view unreadable, large letters but in tiny boxes that truncate the names. The zoom just moves it around, does not fix the problem.

Also, please allow the option of the “Old search” strategy. It works much better than the new search when there is not an obvious well matched choice. Allowing us to narrow down by location and time frame is essential.

Thank you so much for all the improvements!

4 Luayne PierceJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:00 pm

I have used Ancestry.com for over 20 years. I DO NOT LIKE THE NEW SEARCH …. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEARCH A PERSON’S INFO FROM PROFILE PAGE. Let us be able to use the old search!!! Much, much better.

I concure with Barbara Turner-Hartman….why change something that works fine. Some of you people don’t realize that we all don’t have hugh monitors, or good eye sight…. I have to keep my size on print at 125% to be able to read the page…when that is like that I am having to page over to see all of a family tree….personally I use the ind sheet, and events and only use the tree occanually!

Get the old search back up!!!!! There are other services, and when I am spending $400+ for this subscription,I expect to be able to use it easily!!

5 NathanJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:01 pm

Thank you for both continually improving the website and listening to, and heeding, your users’ feedback! I liked the new tree viewer, but I was concerned when the beta disabled the “Show immediate family” link. It sounds like you fixed that problem. Plus the new icons in the screenshot look good, and make the interface more consistent. Now it appears all the links on the profile header will have icons, and they’re still intuitive.

6 AnnaJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:17 pm

I have waited to say whether I like this new approach and in the preview part of this I haven’t experienced any problems. I am concerned about the comment about printing. However, every big change seems to come with some negative experiences, so I will start backing things up now. Thank you for letting us know.

7 Terry ThomasJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:45 pm

I commend your work in making improvements, but I too always defer to your old search screens – I guess I’ll just have to adjust. I do hope you keep the feature where you list all the States at the bottom of the search screen – I use this frequently and don’t want to have to ‘drill down’ to find a listing of state databases. Thank you.

8 JeanetteJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:45 pm

I did comment, often I do not like the new tree view,
Like many of the newer changes,all of the graphical trees and fancy display slow down the pages and make is more difficult if you are using a smaller screen or need different settings due to visual disabilities.

I agree 100% also with many above, Do not eliminate the Old Search, I use both, they provide different results, and the Old Search is much faster, easier to scan the page for relevant information or “hits”

9 Dave YJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:52 pm

Yes that is what I was looking for..Spread it out..Hope I can get my left, right and up and down arrow to work better with the new feature.

10 AngelJanuary 5, 2011 at 1:56 pm

This new format stinks big time!!! Give us the option of using either the old way or the new. If it ‘ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. It’s hard to read and how do you find your ‘home’ person in this new mess???

11 LindaJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:18 pm

I agree – give us the option to use BOTH. I have printed my generations out yet as I’m not finished researching. Now I’ll have to do so before you go and fix something that wasn’t broken.

I can’t believe you took away the feature of finding out surname origin & distribution. That was helpful and how much did it cost you to maintain?

And why would you even think of taking away display immediate family? This is so important as other trees often have siblings I don’t know about. I’m glad you put it back, but quit taking away features when we are paying a fortune to subscribe.

The search feature is disastrous now as it either brings up nothing or thousands of records that bear no relevant relation to the search. I’ve even put in a search after finding a person on a census record, spelling it exactly as the census record shows it, and only clicking exact for the name as spelled and you come up with no records, even though you plainly have one!

Unclicked exact and got over 12,000 records.

You still have a lot of work to do before this cite is worth what we pay for it. But I stay because I’ve learned how to work around some of these problems though it has added hours and hours to research time.

You also need to make census records searchable by location as well as name. And what’s with the 1940 census? I hear you won’t be getting it? Is that true or a rumor?

12 Peggy TJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:23 pm

I do not like the new search – I have been a member of Ancestry.com for 13 years and gone through many, many changes most for the good but this new search is the worst change I have ever seen… I want the old search to still be available and as Luayne P said in comment 4 “when I am spending $400+ for this subscription, I expect to be able to use it easily!!” PLEASE KEEP THE ‘OLD SEARCH’ AVAILABLE.

13 Kel-lea Barnett-EricksonJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:36 pm

I must say I love the new search as well as the new family tree viewer.When I use to key in a name, for example, Theresa McCoy in Ardmore,Carter , OK.I would get a whole page of McCoy’s in various different parts of Oklahoma and even TX !. Now when I key in McCoy’s in Ardmore, I receive all McCoy’s living in Ardmore. I am very happy about that.My suggestion would be to keep both the old and the new searches as they both come in handy. I use them both as well.Keep up the Good work as overall I am satisfied. Kel-lea P.S. I am with Janice on the 1911 British Census.I am at a standstill on my British line until that comes out . Looking forward to it! Oh and one more thing. Any Oklahoma marriages , deaths or births coming out? I noticed there are not nearly enough resources on vitals in Oklahoma. Thank you.

14 Andy HatchettJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:41 pm

Linda Re: #12

Do you have a link to that rumor?

Where did you see/hear it?

I stay pretty well tuned in and haven’t seen or heard anything about this.

What do you mean “searchable by location”?

Are you meaning by street address or what?

15 Kel-lea Barnett-EricksonJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:41 pm

I do think we should be able to search from the profile as well. Just makes it easier. We dont have to switch back and forth.

16 BEEJanuary 5, 2011 at 2:57 pm

Well, apparently, this “new viewer launch” that is supposed to start with tonight’s maintenance shutdown has already been implemented, because I can’t get out of it.
What is the purpose of always bringing me back to the pedigree view? I feel like I’m in a maze or on a merry-go-round trying to find my way back to the profile page!
I agree with “if it ain’t broke, etc”,although one of the best changes was that you can no longer add tons of people to a family with a click of the mouse as when I first became a member. It took me a while to learn this wasn’t the way to go, and I had to delete all those generations going back through time, so I’m very grateful for that “fix”.
However, I have yet to find anything on “new search” that I was unable to find with “old search”. All that information added to “search” hasn’t helped me – if something isn’t there, it just isn’t there – if it was, I found it with “old search”.
“New search” is “big, cluttered and clunky” and hard on “senior” eyes, compared to seeing the number of “matches” as it is set up in “old search”, where I can go to the census or other record I’m looking for, but I guess we better get used to it.

17 Mary Lou PerezJanuary 5, 2011 at 3:26 pm

I do agre wth all the rest, both searce work for me, love your tree leafs ..Cound you have a page that would have the way we want to search,look,read,and etc, So that we may pick before ,so that they pages we are looking at are not so full..it is most of the older genaerations that are having trouble and i belive we do the most
work.looking .for all the younger one must work hard and long.
also i have bad eye `so use the black pages.To see for the light colors hurt my eyes and some time can not see the work sheet with the real white black and your yellow wirks great for me.pages;
keep up with doing it better for all
Mary Lou

18 Elizabeth A NeffJanuary 5, 2011 at 3:39 pm

Why can’t you leave well enough alone…….This new program is a real PAIN in the *#%!

19 Sandy WarlopJanuary 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm

Dont like the new program at all.Im canceling my subscription.

