Posted by Ancestry Team on November 23, 2015 in Australia, Canada, Germany, Mexico, Sweden, Website

Welcome to our weekly update on the new Ancestry website. Last week we posted an article that covered Member Connect and Military Pages, and in the upcoming weeks, we will re-introduce more options under the “Find Person in this tree” menu on the person page.

More importantly, as of December 15th, 2015, the old website will be retired and the new Ancestry will be the only Ancestry website. We will continue providing these posts as needed to ensure you have the latest update on the features available and the features the team is working on.

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:

List of All People – You will have an additional option of navigating directly to the home person of the tree, or to the list of all people in the tree. Our members gave us feedback that it takes much longer to return to the Tree Viewer to access this option, and we are excited to rebuild this functionality directly into the new person page.

Click on the icon to access “Home Person” or “List of All People”:


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:

  • Some members are getting a blank page when trying to view original record images
  • Merge Duplicates tool was not working earlier in the week (this has been resolved)
  • Some members do not like the generic thumbnails that are showing up for hints
  • Members would like to be able to attach stories to Facts
  • Some members are upset that the Military Pages cannot be edited in new Ancestry

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



Help Articles



  1. Pa

    This is sorrowful, not only for the demise and destruction of the #1 genealogy website, but for the fact you can only accomplish one task a week.

  2. Cheryl

    Get rid of those god-awful purple lines. The idea behind this is so childish as to even embarrass a kindergartner! So #$%& distracting and annoying!

  3. Cheryl

    Get rid of the census images in the attic! I want to see ONLY what I have uploaded without having to search through those needless redundant images!

  4. Cheryl

    On the facts page, put the timeline and the family column together as in Classic!. It was an absolutely stupid idea to separate them!

  5. Clay

    I’d like to say, before the bad-manners comments start, that I use the site every day and I’ve seen great improvements over the past month or so. The fact that you can crop pictures from the site now rather than manually cutting them up is a huge time saver. As for Pa’s comment up above, why don’t you try to code a site that so many people can use and exchange information on at the same time and accomplish more, then? Learn JavaScript! Impress us! This stuff is not easy, and you should feel bad for thinking that it is.

  6. Ty

    When building a site for over 2 million people the odds of pleasing everyone is nil. The site has to work for people of all expereine levels. It has to work for people who speak different languages. It has to work for people with different literacy level and different levels of genealogy experience. On top of that it has to work on thousands of different computer and software combinations. In addition, it can not be built to appeal only to today’s users but tomorrow’s users as well. So if purple lines are a game breaker for you then see ya because they aren’t likely to go away. If moving the new location for sources is a game breaker then see ya because they aren’t moving.
    Clay is abosolutely right that only someone with no programming experience thinks its easy to write code for such a large dynamic site. Outcome is not always indicative of the effort that went into producing that 1 item.

  7. nadinemi

    Ancestry, since you are curating feedback I’d like to make sure the following feedback from my recent Facebook post is not overlooked: I am relatively new to Ancestry. I tried the two-week trial in July 2014 after receipt of my DNA results and instantly I was over the moon with Classic Ancestry. It was a fantastic experience. I found it intuitively easy to use and of good quality. I quickly became passionate about genealogy and logged on to the site daily. I found ancestors I never dreamed I had and was able to find and forge solid bonds with cousins I never knew existed. I was and am sincerely grateful for my time on Classic Ancestry. Sadly, Ancestry has decided to force New Ancestry on us. I believe New Ancestry is inferior to Classic Ancestry in ways too numerous to detail here. It doesn’t meet my genealogy needs and I’m not going to use it. I’ve canceled my subscription to Ancestry.

  8. nadinemi

    Clay and Ty: I don’t think it’s easy to write the code for New Ancestry. But nor is it necessary for Ancestry to tie itself into knots to introduce unnecessary features and changes. If more work is what’s needed, then by all means, do it the hard way, but don’t force an unfinished product on customers until it’s really ready to be rolled out. Outcome may not be indicative of effort, but subscribers are paying for outcomes, not for effort. Very sorry about that, but that’s the way business works.

  9. Ty

    You still have access to old until the 15th. However, Cheryl for example listed 3 items, none of which are related to the actual function of the site. They are all items she simply does not like. I happen to like where the sources are now located, don’t really care one way or the other about the purple lines, and think the media gallery including ALL media items is an enhancement that works.
    More work? be specific. What exactly takes more work? They can’t change or fix things from general complaints. However, just because you ask does not mean it will make the immediate list or the list at all. The page apparaence isn’t likely to change for instance. You said you had too many complaints to list. That is rather silly when they have been asking for months for specific feedback.

  10. Monica

    The main reason I cancelled my membership was the dismal colors because my eyes hurt after 5-10 minutes. I have complained to Ancestry about this and seen lots of comments from people with the same problem. I have yet to see this “we are working on” issue on your monthly updates. Why do you ignore this issue that obviously are losing you customers?

  11. Cheryl

    @ACOM. Here is someone else’s idea. When you show tools (the “View in tree”, “View notes”, “View comments”, etc.) on the profile page, the words appear in white lettering against the gray background. Flag the comments and notes with some color when there are comments and notes to be read. Also highlight with color the word “GALLERY” on the profile page to indicate there is media to be viewed. In Classic, of course, all of this was seen at a glance on the profile page. Now all is hidden in New. At least, give us a color indication that something is to be read or seen.

  12. nadinemi

    Ty: Besides the fact that I’ve been giving specific feedback that I think has been ignored, I think I made the correct decision not to set forth all of my issues with New Ancestry in a single massive post. Ancestry knows what my issues are, if they’ve been paying attention. I didn’t want to burden those people in the Facebook community who don’t care to see it.

  13. RobinH

    Clay & Ty, I can’t imagine that anyone thinks it is easy to make programming changes, but I would guess lots of folks would prefer that the system not be rolled out before many of the requested changes and updates are made – and that could very well take lots of time.

  14. Vince

    To caith: In case you are not following the November 13 any more, I just posted there a reply to your comment of early today about a GEDCOM file not opening in Windows 10.

  15. anita

    I am finding the new colors difficult to read as well. Perhaps it is my age, but the new pages seem busy. The timeline I find useless.

  16. Anne Scott Frankland

    New Ancestry – What I still want:

    1. Family Group Sheet link on the FACTS page.
    2. List of All People link on the FACTS page. The 23rd November Update lists this as one of the “Features we will introduce” – but it’s not on the Facts page yet — so it’s still on my list.
    3. The “Not You?” in the Relationship Calculator”.
    4. Move the sources from the middle of the facts page. Put them back below the family column.
    5. Put the Tree Pages dropdown on the FACTS page.
    6. The ability 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.
    11. Link to an overview of List of all Comments – which you took away months ago!
    12. New color scheme. The gray and purple are horrible!

