Posted by Ancestry Team on October 16, 2015 in Australia, Canada, Germany, United Kingdom, Website

Welcome to our weekly update on the new Ancestry website. Last week we posted an article that covered the square profile images and photo-cropping tools and we are working behind the scenes this week to introduce more of your favorite features to the new Ancestry in the coming weeks.

As always, we have also included links to articles and videos at the end of this post that will help answer your questions and provide more tips on the new site.

Features we will introduce:

  • Member Connect – We will bring back Member Connect under the Facts View tools.  You can contact other members who are also researching your ancestors to share your research questions, findings, and more.

CSU_1

 

  • Military PagesSome of you have done great research around your ancestors’ military background and stories. We will bring back view only version of Military Pages so you can continue to access the content you have created.

You will be able to access Military Pages via the military badge (in the green circle)            

image001

 

Features we are still working on

  • Family Group Sheet – A family view of the of the person and their family
  • Continue Search – option to keep searching from within your tree versus right clicking to open new records.

Issues reported this week

Below are some of the issues that surfaced from your feedback this week.

  • Some frustration with Historical Insights. Sometimes, insights are hinting when they shouldn’t be, dates are incorrect, locations are wrong, etc. They could be more accurate.
  • Relationship calculator randomly not appearing on trees.
  • People are confused about if there is a photo cropping tool/how it works.
  • People want to see the thumbnail of photos attached to events on their trees.

We appreciate your feedback and encourage you to keep submitting it. What do you love about the new website? Did you find a bug? Something doesn’t quite work like you think it should? Please submit it via this form. Thank you. We will be providing more updates over the next couple of weeks.

Help Links

Webinars

Links

Help Articles

Blogs

119 Comments

  1. Last week you added the Continue Searching as a missing function. This week it’s not mentioned. Are you still going to include it? PLEASE???!!!!

  2. douggrf

    Kristie, your posts and status updates are ignoring the following issues which have been a problem with the New Site for a very long long time:

    1) Site color schema
    2) Dropping overview of all tree comments since May 27, 2015
    3) Family Group sheet printout option
    4) Better .pdf print object design and handling for saving LifeStory
    5) Adding text and other story media to Facts, just as pics can be added. This was available in Classic and should be retained.
    6) Better site manipulation for deleting and choosing which people to add media too. Interface issues with this are inconsistent, missing data, and causing confusion on how to delete media not only from a given person profile, but the entire tree.

  3. mike

    Yah, douggrf, SOS that doesn’t get answered. Meanwhile, people are hanging as the want the classic version and not all this other junk. There’s a never an answer from Ancestry about when they will no longer be able to access the classic!

  4. mike

    Why did you delete my previous post? People want answers about when the classic will no longer be available!

  5. Pa

    To Ancestry:
    “You will be able to access Military Pages via the military badge (in the green circle)”
    The little military badge is not in a green circle. Those are the hints! HINT

    To Ancestry developers:

    (1.) Life Story On/Off NOT Hide n’ Seek
    (2.) Pop Ups Permanent Click to Turn Off after Viewing Once (Do Not Show Again)
    (3.) Eliminate the dark gray
    (4.) Quick edit
    (5.) Continued Searching
    (6.) Thumbnails on Facts
    (7.) Hyperlinks on Other Sources

  6. Carmen

    When viewing a census or document in the document viewer we used to be able to click on the “Related” tab, see the “Suggested Records” and view them by right clicking and opening them in a new tab so that we didn’t have to leave the document we were currently viewing. Not being able to do this really stinks! Am I the only one complaining about this feature being gone?

    I would really like to have the ability to access my “List of All People” from any individual’s Facts page like before. Now I have to go to the tree overview first in order to access that list from the drop-down menu. Why can’t that be in the drop-down menu on the Facts pages?

    Also, I do hope they understand when we complain about not having media attached to the events on the Facts page that we also would still like all of the media we have attached to show on the Facts page whether or not it is attached to an event in the timeline. In other words, be visible on the page like before.

  7. Carmen

    @ Pa, I noticed that, too about the green circle, LOL! I think these little mistakes show that the people creating this nightmare don’t actually use the site!

  8. Lynn David

    Without the Family Group Sheet views and as a way to navigate a tree Ancestry loses a great deal of its functionality. They’d better get it working.

  9. Carol

    To Carmen and others: Posts dated 16 Oct 2015

    I too noticed there are no “Suggested Records” anywhere in the new version. “Suggested Records” were always giving suggestions that I didn’t get in the “Hints” or by searching.

    I managed to get a call in to customer service before they closed. I related the problem. I was told “they have been included in the Hints.”

    That is simply NOT true!!! And while I was testing it, I had a good, previously unknown “Suggested Record” regarding my great-grandfather’s marriage record in a church. I saved it. It DID NOT appear in the new version in anywhere as a hint or suggestion, only in the classic. I already had the civil record.

    Maybe the customer service people don’t believe us. You can’t attach anything to a post on the blog but maybe you can send an email with an attachment, possibly a screen shot.

    I am getting weary of this new Ancestry. It has so many things wrong with it, I’m over whelmed. I should make a list and make a bunch of screen shots I can send.

  10. Cathy Kesseler

    I’ve been using new ancestry since early August. Suggested records are there. Facts tab, if you click on a source, view, then view record. Suggested records are on the right. Hints tab, if I click on review hint, suggested records show up on the right

  11. Maybe the customer service people don’t believe us. You can’t attach anything to a post on the blog but maybe you can send an email with an attachment, possibly a screen shot. – See more at:

  12. Carol

    To Cathy Kesseler:

    Your instructions were simple to do, but I did not get any Suggested Records on the right. Those instructions do work in the Classic with no problem. I chose a person who I KNOW has Suggested Records in the Classic version, to test your directions. They just are not there in the new.

    Thanks anyway. There must be another answer. Several times the Suggested Records will come up with something that applies to my person and I do save it, but in the Classic version.

  13. Walt

    Could you please clarify the comment on military pages. When will this be available in New? And what is meant by “view only…so you can continue to access the content you have created”? Does this mean these pages cannot be edited or new pages cannot be added for additional ancestors?

  14. emam

    What are the Military pages they are talking about. I have created lots of Military facts but don’t know what these Military pages are.

  15. Dale Freegard

    Please get rid of that alful colour scheme in New Ancestry, return the quick edit, membership connect and back to simple clicks to move around and not so unnecessary clicking. When will you just return to the Old Ancestry please.

  16. Martin

    No mention of the much reported errors with mapping locations. I have a number of ancestors born in India in 1700’s, no attempt has been made to place these in right location, despite putting in “correct” format. However the Ancestry App mapping feature does show then in correct location, so if they can do it there why not on website?

  17. Brian

    Carmen and others. The suggested records are still there. There is now an info panel on the side of the viewer that has the source and related stuff.

  18. Walt

    I asked about military pages over on the Ancestry Facebook page. Here’s what I was told: This “improvement” will only allow you to view pages you created in Classic. You will not be able to create new military pages in New Ancestry. Nor will you be able to edit the existing pages, a limitation that seems to be somewhat careless since it precludes adding to or correcting information on the pages. So if you have military pages on Classic, you might want to be sure they’re where you want them to be because it looks like you won’t be able to change them. Some “solution,” huh?

  19. BEE

    “I would really like to have the ability to access my “List of All People” from any individual’s Facts page like before. Now I have to go to the tree overview first in order to access that list from the drop-down menu. Why can’t that be in the drop-down menu on the Facts pages?” I agree – I use this “list of people” all the time, especially since I have many people with the same names, emigrating from the same small town. It’s hard enough to keep them straight without having to search all over the place for them.

  20. Kathy Edmonston

    If you haven’t committed a crime you have nothing to worry about if your DNA is searched. Great tool to help find evasive criminals!

