Posted by Ancestry Team on July 15, 2015 in Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, Website

It has been just over a month since we introduced the new Ancestry website, designed to transform how you can discover and tell your family story. Over the last month, we have been listening to your suggestions for how to make the new site even better. We’ve been working hard to incorporate your feedback to improve the ease and effectiveness of the new site.

Last month we posted an article that called out some of the upcoming enhancements that we had planned. We wanted to update you where we are on those features and also on some of the issues we have seen and resolved. Finally, at the end of this post we have included links to articles and videos that will help answer your questions and provide more tips on the new site.

Feature update:

We have updated a number of features, and we continue to add and refine features based on your feedback.

Features updated since the launch of the new Ancestry site:

  • View and add notes – Notes are now available as a slide-out on the right side of the screen, so you can quickly review and add notes. It is turned on in the tools menu on the top right.
  • View and add comments – Comments are now available as a slide-out on the right side of the screen, so you can quickly review and add comments. It is turned on in the tools menu on the top right.
  • Media Gallery / Viewer – We have added a number of features to the new media Gallery/viewer:
    • Save photos to your family trees from the new media viewer
    • Edit the description and details on a photo or story
    • Create and upload a new story in the media Gallery
    • View and listen to audio and video files
  • Story formatting in the Gallery – We have fixed the layout and formatting to make it more readable.
  • Web links – We have implemented web link functionality on the new Ancestry site. Web links are found on the Facts View at the bottom of the Sources column.
  • Age on Facts View events – The age at a specific event has been available on the LifeStory page in the new Ancestry. We have now also added it to the Facts View to make it easier to review facts.
  • Adjusted profile page photo to better fit – Some pictures were not fit correctly. This has been adjusted to show the whole picture on the profile page.
  • Quick edit – The quick edit option is now available on the person card in the tree viewer under the Tools menu. It is also available under the Edit menu in the person profile.
  • Guidance on LifeStory and Facts view – We have added some in-line help screens that appear when you first come to either page.
  • Source and media counts on Facts view – Sources and media associated with events on the Facts view are now represented with a number count in addition to the fact/source link lines. Counts are also links and will direct to the appropriate section in the edit modal when clicked.
  • Media Comments – Comments from the classic site will be available in the media viewer with the ability to also comment on them in the new Ancestry site.

Features that we are still working on:

  • Media Gallery sorting/filtering – Sort and filter by media type, chronological order.
  • FamilySearch integration – LDS Account holders will be able to share information between their Ancestry tree on the new Ancestry site and their Family Tree on FamilySearch.
  • Print option on profile pages – The ability to print a new printer-friendly version of the Facts view or LifeStory view of the individuals in your tree.
  • Profile picture cropping – Edit/crop a profile photo to fit in the circular photo space
  • Member Connect – Find other members researching a similar ancestor and save info from their family trees
  • Family Group Sheet – A family view of the person and their family

Top Reported Issues

We continue to listen to and track your comments and issues on social blogs, comments, and in the survey that appears when you leave the new Ancestry site. Below is a status on the top 10 issues surfacing from your feedback.

  • Family Group Sheet – Some of you have asked for this to be available to view and to print. We are planning to make this available.
  • Inaccurate narrations in LifeStory and Facts view – We are looking at the language in the narrations and how to better generate narratives.
  • Photos added to events to appear as thumbnails in Facts view – Thank you for your feedback on this. We are evaluating whether to include this functionality in the new Ancestry site.
  • LifeStory map pins appearing in wrong locations – This has been an issue due to how the locations are evaluated. We implemented a fix last week that will prevent mapping pins for any location that doesn’t have a standardized place. We are also looking at improving the standardized place engine to ensure correct pin placement.
  • Printer-friendly options on LifeStory and Facts view – These features should be available within the next month.
  • Circle profile picture issues – We have updated the profile image to show more of the picture. We will soon release a cropping tool to better fit individual portraits and individuals from group photos.
  • Member Connect – We are evaluating what to do with this feature moving forward. Currently, Member Connect has been underutilized by most members.
  • Color scheme feedback – We have heard your feedback about the readability of the new colors. We are continuing to adjust parts of the site to make sure it is easy to see and use. The new styles are designed to increase the contrast and usability. We will continue to adjust where issues are identified. For example, a bug with Windows 7 and TrueType font support was causing readability issues for some members. We have documented how you can fix this issue here.
  • “Try the new Ancestry” advertisement showing when printing records – This was happening in error and has been resolved.
  • Can’t uncheck profile photo – This issue has been addressed and is now available and we are working to make it more intuitive to change the profile photo.

 

Help Links

Links

Help Articles

Blogs

Webinars

109 Comments

  1. Jeff Record

    These new “upgrades” to the Ancestry.com pages are terrible.Your efforts might be better suited if you work on furnishing additional or better records access than on silly presentation methods. Make this new Ancestry format “OPTIONAL” and not mandatory. I don’t need to know that the RW war was going on in a pictograph while researching my ancestor in that era.You are creating needless headaches for yourselves and your subscribers. Ultimately, you are going to lose subscribers over this. Good luck!

  2. Joyce Fortna

    Thank you for all your work on the new site. I am enjoying the upgrade. I appreciate the fact that you are working on the issues. I have had a tree with ancestry for a number of years and love working on my family history.

  3. John

    I agree with Joyce, the new design is great and I look forward to the changes coming to the new media gallery. Keep up the good work. One issue that I don’t see being addressed is the missing image transcriptions. In the old media gallery, if the image was a scan of a document, you could add the text transcription. Those transcriptions are not yet visible in the new media gallery viewer.

  4. Mindy Thompson

    I too appreciate all of the hard work that has been put into this ! I really LIKE the new version. So thumbs up to all of you…..
    One thing that I would like to see in both the FTM software and the online version is this:: Say I am looking at another persons tree that has 5,000 people in it & I hover over the “find a person in this tree” (top right) then I click on “list of all people” – what I want to be able to do, is see ALL the people in that tree who were born and/or died in say Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee and with that many people that means pages & pages of manually looking.

    Is there a way under the “list of all people” page that a drop down menu or the arrow (for sorting) could be used for the “birth” place and the “death” place (for those who have a city/state listed) for the purpose of sorting the city/states alphabetically.

    If there were only 1 person in a 5,000 people tree that had Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee listed, then it’s very probable that it would be missed.

  5. SUE BOCOCK

    I think what you did is horrible it is harder to navigate. I don’t like it at all but I don’t see you posting that! I told you that before it is enough to make me cancel my membership. There’s an old adage “if it isn’t broken don’t fix it!”