20 Charles JimisonJanuary 5, 2011 at 4:10 pm

Please make the tree work both ways. If it is not broke don’t fix it. I like the old way.
Thanks
Charles Jimison

21 Connie BunteJanuary 5, 2011 at 4:13 pm

Kel-lea #115–
FamilySearch.org has Oklahoma marriage records, and volunteers are indexing them now. For more info on indexing, go to indexing.familysearch.org (no “www”).

22 FranJanuary 5, 2011 at 4:25 pm

I haven’t tried the new search yet but have a question for everyone. Is there a way to mark information you gather as complete just by looking at it—like color coding a line that is “finished” and verified. I work on my site sporadically and sometimes jump from one line to another. Does this new program do anything like that? Thanks, Fran

23 Peggy TJanuary 5, 2011 at 4:53 pm

If the old search is not available tomorrow morning I will call 1-800-ANCESTRY to lodge my dissatisfaction and am seriouly considering cancelling my membership at the same time. (also see my message #12)

24 Robert WhiteJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:04 pm

You’ve developed a great product.
It’s been an amazing journey over this past year since I first joined your clan.
Some suggestions:

1. Making your program friendlier to Apple Computers in the near future.
Printing seems to be an issue.

2. Access to maps world wide from all ages.

3. Assistance in locating cemeteries. Directions, maps, list of those buried.

4. Family line products. Flags, Coat of Arms, Histories, etc…

5. Has Ancestry.com sponsored a cruise yet? Historical tours?
When are we going to get some new tv presentations?

Thank you for all you’ve done,
Ancestry.com is wonderful.

25 Jen HodnettJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:17 pm

Just to help clear up some confusion, the family tree update that we’re doing is NOT related to search. It only involves the tree viewer. Hope this helps.

26 SWJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:19 pm

I would also like to keep old search.

I believe there is more than one way to search by location. You can search from your tree. If you want to just search one year, one area than eliminate any competing information (for the moment)particularly birth locations outside of the U. S. if you want a place in the U.S. The computer doesn’t seem to get that you are looking for an 1860 census in Maine if you have a birth place of England. Even if you have the exact year and U. S. place in your tree, it seems to ignore it to give preference to birthplace. Remove England and it searches the U.S.

27 SWJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:20 pm

Sorry Jen messages crossed. Thanks for update.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ancestry.com, Rosemary Morgan and others. Rosemary Morgan said: Ancestry launches their New Family Tree Viewer http://bit.ly/i2UYd0 #genealogy #familyhistory @AncestryComUk [...]

29 AnnJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:39 pm

It is very interesting that every new/updated option is greeted with cries of “don’t take away old search” when the update has absolutely NOTHING to do with old or new search. I don’t understand.

30 gloria wallJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:41 pm

well , i wish that you would leave well enough alone also . this program use to be more in line with my budget , but when you have added , as much as some people do , and then make it where no one can use it , well let’s just say you might need more new members. please leave it alone , some of the changes have been good , and some i really don’t like. please keep the old search . i think that from reading some of the comments , people do not like the new search. thank you for what you have done .

31 dianeJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:43 pm

Thanks for all the good things you do to help us with our research. Please do keep the old search option available as it is the one I use 99% of the time. I have tried the new search and invariably always return to the old. It always brings me more resuls! Thanks for listening!

32 Theron RogersJanuary 5, 2011 at 5:50 pm

I love the new family and pedigree views. I have two 23in monitors so I can see a great deal of the tree at one time. It is very convenient to work all of the “leaf hints” from these views.

33 Jerry TJanuary 5, 2011 at 6:14 pm

I usually start my work at the list of people in my tree. I wish there was an easy way to click an icon and it would take you back there without having to close and then reopening the program. Could that fix be implimented sometime in the near future? Thanks

Also … I don’t understand all the crying about search programs when the update has ONLY to do with what and how the information is displayed on the screen. I’m so confused!

34 PattiJanuary 5, 2011 at 6:17 pm

Why is it when you upgrade I can barely use Ancestry. I can’t pull up census images. It is extremely slow and it’s not my browser or my internet server. I have access to everything else online. You have raised prices for US portion of Ancestry by $30.00 since last year. Please make what you have work!

35 Diane HJanuary 5, 2011 at 6:20 pm

I just want to know why the update is several hours away and the website is taking 1-2 minutes to load a page. By the time it loads, I have forgotten what i was going to do!!! Please, can’t you leave it alone till it’s time!! I can’t get anything done!!!!

36 BaltimoreharborJanuary 5, 2011 at 6:25 pm

Again you seem not to listen to your members. The new way is terrible when one wants to print up a family sheet.
Also when are you going to include the many MAC / APPLE users. You make us use Firefox which is a terrible site for Mac users. We get tons of Spam using it.
Please listen to your users. You don’t seem to care – fixing things that work well is silly and dumb. When I search for records on a person – lets’ say John Smith why do you show me records for not only John Smith but for thousands of people named John Jones, John Henry etc. Address your real problems and LISTEN TO YOUR MEMBERS.

37 KathJanuary 5, 2011 at 6:32 pm

Do you think that you ANCESTRY.COM could put the time mentioned in announcements and add the time that is in GMT.

The current message says between 1am and 2am MST time. I don’t know what time this will be in the UK. It can’t be impossible for you just add whatever that is in GMT.

Most people know how many hours their countries or their part of their countries are plus or minus GMT.

On the changes – Didn’t like the last ones but got used to then but it was nice to change from one search type to another.

Kath

38 Mary H. SpringerJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:08 pm

I agree with a lot of the things that have been said. I too am an octgenerian, and would appreciate a larger type. if I increase to 125% or so It throws the whole screne out of proportion. but I can deal with that.
My real concern is the message boards. I have an ancestor by the name of HOLLOWAY JAMES. When I type his name I get all the given name JAMES on all boards as well as all HOLLOWAY families etc. Isn’t there a way to get just “Holloway James” and nothing else. Please I have fought the boards for years trying to get away from “Jessee” Jame, who is not my family. Finally Genealogy.com has put a stop to it. now you need to follow their lead, and be more specific.
Thank You
MHS.

39 AnnmarieJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:15 pm

I @#%*&# hate the new view. I’ve been a World Deluxe member going on 11 years and like things fine the way they are. For one thing, if you use Windows7, you can no longer download the Ancestry toolbar because… not compatible. With Windows7 you can’t print out the printable view, it just won’t let you. The only way Windows7 will print out a record is to wait for the record to load and print out from viewable record. I tried new search and… went back to old search, like it better.
The “Tree View” is horrible. I hate the overlapping boxes.
INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE WAY TO VIEW YOUR TREE OR PERSON’S PAGE, ADD MORE RECORDS. THE STATE THAT HAS THE BEST RECORDS ON LINE IS VERMONT. YOU CAN PRINT OUT THE ACTUAL COPY OF THE ORIGINAL, WHICH I ALWAYS TRY TO DO TO GET CORRECT NAME SPELLING AND BIRTH AND DEATH DATES.
Seems like every time we get used to our trees one way, someone has to get the bright idea to come in and throw a monkey wrench into things. Leave our trees alone, we aren’t complaining. If you people have nothing to do but mess with our trees, put some of that time into adding more records for States that have just about nothing for records.
ONE THING I DO LIKE IS THE NEW LINK FOR RELATIONSHIP. LOVE THIS FEATURE, A LOT EASIER TO EXPLAIN TO SOMEONE HOW WE CONNECT TO AN ANCESTOR.