  21. arf

    Issues that surfaced this week? Really? Where, Mars? Those have been on the list since June. Where are the rest of the issues? What about Military pages? So, you can look at them but not add of modify? In this day and time where people recognize the efforts of our veterans all Ancestry can do is thumb their noses at them. Geez.

  22. Trisha

    New and improved Ancestry Website.The following is what ancestry said months back.
    “ANCESTRY IS CONTINUALLY WORKING HARD TO IMPROVE OUR SITE AND MAKE IT EASIER TO DISCOVER, SHARE AND PRESERVE YOUR FAMILY HISTORY. IT HAS BEEN A FEW YEARS SINCE ANCESTRY HAS MADE A MAJOR UPDATE TO THE SITE. WE ARE SENSITIVE (BS) TO THE IMPACT CHANGES HAVE ON OUR MEMBERS. HOWEVER, SUBSTANTIAL RESEARCH INTO THE NEEDS OF OUR MEMBERS (When did this take place?) AND THE EXPERIENCE THEY ARE HAVING ON THE WEBSITE HAVE HELPED US SEE NEW AND INNOVATIVE WAYS TO REINVENT THE WAY WE HELP YOU DO FAMILY HISTORY. THE IMPROVED WEBSITE MAKES IT EASIER FOR ANYONE TO DISCOVER AND TELL THE RICH, UNIQUE STORY OF THEIR FAMILY, WHILE ALSO HELPING THEM TO BECOME BETTER RESEARCHERS.
    A FRESH NEW LOOK. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE NEW ANCESTRY WEBSITE IS A SITE OUR MEMBERS LOVE TO USE EVEN MORE THAN THE CURRENT EXPERIENCE. (Not a cat in hell’s chance!)
    ALL THE CHANGES ARE ANCHORED IN THREE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES THAT ARE THE DRIVING FORCE FOR OUR DESIGN TEAM:
    1) MAKE IT BEAUTIFUL
    2)MAKE IT USABLE
    3)MAKE IT DELIGHTFUL
    (Well Ancestry, you certainly failed on all three there, quite magnificently too!)
    THE RICH UNIQUE STORY OF YOUR FAMILY, ONE OF THE GREATEST UNMET NEEDS OF OUR MEMBERS IS THE DESIRE FOR STORY. WE LOVE TO HEAR STORIES AND SHARE THEM, UNFORTUNATELY, WE’RE NOT ALL GREAT STORYTELLERS (you said it Ancestry!) AND WE DON’T ALWAYS UNDERSTAND THE STORY THAT OUR DISCOVERIES ARE TRYING TO TELL US. THE NEW ANCESTRY WEBSITE INCLUDES SEVERAL NEW WAYS TO HELP YOU DISCOVER THE RICH, UNIQUE STORIES OF YOUR FAMILY AND HELP YOU SHARE THEM TOO.”
    (We don’t want to share the mess you have now made of our trees. all those stupid mistakes you have made to our wonderful trees, you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves for forcing this travesty on us, arrogant beyound belief!)

  23. Cathy Kesseler

    To Carol, I only use new ancestry. The suggested records are there in new ancestry.. I can find them in new ancestry just as I described in my post. They were there last week, there were there last night, they are there today.

  24. May Noble

    I find it shameful that that all the military pages created in the Classic version will become “view only” and will no longer be available to create in that “NEW” mess. Ancestry appears to be getting further and further away true grassroots genealogy.

  25. Jade

    Reminder to all. Ancestry has split up the “Classic” Member Tree person-pages into four (4) hard-to-use pages for reasons they have not stated. Probably to make the pieces easier to view (if not to use) on mobile/hand-held devices. For users of desktop and laptop devices, the drawbacks and limitations are more obvious: they are easier to see, in addition to harder to use.

    For example, the programmers who so delight in hiding stuff within buttons with dropdown menus have been given free reign. It’s too bad.

  26. JM / UK

    For a few weeks now I have been unable to add to or correct information from the index within record images – I can only correct/add from the summary page. I go to any record image and get no edit box from within the image. The ONLY exception is that in ANY 1911 UK census record image I am offered an edit box but ONLY for ‘occupation’ and ‘street address’ – no other elements. With ALL other records – I hover over the fact I wish to edit but no box appears to click on.
    Has anyone else come across this? Has anyone found a solution? I have been given several helpful suggestions by the Ancestry.co.uk Support team e.g. following hints in: Recommended Web Browsers, Managing your Cache and Cookies, Listing Ancestry.com as a Trusted Site, Updating Adobe, Enabling JavaScript – all of which I did, but no change.

    In my most recent query, I asked: ‘Does this have anything to do with the roll-out of New Ancestry – is it a feature that will be lost if I change?’

    I received this reply: ‘I have investigated and can see that the option does seem to be partially available on 1911 census and not at all with the examples you need. I am going to create a report for our team to look into this. I’m not sure if this is a new update on the website just yet. The new website is still in testing mode so it is possible this feature is a work in progress.’

    I have a particular reason to value this feature – I frequently correct transcriptions that are nothing to do with me but which catch my eye [particularly Welsh Personal and Place names which are often woefully incorrect in the original and the transcription] but I only do this ‘in passing’ for the benefit of others who don’t speak Welsh or are unaware of an error. However, I am not likely to take the extra time to click to and from the Summary page away from my own search in the record image if the easy ‘edit box’ feature is lost.

    Some salient points worth repeating from previous Ancestry Blogs :

    1 – from rlahistory – Without our PUBLIC trees, what does Ancestry have to offer? If we all change to PRIVATE trees, we remove a primary resource. Serious researchers do not need the shaking leaf, we just need the resources for which we pay a great deal of money. Ancestry claims over 40 million trees containing 4 billion profiles. All of that built by individual members who had no say in the strictly cosmetic changes coming our way. These changes will make our experience more difficult so that new users can “app” their way through our genealogy. Until we can transition to a new provider, our only recourse is to PRIVATIZE our trees.

    2 – from Vince – Even if you no longer see “Old Ancestry” in the drop-down box under your username, you can probably still get back to the Classic/Old interface while you are in New Ancestry by entering the following in the address bar of your browser: http://home.ancestry.com/NewAncestry/leave [This option may have already disappeared]

    3 – from douggrf – Go to the petition website – and make your voice heard – we want Classic site to remain an option:
    http://www.thepetitionsite.com/600/803/575/save-ancestrycom-classic/

    4 – from Kristie – ‘Re-inventing your family story’ is insulting. We are not in the witness protection plan. We aren’t re-inventing our family stories, we’re searching for facts and documents to VERIFY our family. Someone in marketing really doesn’t get serious genealogists.

    Thanks to everyone who has taken the time and trouble to post and sign the petition.

  27. mike

    To Mary R: Right about the DNA and this country has a so-called privacy act and it our rights should not be violated. To the rest of you struggling with this new Ancestry, why on earth do you bother with the frustration. You are being upaid ginuea pigs to give your thoughts about correcting the interface that should have never been created in the first place. Why pay so much to just subject yourselves to this torture? I cannot for the life of me understand what you are thinking. Ancestry should have spent more time in fixing some areas of the classic version than coming out with this outrageous program. Yes, May Noble, it is not at all genealogy!

  28. LaDonna

    The “NEW” Ancestry, is AWFUL! Ancestry.com would do best to remember the old saying, “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it.” Just give us back all the features we had, and spend your time and our money on fine-tuning the features we had, making them work more efficiently, precise and accurate. For now it’s just high price frustration. I agree with another comment in the blog, it’s quite evident that the builders are not researchers of genealogy and they don’t use this website or any genealogy software programs. Thank You.

  29. Nadine

    Tricia: Ancestry, PLEASE pay attention to what Trisha wrote this morning! She is exactly on target about what’s wrong with the New Ancestry. You are alienating a lot of current subscribers who have much valuable and difficult-to-come-by real information (not “stories”) to share with posterity.