    I’m going to keep posting this list to the updates. Kristie Wells – do each of these still count individually?

    I will continue to use Ancestry after December 14th because I’m not confident enough to move or download my information. So, Ancestry, put back the many features, links and tools we had available in Classic that you did not consider important enough to put in New. I can use an ugly – very ugly — Ancestry, just make it more functional.

  17. Cheryl

    @anita. Many have found the colors difficult. With the deadline looming, it looks like ACOM is going to stick with that hellacious color scheme. No it is not just you…others find the timeline very busy with bustling purple lines sprouting up all the time. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. It would be great if there was a way to disable them as they serve no purpose at all.

  18. Bernie Dalton Esq

    Why oh why ancestry??? You had a great product most of the time but now its going downwards. Who thought of having those glaring colours? Was it a 5 year old? It has been discussed many times but you don’t listen you just placate suscribers. I heard mention in many discussions that I have had with others that if it nots liked I could always leave ancestry – I think thats what it may come to, I currently have a monthly subscription and I think that when its up for renewal next month it won’t be renewed. Hints that bear no resemblance to a tree, your tv ad is so misleading. We may not be the biggest subscribers here in the UK but you don’t mind taking our money for what I now see as an inferior product. Enhancements? What enhancements they are poorly thought out and executed

  19. caz

    Ooooh I also wish there were ‘like’ buttons on here, well said nadinemi, and so many others, we just feel we’ve repeated the same problems we are finding over and over and over again with Ancestry not even mentioning them….. talk about feeling like knocking heads on a brick wall….. even simple things haven’t been transferred over from ‘Classic’, like the button we used to have to ‘search the web’… I won’t be continuing with ‘New’, all the pleasure I’ve had, excitement in finding people, hours of enjoyment or a 5 minute quick search, adding a new person or a new family or a whole branch, it just seems like it’s all gone, I get nothing out of working on ‘New’. Subscription has lapsed and I won’t be re-newing this time, sadly – has been great for many years but sadly just not any more.

  20. Don

    1) leave the purple lines, I would love to be able to attach the sources to the family members also supported by the source.
    2) I don’t care about the census images in the gallery, but I do want to see the entire image in the gallery, not just a piece of it.
    3) Leave the sources exactly where they are now, this is the main reason I’m glad classic Ancestry is GONE.
    4) If you actually used new Ancestry you would know that there are blue numbers by comments and notes to let you know there are comments and notes.

  21. Vince

    To Anne Scott Frankland: Your list is my list, especially items 3 and 6. Ancestry, please make these reasonable changes to bring back functionality of Classic Ancestry that otherwise will be lost after December 14.

  22. RobinH

    Thanks, Anne, for bringing up the topic of how the voting “process” works. I have often wondered about it. If I say “ditto” to what Anne asked for, is that two votes today for everything on her wish list? If I call and post on Facebook and on Twitter her same requests, does that add three more votes for each one of her requests today? How about if I repeat that process once every hour? My, the votes would quickly add up if we all did that. Since we don’t know (even though we have asked over and over and over again) what is on the list of items being worked on or what is on the list of items that will be worked on in the future, we feel obliged to have to repeat our requests over and over and over again, hoping that that will result in our seeing (someday) that those items have made it to the weekly update. Surely, “the process” can be better than this.

  23. Walt

    Would you buy a book that had every other page missing?
    How about a new car that was missing its dashboard gauges?
    Can I sell you a new piano with black keys that don’t work?
    There’s nothing easy about publishing books or manufacturing cars or building pianos.
    But the people who publish books and manufacture cars and build pianos understand that they need to deliver products that are finished and ready for market.
    They understand the value exchange. The customer pays money for the product. The business provides a product that is mature, finished and ready for the customer’s use.
    Why should Ancestry be different? Are subscribers who are paying $300 or $400 a year just funding experimentation by website developers? Or are they buying a product that they have every right to expect to work properly?

  24. Karen

    For those who need purple snakes to be able to figure out what connects, let them have them; let people who find them distracting have the option of turning them off. For those who need someone to write a story for them, let them have it; for those who find them juvenile and inaccurate, let them turn them off so no one will mistake stories for reality. Why in this day and age can’t Ancestry let people customize their pages?

    As for those saying it’s hard to write code, I don’t care. It’s their job. Do it. It shouldn’t take all these months to make the minor changes they have made. How long did it take them to write the original New? Decades?

  25. Cheryl

    @Karen. I agree. Funny, I call the lines octopus arms. Also, how hard would it be to give tree owners a “lock” on the &^#@*& Life Story?

  26. Henry

    Gee! I just did a search for a lady and her husband in Maine. Got several good results…but along with the good results were several that had pictures and a pop-up message box that says, “There’s more to see….Sign Up Now.” One of these was a reference to a history book and the others were pictures of grave stones that were titled “Public Member Photos & Scanned Documents” These cost more money to see in addition to your membership cost. Find-a-grave is still free but I think maybe Billion Graves is now selling subscriptions to see what people contribute. So Ancestry needs to get money too, it would seem. What’s wrong with this picture?

  27. Henry

    Clay and Ty: If you would just read all the previous blogs regarding the new Ancestry, you would realize that people have been specific in what they don’t like and what they want. I spent a great deal of time this past weekend out of curiosity, reading past blogs and folks have been quite clear about what they need and want.

    I also have spent a lot of time using the new Ancestry. I feel I can use it…but…I don’t think it’s efficient. And it certainly is ugly. So I know how it works, but I don’t like the way it works because it’s not logical, concise, or intuitive.

    It isn’t a finished product and all users are the ones who will have to test it and help the company fine tune it.

    Too bad we are offending your little delicate feelings. We are telling it like it is!

  28. Tracey

    All these features we are goingto get “sometime” in the future are all features we had & they worked in Old Ancestry. This company has destroyed what works ,the only new items are generally totally despised by most geneologists and are on the whole booth inaccurate and useless “pretty” additions as bait for new customers

  29. mary

    @Cheryl. I just posted on FB two more examples of horrible blunders in “Lifestory.” Since I have about 10,000 people in my tree, I can probably keep up the posting of examples indefinitely. I have been begging for an OFF switch for Lifestory for months. I don’t want to see it EVER, nor do I want to risk anyone else seeing it. Ancestry is gratuitously inserting incorrect and inappropriate information into the account I’m paying them for.