40 DaleJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:18 pm

Like any new search system it takes awhile to learn how to us it. Have not ha any problem but would love to be able to carry over the search information fron one search to another inorder to make my searches faster and easier. Us older folke can’t always remember as well or as much as you young folks can.

41 Ken WhiteheadJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:23 pm

From time to time I have had one person in my tree twice. Often as result of downloading census information. When this happens in FTM it is easy to merge the two entries into one person, but you can not do it with ancestry.com web trees. I wish this could be corrected.
Thanks, Ken

42 J D FREREJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:28 pm

I do appreciate all this site provides. I do wish more church records were available. The US Census seems to be the major thrust of information.

Often in the past, the church records may be all that exist. The Catholic church is good a keeping records. Start with port cities in the US. New Orleans would be a great place to begin.

European Churches have great records as well. Try starting with historic catholic countries like France which in its own right was big on records. Not to mention southern(catholic) Germany.

43 JeanJanuary 5, 2011 at 7:34 pm

I don’t like the new format at all, as I commented in 2010. I’ve used the ancestry web-site for many years & do wish the format would stop changing.
It would also really be nice if people wouldn’t apply hints at face value before researching to see if they truly fit. There is so much incorrect information about my ancestors on some of these family trees, it is absolutely ridiculous.

44 BEEJanuary 5, 2011 at 8:14 pm

Sorry we got “off topic” and the issue of “new viewer” got confused with the ongoing “old/new search” topic, so I’ll repeat: Apparently, this “new viewer launch” that is supposed to start with tonight’s maintenance shutdown has already been implemented, because I can’t get out of it.
What is the purpose of always bringing me back to the pedigree view? I feel like I’m in a maze or on a merry-go-round trying to find my way back to the profile page!
The more I work with it, the more I dislike it!
I don’t want to keep being sent back to that “viewer tree” when I want to see “family members”!
It’s driving me crazy!!

45 AnnJanuary 5, 2011 at 8:25 pm

@ BEE Click on “Exit Preview”

46 Carol A. H.January 5, 2011 at 9:02 pm

#33 Jerry T:

You could “bookmark” or add a “favorite” while you are on your tree list and then you could open with that. I don’t know what browser you are using but I use this proceudre to get to the exact place I want to re-visit.

(Yes, I know, this is off-topic of the original blog.)

47 Andy HatchettJanuary 5, 2011 at 9:20 pm

Carol Re: #46

I use the same method- saves a world of time; especially if I am working offline and need to look at a particular person quickly.

48 Andy HatchettJanuary 5, 2011 at 9:24 pm

Kath Re: #37

The original Blog about the downtime included the following:

Coordinated Universal Time: 8:00 – 9:00 AM
In London: 8:00 – 9:00 AM
In Melbourne: 7:00 – 8:00 PM
In San Francisco: 12:00 AM – 1:00 AM
In New York: 3:00 – 4:00 AM

49 Andy HatchettJanuary 5, 2011 at 9:27 pm

Kath Re: #37

1AM-2AM MST=8AM-9AM London

50 EffieJanuary 5, 2011 at 9:57 pm

Reading other comments helps me in knowing I’m not alone in this maze of confusion. I started with *Ancestry.com in September of last year. Am TRYING to make it into my fourth month. When on the two week free trial period, I was getting TONS of ‘hits.’ One day, the entire format changed on me! I had to try and learn the ropes all over again! Once someone has been found and recorded, chances are slim in my finding them the next time I link on. Confusion on “Search.” One time I was told something like: “You now have a NEW tree.” I didn’t want to open a new tree. I was searching to find out information–that’s all! I’m now hesitant when using “Search”. We need a place on file where ALL the names of those who have been recorded, can be found without difficulty. This way, I could go down the list of names and find William Watts Parker! They are on my family tree SOMEWHERE, but finding them is another challenge. My best source of information about them came from http://www.findagrave.com and *Google.

51 CherylJanuary 5, 2011 at 9:59 pm

I actually enjoy the new options to viewing the family tree! I don’t see what all the fuss is about. Thanks for constantly trying to improve the services. It is well worth the money if you compare all the costs of gas for traveling and money spent on copies of census or vital records. I did have a problem at one time with seeing the census records. I eventually found out that my Norton anti-virus was becoming more and more restrictive to your site. I changed to AVG and haven’t had any problems since that time.

52 Carolyn PuckettJanuary 5, 2011 at 10:13 pm

I would like to have a printer friendly family group sheet. When I print now, I get all the ads and extra stuff that make me use more ink and paper.

53 TheronJanuary 5, 2011 at 10:57 pm

How about a link from the family and pedigree view to “view relationship to me”? It would help solving the hints.

54 susieJanuary 5, 2011 at 10:59 pm

I for one, hate all the changing you do. I have been a member for many years. A person can spend many hours learning one way, get comfortable and then you go and change it. This is time we could use finding info — IS THIS NOT WHY WE PAY FOR A SUBSCRIPTION???? Since we do pay, you are working for use, so please listen to us. We need to be able to read without using a magnifying glass in one hand and typing with one. And I agree with a lot of posters, KEEP the OLD SEARCH. I get so tired of typing what I want and getting thousands of names that do not match. If you do not want give us what we ask for, I guess we can just log onto Ancestry and you can put up a list and we can just sit and hunt and hunt and hunt till we find what we were “thinking” about. Most of the time, since the New Search was implemented, that is the way I feel. I to will consider canceling my membership, which comes up this month. I hear Familysearch.org is putting their records on the internet as fast as they can. YEAH!!!!!!

55 JonathanJanuary 6, 2011 at 2:15 am

In a culture where so often the changes that are made strictly maximize the bottom line, its nice to see some ‘old school’ GREAT CUSTOMER SERVICE. Wonderful job. Thanks for listening.

56 SWJanuary 6, 2011 at 2:16 am

It looks like I am seeing fewer and fewer of the actual images and more of ancestry’s produced index or record pages. As I went back through everything I have to back it up, I noticed how many of the scanned copies don’t seem to be there any more. No offense but the ancestry page just won’t do. I really need to see things for myself, not just take ancestry’s word for it. That is just not a source at all.

57 SheilaJanuary 6, 2011 at 3:24 am

I hate the new look. Put it back the way it was or at least give people a choice. I have MS and handicapped and my brain has trouble keeping up with changes you keep making. Fix the speed problem instead. When east coast people sign on at 3AM Arizon time the ancestry slows to a crawl with downloading. I also am considering canceling my membership as others have stated above. You just don’t listen to any of the feed back people give you and do whatever you want.

58 Andrew WellsJanuary 6, 2011 at 3:55 am

Jen,

Based on the comments here, I don’t understand how you can truthfully write there was “overwhelmingly positive feedback.” I also took the time to try and explain the drawbacks to this latest gimmick during the trial period. I believe Ancestry.com should explain why we can’t have the option to use either the new or existing Tree Viewer. What is so wrong about providing a choice that the customer desires, but your internal marketing department apparently disapproves of?