  30. Mary M Zashin

    I keep trying but it is very difficult to check and amend the sources for an individual without a “view all sources” option as on Old because on New I have to open each source individually in order to view its detail and attached events. Going back and forth from source to source is inefficient and tedious. It is a frequent complaint that functions that were useful in Old have been for inexplicable reasons removed from New. IMO, an “improved” site should NEVER reduce functionality! Also, I can’t bear the dark grey. You may have lightened it a bit, but it is STILL too dark and gloomy. Please, please change the color scheme. Just making the font of the type bigger doesn’t solve the ugliness problem. Grey is just a very poor choice for a dominant color! I’m glad you went back to square photos, BUT WHY are there ugly BLACK bars on photos that are not perfectly square? On the Oct. 8 blog, your example had grey bars that matched the background. WHY DIDN’T YOU USE THAT BETTER CHOICE???? The bars should match the background no matter what color the background is so that they don’t intrude visually. It’s just not always possible to crop a rectangular photo to fit the square without losing too much of the image. THIS IS EASY!! You’ve obviously already DONE IT ONCE! Make the edges of images match the background. In fact, get rid of black entirely, except for type (which as a rule should be black/dark on a light background for readability). Make the individual gallery look like the tree gallery; ie., get rid of the black covering almost half each image. Also, it is annoying to be continually asked if one wants to leave or stay on a page. . .over and over. . .I’ve already indicated I want to leave. Trust me and stop making me click “leave” again. These (mostly visual/aesthetic) things may seem trivial to many, but they’re important to me because what I use the online tree for is SHARING. I don’t want to share what I regard as a cumbersome, unattractive, and visually repellent mess. I’m waiting and hoping you improve the looks AND the functionality of New so I can stay a subscriber. Changing the color scheme is critical for me.

  31. mike

    To JM/UK, a lot of what you stated is true; however, if users think by privatizing their trees will make any difference that is not true. Ancestry invades them too with this crock new Ancestry, but thanks for posting the other comments.

  32. Janice

    To “Pa,” Ancestry said they “will bring back” the military pages and member connect. They are not there yet. However, “quick edit” is there. They are still working on the family group sheet so that is not there yet either. Once it is, I’m sure they’ll have the capability to print out the page. They are also still working on “continue searching.” I can edit a profile photo with no trouble. Just hover over it to resize. That being said, if one wants to change a profile picture, I see no mechanism for that. One can remove a profile picture, but then you can’t simply choose a new profile photo from the person’s photo gallery. You must upload again. Cumbersome. I agree there are still some issues – that it’s not the easiest site to use right now – but I know Ancestry is working on it.

  33. Pa

    Quick Edit is on the main Pop Up Card File while viewing in Family View, but it is not available from within a person’s profile to quick edit spouse, siblings, or children.

    The return of Quick Edit was only half of its previous locations within a tree, and capabilities.

  34. Vince

    To mike: I think you missed the point that commenter JM / UK repeated about privatizing trees in the statement quoted from commenter rlhhistory, “If we all change to PRIVATE trees, we remove a primary resource.” It is true that Ancestry’s invasion of trees with useless fluff in the New interface applies to private as well as public trees. But much of Ancestry’s business comes from people getting Hints from other trees. People may still get Hints from private trees if the owner has not also made their trees unsearchable, but they will get the data only if the private tree owner agrees to provide it. If a private tree is also unsearchable, none of its data will appear in Hints for other trees. My trees have been private and unsearchable since last June for the very reason that I don’t want anyone else to see the forcibly added fluff that is unnecessary, misleading, and often downright inaccurate in the LifeStory gambit, let alone copy any of it. I have warned the many invitees to my trees, who can still see the fluff if they use the New interface, to please avoid the LifeStory tab entirely.

    If and when Ancestry (1) provides a way for the tree owner to prevent the entire LifeStory view from appearing at all in trees that he or she owns, so that no one can see it unless the tree owner or an invited editor for the tree chooses to display it; (2) corrects the numerous other failings of the New interface; and (3) agrees to keep the Classic interface as a permanent option for those who prefer it; I will consider returning my trees to public and searchable status.

  35. emam

    To May Noble, what are Military pages are these the same as military facts added to a timeline. One of my trees is based on and created for military persons.

  36. mike

    Vince, I got the point of the post but believe me that is half the problem of Ancestry and related websites. It is not genealogy to take info from other trees. Back in the day before the Internet, people had to do genealogy the old-fashioned way of actually finding records themselves by going to courthouses, cemeteries, interviewing living relatives, etc. Some do that to this day, myself included. Of course, I realize that is old technology to some extent but real genealogist actually search for information outside of the realm of any public site. Real genealogy is not easy; you have to work for it and thinking you’ll find someone famous who might be your ancestor is not what it is all about.

    Users of Ancestry have to learn to not reply upon other AMT’s as that is NOT genealogy. Most public trees are NOT even sourced and there are so many fairy-tale trees out there that mean nothing and misinformation just snowballs throughout the site. If you have to reply upon other trees to get your information then you are way off base. Anyone serious about genealogy uses Ancestry for record databases and nothing else and have private, unsearchable trees for a reason. It is doing a disservice to the budding genealogist who might have little knowledge about genealogy to provide even the opportunity to just copy from others. Ancestry was originally set up as more-or-less a research tool and that is what it should be now; not a site that breeds nothing but a group of copy-cats looking for quick answers. That’s all I have to say on the subject.

    Again, Ancestry, most users what to know when the classic will not be available anymore.

  37. Robin

    @emam In the classic ancestry you could create a brand new page for someone, recording and honoring all someone’s specific military history and service. Apparently now we can no longer add to them, correct mistakes on them, etc. That last bit sums up ancestry now…mistakes don’t matter, in fact lets’ create more of them. That is so so ungenealogical that it’s both sad and laughable.

  38. Wrenda

    Janice, To change profile pictures, click on a picture in the gallery. There will be a blue icon for each person in the tree to which the picture has been saved. Click on the name of the person you wish to change the profile picture to and it will give you the option to make it a profile picture. I found it by accident.

  39. emam

    Robin, thank you, I haven’t come across that, I wonder if it is only available on A.com and not A.co.uk

  40. May Noble

    to emam, This is only in the classic version of Ancestry, there under the person’s name where it starts with “search records” go straight across to “other options”, click on that, you will see a listing for “create military page” for that person. This is different than just the military fact citation on timeline.

  41. Mary R.

    Military pages are now on their site, “FOLD3.” It seems they want you to buy a subscription to that and to move yours there.