  30. Anne Scott Frankland

    RobinH – I’ve been told Ancestry counts each and every feedback item. Whether they will return the Classic features and functions to New is another story.

    A post from Kristie Wells addresses the feedback —
    “Kristie Wells@Anne Scott Frankland: We have been collecting member feedback from these blog comments, Facebook, Twitter, our online surveys, our Online Support Community, and in our Member Services Call Center (phone/email). We curate it all and then prioritize items based on the number of requests. The weekly blog posts we provide encapsulate this feedback. If you are experiencing an issue that is not being shown in our posts, then I encourage you to let us know what it is. Otherwise, the product team is reviewing it all and acting on a lot of it and then sharing those updates here.”
    October 28, 2015 at 8:44 pm

    Kristie Wells says the product team will be “acting on a lot of it”. Ancestry needs to act on ALL of it.

  31. Anne Scott Frankland

    Vince – I’ve never understood why all of the things we could do in Classic weren’t automatically included in New Ancestry to begin with. They created their own problem – and then made it worse with things like LIFESTORY, the dark gray banner, the huge Profile name, the Media Viewer, Purple lines and the round Profile picture (which they were reluctant to change) just to name a few. It’s a horrible site!

  32. Carmen

    I think we need to be careful about seeming too ungrateful for the changes that have come as a result of our complaints. Trust me, I’ve been complaining, begging, screaming & venting as loud as anyone about New Ancestry but I’m so afraid that at some point they will decide that nothing will ever make us happy & just stop trying.

    I am grateful that they are implementing many of the changes we have begged for (despite the pace of a snail on Quaaludes). I hope they continue to do so since New Ancestry is going to be our only choice.

    Thanks for deciding to add the “List of All People” on the Facts page. I really wanted that. That said, the things I would still like to see:

    1. In the document viewer, the ability to open “Suggested Records” in a new tab.

    2. Thumbnails of media at the top of Facts Page.

    3. Ability to attach stories on Facts Page.

    4. Ability to hover over people in tree view and see pop-up of info.

    5. Ability to completely disable Lifestory.

    6. “Not You?” in the Relationship Calculator.

    7. Family Group Sheet

    8. Tree Owner’s Name on the Facts Page instead of Guest.

    9. Overview of List of all Comments

    10. Text in Tree View is appears blurry. I like to be able to zoom out to see more people at a time but can’t do this because the text looks blurry even at the default size.

    11. One of the BIGGEST issues for me is the layout of the Facts Page. I just can’t get used to it. It’s too spread out. Being able to see the family closer together on a more compact page was so much better!

    12. Exact Search needs to be EXACT. Search results seem to be getting worse.

  33. Anne Scott Frankland

    Carmen — Why do we have to be grateful when Ancestry gives us back a feature or function that they took away in the first place. Also, Ancestry is probably not worried, in the least, if we are happy or not.

  34. Carol

    Hey folks, this is off topic but I thought it might be wise to let you know. In the last week I have found two source records which are mislabeled in the header of the view of the actual scan. One is an 1870 census which has 1850 in the header. The other is a Civil War Pension Index which has 1901 England Census in the header. Check your documents before you save. I always do.

  35. Henry

    Carmen, I wouldn’t worry about seeming to be ungrateful. They got our money. Ancestry has pulled this kind of stunt several times before over the years. But always before it was tolerable. Yeah, we complained and then we stopped. Ancestry continued to sneak in little tweaks here and there. The last big hassle was regarding the “search.” It wasn’t so drastic as this current change. This is the worst change yet. I can probably work with it as I have practiced a lot over the months, but I will never like it, for all the reasons most people don’t like it. And it will be less efficient.

    Someday, Ancestry will be sold and some other company will try their hand with it. Genealogy is very unique, but we had a good run with the classic. If they should make enough changes as people suggest, it might become more tolerable.

  36. JM / UK

    For anyone who doubts the effects of the ‘New’ colour scheme and presentation, I repeat my post of 31 Oct at 2.02 pm:

    ~~~Many Thanks to ’50-something’ for posting the link to the Ancestry Insider’s blog for Monday, Oct 26th at:

    One blog comment in particular is very pertinent to the discomfort many users are experiencing with the colour scheme in New Ancestry.

    ‘Unknown’ submitted the following on October 28, 2015 at 3:33 AM:

    ” I know that people are resistant to change. However, in this case, I think the reduced functionality of New Ancestry is a genuine cause for complaint. I now hear that New Ancestry will be permanent in November, which in my opinion is very premature.

    Perhaps the top priority should be to change the color scheme and format of New Ancestry. Although tweaks have been made, it is still hard to read. I have had some experience with visual accessibility standards for websites for people age 40+ and the visually impaired. I do not believe that New Ancestry meets them.

    In particular, I don’t believe the new color scheme takes into consideration the points below. According to the workgroup on website accessibility (, vision begins to change at age 40:

    • CONTRAST SENSITIVITY: from the age of 40, contrast sensitivity at higher spatial frequencies starts to decline until at the age of 80, it has been reduced by up to 83%. [New Ancestry’s background is a dark brown/gray. There is much less contrast between it and the text.]

    • COLOUR PERCEPTION AND SENSITIVITY: less violet light is registered, making it easier to see red and yellows than blues and greens and often making darker blues and black indistinguishable. [Colors used in New Ancestry are harder for many to see.]

    • PUPIL SHRINKAGE: resulting in the need for more light and a diminished capacity to adjust to changing light levels. For example, 60 year old retinas receive only 40% of the light that 20 year old retinas receive while 80 year old retinas only receive around 15%. [New Ancestry’s dark background reduces the amount of light.] ”

    I have cut and pasted this extract and sent it as feedback via the ‘this form’ link at the top of this page. Might I suggest that anyone similarly concerned does likewise – I’m sure quite a few of us are over 40!! ~~~

    In the previous Update blog, contributors were referred to as ‘regular whiners’. In my response I asked those who would criticise to:

    ~~~ “Remember that all ‘regular whiners’ began as polite requesters who responded to the exhortation issued above – ‘We appreciate your feedback and encourage you to keep submitting it’. After repeatedly giving ‘constructive criticism in a meaningful way’ which apparently went unheard, they resorted to a stronger human voice to challenge “the soothing, humourless monotone of the mission statement, marketing brochure, and your-call-is-important-to-us busy signal” ~~~

    As in that post I now wish to highlight the plight of those left behind by ‘New’ – those with age-related sight problems; those with older equipment unable for whatever reason to update and those whose broadband speed simply won’t support the new functions adequately. Here in UK many people are still on dial-up and many still have speeds below .5Mbs because that is all they can get.