59 Claudia Redmond RileyJanuary 6, 2011 at 8:34 am

I like the new features and wonder if you will read all these comments. I would like to see a feature that is in Family Tree that allows duplicate people to be merged. I find that at times I have more than one entry for the same person and it creates a mess. This happens when I merge information. Please advise if there is a way to merge duplicate entries.

60 PaulaJanuary 6, 2011 at 10:55 am

This new viewer STINKS… It is so small you can’t read anyone’s name, when you zoom it just moves it around on the screen or off the screen completely. I don’t care about seeing MORE of my tree because I could never see ALL of it. I have over 15000 people in my tree and usuall working in one small area at a time. Either fix it so it’s right and all the bugs are out of it or just go back to the old view. You can keep the other options but the VIEW is terrible.

61 PaddiJanuary 6, 2011 at 11:21 am

What the heck are they thinking? The new viewer STINKS big time. Change for the sake of change is not a good thing. There are other areas of Ancestry that could use an update or tweek but not the viewer. This is my research and I am paying for it every month so I think I should get what I want. What a crock! Other internet companies have lost stature/importance because of all of their unnecessary changes.

62 TracyJanuary 6, 2011 at 11:35 am

I like the new tree viewer, but I print from my genealogy program and not Ancestry.com so don’t have the problem many seem to have with printing. I agree, the dates on the pedigree view are very small, but when I hover over them with my mouse I’m able to see them just fine. All that being said, I hardly ever work on my tree in the tree viewer anyway. I prefer to work on each individual person’s page.

I would also like to be able to merge individuals in a tree. I often have clients who want me to “clean up” their online tree because they have taken hints at face value, rather than researching to make sure they a match before adding them to their tree. Being able to merge individuals and their sources would make it much easier.

As for the new search, I hate it. I always use the old search. For any of you who may not know how to find the old search, simply click on the Search tab at the top. Then, on the right side, just below the menu bar, is a link to Go to Old Search.

63 Dottie McCombJanuary 6, 2011 at 12:01 pm

I do not like the “new search”. Please put the “old search” back in to give us the option of using either one. Also why did you take out the “search historical records” button? I used it all the time. It made it so much easier and faster to find records.

64 Andy HatchettJanuary 6, 2011 at 12:31 pm

Dottie Re: #63

Old search has never gone anywhere.
Just click Search from the main menu bar and then in the far right in small print will be a toggle link that say either “go to Old Search” or “Go to new Search” just click that and you will stay in that search mode until you change it.

“Search Historical Records” has been moved to the first item on that menu line and now says “Search Records”

65 Mac McDonaldJanuary 6, 2011 at 12:51 pm

If I recall correctly, Ancestry & FTM are connected. I have owned every FTM from around 3.0 until they got to 2009. I bought 2009, 2010 & 2011 but still use 2008. I won’t buy another FTM. The look and feel were changed completely.
Now, you have done the same with Ancestry! I am seriously considering destroying my Ancestry website & using only my old Ancestry 2008.
You might learn from Harley-Davidson. They constantly update their products but NEVER loose the look & feel of the orginal product that brought them the customers that made them great!

66 Mac McDonaldJanuary 6, 2011 at 12:59 pm

If I recall correctly, Ancestry & FTM are connected. I have owned every FTM from around 3.0 until they got to 2009. I bought 2009, 2010 & 2011 but still use 2008. I won’t buy another FTM. The look and feel were changed completely.
Now, you have done the same with Ancestry! I am seriously considering destroying my Ancestry website & using only my old FTM 2008.
You might learn from Harley-Davidson. They constantly update their products but NEVER loose the look & feel of the orginal product that brought them the customers that made them great!

67 Kevin PostJanuary 6, 2011 at 1:04 pm

When printing in the new viewer it does not print properly. It prints in 4 pages and cuts off a whole person from page 1 to 2. Tried it in landscape print and then loss the entire bottom section. BETA testing would have been nice.

68 Ian SmithJanuary 6, 2011 at 1:38 pm

#59 Claudia

There is already a way to merge duplicate people in FTM 2011.
Click EDIT,FIND DUPLICATE PEOPLE,YES then let FTM calculate and list the duplicates in your file.
Make your choice and highlight duplicate person then click COMPARE/MERGE and choose the alterations you wish to make then click OK. The computer will then merge the two duplicates.

Cheers

Ian S

69 John HJanuary 6, 2011 at 2:26 pm

I strongly concur with many of the other comments. While the new display has advantages, it is not very easy to work with if you use a laptop with a 13″ screen. Why could you not add this as a NEW OPTION and not take the old one away. Give it us as an additional new option — the old version was much much easier to navigate to an alternate person in the same tree.

Similarly, we had the capability to do searches using both the old process and the new process. Why not do that here. I hope the comments suggesting you took the OLD search option away are incorrect. Why would you have done that without first seeking input from your users.

It is also very frustrating to have you rearrange how things work every few months. I spend too much time relearning how to use the product rather than do much more productive work

John

70 PaulaJanuary 6, 2011 at 2:48 pm

After using Ancestory.com for several hours today I have several issues now with your new “VIEW” if I go to a profile and add information I then try to go back to the tree and I have a BIG BLANK PAGE. I have been working from profile view only for 6 hours now and it stinks. It causes mistakes to be made. People are being duplicated because I can’t see their relationship with one another on the pedigree chart. I pride myself in my accuracy and I want changes and I want them quick. Or My Account and My Family Trees will go to another website. I spend to many hours a day on this website to put up with your “PROGERSS CHANGES” Put It BACX…

71 JanJanuary 6, 2011 at 3:02 pm

I am really dissapointed with the site now. Much more cumbersome to use and get data I do not want and did not search for. Census records have no rhyme or reason to them with dates not being chronilogical or logical at all. I cannot find the “Descendent” tab anywhere. Why can’t we have our choice of the results format the old, more efficient way? I can bring up the old search but the results are in this new, horrible format.

72 BEEJanuary 6, 2011 at 3:51 pm

Thankfully, “view family members” has returned to my trees – it was not there last night.
I’m still working on putting all my trees into a folder to open with the profile page instead of that “tree” page…….
As others have written, you just get used to something in one place, and it gets moved to another!
Also, the “view relationship to me” tab is missing from some of my trees – definitely “frustrating”!

73 Dottie McCombJanuary 6, 2011 at 4:06 pm

The “search records” is not the same as the “search historical records” button which you just clicked. Now you have to key in the name of the person for every record. It is very cumbersome and time consuming.
I am really considering not renewing my subscription. We need some of the old features back!

74 JoyceJanuary 6, 2011 at 4:42 pm

For several months I did not have an Ancestry membership due to price although I had been a member for about 11 years prior to that. I just signed back up 2 days ago. When a ‘new’ search screen became available prior to last spring I tried it off and on but found that results that showed up in the ‘old search screen’ did not even show up. I really did try it often but found that search method more cumbersome, less reliable, more restrictive, harder to read. Now this screen limits one even more and I am getting even less correct results. No longer does one have the options of specifically checking specific types of records, checking exact search, etc.

PLEASE bring back the ‘old search screen’ option that was still available in the upper right of the page. Many of us still prefer it and it is MUCH MORE user friendly and reliable.