  6. Patricia

    I like some of your historical insights on the lifestory page, but you need to provide an EDIT button for us to adjust the test. For instance, you write things like John Smith may have come to NY through Ellis Island. It frustrates me to not be able to EDIT your facts. I’ve had multiple relatives come through Ellis Island. I don’t want the story line to say someone MAY have come through Ellis Island when they DID. Please give us an edit button. Also, please inform your customer service people not to advise people to click IGNORE on these historical insights without first warning the customer the insight will be gone forever. Repeatedly, your reps have told me to do this. I don’t know why these stories can’t be on your site, filed by geographic location, so I can go in and pick and choose which ones to add to my life stories.
    Also, every time I add multiple pictures to an individual fact that I place on the life story, your system rearranges the order of my media items and ruins the flow of the life story. Please give us a way to drop and drag our media items to create the order that best supports the fact we are illustrating.

  7. Patricia

    Please add a delete tab to the quick edit feature on the pedigree chart.
    And please fix the legibility of the type face. When I am on the pedigree chart, I have to enlarge it alot just to make it legible. Doing that means not that many people are visible at one time. I had no problems with legibility on the old Ancestry.

  8. Patricia

    Please restore the thumbnails of media items to the facts on the persons profile page. I find it such a time waste to have to go into the gallery to see if I have a media item added to a fact.

  9. Patricia

    When I create custom facts, and add them to the life story, your pins do not use the name of my custom fact, but instead just say custom fact. Please have the pins use the title of my custom fact.

  10. Patricia

    I look forward to Member Connect functioning again and the availability of Family Group Sheets.

  11. Patricia

    I wish you had a little icon that indicated if the tree owner was a DNA customer. That way, if I see people on their tree that match my family, I’ll know to check my DNA list for their tree connection.

  12. MaryM

    It’s still not ready for prime time. Much of what’s on my tree pages in the new format needs editing: children’s last names don’t show on timelines when the mother has more than one spouse; death records come before birth records; multiple spouses are listed if there is more than one marriage record for the same person. I can’t access my pictures from anywhere on the FACTS, GALLERY, or LIFESTORY pages to edit them or add information. Cemetery names and locations don’t show with my grave pictures. I can’t edit/delete most of what Ancestry has chosen to write on the FACTS and LIFESTORY pages for me. The new format doesn’t work for big trees. Pages are too long–too much scrolling to see everything. If I had known that Ancestry was going to make all these changes, I wouldn’t have put so much time and effort into my trees. And when is the Louisiana “County” problem going to be resolved? It’s “Parish” not “County!”

  13. Cheryl

    Thumbs down to all of New Ancestry. Everything about is not user friendly! It is really Ancestry’s new game of hide-and-seek. New is so clunky and cumbersome I’d be embarrassed to claim it. But here is a suggestion for those of us who NEVER used the Story View in Classic and will never use Life Story in New . . ,give us a method to turn Life Story off so that visitors to our trees will not be able to view this complete and utter disaster!

  14. Cheryl

    Another suggestion…you did add the age to the facts page (how could you not have added it to start with?). Now put it inside the box with the fact and MAKE THE AGE DARK ENOUGH AS TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT!!!!!

  15. MickieJE

    Most things seems to be going well. But I have two problems with the circle frames. one is that I just prefer the rectangles, the other is loss of size or image (one has to go if you change shape. Instead of working on adjusting the circles, why not just offer the formatting option to use circular or square frames? I’ll keep my images off for now – too many have details in corners. Also, is there a way to brighten up the family tree view? It’s very dark and the tree is overall harder on my eyes. As I said, though, other functions all seem to be going well so far. Thanks for listening!

  16. Linda

    Sorry Ancestry! Your subscribers are not your development team. Subscribers pay a fee to access records or indices through an appropriate interface. Surely, your implementation plan did not include the alienation of subscribers???

  17. Linda Thomas-Fowler

    Was the option to save record images removed????? It was there yesterday but seems to be gone today! How is one supposed to download record images now?

  18. Lisa

    I used to be able to see both an ancestors parents and siblings on the hints page to make a quick comparison to know if I had a good hint, or if it wasn’t my ancestor. Now I have to toggle back and forth from the hints page to the facts page. Not pleased.

  19. jeanvirginia

    I just finished a rather quick read of the July 15 update and note that you are evaluating the Member Connect feature.

    It has been very helpful to me to see right on my home page a tree owner who has saved something from my tree, making it possible for me to check out their tree. I can then contact the tree owner for further information if it seems that it would be beneficial to either or both of us.

    Please continue the feature for those of us who do utilize it, even if it most members have not done so.

  20. MarshaCromwellPerry

    Don’t like it. Makes it more complicated to use. Also what happened to all the stories I attached? Have they been erased? How to I add new ones? Not Comments – actual stories. PLEASE go back to the former easier, less complicated format !!

  21. Janice

    Thanks for what you are doing to improve the new site. I am waiting for ~all~ printing ability functions to be restored before I return to new site, including records, indexes, story view, etc. Would also like it if there was a nice printer-friendly view of the family group sheet. Looking forward to the ability to sort pictures and such. While I do, overall, like the historical insights, I would like to be able to indicate that a person actually did serve (or did not) in a war, for example. Or whether or not their life was particularly affected by an event. I think a lot of subscribers are unduly harsh – many don’t like any change at all – but I know you are working to develop a better product and I appreciate that. Thanks.

  22. Dissatisfied Subscriber

    Ancestry has devastated its most valuable asset by destroying the classic timeline that was able to contain photographs and images of documents along side the text in each timeline slot. Those images along side the text could express so much information and emotion in such a small space; they could draw your attention immediately to a particular time in an ancestor’s life with an image of their family, a picture of their covered wagon or sod home on a prairie, the one room school house where they attended school, or a tribute posted of an image of a folded U.S.A. flag beside the text explaining the death of a soldier who died in service to his/her country. The classic Ancestry timeline was GREAT — it gave us a unique way of presenting our family history in a series brief timeline summaries in a text format highlighted with photographs or documents pertaining to an ancestor and their families along side the text. The timeline images (that could be clicked on to open to full size) helped to draw a reader’s eyes to a particular timeline slot and stimulate their interest in reading the text in the timeline to learn more about the person, family, or historical event presented.

    The classic Ancestry timeline enabled the subscriber to have options to display their work in a format that was attractive, easily used and understood (not just by the subscriber but by anyone they wished to share the information with – from the young to the elderly). I have worked on Ancestry for years to preserve my family history in an easily used, informative, attractive, and interesting manner — in one fell swoop Ancestry destroyed a good portion of what I have tried to create. Ancestry needs to place itself in my shoes, as well as the shoes of so many other Ancestry subscribers, and understand how DEVASTATED and ANGRY we are to have years of our hard work vanish or be separated away into distinct screens. Screens where our timeline is cramped by useless census file icons with large print identifying the census file (basically a “screen hoarding ad” to promote Ancestry’s records), or cramped media galleries presented in a jumbled random sequence, filled with cropped file icons, and covered in white print titles. Ancestry should never take the images we save to our family tree(s) and crop them or print across them! The classic timeline had so much genealogical information neatly displayed on one screen – it was a focal point to show how all the information on a family came together to present the history of an ancestor.