    @RobinH As to the ‘Vote early, vote often’ suggestion, I think I shall now persistently cut and paste any item presented here and elsewhere into the ‘this form’ button at the head of this blog – after all, as it says there: ‘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’.

  37. Monika

    @ Clay and Ty. Thank you for participating in the feedback about New Ancestry, and, since you seem new to this blog, No, I am not the same person as “Monica”. I agree with you that, when you are building a site for over 2 million people it is absolutely impossible to please everyone. Having worked in administrative and managerial positions for a prolonged period of time, I can tell you, however, that there is a right way to handle dissatisfied customers and there is a wrong way. ACOM has, in my opinion, a history of choosing the wrong way, starting with making the customer wrong when (s)he points out something that does not work, treating the customer like (s)he lacks intelligence and, therefore, cannot see the “correctness” of what they have done, or just blowing the customer off with cliches (sorry for the lack of accent on the e), like “We have passed your comments on to…for review”, while all along knowing that nothing will be done about it. That causes people to become agitated.

    After MONTHS of detailed feedback and complaints made by thousands and thousands of ancestry members on various sites, about the inaccuracies and/or banalities in LifeStories and Historical Facts, what is the response of ACOM? A TV advertisement that attempts to lure new customers (who have no experience doing genealogy since they are luring them in with the suggestion to just “type in your name and the name of your parents” and let the “hints” lead you further) to join by promising them these wonderful LifeStories as a sales feature in said advertising!!! No serious genealogist, and, in my opinion, no person with an average IQ or an above average IQ appreciates this feature. Anyone that tells me that they like LifeStories and the Historical Facts as they appear on probably also watches “The Kardashians” and “The Beverly Hills Housewives” on TV, or is one of those college students interviewed on an American college campus, who, when asked who our current vice president is, comes up with the wrong answer. It is downright frightening! ACOM, at least create a button that allows us to turn these two features off on our trees before you advertise this feature on TV! (I am not suggesting ACOM get rid of these two pathetic so-called “enhancements”, since amongst 2 million people there will always be some who appreciate these “enhancements”. But, first and foremost, when I create a tree, no one, and I mean NO ONE, including ACOM should have the right to add something to my tree, nor to delete things from my tree (unless I use obscenities). When you do genealogy correctly, your soul connects with your ancestors–ancestors that had a very hard life and whose life should not be trivialized by creating computer generated stories about their lives that do not do their lives justice.

    ACOM admits to knowing that the “old” ancestry program appealed to genealogists. The seasoned genealogists are more likely to create accurate trees than the inexperienced newcomers ACOM recruits via TV advertisement. Accurate trees add to the credibility of this site. That SHOULD be important to ACOM. As such, the features of New Ancestry (including the “presentation” of these features as they existed in the “old” ancestry program) should remain as user friendly and easy to view and work on as they were in the “old” ancestry program. And, if they are not, explain to us how many of these 2 million people really wanted the site to look as New Ancestry looks today! I asked Kristie Wells repeatedly the following questions (e.g., see the blog of October 4 and October 8, where I made statements that concur with some of the statements you make). I asked “When ACOM “brainstormed” the creation of New Ancestry, were they influenced by how many members requested what? E.g., how many members wanted circle profile pictures? How many members asked for a computer generated LifeStories feature and computer generated Historical Facts? (If you know anything about computer generated programs like LifeStories, you must have known that, in order to keep it accurate, the stories had to become trivial–he was born, he married, he died–and that, if you wanted to extend data beyond that, inaccuracies could not be avoided.” Prior to creating the Beta version, did ACOM care how the MAJORITY of the members feel? Or did they just decide to go into “parent” mode and decide what is good for us and AFTER that ask us to evaluate the Beta version? While New Ancestry may draw in new members for a while, a genealogy site that wants to have credibility should not encourage its members to just “click on the leaves”. This is why there are so many trees on that are pure garbage. There are trees on that copied from each other and show both, me and my mother as “deceased”, as they attached us to my husband, simply because so many people have the same name as we have. When I told them that we are still alive they refused to change their records, because, after all, the leaves showed people with our names and they were dead. As a matter of fact, I had to involve ACOM because this “outed” so much information about us that an identity thief could have taken advantage of that information. Now add the computer generated LifeStories and incorrect Historical Facts “enhancements” to a tree like that and you have added diatribe to the incorrect information that people already have in their trees. One good thing has come from this for me, and that is that I found an excellent stand alone genealogy software to which I transferred all the trees I used to have on

  38. Barbara

    Monika, you are so right. It’s not just Ancestry though. Everywhere websites are being dumbed down to TV “Reality Show” levels. Useless glitz and close enough to truth additions. Real genealogy is doomed anyway. If hired transcribers get so much wrong, good luck to the new generation who can’t write or read cursive. I’ve enjoyed my 15 years with Ancestry. Their database is great and I have freely shared my labour, photos and certificates. However, my large tree will be private until “Life Story” can be permanently shut off. Correct historical facts can be searched for elsewhere, if needed.

  39. I have been on Ancestry quite a lot here in the past weeks. Have finally found a member of one family whom seem to not want to be found. But then again had problems with finding wrong census records on wrong pages. The reading of the US Directories for many different years, that are not correct such as addresses, etc. I have just in the last evening set request for correct records, more than one on one person. I think the states have, like Virginia, been working very hard to upload records. Thanks to them. I wish you would make sure that all of our concerns are brought up to date, before changing to new format, etc. I do not like the new format, but am trying it. Sometimes, NEW IS NOT BETTER. I have been complaining about a birth record for one of my husbands relatives that is correct on record , but the upload list another page. I even copied it and sent to them. Still no response. I agree with Barbara.

  40. linda

    I agree with almost all the complaints above. I will sign up for next year for 6 months, in order to give it a fair trial to see if suggestions are followed. Beyond that … I don’t know.

  41. Cheryl

    @linda. I’ve been using Frickin’ New for quite awhile and still dislike it. It is such a clownish format compared to Classic which, by ACOM’s own admission, is for genealogists. And on to something else…I posted previously that in Frickin’ New there is no notice on the profile page that tells of comments being added to your tree. I have since found out there is such notification (somewhere), but since I have never had any comments posted to any of my trees I never realized this. But there is still no place on the profile page that tells you if you have added media, so you have to visit the attic to find out. ACOM, PUT OUR UPLOADED MEDIA ON THE PROFILE PAGE! Need to be able to see it at a glance as in Classic. And there is no way to tell if you have notes unless you click to find out. ACOM, REMEDY THIS!