  42. Trisha

    ANCESTRY, CAN’T YOU SEE IT YET? ALL THE FRUSTRATION YOU ARE CAUSING, NO WONDER YOUR CUSTOMERS ARE GETTING SO ANNOYED AND ANGRY ABOUT THIS WHOLE NEW “SO CALLED IMPROVED” ANCESTRY,
    DON’T YOU REALISE BY NOW, YOUR CUSTOMERS WERE VERY HAPPY INDEED TO WORK WITH THAT “UNIQUE OLD CLASSIC ANCESTRY, IT WAS A JOY TO WORK WITH ANCESTRY. WHY DO YOU THINK SO MANY OF US STAYED WITH YOU OVER THE YEARS? THERE ARE OTHER SITES OUT THERE, BUT QUITE FRANKLY YOU HAD THE BEST SITE WITH YOUR UNIQUE OLD ANCESTRY SET UP.
    YOU ARE RUINING WHAT WAS THE VERY BEST GENEALOGY SITE, RUINING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE’S ENJOYMENT OF DOING THEIR FAMILY RESEARCH. FOR MANY PEOPLE, MYSELF INCLUDED, IT HAS BEEN AN ESCAPE AFTER SOME TOUGH TIMES. I PERSONALLY HAVE SPEND HOURS UPON HOURS RESEARCHING ON YOUR WONDERFUL OLD ANCESTRY SITE, I STILL AM WHILE IT’S THERE, BUT I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WORK ON THAT AWFUL NEW THING OF YOURS!
    I HAVE SAID THIS NEXT BIT BEFORE IN PREVIOUS BLOGS, BUT I THINK IT IS WORTH REPEATING AGAIN.
    “RESEARCHING IS ABOUT LOOKING AT THE OLD ISN’T IT? RIGHT, SO THEREFORE THE FORMAT FOR BUILDING OUR TREES SHOULD NOT HAVE A TRENDY FULL IN YOUR FACE FEEL TO IT. IT SHOULD HAVE A KIND OF ANTIQUE STYLE ABOUT IT. THAT IS WHAT BROUGHT ME TO YOUR SITE OVER FOUR YEARS AGO, I TOOK ONE LOOK AT YOUR FORMAT (YOU HAD THE GREEN LEAVES ETC BACK THEN, NICE TOUCH, I THOUGHT THAT VERY CLASSY ACTUALLY) AND JUST THOUGHT WOW, THIS IS GREAT FOR RESEARCHING. ALL THE OTHER SITES WERE BLAND AND BORING TO BE HONEST, THEY DID NOT ENTICE ME LIKE YOUR SITE DID.
    I WILL THANK YOU FOR ALL THE PLEASURE YOUR SITE HAS GIVEN THESE PAST YEARS, IT REALLY HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS ENJOYMENT TO WORK WITH YOU, AND WAS HOPING IT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE SO. BUT YOU REALLY ARE SPOILING YOUR SITE NOW, AND YOU JUST CAN NOT SEEM TO BRING YOURSELVES TO REALLY, I MEAN REALLY LISTEN TO ALL THE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK YOU ARE GETTING ABOUT YOUR NEW FORMAT.
    IT IS JUST NOT THE RIGHT WAY FORWARD FOR RESEARCHING OUR TREES, HONESTY ANCESTRY, IT REALLY IS NOT!
    ALL WE ARE ASKING IS THAT YOU “KEEP OUR BELOVED OLD CLASSIC ANCESTRY” RUNNING ALONGSIDE YOUR NEW IDEAS. SURELY THAT WILL PLEASE ALL YOUR CUSTOMERS.

  43. Donna

    Does anyone know where to go to add notes? I found the little pull down where we can read notes and comments, but nothing is there to ADD notes.

  44. Cheryl

    Add our photos and stories to the profile page SO THEY ARE IN PLAIN VIEW AND NOT HIDDEN IN THE ATTIC! Allow tree owners to add them to the timeline. Also get rid of those RIDICULOUS, JUVENILE PURPLE LINES!

  45. douggrf

    Here is another longstanding problem in the New Ancestry forever…It should be fixed and would be very easy to do so.
    Programmers heads up here:In New Ancestry search. When I select media, a story or a photo someone has on their tree and you try to save it to your own tree, you type in a name and if you have several people in the tree with the same name there’s no way to determine who the correct person to attach to is. There are no dates next to the names any longer when you try to save. So which John Brown in my tree?

  46. Over the last 5 days I have not been able to view my tree with either the new or old Ancestry at times I have been able to see the old tree but, the last two days nothing? and the Pedigree tree usually only shows, maybe ten people at a time.

  47. Anne Scott Frankland

    Donna — Click on View Notes — type in you information — and click on View Notes to close the box.

  48. Anne Scott Frankland

    Donna — correction — Click on View Notes — type in your information — and click on View Notes to close the box.

  49. douggrf

    The NOTES function is a private recorded message with the tree owner. It is not viewed by guests. You can add only one long string of NOTES in the New Ancestry – actually not very long at all.
    Comments can be added many times and are publicly viewed by guests. Before May 27, 2015 Ancestry congregated the viewing of Comments on the Tree Overview page. No More of THAT!
    Notes follow Gedcom export, Comments do not.

  50. Wayne Moore

    I really like the side panel when viewing a census image. Please add the ability under “related” to right click (or control click) on another census year, to open in a new window. It is frustrating to be forced to leave the window you are in – to view the next or previous census.

    Thanks,
    Wayne Moore

  51. Janice

    What is your time frame (date) to restore the following functions? All of which are now broken in new ancestry:
    1. Ability to attach non-photo media to a Fact?
    2. Provide a link to Stories that were attached to Facts in Classic Ancestry?
    3. Return the photo icon to individual facts?
    4. Return the one-click ability to see ALL media attached to an individual fact?

    In classic ancestry, first I create an event vital or custom, then I add a short description, then I attached an image or a text story. When a viewer stops by, it was very easy to scroll down the timeline, see an icon and a short description, if you wanted to see more, one click and there was everything, images,
    stories, documents, notes, whatever was attached.

    If viewer wants to see what media isn’t attached to a fact, then go to the gallery.

    And don’t get me started on LifeStory; let’s just say that after spending thousands of hours creating my own individual life stories on the timeline, seeing icons, short descriptions, cropping images, editing stories, and one easy click to see what is attached to that fact, the ancestry LifeStory does not work for me.

    As new ancestry is an enhancement and upgrade, it would seem to be apparent that ALL functions and tools will at some point, be available in new ancestry.

    Especially, considering the $600.00 a year being spent for functions that make my research easier. Having several of those functions taken away, does not make me happy!

  52. Janice

    My problem is that when I am at an event in classic, all I have to do is click at media, select write a story and I can type in any text information I want AND that text information is attached to that event.

    When a viewer stops by, they see an icon, a short description of the event, if they want to see more, ONE click and they can read EVERYTHING that is attached to that one event. If they want to see items not attached to an event, then they can go to the gallery.
    So, my question to ancestry still is:
    WHEN are you going to re-establish these functions? I have been working on adding text obituaries to several profiles and having to hunt through the gallery is simply beyond the biggest waste of time for me the researcher and my family the viewers.

    You want a citation? How crazy is that? You don’t require a citation if I scan the obituary or story as an image!

    It is still easy to attach an image to a fact, no citation needed. So it makes no sense to me at all that, when I have an image of an obituary, I attach it to the fact with no problem and no citation. BUT, if I re-type that very same obituary and add it as text, it cannot be attached to the fact without creating a citation. Really stupid!. In classic, everything is great, one click and I can see the image and the text attached.

    I go to new ancestry and of course, the image is attached, but the transcription is not. We have to go hunting the gallery to find it, and a viewer would not even have an idea it was there to go look for it.

    Citations have their place, and definitely are very important to us as researchers. At the same time, I want my family contributors to enjoy adding childhood stories and memories to our family history for the rest of us to enjoy. That does not need a citation. How on earth would you create a valid citation for my mom’s childhood story: Tweet-Tweet, my bird flew away! I don’t know if the story is true, but it sure is a wonderful story to share.

    Also, I regularily attach family recounts of many events in the timeline, like stories about traveling across country, on Arrival or Immigration Fact. Or, the farm picture with Grandpa’s favorite horse, Dime. Again, no citation needed! It is simply a family story.

    But, very importantly, I want my family to be able to share a great family story, without having to search the gallery and try to match-up a story with an event. Really a dumb move on ancestry’s part.

    I know how frustrating it can be to see incorrect information all over the place when we are striving for accuracy in our own trees, since I am not the ancestry police over all family trees and only really care that MY tree is correct, who cares about those other trees. If you are really a researcher and not just a casual user, what others do is of no consequence. Sure, if I see something really out there, I send a quick message to that tree, but there is rarely a response.

    As a real researcher, I welcome and encourage corrections from anyone to my tree! If I find information on other trees that I would like to use, I validate any and all of those vital facts before I add them to my tree. I try my best to stay out of other people’s business and only take care of my own. Take you tree private, if you don’t want it shared.

    1. ALL media, images, stories, text, documents, whatever is attached to a fact should show with ONE click. Stop the searching in the gallery. Way too time consuming and impossible to read a multi-page story in the correct order.

    2. Return the icon so I can see a preview, before I go waste time searching in the gallery, or going to LifeStory and reading a bunch of stuff I don’t care about. LifeStory may have its place, but not for me.