Keep the new search screen for those who like it. But give those of use who find it less reliable the ‘old search option’ back.

I am seriously beginning after 2 days to rethink my 2 day old membership.

75 Danielle NickumJanuary 6, 2011 at 4:53 pm

I HATE the new format because it does not function or print with MAC computers! I have already complained to your technical service about 2 weeks ago and your rep told me to try FireFox browser (which I did and it still didn’t work) because this new update does not work well with MAC users. Why would you release this knowing that MAC users would not be able to use it? I can not switch trees or add info from other trees or searches!!!!!

I see from some of the other comments that this has happened to other users.

Thanks a lot! as soon as I go through the painful process of having to manually force print my tree info, I will cancel my subscription to ancestry.com. You have made it impossible to use now. Before you ask, I have a MAC Book Pro that is less than 1 year old so don’t blame it on my computer! The old format worked just fine!!!!!

76 CherylJanuary 6, 2011 at 4:57 pm

I wholeheartedly agree with #41(Ken).
I looked on my listing of “all people in my tree” and I had 12 of 1 person. I don’t know what the “primary” link is to my tree. I would love to see a merge feature like it is on FTM.

77 Danielle NickumJanuary 6, 2011 at 5:11 pm

Just who exactly performed the testing of this “New and Improved” software update? Was any done at all? You surely did not test on Apple/Mac or you would have known it did not work properly and if you did, then you knew it would not work and released it anyway! Thank you for being so considerate to your customers!

By the way, I have read all of the above comments and I think maybe 3 out of the 75 were positive. Great numbers!!!!!! WAY TO GO!!!!!!!!!

78 lynneJanuary 6, 2011 at 5:20 pm

Hate the new way the family tree is now. I am seriously thinking of cancelling my subscription to ancestry.com.

79 Denise MauckJanuary 6, 2011 at 5:28 pm

Is anyone else experiencing a painfully slow response from ancestry today after last night’s upgrades? Searching is very frustrating today. Please ancestry, fix this problem. It’s driving me nuts!!

80 SWJanuary 6, 2011 at 6:09 pm

Dottie #73
I tried using the “search records” and was able to search without retyping anything. I was also able to switch out of old search to new search without leaving my person’s page.

Hoping I won’t run in to that problem because I would not be happy. I hope your “search records” starts working. Good luck.

81 katie freelandJanuary 6, 2011 at 6:33 pm

Hi My name is katie i want to learn about my ancestors. i only know up to my great grandparents. But you have to pay to use this right? How do you pay? Can i send it in the mail or someething to the ancestry .com people whover collects the money?

82 dixychikJanuary 6, 2011 at 6:50 pm

What idiot decided to put the search clear over on the left side of the screen? We get used to something in one place and then you just up and move it where it doesn’t even make sense. Is there anybody who works there who actually uses Ancestry trees, or do you just hire the dumbest people you can find? I have asked a hundred times for a screen to be able to enter as many children as a family has on one screen, instead of entering 12 kids ONE at a time, and nobody listens. If you are going to do something, do something that makes sense and something that is useful instead of just juggling things around to make it more difficult. You drive me CRAZY.

83 Andrew WellsJanuary 6, 2011 at 7:28 pm

It shouldn’t have been a surprise that my ancestor who married his stepmother after the death of his father causes an “internal error” with the new Tree Viewer. The legacy Tree Viewer handled this just fine. Thank you for the “improvement.”

84 RitaJanuary 6, 2011 at 8:11 pm

I absolutely hate the new “view” and have said so on every poll I have sent back to you. I can not believe what a mess this is. Why, Why can’t you leave us the option to use the old tree? I am sick and tired of paying big bucks to use something that periodically goes completely crazy. I don’t know who has these brilliant ideas, but they need to move on to a different company. It is possible to make good upgrades without going to a completely new format. Listen to DixyChik #82. She makes really good sense. I keep saying that I am going to leave Ancestry if I can’t use the old ways. I guess this time it is going to have to be for real. There are other sites out there. It is just a hassle to change over. But sooner are later all good things must come to an end. I think your time has come.

85 Carol A. H.January 6, 2011 at 9:04 pm

I am one of the many who find the new tree view to be a real problem. It does nothing to help with my research. It makes my computer very slow and less efficient. It looks like you are trying to impress people with pretty colors and a big spread.

Colors I don’t care about in this case, but I never have needed a big view of the tree. I’m doing research on one person at a time. All these people on one screen is confusing and messy. I get locked into the tree view and can’t escape. Either I’m doing something wrong or this is the worst “improvement” since the new search. This is not going to be productive or fun. We need a way to limit the generations shown in the tree view. You have settings for everything else, why not here. It would make it more like it used to be.

I didn’t like the preview and I find this new tree view to be absolutely terrible.

86 Sami ParkerJanuary 7, 2011 at 1:53 am

Thanks for sharing such a nice information, I wasnt expecting such technical details here,am amazed at that, anyways, thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge with us.

87 bromaelorJanuary 7, 2011 at 4:41 am

#86. No Sami. You are just another spammer trying to embed the url of a commercial website into the blog so that it will be picked up by search engines and give it a higher ranking. And Ancestry are dumb enough to let you do it!

88 bromaelorJanuary 7, 2011 at 5:05 am

… I have read all of the above comments and I think maybe 3 out of the 75 were positive.

Or it could mean that the over one million other Ancestry subscribers are quite happy with the changes and feel no need to comment?

… I expect to be able to use it easily

As most subscribers find the Ancestry site very easy to use, have you considered that the problem may lie with your lack of IT skills?

…am seriously considering cancelling my membership

I’m regularly bemused by those whingers who announce that they are ‘seriously’ considering leaving, but obviously never do, because they always return to make the same empty threats again and again.
In reality, I’m sure that Ancestry would prefer to have satisfied customers and would be happy to see the back of them.

Ancestry have done a good job and given us some excellent new features in the past year. Well done and keep it up!

89 SWJanuary 7, 2011 at 9:26 am

Still having trouble with the “add a new person” part of the process of creating someone from a source by attaching source to new person. The space with the new information goes blank the moment I choose the sex of the new person and only leaves me the option to select someone already in my tree. From there I can try again to make a new person which may or may not work.

90 Phyllis CouchJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:06 am

With just a quick look at the new pedigree veiw this am,I am impressed. To the people who threaten to quit Ancestry,I don’t believe you can get this much information this easily (yes this easily) on any other genelaogy site. Also,it is really hard to please any SMALL group of people,let alone a membership as large as Ancestry’s.That said,I think taking a computer class would help a person navigate and use the site,as well as a lot of other sites.

91 Danielle NickumJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:31 am

To the idiot bromaelor on comment #87 and #88:

Obviously you must work for ancestry.com or on the payroll. Several people have told them repeatedly that there were issues with the MAC computer owners using them so don’t try to make it seem like I don’t know my way around a website.

Since you know so much, maybe you can fix the issue with the MAC users or better yet ask, the millions of satisfied users, some of them who have MACs how much they like. Otherwise, don’t jump in on issues that don’t concern you!Idiot!!!!

92 TheronJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:34 am

I have belonged to Ancestry.com for over 10 years. I have three trees, one with over 8200 people. I have used 8-10 software packages over the 25+ years of doing my family history work on a computer.