  42. Carolyn

    I have had a membership in Ancestry for many years. When the “new” Ancestry came out, I took a look are realized that it had been geared to people who dabble in genealogy and think they can find all their ancestors on Family Trees. When I look at the screen, I cannot help but think they have put young people who do not do genealogical work in charge and forgotten that the ones who made Ancestry work were those who were looking for original records and easy-to-use formatting. It’s becoming a chore using Ancestry and added to the “work” of genealogists. So sad.

  43. toni

    Ha! No more money from me! If you stop using ancestry for information, go look in the wild for it, you will find more than you looked for. Yes. A little more work initially. A little more time. Initially. But the things you will find!! And with practice the time involved will lessen and the things you find will give you happy dances more often. The tree quality at ancestry is going to go down the toilet, no doubt about it. When the shaky leaves were introduced it was the beginning of the end. The “new” search engine a few years ago made searching very difficult. And now this. Life DOES exist without ancestry. But you have to try it for 6 months to know how great life at a different web site can be.

  44. Mary M Zashin

    I think the cosmetic issues are important and that if ACOM changed the color scheme and formatting of the fact page many of the complaints would stop. I’m reasonalby reconciled to the New since I found out I can myself change the color scheme, but it would be better for ACOM to offer “skins” that are site-specific since an add-on can’t do everything. But, I agree that having things work is primary. I’ve found a number of small, yet cumulatively irritating, bugs that I think should be fixed (yes, I’ve given “feedback.”) Like, no expander buttons (such as on this form) on the edit fields for media descriptions (so that, for example, if you want to edit a media note, you can see only three lines of text at a time), no “date added” or formatting choices for notes, no ability to add a description or transcription to a source from the gallery, only by opening and editing the source citation field (and the added material doesn’t show up attached to the source in the gallery). Small things, yes, but this is a hobby for obsessive people, after all 🙂 I’d also like to be able to remove the thumbnail ACOM adds to the marriage fact, which is the primary photo for the spouse. When the primary photo is a tombstone it’s not very appealing connected to the marriage! I actually think Lifestory can be positive as a display, especially since the ability to add media to events was restored, so that media can then show up in the Lifestory timeline. I really don’t like the canned narrative, however. It’s repetitive and the facts are already displayed. They don’t need to be recapitulated in a boring sentence. Ideally I would like a way to turn off Lifestory for the whole tree. Barring that, I would like a way to turn off the narrative. I’ve found you can’t just edit the narrative sentences out. They reappear instantly. You can, however, replace the sentence with a . and then that’s all that appears. But doing that for a tree with 1000s of entries is just not practical. Adding the ability to shut off the narrative, as one can do with “historical insights” (which when not grossly inappropriate, are usually just banal) and family events in the timelines, would be very useful. BTW I like the filmstrip on source images, particularly because you can shut it off if you want. I also like the ease with which an event on the fact page can be connected to an already-added source on the page. So, I’m finding some positive, but ONLY because I can alter the horrible color scheme. . .

  45. KarenT

    Thank you folks at Ancestry for listening to all our whining 🙂 I hated the new pages at first but have grown to appreciate some of the new features. I still think the story page and the octopus purple lines should be an option in the settings drop down menu, so we don’t have to always see them. My request this week may be simple… When adding a record to my tree would it be possible for the description box to come up at the same time as date and location? I frequently like to add notes there and sometimes I have to wait until they appear on the Fact page to edit and add notes. My example would be adding a burial record from The date is empty for you to fill it in, the location is there, but the description box is not available. I like to put the name of the cemetery there. Keep plugging away and this site may be perfect someday 🙂

  46. Pooh

    Ancestry suggestions

    Have computer highlight potential DUPLICATES.

    Have a separate section that gives a list of DUPLICATES so that we can work on them when we choose.

    Have a suggestion area where we can see everyones suggestions. Allow us to vote on what we want to have changed. Don’t just use your own thoughts on what suggestions should be accepted.

    Have a go-back button that allows changes to be undone and reverted to a previous edit. Helpful for when we make an error that we need to undo.

    Allow more space to DESCRIPTION area so that we can tell our story the way we want. Why are you limiting the character spaces?

    Lifestory DESCRIPTION for EDUCATION does not show info that I have typed.

    Lifestory DESCRIPTION for MILITARY does not show info that I have typed.

    Lifestory DESCRIPTION for OCCUPATION does not show info that I have typed.
    Fix mobile app. It is missing features.
    All options on desktop version are not available on mobile site.
    Unable to merge duplicates

    Allow users to say yes or no to keeping an alternative fact. Don’t just assume we want to keep it.

    U.S. Social Security Applications and Claims Index, 1936-2007 is not always showing death date. Even if date shows.

    Have buttons on all items that show item was read. That way we know when we have looked at an item.

    Have an automatic save when writing to others. Twice I have lost my entire dialogue when something happened. If there was an automatic save of material, I would have been able to return to the word that I had last typed without having to retype all.

    Ensure it has the same operation as desktop site.

    Comments do not always show on mobile site. Page says there are two comments but nothing shows when comment section opens up

    Show more military info for person. Now it is minimal info that shows. Include war, dates of service, side fought on for Civil War, company info and all other info that has been found.

    WHY have military button to view only? WHY are you not allowing it to be part of the identity that would be views like any other aspect of their life. Does this print military info
    Have individual buttons on each item in facts and lifestory so people can choose yes or no to include info.

    Include dob and dod dates with names when people search to find which relative to attach info. Lot of relatives have same name and items get posted to wrong person.

    Show when spouse and kids are “NEW” OR “DIFFERENT” when trying to save info. Now it is just showing when dates or locations are effected.

    Allow pics and comments to be open while in mode to select items to include on your tree. Now we have to select to open the other tree to view the info and then start the process over to review from all the trees.
    Have a stop button on names so you don’t get any more hints on that person. With large trees, it is hard to remember where you want to cut the tree expansion when you get hints.
    Since updating on 10/28/15, save to tree does not work right when trying to save from another’s tree. WHAT HAPPENED? Now, even if you don’t have the box checked, it shows the other persons info that they have inputted into their tree. Example, my data shows one date and displayed as 03 Feb 1967, But the other person has February 3, 1972, it shows that in my tree. I can not save anything as I am afraid that I will corrupt my data. Checked this several times and it is not working correctly.

    Have update tab along with add tab, Will prevent duplicates and allow person to be updated.
    Have transcript available for videos. You already have that for intro. Please extend that further to the rest of the videos in series. Especially important for cell phones where videos do not always show correctly.