    3. Do not force me to add a citation where none is needed, any non-vital fact.

  53. emam

    to May Noble, thanks but after looking we don’t have that link to add Military pages. It must be as I said earlier only available on .com.
    Trisha, your comments are right on the nose.
    I am working away in Classic until my subscriptions runs out. I am not going over to even look at the new now for fear of what it will do to my tree. I am going to carry on with my Military trees and find as much info as I can on them until classic is not longer available or my subscription runs out. (I am researching WW1 persons from my village)

  54. JM / UK

    Re my previous post in this blog [See October 17, 2015 at 11:16 am for a full explanation] about being no longer able to add to or correct information from the index within a record image window – I now find that I can no longer see other peoples additions/corrections which used to appear in italics and when hovered over, a box would appear with further details. I discovered this change because I was notified through Recent Member Connect Activity that someone had made a correction to a record which has been saved to my tree. When I clicked through to view this event, nothing showed up. As well as my reasons for valuing this feature stated before, I would add that after discovering a crucial maiden name thanks to a member supplied edit, I always put in any maiden names I know to be correct – after all this name might be someone else’s brick wall.

    Has anyone else had difficulty with this feature?

    Maybe next time you are in a record image window you should check to see if you still have it!

    Thanks to all – I have picked up so many tips from this blog!

  55. emam

    to May Noble, thanks for the info. this feature mustn’t be available in the UK, I have checked ant there it isn’t there a page available. I posted earlier but it hasn’t shown up. for some reason I keep having to put in what I see in a verification box. It then said the post was going to the moderator. Has anyone else had this.

    Trisha’s comments are right on the ball as far as I am concerned. Ancestry used to be a pleasure to use. Now I’m wondering whether to add more info or not. I am only using the classic until my subscription runs out.

  56. Bev

    @JM / UK. Yes, I am currently having the same problem with Member Connect Activity that you describe. I was notified that someone had made corrections to four records in my tree. I clicked to view the corrections and was taken to the original views of four census records, but could not view the box showing what corrections were made. I had to search for the tree of the person who made corrections. I viewed the census records from that person’s tree and no corrections showed. I viewed the census records in my tree and no corrections show anywhere. All four census records need a correction for the spelling of the surname. So much for the current usefulness of Member Connect and for the ability to correct transcription or enumerator errors.

  57. BEE

    “Notes follow Gedcom export, Comments do not” – My trees have always been private, so I’m not concerned with what is written in my “comments” although it’s mostly obituaries, but I can’t believe they are not copied when I do a Gedcom. Without that list on the overview page, I would have to search person by person for “comments”. I did find a couple, but when I tried to “copy and paste” into a “note”, it said there was no text! I had to retype the whole thing! To find and copy the comments would be more than tedious, but there is no way I can retype each and every “comment”!

  58. Vince

    To JM / UK and Bev: I can’t speak to viewing of corrections within a record image window in the context of Member Connect Activity, but I have made numerous corrections to inaccurate transcriptions made by Ancestry from images of census and other records, especially their routinely flubbed conversion of Quaker dates written before 1752. I checked a few of my corrections today, and I still can see them in both the Classic and New interfaces. Of course, Ancestry has made it harder to find the corrections in the New interface.

    In the Classic interface, I click on a source on an individual’s Profile page to bring up the transcription view of the source, usually right-clicking so that the view can appear in a separate tab or window. Below the thumbnail view of the source image is the link “View/Add alternate info”. If no alternate info has been added for the record, the link is just “Add alternate info”. Clicking that link displays all corrections previously made by anyone and offers entry of further corrections or just the latter if no corrections have yet been made.

    In the New interface, clicking on the VIEW link of a source listed in the FACTS view of an individual brings up the New version of the Ancestry transcription page. I have to then click on VIEW RECORD (right-click is also available) to get to a version of the transcription page that looks nearly identical to the transcription view of the Classic interface. There I see the same “View/Add alternate info” or “Add alternate info” link as in the Classic interface and can view alternate info entries that I or others have made.

  59. JM / UK

    @Vince – Thanks for your comments – I am still able to view/add corrections from the Transcription Summary page, but it always used to be possible to do this from the Record image window via a quick edit box in the index accessed by clicking on the ‘2 heads’ button, then hovering over the element I wished to alter. This was quick and easy – I could add/correct as soon as I saw something inaccurate. The alternative name or place etc. would then appear in italics both in the Record index and on the Summary page. Now I don’t have that option. As someone said previously – lots of small but very handy features seem to be quietly disappearing. Actions which used to have common-sense pathways now lead us all over the place.

  60. Vince

    To BEE: The proposition “Notes follow Gedcom export, Comments do not” is sad but true, regardless of whether a GEDCOM file is generated from the Classic or New interface for Ancestry member trees. The standard structure of GEDCOM (GEnealogical Data COMmunication) files, Release 5.5, was last revised in 1996 and is still in use by Ancestry and many other tree creators. Each line of the text file begins with a four-character tag specifying the type of data on the line. See wiki-en.genealogy.net/GEDCOM-Tags for a list of the tags and their meanings. One of the standard tags is NOTE, which Ancestry uses to record the contents of Notes fields in its trees. There is no standard tag for “Comments”, although I’m not sure why Ancestry couldn’t put the text of the Comments fields of its trees into NOTE lines of the GEDCOM file. All I know for sure is that Ancestry does not include the contents of Comments fields in GEDCOM files at all. To preserve the text of Comments fields in a GEDCOM file download (or, for that matter, during synchronization with a Family Tree Maker 2014 tree), you do have to first copy the text to an associated Notes field.

  61. Vince

    JM / UK: I certainly agree that “lots of small but very handy features seem to be quietly disappearing”.

  62. Elhura

    Ditto to Trishsa’s comments of 10/18/2015. She covered it well! There is little about the new Ancestry that is enticing to genealogists and other serious researchers, alike. Don’t forget the petition to KEEP CLASSIC as a working option along side the new. It is the only way thousands of us will be willing or able to continue to use Ancestry.com – the same thousands whose financial support and research contributions have contributed to Ancestry’s years of enjoyed success: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/en-gb/600/803/575/save-ancestrycom-classic/

    Also, Ancestry, keep trying to repair vast problems you have with the new, beginning with the poor color scheme which, very simply, should be the same as Classic Ancestry (how hard can that be?); the childish and distracting purple lines; the multi-layers for achieving once simple functions so well defined by others in this current post; and the return of photos and stories to the Fact page so their very use does not become a scavenger hunt. Let’s hear it for these things and more, Ancestry users! If these things are to make it to the IMPORTANT ISSUES list, they must be repeated by the vast numbers of users affected by them.

  63. BEE

    The good news is I figured out how to “copy and paste” from my comments into a “note” – after pasting, hit the “bullets” and “save” – but how in the world am I ever going to find all those “comments” if there is no record of them?

  64. douggrf

    The purpose of adding comments to trees is to let the work of community collaboration stand as a work in progress. Every tree in existence is never ever finished, and no tree is ever perfect.
    Hence Ancestry several years ago allowed for the comments mechanism (long-after Gedcom 5.5 standard was set- hence not involved in the criteria) to give members the ability to comment on each others works.
    The value of the aggregate view of comments seen (before May 27, 2015) was to gauge the apparent “quality” of a tree before trusting it for further research by others. Hence when you read some tree’s comments summary of error after error – you can make a fair judgement call as to the nature of the work represented by the tree.
    Ancestry dropped this feature May 27 2015 to the apparent surprise and total chagrin of everyone in the genealogical research community.

  65. Elhura

    I cannot tell you how much I have relied on comments of others, both on my tree and being able to view them on others. They often provide leads you would not have had otherwise and gives added opportunity for you to check out the information on your own. I have also used the Comments section to make public notes to myself for others to see. To lose that capability is yet another “set-back” of the new Ancestry.