    My family contains many men and women who served their country from before the founding of our nation to the present. Part of what I worked on was to honor them and their lives — Ancestry threw my work aside and replaced it with generic fillers that have caused my work to lose the personal touches and tributes that made my family timeline unique and interesting. Just as I was hitting my stride and getting to a point to know exactly how to best present my family history, Ancestry devastated the format that suited my work the best.

    If Ancestry has redesigned its site to attract more subscribers, the dissatisfaction with the new site will only drive subscribers away. To attract more customers, Ancestry should reinstate the classic timeline and uncropped images, and provide more ORIGINAL documents: Wills, Marriage Records, Birth Record, Death Certificates, Obituaries, Old Newspapers, County Histories, Land Records, Naturalization Records, etc.

    Ancestry needs to make their site desirable by providing accurate information, more original documents, and listening to the needs expressed by their subscribers – THEY SHOULD STRIVE TO BECOME KNOWN AS AN INTERNET SITE THAT TRULY LISTENS TO ITS SUBSCRIBERS AND PROVIDES WHAT THEY ASK FOR!!!!!!!!! Not as a site that forces thoughtless, devastating, unnecessary, unwanted, and useless changes upon subscribers (soon to be former subscribers!!!!!!).

    I vote that as Ancestry subscribers, we join together to make our voices heard – if Ancestry chooses to continue to ignore our requests, do not renew your subscription to Ancestry. Take some time to spread the word about the errors and problems that you have experienced so people thinking about subscribing will be informed about the problems we have experienced with Ancestry before finally deciding whether they are still interested in subscribing or should be looking elsewhere.

  23. Vince

    Re, Dissatisfied Subscriber comments: For all the reasons that you and other dissatisfied customers have eloquently narrated, I certainly hope Ancestry will keep the Classic Site intact for serious researchers and make the new interface an option for the very few subscribers who seem to like it. If they do, all tree owners should also have control over which interface is presented to other subscribers who view their trees. I do not want anyone viewing my trees under the cumbersome, misleading and inaccurate environment of Ancestry’s new interface. That’s why I’ve made all my trees private for the time being and will warn any invitees about the problems of the new interface.

  24. JoAnn Olinger-Luscusk

    Please let us keep the old Ancestor web interface if we wish!!! I know where everything is on that site, I can find things, it’s well organized. The new site is NOT well organized, and is TOO PUSHY. That is, it forces so-called “facts” about our ancestors upon us, instead of allowing us to edit these according to documentation that we have found. You need to keep the classic site for those who want to use it.

  25. douggrf

    Review this quote carefully: ” A LIFESTORY is about events; and exploring those events requires multi media options – and this quite frankly is the opportunity for your growth. While I am the family historian, I am only one person. My family would engage if they could explore their ancestors in an interesting manner.

    Sometimes this place takes on the tone of library science and archivist. LIFESTORY seems to be functionality designed to bring to life people and their events — AND behind or supporting LIFESTORY is FACTS the place for genealogical best practices for research, sources, citations, etc.

    LIFESTORY is a good first move, but needs to enable exploration of the person and their life events and not simply answer – does it work for GEDCOM. LIFESTORY should be the public face of the person – as such its UI should be engaging.

    The product could evolve to family portal (read as additional subscription revenue) for family members interested in exploring but not researching, compiling, building and maintaining.

    For example,

    The story of the wedding event is comprised of documents and rich media (marriage license, wedding certificate, pictures, video,) … The event is created, but how do you add the multi media files?
    pdf is an absolute must – it is the de facto multi page format. If I have a multi-page Will that I want to include in the LIFESTORY … well today I can’t unless it is one of the picture formats where you have to upload multiple png’s, jpegs, etc to. Seriously pdf should be a mandatory inclusion. AND have an inline pdf viewer. Having to download the pdf file for viewing actually will decrease site usage and time spent on the site.

    LIFESTORY seems to be functionality designed to bring to life people and their events. Behind or supporting LIFESTORY is FACTS the place for genealogical best practices for research, sources, citations, etc.

    So, make LIFESTORY more useful for its purpose – exploration of the events of the life of an ancestor.

    FACTS = Documentation

    LIFESTORY = Immersive Exploration

    Get that right and there is a new revenue channel. “original comment by researcher Todd Evans

  26. pat

    i am working on the new version with census documents. on the classic version we had an index where everyone listed on that page was listed. we could check for information not seen on the document, verify names, birth dates, clarify names, add variations of names, dates, etc. i am not seeing the index for the new version. will the index be added back to the census documents? it was always very helpful for me. i could also go to different people in the family and attach the record to them but now i can’t. i liked this since the census document does not always show up for all the family members. i see you have added some functions to the new version. i am trying to not go back to the classic but i still have to so i can get information or do functions still not on the new version. help! thanks

  27. pamela

    oh dear, I have not been onto ancestry for over a week and it seems that the new update and format that has been released by Ancestry is about as acceptable as a heat wave in a chocolate factory. Why is it that companies decide what they think is best for paying customers and leave no option or a choice to adopt the new or to remain on old format. New subscribers could get the new or updated format. . I don’t mind a few changes and improvements but seems to be a lot. I cancelled membership to another site last year as their changed format was such that I could no longer find anything. I had just paid subs at that time so that was lost money. I hope this does not happen with Ancestry. I have been member for years. Hopefully Ancestry are getting too big and not too interested in the long time members. I get annoyed with the fact that you seem to be riding a bit rough shod over paying subscribers as you get bigger and more dominant. If I am paying for a service, I want to be able to have some control and if changes are made that I the SUBSCRIBER have to opportunity to choose the new format or not. I don’t subscribe and join a club to play football and halfway through season the club decides opt for rugby without any by your leave. Ancestry I know you will take absolutely no notice. Subscriptions are now very expensive and more so for people on fixed incomes. World membership cost is more than two weeks income and will be more so with exchange rate. Not sure I will be renewing membership. I, as a paying customer feel I should have some control over what is happening. I heard the new colours are hard to read. I already have sight problem so thanks for that little innovation and how come you released an imperfect product and expect us to waste time reporting and losing value for money whilst your boffins keep trying to fix the problems caused. Any updates seemed to be or are riddled with problems no matter. I have worked on my family history and subscribed for many years. I use and value Member Connect, so evaluate that to the positive and leave it be, would be appreciated. It is or would be a sad world if we all had to be like sheep and do what the shepherd wants without the choice of jumping off the cliff or not . I do hope when I open ancestry I will find all my records etc intact and not be as disappointed as many seem to be. Going by dougrrf, dissatisfied subscriber and many others it seems perhaps I will not be best pleased. Perhaps I will be back to comment further maybe even to report I have had a very positive experience on the new beaut updated Ancestry. I certainly hope so. Wishing myself luck here..