    SELECT ALL COLLECTIONS should mean just that. EVERYTHING on a person should be available for a person when selecting that option. We should not have to continue to hunt around under other collections in order to locate more info on a person!!! Why have an ALL COLLECTION category if it does not include ALL COLLECTIONS?

    When saving, especially on mobile site, the save optuons are not always the same. Sometimes you have to choose categories, such as marriage, death, baptism,etc. WHY?? I am trying to save military info that does not fit into any of those categories. So what do I do with my info. It will be incorrect if I choose a category. WHY DO YOU EVEN HAVE THESE CATEGORIES FOR SOME ITEMS AND NOT FOR OTHERS. IS IT NECESSARY SINCE NOT ALL SAVES HAS IT? IF NECESSARY HAVE AN OTHER CATEGORY.
    Previously, you have mentioned that you choose what updates you will work on based on number of submissions. Rather, I suggest that you institute a page specific to members making suggestions for updates. Allow others to upvote if they feel that is an update that is important to be worked on immediately. The top vote getters are the issues that we would expect that would be worked on that week.

    Let the issues ride each week so that they can continue to be voted on.

    Members would be able to see for themselves that their issues are being addressed in a fair manner.

    Mobile search only searches for the word Dr. And not the rest of the name. This needs to be fixed to search for full name minus title.

  47. Mina Robbins

    Are other people having issues using ancestry in Safari browser? I constantly have to reload the page because nothing will happen when I click on links. It is really annoying and it never happened in the old version.

  48. caith

    @Vince, yes, I just saw it. My wifi has been down for 24 hours.

    Thank you for your generosity in responding. My GEDCOM file probably will not open because of “operator error”, as my husband says. LOL I learn much from your comments and will continue to work with it.

  49. Jason

    I for one am getting really tired of all of the negativity about the new Ancestry. I love the new look. The purple lines and the placement of the sources also have made it quicker and easier for me. I love the Lifestory as well to share it with my relatives. I have not found anything that would make me want to leave Ancestry. Keep up the good work!

  50. MKath

    I have been working with New and Old Ancestry. I still prefer Old Ancestry because PRINTING OPTIONS are MUCH better than in New. A PRINT PREVIEW in needed for all printing jobs. LifeStory hasn’t gotten any better. I’d delete all the stupidly written auto-generated stories if there were a way to do it. Facts on that page are still messed up and I don’t have time to correct. In some cases, it’s not possible for me to correct. Historical Insights pictures are still mostly all irrelevant and captions don’t relate to or match the details on my tree. I don’t need any purple lines. They’re highly distracting. I still prefer to access sources from the Facts boxes they way I can in Old Ancestry. Much more efficient. I’d like to have an easy way to access pictures and documents in my media files. I don’t allow anyone new to see my tree because of all the changes that have been made recently. New Ancestry is genealogy dumbed down. If Ancestry wants to write my family story–and it’s an incredible one–then they need to find a way to do it with depth and a reasonable degree of accuracy. One-size-fits-all story platforms just don’t work.

  51. Carmen

    @ Pooh: You said, “Allow pics and comments to be open while in mode to select items to include on your tree. Now we have to select to open the other tree to view the info and then start the process over to review from all the trees.”

    I assume you are talking about hints from other trees. I can’t even imagine saving anything from someone else’s tree without opening it to investigate and make sure it truly belongs in my tree. This is how people’s family photos end up saved to someone in a completely different family who merely has the same name as someone in your tree.

    You also want a “go back button” to undo errors and are very concerned about being able to work on the mobile site and on your phone. You want Ancestry to tell you when you have a bunch of duplicate people in your tree.

    I have never been able to understand how people wind up with the SAME person added to their tree half a dozen times! Much less dozens of people duplicated over and over.

    These are all red flags that you need to slow down and do more careful research. Building an accurate tree takes time and careful evaluation of each person and/or record that you add. Otherwise, you just end up with another one of Ancestry’s useless trash trees.

    PLEASE understand this is not meant to be an attack on you. I just feel that a few of the things you are asking for are not really important to the functionality of the site if you are doing careful research. I think most of us want Ancestry to focus more on fixing things that aren’t working and bringing back useful features we once had in Classic Ancestry.

  52. Chuck Crannell

    Pooh has some wonderful suggestions. I particularly like:
    – stop button for collecting hints on some folks
    – duplicates suggestion. FTM has a specific tool for that, it would be great if something similar were online.

    My largest general complaint is the amount of whitespace that is used, cluttering up the screen. It makes the layout inefficient – particularly for tablets using the website (as opposed to the app), and for modest laptops. Screens are wider than they are tall, so the added width to the page is OK, but I get only a half to 2/3s of the same info on my Facts page than I used to. Even with a 27″ iMac, the increase in whitespace is extremely annoying. Browsers come with magnifiers, let people use those instead.

    Please add a preference to hiding the Lifestory page. It’s useless to anyone with even a modestly critical eye.

    Please add a preference to turn off the purples lines. Perhaps this is the reason so much whitespace and gaps around boxes has appeared? I’m sure this was somebody’s pet feature – please keep it in the doghouse.

    On general issue which extends to either version – I find that photos I have uploaded and attached to folks frequently get hinted back to me. It seems that folks who “borrow” my photos attach them to their trees, and eventually they get hinted back to me. Somehow the attribution is getting removed. I’m wondering if Ancestry can include some meta-data to the object so that the originator is known. The context gets lost, and a somebody else who may find the photo (story, etc.) useful cannot ask the originator any pertinent questions.

  53. Susan Aaron Moller

    I can put up with a lot of things about the new website. It can look different than the old version and can function differently but what I can’t tolerate is when it loses information. Ancestry has repeatedly said that “All the research and information you have now will be on the New Ancestry”. This is untrue. I have attached hundreds (maybe thousands) of PDFs articles to facts I have added. They are mainly newspaper articles and the facts added are like headlines. The New Ancestry no longer has the PDF attached to the fact. It just throws them all together in the media gallery. When there are up to 50 PDFs for one individual, it is almost impossible to match them back up to their facts which read like headlines. Losing the connection makes the articles meaningless. I have been assured for 5 months that this will be fixed before forced migration. Now I found out that Ancestry will not fix it! How can they tout a new website when it no longer has the functionality of the old website?

  54. Pooh

    Carmen, thanks for taking the time to comment and in essence, do the same thing that you are accusing me of. Please slow yourself down and think for a moment on how others might be impacted without personally inserting yourself and what you feel is important for EVERYONE.