  66. Joyce

    I have long relied on comments made to myself to put reminders on profile pages on various sources I wanted to keep track of, various places I had checked etc and used to title each comment to I would know exactly what each one was about…this was ruined when they hid comments on classic quite some time back…NOW the way comments show in NEW they virtually all run together making the info virtually impossible to figure out.

    I have also left comments to myself when something puzzled me and sometimes people who saw my tree answered the question I had left myself and gave me the answer.

    I have had others leave comments when they happened to find an ancestor of mine somewhere else such as Ellis Island–Comments were USEFUL the way they used to be set up…

    People looking at various people on my tree could know that I had spotted various discrepancies–they could find links to things both on and off ancestry–NOW all my carefully crafted comments for myself and others have pretty much become USELESS–THANKS ANCESTRY–

    You have taken SO many changes made over the years FOR A GOOD REASON and thrown them out the window–because the people who designed the NEW site don’t know the first thing about REAL research….HINTS is not research….

    It is very hard to stay organized in genealogy and being able to make comments to ourselves and others was an extremely useful tool for people who do good old fashioned research…

  67. CAH

    I have to agree with Joyce. I keep trying the new but it isn’t intuitive and stuff is all over the place, not making much sense. I feel like I’m in a maze. It may be all there (plus a bunch of stuff we didn’t need) but I doubt it. It is in such an illogical presentation, I’d be ashamed to show it. I have many trees on this site but I’m looking for a place that is more logical to put my trees. One that a non-genealogist can understand. It doesn’t have the flow of the classic. I can’t imagine why such drastic changes were necessary. Surely changes could have made slowly and thoughtfully.

  68. Gina

    Looking forward to improved (and hopefully more?) Historical Insights. I have found the Insights to be so helpful. I never knew about the “Big Snow” in Colorado when my grandmother was a teenager there and it never occurred to me that familly who left Oklahoma for Los Angeles were part of the the dust bowl migration like John Steinbeck. Thank you!

  69. Alan Proudlock

    New Ancestry website
    When you search from the ‘Family Tree’ page (find a person in this tree) you have the option ‘List of all people’. This option isn’t available from a person’s profile page which is a minor inconvenience.

  70. Alan Proudlock

    New Ancestry website

    1. Add a son or daughter to the family group from one of the parents profile pages
    Result: when you view the profile page for the son or daughter you have added the relationship displays

    2. Add a son or daughter to the family group as a new person when saving a census record for one of the parents
    Result: when you view the profile page for the son or daughter you have added the relationship DOES NOT display

    Either way you are adding the son or daughter to the same family group; the only difference is that after adding the person one way the relationship displays, the other it doesn’t.

    The reason I mention this is that I have already raised an incident wth Ancestry and have been told (quote) “This issue has been raised, although, so far, every single case turned out to be a relationship mistake or a duplicate”. This is so not the case!!!

  71. caith

    Just now, I spoken to a rep at Ancestry re FTM, and as an aside, I asked her when Classic would be disabled. She said they have no tentative date, and it could be as far out as 6 months, or even a year………

  72. Monika

    @caith – Maybe so. But yesterday, while I was working in Classic Ancestry, it bounced me into New Ancestry without my permission and I had to use the http:/…/leave address to get out and now am dreading to find out what errors this experience has created in my tree. And, clearly, in the ancestry.de section I (and my guests) no longer have the choice and are FORCED to use NewAncestry against our will. I received a letter from ancestry.com apologizing that I had been misled into believing that I could get out of NewAncestry in ancestry.de by using the http:/…ancestry.de/leave address, since this option has been “disabled”. Granted I can still work on that tree in ancestry.com in Classic Ancestry. But as I said, yesterday it threw me into New Ancestry without my permission and the “invitation” to go onto New Ancestry while I was working in Classic came on every five minutes or so interrupting my work.
    P.S.: Did anyone else notice how quickly they create new articles/blogs these days, hoping to “drown” the weekly updates under new articles as quickly as they can? 🙂 Sorry, I do not visit ancestry.com much anymore. Am spending my time in Rootsmagic and LOVING it!

  73. Vince

    The Ancestry Insider (a blog written independently of Ancestry.com and FamilySearch by a former insider at those two organizations) today posted the following notes from comments made by Howard Hochhauser, Ancestry.com’s Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer, on 30 September 2015 at the Deutsche Bank Leveraged Finance Conference:

    “…
    “New Ancestry took about a year and a half to build and is designed to add value, retain existing subscribers, and get more people into the service. The old site appealed to genealogists. The new site is more visually appealing. The old site was, essentially, a spreadsheet of the facts about an ancestor. Using machine learning, the new site is essentially a story about an ancestor. When you radical change your product, you run the risk of aliening your core base and that hasn’t happened. Test data shows that it has increased retention among their core base.

    “About half of their subscribers are using New Ancestry. They have tried forcing people into the New Ancestry to see if cancel rates change and have seen it doesn’t. They will not force a hard cutoff [near term]. Eventually they will. There have been complaints, but overall it’s been a net positive.

    “People are uploading photos and accepting more hints in a dramatically higher fashion with New Ancestry. They think that will increase the amount of bill through.
    …”

    The complete posting of notes (in two parts) by The Ancestry Insider from Hochhauser’s comments may be viewed at:
    http://www.ancestryinsider.org/2015/10/ancestrycom-at-banking-conference-part-1.html Tuesday, October 6, 2015
    http://www.ancestryinsider.org/2015/10/ancestrycom-at-banking-conference-part-2.html Wednesday, October 21, 2015

  74. mike

    Vince, one word to all that BS about Ancestry…nauseating. Thanks for posting it. I am for one along with many others totally fed up with all this Ancestry crap. I’m gone and really don’t care anymore. When their ads come on TV I turn to another channel. I can’t stand to even look at them. That is where part of your subscription is going, folks. I get so I don’t want to even read this forum anymore.

  75. caz

    For the last couple months I’ve been working on transferring my ‘direct line’ at least onto FTM (2014) that I’ve had for ages, but am now very slowlt playing catch up – re-checking I have all media uploaded, etc. and am trying to generally ‘tidy up’ a few large trees I have on Ancestry while updating FTM…I totally dislike the ‘New’, as I’ve mentioned before, but now I’m thinking about forgetting FTM as well (cos it’s related to ‘Ancestry’, and giving one of the other’s a go – maybe Legacy or Roots Magic?? I know it’s going to be a hard slog with large trees, thousands of people, and loads of media, but thought at least starting on my direct line maybe a good idea…. basically I’m asking for any advice, suggestions, recommendations, opinions, please….. Will it take forever? are any ‘similar’ to FTM? I’m middle aged and not particular computer minded but can manage the basics….. will I have to add all media separately? (I made the mistake particularly in the early days of not saving all my media on ‘Ancestry’ trees to my computer and I’m not a member at the mo. having let my subscription lapse because of all their mess forced on us).. I think I’m 50 – 75% decided I should give different software a try, and Monika, noticing your post above saying about ‘Roots Magic’ maybe now is the time, is that ‘Roots Magic’ the software you are using?… but will a change-over be very difficult? Thanks in advance for any advice and recommendations …..

  76. caith

    @Vince – IMO, Hochhauser can say anything, at any time, but that does not make it so…… or even the truth. Merely, rhetoric and not reason, spoken to assuage the stockholders, the customers be damned. Just spin, spin, spin like a politician.

    @Mike – yes, we all feel the pain and anguish, great disappointment. If I go into a store, and all the employees are disgruntled, I never go back into that store…….

    I am 72, but still a kid in the sandbox; and then, when I quit having fun, I would always go home. Well, I am going home. This w-end, I am cancelling my yearly sub which expires 11/6. I may in 6 months take a one month sub to see what has changed, but never again will I subscribe for more than 1 month, if that.

    The CUSTOMER is always right. I will come back as a regular customer only if they keep the Classic. Keeping the Classic is only a petty compromise on their part…………….