  28. Carol Brown

    Please fix the Life Story mini pedigree so that children are not linked to all spouses in a multiple marriage situation but instead, are linked only to their appropriate parent.

  29. Walter W. Crites

    The new version is not user friendly. My tree has lost many of its members, and those remaining have been decapitated. Bring back the previous version and let the new one be optional. You have dome your subscribers a disservice with the update.

  30. I echo the “dissatisfied” comments in spades. I use “find person in this tree” all the time. It should always be available; now it takes a lot of time and work to get there !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am very unhappy about this

  31. Steve

    Just received an email that says try the new Ancestry, its practically a new Ancestry. Is should say its a impractical Ancestry.
    They have destroyed all the good things they have been known for.
    They are going to keep the circle pictures, no matter how many people complain.
    The story book is just that, a story, but the serious researcher, wants the facts, in the classic view.
    This is not what I paid for.
    Ancestry will be down to a handful of members, if they keep this NEW format.

  32. Constance

    Your developers time would have been better spent making sure that all of the current features were working consistently. I greatly valued Member Connections and that hasn’t worked for months. I do NOT want a story line. The new format may be nice for the occasional visitor, but it has garbled up years of research. PLEASE make sure that “old” Ancestry does not go away.

    Many of us are undoubtably researching other companies. I have been a loyal subscriber to Ancestry for many years, but this new format is pushing me to consider making a big change.

    Listen to your subscribers!!! Quit playing with the fluff and let us keep a format that worked for serious researchers.

  33. Jade

    Amazing how many think their subscriptions are paying for having their trees hosted. All trees are freebies, folks. It is access to the databases you are paying for.

  34. Steve

    One example: my grandfather, I added many events with 13 pictures. But in the story book page, only 2 pictures, events not shown: school, military service, the many service awards, work, religion, hobbies, & burial.
    But I was so glad to learn from Ancestry, that he may have read the Sears Catalog !!!
    Please, subscribers, who hate this new format, let Ancestry know how we feel.

  35. M Zashin

    PLEASE do not continue the circular format for primary photo!!! Sometimes I have only a document or a tombstone. Pictures are overwhelmingly square or rectangular–very rarely circular! Please tell me the reason you are insisting on circles? NO ONE on the message boards or here that I have been able to find wants circles. WHY are you keeping the circles? It doesn’t matter how many “editing” features you add, it’s not possible to “edit” a document to fit into a circle. Please give me an answer as to why you stubbornly insist on those inept circles!

  36. Melinda

    The New Ancestry does not live up to the hype. I would be more forgiving of the bugs that need to be worked out if you didn’t make such a production of the new features as if they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Today I received the email about the new Ancestry and viewed the (advertisement) video. One one the last things the video boasted was about how the media gallery allows you to “organize and sort photos (etc) quickly and easily.” Nothing could be further from the truth when users no longer have ability to change/select which is the primary photo or to rearrange the order of items displayed. I understand that we all make mistakes from time to time, but when you blatantly mislead your subscribers with such false statements it makes me angry. I don’t like giving my money to to companies that cannot be trusted to tell the truth and I will think twice about my next renewal.

  37. Dianne Diprose

    The new system takes no regard of the context of facts. I have ancestors whose whole life was spent in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. If one record happens to not specify Australia, then your system places them in Melbourne, Florida. One relative died in the First World War and the official record gives a death place of France & Flanders. Your system placed his death in Flanders, New York and offered me an article about why people emigrated to America. Do you not understand WW1? This is UNFORGIVABLE! You are trying to attract international clients but your system still tries to place everyone in the US. Must do better!

  38. Mary

    I am amazed at the number of people who don’t know they can cancel their Ancestry.com subscription TODAY, get a refund for the balance paid, and still have complete access to their Tree, whether to edit, delete, add info, or invite people. And still see other Trees on which one is a Guest. You also will still be able to see the list of “Hints,” just not be able to click on them for info. THAT’S THE ONLY DIFFERENCE. But with the “hint’s” info, one can then go to free FamilySeach.org, and there’s a good chance the info will be there. Cancel today to show you hate the new Ancestry and the way they’ve dissed our hard work, our ancestors, and our dollars!”

  39. Marjorie Cutting

    I am finding the new web site difficult to work. Some features are good but the whole presentation needs to be more compact, so a family can be viewed on one page. I miss not having census B&D records on the same page as the profile. I find the new presentation discourages me from pursuing my research.Very disappointed overall. I would like the option to use the old web page method.

  40. Connie

    I’m disappointed in the new ancestry format. I can’t access the sidebar in the gallery to edit copy on the photos. (It just shows a sliver of it). When adding family members to the profile, the new person takes a long time to show up. Having to manually refresh the entire page is a real pain. A agree with wanting to see three generations when searching for documents. It’s nice to be able to see the parents and children of people I’m searching for. Please make it easier to navigate, not harder. I, too, would like to be able to use the old format on some things.

  41. calyx

    The worst “update” since the removal of Old Search. New users won’t know the difference but long term users will bail.

  42. Diane

    Still disgusted with this whole mess. Does anyone know if we can successfully transfer all our information to familysearch ? I was reading up on it this AM and it the messages were mixed. I have FTM 2012 ( which I also dislike- loved the older versions) and wondering if I can do it that way. SORRY ANCESTRY- I have tried repeatedly to make my opinions clear on your blogs and on FaceBook about this new version but obviously YOU ARE NOT LISTENING. WHY CAN’T WE HAVE BOTH THE OLD AND NEW VERSIONS AS PERMANENT OPTIONS??????????

  43. Nancy

    Someone needs to fix New Ancestry with military pension records. Military pension records translate on Life Story that the person “served in the military” for the years when they actually just received a pension. I have several women who now appear to have served in the military when they were 80 years old.

  44. Bob Buchanan

    I understand that the old interface code is too old to be upgraded, or even kept current with growing demands and additional functionality. Perhaps because it’s new/different, it just doesn’t seem as user friendly.

    On the other hand, I like the LifeStory mode. It shows me timing connections I hadn’t seen before. They wrap a person’s story together better and make it more complete and interesting.

    Bob

  45. BL Samuel

    “new look” has some great features, like the timeline and ability to edit story and data.
    One thing, however, how can one eliminate the “Family Trees” when researching? In all the years that I’ve used Ancestry, seldom, very seldom have I run across a tree that showed evidence of anything but copying another tree! I have mine private as I received way too many emails asking me to send “everything you have on (fill in the blank)” ! Ancestry provides a tremendous data collection-appreciated, but lacks in fostering real research techniques and understanding.