    My comment, as everyone else’s was solicited. I appreciate the opportunity to add my concerns even if you don’t seem to feel the need for others to have an opinion if it differs from yours.

    Perhaps if you were as eager to think through some possible sceanarios as you were to bristle at my comments, it might have made more sense to you? And yet, you have the audacity to tell me ” to slow down and do more careful research.” If you only would have taken your own advice!

    And please don’t pretend to not insult others by adding false sincerity with a statement such as “PLEASE understand this is not meant to be an attack on you.” What else is it?! And then it is punctuated with snarky comments to include ” I can’t even imagine…” ” I have never been able to understand how people…”

    Perhaps this holiday season would help you develop a tolerance for other people’s opinions without feeling the need to insert yourself?

    None of your reasons for your thinking that something was being asked for had even a smidgen of “your truth”.

    Operating on a mobile phone that is not top of the line makes it difficult to access each screen that opens slowly. That is wonderful if you are able to afford top of the line phones and desktops that respond quickly to aide in your research. However, not being so fortunate to have such equipment, and after I have spent a great deal of time trying to navigate and researching to ensure the accuracy of information, and I decide that it is something that should be added to my relatives, it is very cumbersome to have to continuously maneuver the screens in order to add each one.

    For the pictures, what I asked for was the ability to open the pictures up similiar when everyone’s list opens up and you can select which item is relevant to your ancestor. Open the pictures and let people choose which ones are appropriate all on one screen by checking off the needed ones. WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU ASSUME THAT NO THOUGHT OR RESEARCH PROCESS HAD GONE INTO AN ACTION BEFORE MAKING A SELECTION??!!?

    Yes, an undo procedure would be helpful to those of us who aren’t as perfect and never make mistakes like some people seem to want to present themselves as being. Yes, I have accidently deleted important info (that was spent hours working through thank you!). The good folk in the Customer Service could not help me retrieve my info and thought it was a good suggestion when I told them that an undo button would help! I made the suggestion in the manner that is provided to ALL customers, whether they believe in your same goals or not.

    An update button, next to an add button, when adding information about a relative is helpful, especially on a mobile phone. You don’t have to navigate to other screens to update.

    Actually, this would be helpful on a desktop as well to simplify updating info. ‘Simplify’ does not equate to no research!! It means helpful tools to get the research done!

    And yes, duplicates do occur when hitting the add button to make an update. On a slow phone it is easier to ‘add’, and then delete a duplicate, then to go through the slow screens to make the changes manually. (This is what works for me so please do not feel the need to comment)

    More of inaccurate ASSUMING! (Have you ever heard the definition of assuming?)

    This service is advertised to work on cell phones. I ask that improvements be made to accomodate the cell phones to make it easier to work with. If not important to you than please feel free not to worry about it.

    The suggestion forum was never meant to be co-opted by a group of people who assert that only their wants and ideas are important and should only been given respect over others!!!

    Thank you forum for this oppourtunity to include my suggestions!

  55. Carmen

    Sorry Pooh, but I guess I just don’t understand what you are saying with this,

    “For the pictures, what I asked for was the ability to open the pictures up similiar when everyone’s list opens up and you can select which item is relevant to your ancestor.”

    I never said you shouldn’t post your comments or suggestions. I just don’t want features added that are going to make it easier for people to look at all the hints from other people’s trees & simply click & add, click & add photos without having to go into the tree.

    If I misunderstood what you were saying I’m sorry. But your statement wasn’t very clear.

    And yes, I did make some assumptions based on your post. Of course, we have probably all had a person duplicated at some point, but if you need “a separate section that gives a list of DUPLICATES so that we can work on them when we choose” then clearly there’s a bigger issue.

    As for doing serious research on a smartphone, in my opinion, that’s an oxymoron.

  56. Tony Australia

    I have just read the comment of Susan Aaron Moller .
    I have emailed Ancestry only to receive polite responses filled with platitudes but no promises to do anything.
    After I approached Ancestry I was told:
    The change was intentional and:
    “The good news is that you can relink the images to the personal facts in the timeline for individuals in your tree by hovering over the fact, and clicking on the “Edit” option which will appear. From there, you can click on media to add images, or you can click on “Lifestory Options” and paste the text of stories into the “Narrative” section. These images, and text will be added to the “LifeStory” section of the profiles.
    The “LifeStory” section has been added as a rich way to see the history of your ancestor and share that with others. We have many editing options for the “LifeStory” features so that you can tell the story the way that you want to. We encourage you to give these features a try.

    We know that you spent a lot of time adding links to the timeline in the Old Ancestry, and we know that it will take a lot of time to add the media, and stories back into the timeline and into the LifeStory so they are properly sourced.

    The “LifeStory” section has been added as a rich way to see the history of your ancestor and share that with others. We have many editing options for the “LifeStory” features so that you can tell the story the way that you want to. We encourage you to give these features a try. ”

    I immediately responded pointing out that the ability to link stories to facts was a critical part of my tree:
    “First, the old Ancestry site enables me to link documents such as birth and death certificates and stories such as press clippings to the event listed in the timeline. Obviously the Ancestry program was written to allow this sensible practice. It enables the reader to immediately check provenance and proof to support the entry.
    The new program will automatically remove from the timeline event all links to stories such as press clippings and documents such as birth and death certificates. They will be stored in a different section, the media gallery.
    Your email does not offer any reason why it was necessary to make this programming change. Can you tell me why?
    Second it will take me ages to “relink” the stories and documents as suggested by you.
    Once again you do not explain why it necessary to put me to that inconvenience. Please tell me why.
    Third, this unilateral change will affect thousands of stories on my tree and presumably millions of other, Ancestry family trees.
    Imagine the millions of entries which will be required to re-establish the feature which is ALREADY on the old site. Not consumer friendly. Why?

    I then received a further polite replies telling me that the best thing to do was keep complaining and directed me to this blog.
    How many other Ancestry users will be affected by this very poor decision?

    And to those who say it is hard to write software – you are correct. That is why Ancestry charges us hundreds of dollars each. I don’t care about colours or schematics I care about substance.
    All I ask is that a feature which is currently on the old Ancestry be included in the new Ancestry – pretty simple.

  57. Tony Australia

    Susan Aaron. My support for your sensible suggestion and complaint has been censored. I too have constantly complained to Ancestry about this issue and never received a satisfactory response. Once the changes made on 15 December as possible impossible to imagine that the pre-15 December linking of stories to events will occur.