  77. douggrf

    The attribution of comments by Howard Hochhauser, Ancestry.com’s Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer , is absolute company spin.
    The whole campaign by the powers that be at Ancestry has been slowly coming to their senses.
    While the campaign points out that they detect little loss from customer cancellations- what they don’t take into account is the number of trees that have been downloaded or privatized. There are several considerations to viewing the wholesale impact of the New ancestry campaign on Ancestry, and in fact the real impact on the company will haunt them years from today.
    Complaints have made a difference – particularly the profile pic returning to a dynamic square, and dropping the silly circle portholes on the site.
    The original drop dead date for the Classic was set in company pronouncement to be August 1, 2015…now look at the calendar today and see what is changing about the entire timeline.
    Look at other publication sites besides the company blog, including those who claim to give un-biased reviews for the company, and yet accumulate a steady stream of critical comment.
    This change has proven to be a big deal! – Ha, much bigger than the company had expected.

  78. Robin

    Dear Mr. Hochhauser,
    “The old site appealed to genealogists.” “The old site was essentially a spreadsheet of the facts about an ancestor”. Sir, you can’t know how tempted I am to drown you in sarcasm right now, but…I’ll stick with facts….Yes the old site appealed to genealogists, wasn’t that why Ancestry.com was started? Didn’t you add your billions of records to this site so genealogists would be able to create the skeleton of their ancestors lives via timeline/spreadsheet? While I agree that the new site may be more visually appealing to you and others, it is not to me. The color gray is drab and depressing. The fonts are harder to read and that doesn’t touch on the visual mess of all your purple lines (and how INSULTING they are). “The new site is essentially a story about an ancestor.” Your new site has added stories to my tree. The first one I read, the first thought that came to my mind was “See Spot run.” I am not kidding. The second one I looked at turned my ggg grandfather’s life into a totally reinvented untruthful mess. Sir, I have a brain. I pay ancestry for the records, because I am a genealogist. I then search libraries, google books, family search books, genweb sites, etc to get the information I need to flesh out the table of facts I paid you for and write factual, intelligent (not computer written drivel) stories about my ancestors. I cannot believe that the vast majority of your customers pay you to get a story rather than a record. The record is your job, the story is mine. You may add the following to your spreadsheet…I gladly paid you for records, I will not pay for a story I could have (and did) write better myself. Thank you for listening.

  79. Janice

    @ROBIN May I add to your comments since I just read the “company line”?I cannot use the new due to the hideous color scheme. As a long time user of ACOM, I’ve been through many changes and created my own program for my tree because of their idea of “new and improved”. I strive for accurate resources and facts about my folks. I canceled my subscription but since it won’t end for another month, there is no way for ACOM to know how many are leaving at this time. ” New members” does not mean paying members either. When did FACTS on a spread sheet become not enough for a researcher? Your so called “life story” is so full of errors that if it weren’t so sad it would be comical. I will not accept that ACOM knows my folks Life Story better than I do and consider a computer generated mess a real slap in the face. Rather arrogant on your part as well as assuming I want my DNA sold to the highest bidder. If you were a factual researcher you would be ashamed to cite New ACOM as a resource.

  80. JM / UK

    Re the claim that “People are uploading photos and accepting more hints in a dramatically higher fashion with New Ancestry.” — Could it be that those who are planning to jump ship when their subscription expires are frantically grabbing anything and everything to sort through at a later date?

  81. Trisha

    @ Robin. well written Robin, you made me laugh, with the “see Spot run” comment, but you are perfectly right, the whole damn thing is comical beyond belief!

  82. Trisha

    @ Bee, apologies for the last comment, I had thought you said the new ancestry was visually more appealing! when of course you hadn’t, sorry.

  83. mike

    Some excellent comments posted on here. The new Ancestry will be nothing but a “stories” contrived by Ancestry, copied photos about your ancestors and nothing more. It will no longer be a site for genealogists; you can count on that. It is just as their TV say, “Find YOUR story,” We might as well give up the ghost to any thought of them retaining the classic interface as they have no intentions to do so. As time goes on; revenues will fall off and someone else will pick up the ball and leave Ancestry in the dust.

  84. Trisha

    Dear Mr Hochhauser,
    You say “The old site appealed to genealogists, and the new site is visually more appealing”
    (“appalling”, more like!)
    And Mr Hochhauser, it’s you that should have gone to Specsavers!

  85. douggrf

    Mike, there are several scenarios ahead for the company of Ancestry as it is up for sale. If the mis-management of the site and the development of the New with its attendant problems, you can be sure there will definitely an impact on the viability of the brand.
    This could be retaining or returning to Classic, actually that will be an amalgam of both sites that will survive way into the future.
    OR it might mean a competitor will grab market share, but not likely a single entitity – so hence maybe some new trade-offs in company acquisition and shake-outs for the entire genre of companies.
    Time will tell us more!

  86. caith

    I am beginning to wonder if ultimately, Ancestry WILL retain Classic. From rumblings, it seems the disabling of Classic is not as imminent as we thought in terms of time. Is Ancestry testing the waters with the younger market to see if they will re-new after 6 months and become customers, while stringing us oldsters along? Will Ancestry finally throw their loyal base a bone, and retain Classic? In the end, the numbers will speak, as we have spoken.

    We shall see. Stranger things have happened.

  87. Karen

    “About half of their subscribers are using New Ancestry. They have tried forcing people into the New Ancestry to see if cancel rates change and have seen it doesn’t.”

    So in other words, those forced into New without the ability to return to Classic were merely guinea pigs being played with by Ancestry to see if they would get fed up enough to cancel. A great way to treat customers Ancestry. I wonder how many called and demanded to be returned to Classic and how many figured they were just stuck and are just waiting until their subscription ends. Or are they talking about new members who were all put in New and didn’t have a clue anything else existed.

    I wonder what other mind games they are playing with customers to see how they react.

  88. Anne Scott Frankland

    New Ancestry – What I want:

    1. Family Group Sheet link on the FACTS page.
    2. List of All People link on the FACTS page.
    3. The “Not You?” in the Relationship Calculator”.
    4. Lighten the repulsive Gray.
    5. Put the Tree Pages dropdown on the FACTS page.
    6. To be able to Hide the LIFESTORY – forever!
    7. Get rid of the stupid Purple lines. Put the list of Sources as a dropdown in the fact box.
    8. Put the Media Gallery back on the FACTS/PERSON page.
    9. Put the Owner’s Name on the Facts page instead of GUEST when on another person’s tree.
    10. To be able to save a HINT record to My Shoebox without having to YES-NO-MAYBE.

    Or – better still – just KEEP CLASSIC. It’s so much better than NEW.

  89. Carrie

    To Robin: Your post of Oct 21 says it all for me. I use the classic version to find records for my facts. I do my own stories and if there is nothing more than some records, I won’t write a story that isn’t true or one, which is stupid for an adult. (See Spot run!) Certainly I won’t allow my story of my ancestors be dumbed-down to that inane thing they call life-story.

    The purple lines are annoying. The whole “fact” column is crazy. I don’t need or want all the births and deaths of all the siblings, children and parents in one column. It’s messy and inefficient and not helpful at all.

    The whole color scheme is ugly and depressing. It certain is NOT uplifting or energizing. I feel like I don’t want to do any genealogy. Maybe after 31 years I should quit. Quitting Ancestry isn’t really an option. I have a free account. They aren’t making any cash from me for subscribing.

    Folks try Roots Magic. There is a free version online. Nicer colors.

    Ancestry does have my trees, all private and un-searchable, but member connect notices go out to others who have the same people saying, “Jane Doe was saved in a private tree.” And also when you save a record to your private tree, another member connect notice goes out letting others know a record for Jane Doe was saved to a private tree. So others do get to know that someone with a private tree is working on a certain person. That’s ok if others do the research, not just blindly connect. They just don’t see your whole tree.