  46. Vickie

    I would like to see the old version as a permanent option as well. I feel the new version sucks. However, I realize sooner or later we’ll all be stuck with the new version. New version still doesn’t have web links. The search for person option while in profile view in the old version is easy to find, in the new version it’s there, but hard to see. Look for the small magnifying glass. They have added comments in the new version, but again hard to find. Have to look under tools.

  47. George

    There’s always some transition issues and that’s understandable. But you’ve really missed the boat on this project. Subscribers are obviously highlighting some substantive issues which you should not blow off. Amongst many other problems, why don’t LifeStory and Facts sync?

  48. Shauna

    I am becoming convinced that Ancestry is really for the genealogical
    novice or browser rather than the serious researcher. Most of the “new ancestry” is irrelevant fluff and makes actual research harder. Not impressed

  49. Jade

    Please fix the location-part omissions in StoryLines and all narratives, and fix the wrong place-insertions. These are genealogically wrong and very confusing.

  50. Helen

    Please keep Classic Ancestry. Make it our choice and not Yours. You don’t spend hours working on trees. Classic is faster and more fun to work with. I haven’t been on Ancestry long but I have just about completed several of my family trees. I hope to completed them before you force us to use the New Ancestry. PAY ATTENTION OF WHAT YOUR SUBSCRIBERS ARE SAYING.

  51. Kathleen

    I agree with every single loyal Ancestry. Com member who has spent hours, days, months, years using the Classic version to establish several generations of profiles, only to have it switched with little warning and no option out to retain the classic version. If you lose a great many members, you deserve it for your thoughtless, immoveable position to refuse the classic version…even if it were for another year to allow those of us to finish our tree or to become accustomed to the new version.

  52. marylou murray

    I, also, do not like the new Ancestry. When tracing our roots, it is important to find the truth with sources to back them up. I don’t like it that a story can be made up with only partial information (ex: Joe and Molly had 1 child, when in actuality they had 5. It also appears that others can add or correct information without my permission, which can often be in-correct

  53. pamela

    In my comments of 17 July at 3.46am. I meant to say: Hopefully Ancestry are NOT getting too big and not interested in long time members opinions. I see negative remarks have not abated.
    Mary 17 July 9.03. I did not realize can still access tree if cancelled subscription. Are you still be able to sync tree on Ancestry with Family Tree Maker if take this option?
    Off to see what has happened to my tree in the last two days. I have not as yet lost anyone and hopefully it stays that way and that my British family have not suddenly American citizens, as appears to have happened to Dianne Diprose. I am going to be searching records today.Trust I will be able to find who and what I want and be able to return with a glowing report.

  54. pamela

    I have added a comment and it has disappeared. Not a glowing report and I am not going to rewrite it. except to say, that I comment of 17 July it should have read. Hopefully Ancestry are NOT getting too big and not interested in long time members opinions.
    Thanks for the info on subscription Mary 17 July and Dianne Diprose I do hope my British ancestors have not suddenly become American citizens as appears have yours. I am off to research some more and trust my people still hanging on correct branches on my trees.

  55. Pamela

    I have tried three times to add comment. Will not accept my comments. They were not unacceptable a were respectful and polite and I am not best pleased.

  56. Gene

    I canceled my subscription today. It is sad because I have been a member on Ancestry since November 7, 2001 and visit the site daily. I will probably have withdrawal symptoms for a while but I imagine I will get used to it, just like I am told I would have gotten used to LifeStory. It is just too much of a risk to take that I can lose some or all of my years of research and data entry. So I choose to be sad by my own choice, than to be mad because of Ancestry.com’s choice.

    I don’t expect that Ancestry.com will back off the “New Ancestry.com” because then the people who have to make that decision would have to acknowledge they were wrong and that would be unlike most decision makers I have met. It is what it is. The correct approach, if LifeStory was such a great new feature that most would love and want and use, would have been to make it a chargeable option with a free trial. People will pay for worthwhile features that improve their experience.

    I have been in software development for decades now and the basic rule is you don’t take away functionality that people have. Unfortunately, I suspect the new Ancestry.com will become your Microsoft Vista and someone there will end up apologizing for it in the end. The right decision would be to make a very public announcement that Classic Ancestry will not be going away January 1, 2016 or ever. Turn this around like Coke had to do with the New Coke and Classic Coke.

    The amount of negative comments I see all over the Internet must make the employees at Ancestry.com very nervous. Take it from someone who has seen whole development teams be laid off because someone in Marketing kept telling their customer base that they were wrong and correct it before it was too late.

    Good luck to you! I wish you nothing but success because I appreciate all I got from you since November 7, 2001. In the divorce settlement, I get to keep my data “as-is” and my money, and you can have a new Event to place in people’s LifeStory’s – the day I canceled my subscription. I can’t be stressing over something that is going to happen that is outside my control. I can only take my ball and go home.

  57. Wesley Riker

    As I have mentioned in previous statements…typically when there is an update…something improves, fixes are made, etc…I have never seen someone develope something that hearded them backwards…the circle pictures are absolutely ridiculous…I have a bunch of torsos…there was nothing wrong with regular squares. But then again, I fear ancestry is only catering to the few people that own Microsoft tablets…as the app from Apple Store never works right…this life story thing is ridiculous…if I wanted a story about my ancestor, I’d finish the book I’m writing….I’m so sick of a world of redundancy…the classic site worked very nicely…very comprehensive. Please leave it alone.

  58. Vince

    @Gene — I second your eloquent comments. I also cancelled my subscription today after nearly daily use since 31 Jan 2005. It’s been a good 10 years, and I’ve learned a lot. I’ll learn more from other places, but maybe Ancestry.com will still help. I remain hopefully optimistic that the powers in charge at Ancestry will do the right thing by their long-time subscribers and keep the Classic Site as a permanent option.

  59. Mary M Zashin

    OK, it’s just ugly. The dark grey mottled background–was it inspired by dead and rotting alligator skins? The neon green–bilious and hard on the eyes. The circular photos–devastating to those of us who don’t have a photo of a person but rather of a tombstone or and document. There’s no way to “edit” such a thing into a circle! Please look again at the clean, uncluttered, light look of the classic site. It’s much more aesthetically pleasing. Why you think this new look is “modern” is beyond me–it’s very 1950s to my eye. Who on earth did you hire as designers? Nobody with any graphics arts training could have been involved in this visually repulsive construction.

  60. Mary M Zashin

    AND–I really need a “View All Sources” option, which is apparently missing from the new look.

  61. I keep trying to get off this New Ancestry because it’s absolutely useless in its present state. I get on “classic” for a few minutes and I get switched back to the “new”. Can’t get much done with this.

  62. Monique Livsey

    Hi, my name is Monique Livsey
    I’m looking for my biological father, Bernard Paul Livsey so can you please help me find him thank you??