I like the many new features that have been added.
To attract new customers you have to give the customers what they want and need or they will go to someone else who has the next new thing that comes out. You can not “just leave it alone because it is working”. If the car industry did that we would all be driving model T’s because they worked. Remember, the more people that join Ancestry, the more information is available, and the more likely you will find that person you are searching for. Although there is always a learning curve, I enjoy learning new and useful ways of doing things.

I am looking forward to some additional features that I am sure will come along with time. More database management, like combining existing people would be helpful. “Relationship to me” links on every page, links to maps, cities, cemeteries, plus all of the worlds existing records that will eventually be scanned and keyed into new online databases. Think about all of the “old country” records that will be translated and added eventually.

Sure there are going to be bumps along the way, but for me, I have been learning for over 70 years, I enjoy progress and the changes. Please keep them coming!

93 JadeJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:37 am

Please provide option to eliminate thumbnails so the text will display large enough to read.

It’s useless to have a 5-generation display if you can’t read who the people are. The keyboard Ctrl+/- shortcut does not change text size in this viewer, just zooms in and out. This is verrrrrry disappointing.

94 JadeJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:41 am

In the family view, how do I get a chart showing 5 generations of descendants of one person?

The link to see a target person’s family shows parents, grandparents, aunts/uncles, siblings and only her grandchildren.

Navigating down one generation does not eliminate prior generations, just eliminates the target child’s siblings and their families.

Other tree-hosting software does this beautifully, with specific options as to how many generations of descendants are shown.

95 JadeJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:42 am

This is not more user friendly. Bring back the navigation arrows. Dragging is literally a pain.

The navigation pane is useless.

96 J. FulmerJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:04 am

I can’t see how the new tree viewer is helpful since it is in a pedigree/tree view. Like many others, I have more than 10,000 people in my family tree database so it can’t be easily or usefully viewed in this new tree format.

So right now I am just clicking out of the new family tree view as soon as possible and work off of the individual profiles I did before.

Keep this new view if you want but please don’t allow it to pop up on the screen initially as the default case.

97 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:11 am

Jade Re: #94

In Family View You can’t get 5 generation descendants view of a person.

What you get is, depending on your monitor size, a 5/6 generation view of the focus person’s family. (I have as 23″ wide screen and can see 6 generations including great grandchildren.

Grandparents of Focus Person
Parents and Siblings of Focus Person
Focus Person
Children of Focus Person
Grandchildren of Focus Person

Doesn’t the text size change when you zoom ion and out? It does on mine.

98 bromaelorJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:22 am

Danielle #91,
I have no connection with Ancestry apart from having being a satisfied subscriber for many years. Why do some people seem to assume that anyone who is happy with Ancestry has to be an employee? Ancestry do have over one million subscribers!
I’m not able to help you with your problem on your Apple Mac as I’ve never used one, and have no intention of doing so! However, I did teach IT for thirty years so I think that does put me on a slightly higher level than an idiot.

99 bromaelorJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:25 am

P.S. As an ex-teacher I’m quite used to dealing with obnoxious characters like Danielle!!!

100 JadeJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:50 am

Andy, #97

I want my target person at the top of the Family display and not have the 2 generations above her, and several generations below her.

Yes the text enlarges if I zoom in, but I want to see the whole family group **and** be able to read who they are. Duhhhh . . .

The thumbnails are fine for family groups that are mostly late 19th century and later where someone wants to print them out with photos in the boxes (though the printout utility has the same major drawbacks as 20-year-old software did).

But I want to be able to read the text, without all that space taken up by thumbnails. I want it as a diagnostic tool.

Other website tree software does a great job with showing 5 to 9 generations of descendants of one person or one couple (e.g., The Next Generation [TNG] software).

This Ancestry.com Family view is a hybrid with few options, not doing any particular purpose well.

My pre-1850 family members clean forgot to invent the camera or to pay to have a portrait painted.

101 Danielle NickumJanuary 7, 2011 at 12:36 pm

bromaelor # whatever,

I am sorry for calling you an idiot but you started the insults by inplying that I lacked IT skills which I have used for over 20 years and I have also built programs and taught students programing.

I was stating that since you know absolutely nothing about MAC computers that you should not insult people that have used them successfully with ancestry.com in the past and are having problems with the new software. You would not be so condesending if you were experiencing the same problems.

Bottom line is ancestry.com was aware of the problems and launched anyway knowing it would cause problems for MAC users.PERIOD!

102 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 12:43 pm

Jade Re: #100

Ancestry may, in the future, offer the layout you want; but it isn’t available now.

That is one reason I use a real genealogy program rather than these rinky-dink online applications- so I can see and get exactly what I want and not have to worry about the various limitations of the online applications.

103 JadeJanuary 7, 2011 at 12:56 pm

Andy #102

I occasionally used the Family View to see where I needed to fill in family groups. That is where a Descendants view was helpful, particularly when I had not worked on the tree for a while.

Clicking to view descendant groups does not help with that approach. The old view was much more useful in this respect. Particularly the aspect of being able to read who you’re looking at.

104 netzbandJanuary 7, 2011 at 1:29 pm

I have been on Ancestry a long time, and am always extolling its benefits to others. However, I found myself at my long awaited week at the National Archives, with my own computer logged into my own account—and am FRUSTRATED. I’m sorry you do not still have the “old search” option.
I have wasted too much time this week because of this, and wish you would give me the choice of both. They both have positives and negatives, but together are more powerful than just giving us one.

105 PaulaJanuary 7, 2011 at 2:10 pm

After reading all 104 bloggs, I have come to the conclusion that we are not all seeing the same thing when we click on view family tree. When viewing the pedigree chart I see a five generation chart that is so small I can’t see the names or leaves or anything but lines. When I click on the ZOOM feature all that bunch of lines does is move around on my monitor. If I hover over the lines a profile page appears at the bottom of the page. WOW I can then see who the person is I’m hovering over. But wait there is more… When I go to the profile page and add information and then click on return to tree.. Low and behold I get a blank page, thats right ZIP NOTHING a big white blank. Before when I left the tree it came right back to the person I was working on before and I could continue on from there. NOW with the new little group of lines it returns to who else but the HOME person. Now wait a minute something is WRONG with this picture, I’m suppose to be in the 1600′s and the NEW VIEW just brought me back to today.. OH WELL I’m paid up til the end of the month.. we will see if I remove my trees and go to “One Great Family” or if I stay here. That ladies and gentelmen is how long I am giving them to CLEAN UP THEIR MESS. AS far as searches go. When you type in name, birthdate, death date place of birth and place of death you should get that general location ie: INDIANA not ENGLAND.

106 PaulaJanuary 7, 2011 at 2:15 pm

oh and something else:
Ancestry says
We increased the number of generations you can view at one time in the pedigree view
We made it possible to drag your tree around the screen to view more of your tree
We adjusted the borders so the view will expand to the full width and height of your monitor

All I have been able to do is move those lines around on the screen. I don’t get full view because there is so much crap in the borders that about 3 inches of my monitor is taken up with junk and I have a 19 inch monitor. I can add more lines if I wish, but why bother since all they are is lines.