    Why didn’t they fix any complaints that existed on the classic? Why scrap the whole program just to present a “new” one? Dumb!

  90. Joyce

    Of course they have not seen much in the way of cancellations yet-it takes TIME to move a tree–especially if it is large and has a lot of info attached in the form of stories, photo’s etc–and WHY are 50% of users using the NEW? #1 people new to ancestry OR signing back up after they have let their account lapse for a while have NO choice-they are stuck in NEW.

    Some people don’t realize if they get into NEW by mistake they can switch back to OLD–I have run into several people that thought they were stuck and we see ppl on THIS blog all the time who think they are stuck.

    People with VERY large trees cannot possibly move them–I estimate it would take me about 5 years to get all my info off ancestry–at the very least–and then of course people don’t know where they can move their info to–especially since they don’t know what company ancestry might buy next and then shut it down as they have done before.

    This has been an eye opening experience and people are being cautious about choosing a new site if they plan on moving their tree—BUT trees cannot be moved overnight…

    Ancestry WILL feel this in the future if they don’t keep OLD as an alternative way of viewing your tree…

    I am afraid to do ANYTHING after reading about things vanishing when they try to work in NEW…bad enough that the programmers are also adversely affecting OLD at times—I don’t know how many times I have gone to a Census only to see the top labeled something totally different.

    Recently I have trouble in not being able to remove a source I had attached that I later discovered was incorrect–I have to go to NEW to be able to delete it–fortunately they seem to have fixed that–for now.

    It will take a while before ancestry FEELS the change…

    The fact that people are downloading GEDCOMS and getting all kinds of info off their trees should telll them something…

    It takes time to move tree info-and many people don’t have all day every day to do it–

    They WILL feel this…I don’t think NEW customers will be any more impressed than we are–especially with those stupid purple lines that do nothing but confuse you.

  91. Mary R.

    They are NOT going to get rid of the NEW format. This is from the 3rd-quarter report, Oct. 21st: “Ancestry Business Updates– Subscribers — Subscribers of Ancestry websites totaled approximately 2,243,000 as of September 30, 2015, up slightly compared to June 30, 2015 and up 6% compared to September 30, 2014.

    Product — Ancestry continues to make progress on the roll-out of a broad redesign of its core website. The new website features, capabilities, and site enhancements reinvent the ways Ancestry members create and showcase their family story…” http://corporate.ancestry.com/…/ancestrycom-llc…/

  92. Kristie

    The interesting numbers would be the increase in sales of FTM 2014 as people prepare to leave, and the number of trees taken private and unsearchable. (People who haven’t touched their trees since May 30, 2015 AND all those whose subscriptions are free don’t count.) Making people move to ‘New’ is crazy – some assume this is the way it is, say nothing and just leave, and some never saw ‘Classic’, so just assume this is the way it is (and of course, some get ACOM for free). I truly never have seen a product roll-out handled so poorly. New is a product with so many flaws that performs much worse on the user side than ‘Classic’. There should be a PUBLIC list of what is being worked on – so much feedback has been given – you have plenty of issues to tackle. One of the most important is the lack of dates after name choices to add records to – we all have multiple ancestors with the same names! Come on and make it work like it does in ‘Classic’ already! From the colors to the lack of user-friendly functions, what were you thinking?

  93. Joyce

    For those thinking of moving their trees–but also could be a handy resource for anyone–I am using familysearch more and more lately as there is a LOT of info there NOT available on ancestry.com. Eventually I will also upload a GEDCOM there when I finish doing source citations on my tree on ancestry–NOTE if you upload a GEDCOM here it is for reference only…so if you want to put your tree there you will have to build it from scratch…that does not seem very useful to me–anyway this article about a new book out about how to get the most out of familysearch.org—might come in handy if you are thinking of moving your tree there

    http://www.ancestryinsider.org/2015/10/review-insiders-guide-to-familysearch.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AncestryInsider+%28The+Ancestry+Insider%29

  94. nadinemi21

    Ancestry, please, please, pay attention to Robin’s missive to Mr. Hochhauser. She captured my feelings exactly. Thank you Robin!

  95. Don

    @Joyce Familysearch is not your tree. Anybody can make changes to it. Even if you try to not attach it to their one tree, at some point someone will come along and merge people from your tree to the one tree.

  96. Trisha

    @Kristie (about 5 comments above)
    Excellent comments Kristie, I agree with every word you say. In September, after taking six months off from Ancestry, I came back to renew and got the shock of this awful new format. I just knew right away I could not do my further research on that thing! Then about three weeks ago Ancestry offered me £30 off to renew, I had a couple of days only to decide about it. At the last minute I took up the offer, mainly because it was the only way I could continue to view all my records/documents, but I also told them I would renew only if I could continue working on classic, and to work on how to best save my trees. Thankfully, the classic is still available, But what I also realised if I did not renew is that I would miss very much the shared experience of people helping other people on ancestry, making connections with distant cousins I never knew I had, getting a message in the box from a fellow researcher gives me such pleasure. Connecting with someone miles and miles away who are researching the same ancestor is brilliant.getting to see pictures of my ancestors is fantastic, and for example, sharing my own old photos with 2nd cousins I didn’t know about, letting them see for the first time what their great grandparents looked like, letting them view an old photo taken a hundred years ago of a young soldier aged 18 (my grandma’s only brother) who was killed in WW1 brought tears to their eyes! But if new ancestry is going to be the only option, thousands of researchers will leave ancestry, taking with them marvellous information they have come across over the years while researching their trees, taking with them the wonderful old photos that they have on their unique trees. ANCESTRY CAN YOU REALLY AFFORD TO LOSE THESE QUITE WONDERFUL RESEARCHERS?

  97. Henry

    Don, you are absolutely correct. The “tree” which is on FamilySearch is meant to be ONE connected tree. If you don’t connect your ancestors, the good folks at FamilySearch will do it for you. Or they have a program which will do it. ANYONE can then EDIT the people in the ONE tree. This is not always helpful. I was set to add my work to “the tree” when I learned there is only ONE tree. Somehow that didn’t set too well with me. I didn’t want to keep checking my people to see if anyone made changes or additions. It would be like doing the same work over and over! There is no way to keep your tree separate in FamilySearch. I think that is very sad.

    Of course we will have the same ancestors in some situations, but would you like someone to get into your tree on Ancestry and make changes and not even let you know? Think twice about what you want to do. Investigate for yourself before you commit.

  98. CAH

    Tricia on Oct 17:

    Well said. I keep checking the new and I want to go vomit when I see what it is now.
    They should never have released it!

    I’m a very long time subscriber and it really makes me ill. And I know it will take part of the joy in my life away.

    This is not the first time this has happened, but it is the worse version they ever made.

  99. vonnie

    I am trying very hard to like the new ancestry but keep coming back to the old site. One problem with the new site is that when I search documents I already have attached to my tree appear as new documents. In the old version attached documents are filtered out of a search. Also there is that pesky “road map” that appears every time I return to my tree. In the old version you put it at the bottom of the tree view and not where I want to view the tree. I can’t stress enough how ugly and confusing the new tree is. It boggles my mind as to why you came up with such a hideous mess instead of adding onto the already efficient tree.

  100. Pa

    Three weeks, and you have yet to restore the Military Pages via the military badge (in the green circle) .

    You delete non-derogatory posts or messages.

    But you let others post SPAM about Latest Govt. Bank Jobs.

  101. Charlotte

    I am sorry but the new format is crap. I can’t find things and I can’t stop wrong sites from showing up over and over again. Making corrections is a lot harder. I don’t like the new format and wish you would go back to the classic format you had. Not everyone is a computer guru

  102. Debbie

    I have been trying to get used to the new Ancestry, but I still find it awkward and unhelpful. Just go back. About military pages, I’m shocked that we cannot create new pages or edit the old ones. Shameful!

Comments are closed.