  63. Julie Moore

    Dear ancestry, Your new cluttered and chaotic look is a horrid perversion of something that used to be great. To mention something I didn’t see mentioned above, It takes twice as many clicks to do anything with this terrible new format. What a waste. Also, your choice of color formatting hurts my eyes. How can I change it? Time for you to re-evaluate whomever / whatever caused this backward step for you and your loyal subscribers. Seriously, the time and money you spent on developing this new garbage format would have been better served developing a chromosome browser for us. We are not ignorant of the ways and we do know how to utilize REAL genetic genealogy tools. If making your site more difficult to use was your intent, you have succeeded.

  64. Kristie

    Customers have accepted the fact that no one at Ancestry is listening, so you probably won’t get many posts on this blog entry. Many are busy downloading and organizing their exit from Ancestry. I have given specific feedback about what’s wrong with new Ancestry, but now I agree – why bother? You won’t change a circle to a square for profile photos that even your supporters are begging for. I know the code that runs Classic is a patchwork and unstable. Classic has issues, and I am for progress. I might have been one of your biggest cheerleaders IF new Ancestry improved… anything. The bottom line is it’s ugly and doesn’t function logically. You caused your own resistance to ‘new’ with the “soon new Ancestry will be the only Ancestry” attitude, and by shoving a not-ready-for-action Beta site on the stage. You owe customers an apology, and some meaningful communication.

    I am waiting to see if substantial usability/design improvements are implemented by my renewal date. If not, I have to break up with you Ancestry. I had a wonderful time with many happy memories, but I’m not going to stay in a dysfunction relationship. Thank you for the joy you once provided, and thank you for showing me where you’re headed so I have time to prepare to move on. I have mastered how the new site works, but I don’t care for the ugly, convoluted set-up. I could ‘get used to it’, but I don’t have to. I have options. I am, after all, the customer.

  65. Bev

    @Kristie…thank you for expressing my views about new Ancestry so very well! I’m one of those who is currently “busy downloading and organizing” and preparing to move on.

  66. Nancy

    I love Ancestry and have been a member since 2000. I have maintained a subscription most of that time. There is absolutely no way I could have discovered all I have on my ancestors if I had to do it all traveling and on-sight research. I appreciate that technology evolves and with that comes changes to web sites and interaction. But those changes shouldn’t make things more difficult for users. You make such a big deal about LifeStory, yet that is useless to me. I can create a comprehensive timeline in my genealogy software that can be either printed to a pdf or on paper. I don’t upload any media to my trees so I don’t have those issues that so many others are having. I am on the family tree pages a great deal due to the DNA kits I administer. Within a short time the dark background and faded colors cause me eyestrain and headaches. I have tried changing resolution etc. Doesn’t help. In your post you list the color scheme as one of the top complaints, yet you say you are doing nothing about it. Instead telling us to adjust our fonts. It isn’t the fonts I have issues with, it is the dark background and faded colors. It is a sad day when a company refuses to listen to their customers.

  67. Margaret

    Really don’t like the new setup. Also I have noticed that some information got changed by error = i.e. an Uncle from England who died in England seems to have (according to the record on his mothers list_ died in Illinois. If we must use this, please give us an edit so we can correct the errors. Really liked the old classic and ability to access other members who have same ancestors.
    Do appreciate all the work put into this, but seems many of us were happier before.

  68. Cynthia

    I don’t like the new Ancestry website at all. Family group sheets are essential. It is slow, tedious and needs serious upgrades.

  69. Char

    I see someone else mentioned this today, but thought I would let you know that I want it too. It is the ability to delete a person from the tree page, using quick edit. Also, the link within the quick edit to more detailed edit, as it is in Classic.

    When I have decided to delete an entire branch, I do it from the tree page. I put it in family mode, from the viewpoint of the oldest person.

    Then I start deleting the youngest in the branch and work my way up. And that can only be done if the delete function is available on quick mode.

  70. Greg

    The post above clearly states profile pictures have been adjusted to show the whole picture instead of them being cropped off at the neck.
    this is not the case and the pictures are not fixed. Ancestry is losing credibility (and subscribers I would guess) quickly.

  71. Vince

    As of today, the drop-down menu item under the user name at the top right corner of most screens in the new interface for switching back to the old interface has changed from “Classic Site” to “Old Ancestry”. Ancestry administrators: Please tell us that means you have decided to keep the Classic/Old site available permanently, as requested by hundreds of your long-time subscribers.

  72. Bailey

    Interesting how Ancestry says they have been listening to us and incorporating what we say into the new site to make it better. Clearly they are not listening or the new would go away. If you code is old then update it. Don’t go changing things that have made life easy and fun for researching our heritage. If you ask me, this whole thing was conceived by people who never used the old site. Smacks of someone wanting a promotion and to make a name for themselves by “transforming” a good product to the perceived great product. Well, time to move on and job hunt for those people because they have made a huge mistake. Let’s just say if we all screwed up at our jobs like the creators of this new site we would have been fired by now.

  73. jill

    Love the new site makes it feel like you are back in time w the histoy connection.you provide great tools to learn the site and updating your subscribers.Ty

  74. Bailey

    Do not like facts in one column and sources in another. Stupid change. No need to scroll all over the place to see what source is with what fact. Would love it if Ancestry would put it back the way it was. Makes for unnecessary work for the user. And, looks horrible.

  75. Bailey

    Can you remove the circle for pictures and go back to the classic style? too much white unused space around the picture and most of the time the pictures are not round but square.

  76. Bailey

    Lots of comments about code used for classic sight. It’s all about the presentation. Code can be updated and the classic sight could still exist. And I agree with previous comments about the timeline. I don’t really care what happened in the world when my mother was born. If I am interested, I’ll research it myself without snippets of history being decided for me.

  77. John Schroeter

    I am with the majority in my disdain for the “New Ancestry! Particularly in regards to the family tree functions. I have been a member for many, many years and often recommended Ancestry to others. I will not do so now. I have only started using the Tree feature recently, haveing finalyl made some sense of disputed ‘facts’. I found it easy to use and well geared to people who are serious about genealogy. The “New Ancestry” is a disaster in regards to family trees. I have been agonising over whether to continue my subscription. I have decided to continue at least for now because of the data bases. But, I will not be adding anything to my trees. I will wait and see if Ancestry actually listens to the majority of their subscribers.

  78. Please leave Ancestry as is. We spend enough time looking for our ancestors and we DO NOT have time
    to spend learning this new format!!

  79. Bailey

    switch to the UK site. There is no switch to toggle back and forth between old and new. Well, at least not yet. Guess they want to see how those that use the US site do with unwanted changes. And, I still have yet to understand when I do a search and check off female I get more male names than female. This is what I mean by spending dollars on search engine and not the fluffy, ugly look the new site has.