107 Andrew WellsJanuary 7, 2011 at 3:35 pm

If there was as much emphasis on correcting known bugs in this application as there is on releasing new features without sufficient beta testing, I for one would be appeased. Unfortunately I expect that many of the problems with the new Tree Viewer will never be addressed or corrected, as long as this corporation remains so out of focus. A fundamental principle for re-design of any high volume commercial database application is to make no improvements which will adversely affect the customer experience. Every major software release is likely to have undiscovered bugs, I understand this. What I fail to understand is why there is apparently such a low priority on fixing what is broken rather than breaking that which is working.

108 BobJanuary 7, 2011 at 5:20 pm

Danielle,

It’s called a Mac, not MAC.

Regards,

109 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 5:31 pm

Paula Re: #105

As to old Search, it is still there.

Try these ( and bookmaker them in your browser).

Link to NewSearch Form is:
http://search.ancestry.com/search/default.aspx?new=1

Link to OldSearch Form is:
http://www.ancestry.com/search/default.aspx

110 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 5:34 pm

Netzband Re: #104

See #109 above for direct links to OldSearch and NewSearch.

111 Jan D.January 7, 2011 at 7:38 pm

You can get the old search but what it brings up is not the old results page but the new one that includes may names that are no where near what you are looking for. You are not even told how may results there are but have pages and pages of junk to search.
Why not offer two different memberships – - one for the old way and one for the new way? Programers have a tendcy to celebrate what all they can make a program do but have no thought for the uses and that seems to be what has happend here. I quit using FTM several years ago for just that reason and created my own program that works much better for me. I just want an easy, accurate, search results that doesn’t give me pages of garbage.

112 BEEJanuary 7, 2011 at 8:31 pm

Jan, I’m not sure what you mean. When I search with “old search”, everything looks the same as it always did to me.
I wish I had enough computer savvy to create my own program. I purchased FTM 2009 including the booklet, and FTM 2010. I used them, but never really figured out what I was doing – it was all too confusing, so with all the negative comments, I have not done anything with them in my new computer…..I have no idea what to do with them, so I just let them sit there, which may not be a bad thing to do.

113 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 8:36 pm

Jan Re: #111

Every NewSearch results page I’ve seen gives the number of search resluts at the very top of the results list, usually phrased as “1-50 of 245,397″ or somesuch does OldSearch not do the same?

I know that on NewSearch results if I change the view at the top of the results page from the default “Sorted by revelance” (which it really isn’t) to “Summarized by category” it gives me much more manageable lists of results to look thru.

114 Virginia DunhamJanuary 7, 2011 at 8:56 pm

#111 Jan
When you go to “old search” do you check “exact”?

If you do not do this, you will not experience the old search you may be looking for.

(You can still do wild card searches with “exact” checked.)

Virginia

115 Carol A. H.January 7, 2011 at 9:09 pm

Andy #113

I have not seem a numeric total for hits in the old search for quite some time. It used to be there before new search came along. It really doesn’t matter to me because I usually find what I want in the first page of 50 hits or sometimes in the second page of 50 hits, (which would be the first 100 hits total). How many pages is affected by the number of stars you choose. There are also other factors that affect the number of hits you get, too many factors to list here.

116 Carol A. H.January 7, 2011 at 9:31 pm

Well, I guess I must eat a little humble pie. I was a bit too hasty. I thought the new “family” tree view was a new “pedigree” view. I was mistaken. There IS a pedigree view, which is much like it always was. It is the new “family view” in graphical chart form which I think will NOT be of much use to me. This chart looks like old charts in books when people wanted to show how they were connected distantly to royalty. Kind of showy.

Sooo! I still think new search is too time consuming and I use it only occasionally. I get what I need IF the record is on Ancestry with old search much quicker. I also still feel Ancestry should fix databases (add missing images) and do a better job of indexing (no OCR) before they add bells and whistles to dazzle folks who probably don’t care much about documentation, anyway.

The name-gathers will be with us always.

117 winleeJanuary 7, 2011 at 9:50 pm

Don’t you just love to picture this guy “Andy”.

Sitting around all day in front of a computer with a bunch cokes on one side and bags of chips on the other, cookie crumbs all over himself.
I’ll bet your also a regular caller on your local talk radio station, that everyone gets tired of hearing, can you picture him a blue tooth in one ear typing away annoying people on the radio and the world wide web at the same time….. way to go Andy, how could we ever survive without you,…. get a life.

118 Andy HatchettJanuary 7, 2011 at 10:42 pm

Winlee Re: #117

1 Coke
No Chips
No Crumbs
Never call *any* radio shows
No Blue Tooth

Methinks you need a new crystal ball- your present one seems a bit faulty.

Oh- and I have a quite full life, thankyouverymuch.

119 David FarrJanuary 7, 2011 at 11:53 pm

Pedigree view printing does not print all of whats on screen.Example only prints selscted person and ancestors does not print spouse ,children or siblings.sucks

120 BEEJanuary 8, 2011 at 8:38 am

Carol, I’m not sure this is what you mean, but in “old search” if a particular item doesn’t come up with just the name, birth date, etc, I go to “search record”, “narrow your search”, choose “record type”, then “more” and it brings up the “Ranked Search Results” list with the number of “matches”, and I can go to the particular “title” I want to explore.
I’m researching a family in a small New Brunswick, Canada community, and so far, the first three or four items that appear in “search” are documents for that particular person, followed by a lot of “stuff” that doesn’t, but it’s not the “in your face” view as in “new search”.

121 SWJanuary 8, 2011 at 10:07 am

Thank you for steps toward improving the citation process. I think that I may like the new view and the pedigree pages especially if the changes others have mentioned above are made, but then I never used the old family view. It does look like the marriage between first cousins views oddly. Still getting the one blank section I mentioned above but all in all doing okay with the new stuff. Hopefully it will continue to be okay. Best thing for me is a move toward improving the citation process.

122 Lawrence HedrickJanuary 8, 2011 at 10:19 am

the new family tree is for the birds, can’t we have the old back. I can’t even get my tree to enlarge and as it is can’t even read it with a magnifying glass. It is useless in it’s present form, Does everyone have this problem or is it only on certain operating systems

123 Jan D.January 8, 2011 at 1:44 pm

Thank all of you who are helping. I still find this to be very convoluted. If I already knew all the data to do an exact search, I wouldn’t need this site at all. :) I’m currently working on 5 different trees. I was adopted at age 2 and have found 2 half siblings recently so am working on a very intricate ancestry. The time it takes to go through all the pages of “stuff” is disheartening. I find I am using my other sites more and more and this one less and less.

124 carolyn atkinsonJanuary 8, 2011 at 8:03 pm

I know every program is different, but one thing would be SO VERY HELPFUL. Letting a person be numbered. In the LDS PAF programs, they are numbered, and it is so much easier to keep people separated when you have multiples of families with the same surname and given names thru the generations. Is there an option to do this that I might have missed? I have such a hard time with this that I am afraid for anything to get more than a couple of generations before breaking it off, but I prefer them connected. I have an old PAF program with over 21,000 I would like to upload. I had been tracing generations of a town trying to find my family connections, and also the generations of COURTRIGHTS from John Abbotts book to help others with their connections.

Sincerely

Carolyn Leverich Atkinson

125 carolyn atkinsonJanuary 8, 2011 at 8:16 pm

This is to #40 Dale, who has Windows 7.