  80. Vince

    Bailey: Good to see this happy cat let out of the bag — I made the switch last week but was leery of mentioning it here for fear of accelerating the demise of the Classic/Old interface even at the ancestry.co.uk site. I’ve routinely kept my main 8,100+ person tree and smaller ones synchronized through the TreeSync feature of Family Tree Maker 2014 on my PC. So I was able to duplicate most of my main tree at ancestry.co.uk by upload of a backup from FTM. Several types of data held in the original tree are lost during such a transfer through the download/upload process:

    From Ancestry
    •Comments [deal breaker for many trees, but I made little use of comments]
    •Military pages
    •DNA Results
    •Photo tags

    From Family Tree Maker
    •Some types of notes (research, fact, citation, relationship, media)
    •Some types of media (relationship, source)
    •Media categories
    •Short place names
    •Place locations
    •Person and relationship ID facts
    •Saved charts & reports

    See more about what is and is not transferred during TreeSync at: http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5356/kw/sync/

    A specific sad loss during the download from Ancestry to FTM is the information about which Ancestry member originally submitted items that were attached to the original tree from other Ancestry trees, which apparently is also lost in the New Ancestry interface.

    Stories that were created on the original tree in HTML form (Add Media / Add a story / I want to write a story) or attached from other trees in that form are downloaded intact from Ancestry to FTM but are NOT included in the new tree created by upload. Ancestry developers of FTM explained to me in 2013 that HTML files are excluded from uploads because they could have malicious code injected before the upload. Downloads of such files from Ancestry to FTM are allowed because they were created within the Ancestry system. That loss is a potentially large for me, as I have more than 400 such files in my original main tree. But I’ve been intending to convert them to PDF files, which are accepted for upload. Now I have increased motivation to get on with that project while waiting to see whether Ancestry.com eventually decides to keep the Classic/Old interface active for people who prefer it.

  81. Roger

    No. Your trees are already available in Ancestry.co.uk. There is no need to upload or port anything in to Ancestry.co.uk. Your username and password will log you in to the UK site as do my details log me in to the US site. In fact, you can be logged in to both sites at the same time and I am frequently doing this so that I can test and check the usability for me, of the New Ancestry. I have the Classic site open, here for me in the UK and the New interface open in Ancestry.com. No need to upload or download GEDCOM files and no need to sync (I don’t use FTM) – any changes to data you make in one site will more or less be immediately be reflected in changes at the other site. It is a very useful facility and well worth working with it as a learning process. Whilst I am working, using Firefox, I have one tab open at .com and one tab open at .co.uk.

  82. Roger

    If the day of death is not known but the day of burial is, the burial precedes the death in the timeline of the ancestor’s profile. In Old Ancestry it does not and it is the correct way round; the death will be shown as May 1832 and the burial will be shown as 25 May 1832 and this burial will be the last event. This needs re-ordering.

  83. Mickey14

    Sorry to let the cat out of the bag Roger, but I have been using both sites as you do and felt bad for those that may have access to the UK site and are having problems with viewing for sight reasons, etc. Sadly, the demise of the classic ancestry that we all seem to love will happen sooner or later. But for now it is good to have options.

  84. Dee

    I hereby cast another vote of dissension for the NEW AND IMPROVED Ancestry. I have used ancestry since it began and you paid for only the modules you wanted. I am sad to say that if ancestry deletes the Classic format, I am gone. My daughter and I are working hard to download/print off all that we have paid to find. Yes, Classic format does have problems. Why did they not fix those instead of forcing this new format? I was thinking maybe they could borrow some programmers from Microsoft, but some of their stuff is just as bad. Hummmm – what to do? Unfortunately, continue saving records so that I can leave ancestry.

  85. Roger

    When we correctly added a marriage and added the data – all in the right order – we would get a nice box in old Ancestry timeline that said ‘Marriage to John Doe’ and for the spouse ‘Marriage to Mary Smith’. That’s gone and doesn’t display in the New Ancestry timeline. We just get ‘Marriage’ and the spouse is at the bottom of the timeline entry. This is retro . . . . . Small thing but I preferred it the way it was.

  86. Jake

    It appears I am late getting my two cents in and everybody has already laid out how really bad and frustrating in every possible way that the new Ancestry truly is. I also resent the fact that when I bailed out and answered the questionaire, I was presented with a message (don’t remember the exact wording) telling me in effect to get used to it because we are going to change it and the old ancestry is going to go away. That was the last straw and my very large extended family and I have been shopping for a new service. We are waiting to see if they really intend to go though with this fiasco and then cancel our subscriptions. Adding to our displeasure is the fact that lately 90 % of the time that I find a document I need it has been coming up “INDEX ONLY” and I am not able to see the actual document and cull a lot more additional information contained in those documents. Also many of the documents after selecting are not updating the profiles. In conclusion, there is only one other experience almost as bad as this that I have had in recent memory and that was when I tried Windows 8.1 and had to get my money back it was just as awwful as this is.

  87. Helen Ullmann

    I do serious research on Ancestry and I need it. I need to be able to print whole pages from books. So frustrating that that doesn’t seem to be possible any more.

  88. Susan

    I wrote to you much earlier about this upgrade and pointed out some of the mistakes, but I don’t see my message posted in this list.

    I totally agree with everyone who doesn’t like this “upgrade”. It is just wrong in so many ways. Please read the comments and take them to heart. We pay a lot of money for this, and Ancestry, you get a lot of souls for our dollars.

    I totally agree with the comments of Kristie, John Schroeter and Bailey, above, as well as many, many others, and I, too, will not recommend Ancestry to anyone because it’s too difficult to use.

    Change it back and spend your money on acquiring more records and fixing the few problems you already had.

    Lastly, I spent a long time tonight trying to even get in to the site. You kept tell me that I didn’t exist, my username and/or password was wrong. That made me really unhappy. It’s like filling up the gas tank in your car only to find that there is a hole and the gas is spilling out all over the ground.

  89. Bailey

    I agree with Jake. Why so many “index only” records and no visible document? And Dee was spot on with the comment of why not fix what was wrong with “Classic Ancestry” instead of rushing head long into this new thing – feels like it is still in beta testing as nothing works well or is just horrible. I think the company is more interested in trying to sell themselves rather than listening to users and their constructive comments. But, then again, Ancestry is like a politician – elected by the people to go do what they want.

  90. Tom K.

    I really don’t like most of the new changes. I’m not interesting in telling any story here. I am here mostly for research, and many of the changes make it harder for me to conduct research and to find the source of the document I’m looking at, etc. Especially with the census: I don’t like that you have removed the jurisdiction line which used to be in the upper-left of the image. I was always glancing at that to make sure of where I was, what the correct spelling of the township, etc., and using that to navigate to other parts of a county, etc. Now I have to go digging to find it. Takes time and I don’t like it. Also, I want to be able to look at sources more easily. Looks like you have changed that a bit. I also don’t like all of the pop-up adds I get now, even if they are from you. Again, I not interested in “telling any story” on Ancestry.com. I’m here researching and don’t like the interruptions and they way you have made things harder and more time-consuming to look at things.