Make sure you are using your 32 bit browser and NOT the 64 bit browswer. Makes a huge difference on a lot of websites. Most of them are not up to the 64 bit yet. Facebook isn’t either. Hope this helps you with Ancestry. I have no trouble with my Windows 7 with the 32 bit.

126 Carol A. H.January 9, 2011 at 4:14 pm

Carolyn #124, and all other who may be interested:

To my knowledge, Ancestry trees do not have RIN numbers (Record Identification Number) like the PAF program. That program is easy to use but you do need to know how you are going to add sources before you start. You have total control and responsibility for the sources. The last version was 5.2.18.0, 1999-2002. Old, yes, but very stable. Not much in the way of bells and whistles. But with planning it works.

Of course there are other programs that are LDS church related such as Roots Magic. It is not free as is PAF, but is not expensive. There are numerous family history programs. Some are very sophisticated and of course cost much more.

Ancestry’s tree program is ok if you don’t make any errors, which are sometimes very time consuming to correct. Many people just don’t bother and so their trees look sloppy. RINs would be very nice but Ancestry doesn’t seem to be inclined to add that feature.

So far I’m finding the new Family and Pedigree views to be very inefficient and not much help. Sometimes to save time I just reload Ancestry to get back to where I want to be. Too much clicking and waiting if I have to go through the tree view.

127 Paula gumpo1946January 10, 2011 at 10:58 am

Lawrence #122 so far I think it’s just you and me that have the problem with enlarging our tree.. And the funny thing is, it has nothing to do with our account. I opened my account on my friends computer over the weekend and Whammo there it was. I can also open it to full view on my OLD laptop but can’t get it to open at all on my PC. Maybe we should get together and compair notes or something. I think it must be a system setup issue on the PC.

128 Kathy SJanuary 10, 2011 at 4:53 pm

I hate the ‘printer friendly’ view of the pedigree.
The boxes are too big and overlap covering up information. It’s really ugly when printed!!
I’ve noticed you’ve also done away with
the ‘Family Report’ option that you could access from the old family view, which printed out the person’s name, grandparents, parents, siblings, half-siblings, spouse and children along with their birth year and death year, just text listed on one page or two depending on how big the family was. Can you please, please bring back this option?
I’m on my fifth tree and the others looked great.
This one is going to look crappy with the new
changes you’ve made. Please stop changing it all the time. I feel like I’m in school having to always relearn how to use the site. I have to agree with the folks who think you really messed up this time. I used to work for a major software company in Houston and I can tell you that if we had released a new version of any of our products that was this bad the responsible programmer(s) would have immediately been fired!

129 JadeJanuary 10, 2011 at 5:27 pm

At the same time the new pedigree and family views were rolled out, some changes were made to the Individual Profile pages.

One was to remove the scrolling right-left arrows from the Media Gallery on the Individual Profile pages.

Please put these back. They were very handy.

130 J. FulmerJanuary 10, 2011 at 7:16 pm

Sorry …this is off-topic a bit …does anyone know how to change the “home person” one of our posted family trees? Thanks in advance.
John

131 Carol A. H.January 10, 2011 at 8:32 pm

#130 J. Fulmer:

Hope this helps. I did it several times and it works fine. Go slowly and allow time for screen changes.

1. Click on “Family Trees”
2. Open the tree you want.
3. Click “Tree Pages”
4. Click “Tree Settings”
5. Click “Change” on the right side of screen under “Your home person in this tree.”
6. Enter new name or browse list (easiest).
7. “Select” the new home person in the list.
8. Click “Select” (orange button in next screen, lower left)
9. Go to “Find a person in this tree” box.
10. Select “Home person” in the dropdown and you should be back to the new home person for that tree.

132 PaulaJanuary 11, 2011 at 12:01 pm

Ancestry customer service has been most helpful with my problem. We have been running tests on my computer for two days now and I just got another e-mail from ancestry with another test to do. I did the test and WOW I finally have the family tree I am suppose to have. It’s fixed.. My life is no longer in termoil. #122 Lawrence, I told them that you were having the same issue so they may be contacting you in the near future.

133 Jen HodnettJanuary 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm

Thank you all for commenting on this post. As some of you mentioned that you were having difficulty using the new tree viewer, I’ve posted a new blog that has FAQs on some of the features that have changed from the old tree viewer. You can get to the new post by clicking this link http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2011/01/11/family-trees-new-tree-viewer-tips-and-faqs/

134 John HJanuary 14, 2011 at 10:42 am

The new view can be very valuable in helping you see/spot for the first time how people fit into the bigger picture, might be related to somebody in your tree, etc etc. — so it has many advantages and should be retained.

But it can also be tough to work with since it includes 5 generations (if that many are known) and if some/many of them had many many siblings — which makes the display quite large and hard to work with (Yes I know you can enlarge and just look at part — but it is hard to just stay there) — so can you give us back the option we had before, to as an alternative only see 3 or 4 generations — rather than 5. Also, in the prior version you had the option to toggle whether to show/hide siblings.

Also, does the person you pick have to be in the middle row if they both have ancestors and descendants –rather than allowing you to move them to top ro bottom if you more interested in descendants or ancestors, respectively.

135 J. FulmerJanuary 14, 2011 at 5:30 pm

#131. Thanks for the help Carol.
John

136 Carol A. H.January 15, 2011 at 12:57 pm

#135 John Fulmer:

You are welcome. Glad to be of help.

137 JadeJanuary 15, 2011 at 4:19 pm

Why did you eliminate ability to view a public Member Tree’s List of People?

138 Carol A. H.January 16, 2011 at 2:27 am

Jade # 137:

I can see a list of people in a public tree. To the right of the owner’s username is: “Find a person in this tree.” The dropdown gives 3 options (used to be 4, but I can’t remember what is now missing). You can go to home person; go to last viewed; or list all people. The last one being how I get the list.

If you are not getting at least these 3 options, something is wrong with how your system gets Ancestry. I don’t have any other suggestions. Good luck.

139 long time userJanuary 16, 2011 at 3:16 am

John # 134:

The PEDIGREE view allows you to see siblings or children of one person much easier than the FAMILY view. You have to roll your cursor over the person whose children/siblings you want to see.

Click on the “View his/her family tree” in the pop-up (it will also put that person in the root position). You will see the spouse and children. If you want the siblings, click on the word “Siblings” after the list of children and you will get the siblings.

I had to practice the procedure to see what Ancestry is trying to get us to do. Sometimes I think they are a little nutty out there in Provo. Not enough oxygen in the high desert.

I feel like I’m in a labyrinth in the program. Most of the new features I just don’t need or use but I want to know how they work.

Sorry, I can’t answer your last question.

140 JadeJanuary 16, 2011 at 6:29 am

Carol, #138 – thank you for the reminder of where this is hidden. Expected it to be in the silly “tree pages” drop-down.

About the Ancestry.com blog

Here you will find informational, and sometimes fun, posts from the folks behind the scenes here at Ancestry.com. We hope you’ll notice just how passionate we are about family history and about the products we’re building to help connect families over distance and time.

Visit Ancestry.com
Notifications

Receive updates from the Ancestry.com blog Learn more