  91. calyx

    Stop putting ads for the New Ancestry on the front page of the site. Stop dragging me into the New Ancestry when I login. I advise everyone to move your data to FamilySearch. Here’s a tip. I had a number of issues with Ancestry. It took 2-3 years to clear that up. STOP TINKERING WITH THE SITE. Make your programmers take some classes in genealogy research.

  92. Krismania

    This new horror had better be OPTIONAL! A load of extra ‘smart’ stuff we don’t need, and it’s much harder to navigate. Don’t force this on otherwise fairly satisfied customer, and for pity’s sake learn something from the Findmypast disaster and stop fixing things which ain’t broke! It’s a horrible change full of unwanted information and cheap tricks. Not for the serious genealogist at all.

  93. JennyThe Rook

    I am readying for my next spate of research I hop on to check a fact I had and I see this ugly scrapbook garbage that tries to tell my story FOR ME. Badly. If this truly is mandatory soon I need to be a member long enough to strip all my data and photos ( I lost some stuff to a leaky storage facility or Id just leave now) to HD for new program. Get my Gedcoms and blank out every piece of data I ever put here even if WFT will have info incl the bad info (_( This place will be the mecca of clickers with disposable income who didn’t want to actually vet material; who have no idea if that immigrant is really related but wow it goes back to 1400! And will muddy trees and set back research 50 years! This is HORRIBLE! Please at least make it optional. hard work and years designing a car that doesn’t run…still is the yield of a Junk Car!

  94. Bailey

    I must admit I take those Ancestry hints I ignore them, but they stay with the record. I often use that to further my research and not just blindly accept them since so often they are wrong. But at times they do point me into a direction I haven’t thought of. That being said, my opinion of “New Ancestry” remains the same. dollars would have been better spent on search engine upgrades, obtaining new data and document images rather than all this “index only” that shows up. And the telling a story is stupid. If I want to tell a story about my tree or ancestor I am quite capable of doing that myself, along with what information I determine is necessary. I don’t care to have Ancestry determine that for me. all of this fluff makes research more difficult and less enjoyable than need be. And telling me to turn off certain features just lends credence to the fact that those things are not necessary.

  95. Ann

    I agree with Bailey and the hundreds of others who have written and called customer service to complain, it would have been nice to have seen the money that went into this terrible and un needed update go to a stronger search engine, or better way to search the card catalog or to DNA results that identified the exact cousin relationship, rather than broad ranges like 3rd through 6th cousins, and instead said: Maternal Line, or Paternal line, 3rd cousin. Or into a better obituary and newspaper collection, or purchasing more record collections, or more military photographs. Why Ancestry would spend all this time and money on an update to a system that was perfectly fine and we were all satisfied with,and no one complained about, befuddles me. I doubt anyone wrote them and said:” I would like you to take my individual’s profile pages and reconfigure them into soppy prose life stories that mortify me to have linked to my username, or that they said:” Please make the colors on the website so glaring and distracting and the entire graphic design so overly busy, that I can’t concentrate while looking at the page and get anything done.” Or “Please put that bizarre inverted Nike like symbol sweeping across the middle of the page thing, in the middle of my page to direct my eye to a function on the page.” Or: “Oh please crop all my photos so they do not fully fill the icon frame”, or ” When I click on an individual in a tree I don’t want it to actually open it and find the individuals overview, what I want is to get the same exact information I just got from their tree icon their DOB & DOD.” Why do you think I am clicking on them? I want to be routed to their overview so I can look at their life events and see if they match the individual I am trying to find. ” I would also like Ancestry to post how simply users can switch back to Old Ancestry if they choose. Had I not found out how to do it on the blog, via another users instructions. I would still be pulling out my hair. That should have been an articulated choice to users, rather than an enforced one that simply popped up. Had I not seen how to do it on the blog via that user’s instruction to look in the right top pull down menu and just click on old Ancestry, to revert back to old Ancestry, I would still be near tears, as I find new Ancestry unusable and certainly will cancel my subscription, if that way of working on Ancestry, becomes the only way of researching Ancestry. The update is abysmal and it would be nice to get a response from Ancestry regarding why certain choices were made. I can’t understand why a company would choose a graphic redesign so radical, and so not in keeping with the graphic design and colors their company is know for, and that attracted users to. It would be like the Prudential Rock suddenly being redone and their logo becoming a duck, or a baseball team changing it’s colors. Who in the world wants to look at the New Ancestry other than the graphic designer team who came up with the look of it. Dark taupe and coral, really? I also dislike the new message system, and wish they had kept the function where one clicked on the downward arrow and the message immediately expanded. I am there because I want to actually read the message, not see a small portion of it.

  96. Brenda

    I dislike the new format. Perhaps you could keep the old format available to those of us that have been members for many years (grandfathering) and paying a lot of money on our memberships. Any new membership/researchers could start with the new format.

  97. Bailey

    So angry. Saw the US Wills now added as documents to search only to see the pop-up that says only available on the new ancestry. Seriously people? Too many complaints so you make people go to the new ancestry by baiting them? Extremely poor customer service plus I pay handsomely for the access to all documents. And you pull that stunt?

  98. Jennifer

    I loathe using the new Ancestry. It’s chaotic and jangling. It is not neat and tidy. The color combinations hurt my eyes. Please bring back the classic Ancestry permanently.

  99. Becky

    I don’t know what you mean by Members Connect was not used often.. I have used it ALL THE TIME. But I have a serious long family tree. And I have done serious research. I notice on the DNA site a lot of people don’t even have a family tree. Perhaps that is why.they don’t use Member connect. You have to have some kind of family tree in order to find connections.. DO NOT GET RID OF THE MEMBERS CONNECT! It is a great tool. I haven’t look a lot at the “new ancestry” because I hate it and I get sick to my stomach and my blood pressure goes up every time I look at it. PLEASE KEEP THE OLD ANCESTRY. A cousin of mine who did serious research already has left ancestry and taken his tree with him… because you site is no longer a good place to do serious research of ancestors. YOU ARE WRECKING A GOOD THING…

  100. Dissatisfied Subscriber

    A word to the wise.
    Beware that if you renew, you no longer are then able to choose to use Classic
    Ancestry !!! (The option DISAPPEARS from the menu.) So, think long and hard whether you wish to give up that option to (temporarily, at least) access the old format.

  101. Vince

    As of today, even if you no longer see “Old Ancestry” in the drop-down box under your username, you can still get back to the Classic/Old interface by entering “home.ancestry.com/newancestry/leave” (no quotes) into your browser address bar while connected to New Ancestry.

Comments are closed.