  58. echohermes

    I am in total agreement with Tony Australia and Susan Aaron Moller. I can work with the new website as long as it keeps the same features that the old one had. I had attached many transcriptions of newspaper articles in the ancestry story form and PDFs of articles by date in the timeline of the old website. Now they are just shoved into the gallery. The PDFs have to be downloaded now where as before they could be read immediately. I just tried to paste one of the stories into the lifestory section and it is filled with typos, no spaces between words, and missing letters. It would take me forever to try to edit it back to the way I originally wrote it. I cannot possibly do that to all of the many stories I have written. Also some of the transcriptions which were perfectly fine in the old site now show as only one sentence with arrows from left to right that you have to click to advance. It’s difficult to read a long story that only will show one sentence that you have to keep clicking !

    I don’t mind the colors, purple lines etc. All I want is for the new site not to lose all that I did in the old site. I hope that new ancestry will soon return the function of attaching stories to the facts page. A continue searching button would also be greatly appreciated. Please keep the original features of the old site in the new site!

  59. caith

    In life, it is not what you say, but how you say it………
    Could the moderator please delete the last commentary of Pooh. There is a lot of “background noise” in it.

  60. Graham

    I do hope that the ‘new look’ Ancestry does not fall into the many traps which resulted in findmypast being rendered virtually unusable.

  61. Elhura

    @ Carmen. Agree. The petition has grown by leaps and bounds since the announcement. Overnight, 44 people have signed it so word is finally out. Earlier 44 a week was good. How we wish Ancestry could get the message that is so loud and clear!

  62. Elhura

    The 44 “overnight” was referring to the very early morning hours, not a huge time block. Certainly, a very telling bit of info.

  63. Jan Murphy

    I dislike having the dark banner across the top of the profile. As we’ve stated many times before, it is not easy on the eye to focus light text on dark and dark text on light at the same time. This may be okay for magazine design, where one reads the first page of an article and then moves on to the rest (which is all dark text on a light background), but not for web pages that we have to look at constantly. Please offer users a choice of color schemes and find color combinations which are easier on the eye. Younger people may not have the same vision issues as those of your longer-time customers, but they deserve a website which is pleasing to look at also.

  64. Mary Yetter

    I appreciate many features of the new Ancestry and the fact that Ancestry is continually updating the site based upon customer feedback. Not only do they update based on feedback, but Ancestry also reports updates on Ancestry blog to keep customers informed. I have been consistently working on my family history for the past 28 years, so I consider myself an experienced researcher. In my opinion, I do not feel that anything about the new Ancestry warrants canceling my Ancestry subscription. As far as I am concerned here is no better genealogy site out there, and I have checked out and subscribed to several. I think my research would be limited without an Ancestry account, and this site would be the last genealogy site I’d cancel if I had to save money. As far as those little purple lines are concerned, maybe I like them because I am a child at heart, but if anyone doesn’t want to view them, just don’t click on the sources unless you want to access a full view of a source.

  65. Jeff

    The new user-interface is pathetic. I (sadly) just renewed my membership only to be subject to it. Are your programmers really that clueless? Ancestry should be working to improve their site, not turning it into an eyesore that inhibits customers from using it.

  66. Nadine

    I have read ALL of these post and fully agree with 99% of you. I Did not feel the CEO is really getting this feed back. So I took the time to write the CEO. Ancestry Did call me this morning. The CEO office; Maybe if more people would take the time and the .50 to mail. maybe the CEO will get the Idea. I have been a member since there start up and have seen many changes. This so called NEW” Is not what we want , need and they have taken away what we use. WRITE the CEO;Tim Sullivan CEO of Ancestry; I googled Ancestry CEO and got the address. Maybe a BAG of Mail will turn this around.

  67. kenmaag

    I am not paying for a beta site with bugs and missing features. It is so perfectly obvious the new site is not ready. Ancestry you do a great disservice to your long time subscribers. Shame on you!

  68. JM / UK

    Comment from Karl Thacker at:

    ~~~” I’ve worked in software development and related functionality for about 18 years. Everything I see – this has the hallmarks of off-shoring, I’d guess both development and data hosting.

    It would explain the change in layout to one that is less user friendly, and more cumbersome. I’d guess they are changing the application on which it is built.

    The indexing that hasn’t been run in months, causing CUSTOMERS to not see data which exists on other records/trees. Most likely done intentionally since they know they will be backing-up and restoring the databases into new servers anyway.

    Non-stop broken functionality- a highlight of poor developers.

    The constant comments/questions about what specific browser in use by customers. (WHEN was the last time you had another company which had to ask you what browser you were using??)

    And, most importantly, the stubborn-headed refusal to accept the new product is not only poorer, but poor on it’s own. That it is not intuitive. That it gives customers less flexibility, reliability, and enjoyment. And – it’s simply broken. Their Visitors Comments section is proof of all of this.

    And don’t discount the likelihood there is probably some fairly recent division head who spearheaded all of this as an ego trip and refuses to accept they messed up.” ~~~

    Also – have a look at some interesting comments in today’s entry from Ancestry Insider:

  69. Carmen

    My post about the surge in people signing the petition since the announcement of D-Day was deleted because it contained a link to the petition. If anyone wants to see it just Google “Ancestry petition.”

  70. Chuck Crannell

    FTM (for the Mac OS X) sufferes from a similar situation regarding software design. The updates earlier this year suffered from massive memory leaks. I’d leave the application open across a day or so and find that the amount of memory it was using went from a few hundred MB, to nearly 2.5GB. Much of that behavior has ceased, but the inconsistent behavior in linking media (forgetting where media is on one sync, then it’s fine the next day) persists.

    Couple that with the fundamental changes in’s changes (for example the issue Tony Australia describes in detail) has me worried about what I won’t know gets bolluxed up until later.

    Does anyone know if FTM is rolling out an update once the New Ancestry becomes the permanent ancestry?

  71. Trisha

    ANCESTRY. If you cannot be bothered to look at the thousands of negative feedback on “OUR SAVE OLD ANCESTRY PETITION”. Then here I shall repeat just a few snippets of the more recent comments on THE PETITION (THE CRITICISM OF NEW ANCESTRY WON’T GO AWAY, BUT YOUR CUSTOMERS WILL!)
    Recent comments:-
    “The new ancestry is horrible, the colours are awful, the layout cumbersome, and the additional “fluff” is not welcomed. Ancestry, you got it wrong this time. Seriously thinking of cancelling my subs. I have several family members with memberships and they are also considering the same”
    “I am a paying member for 8+ years, new is not user friendly – REMEMBER: Paying customers pay YOUR salary. You should fire the person who’s idea it was to change ancestry’s ‘LOOK’.
    “I think you have made a tremendous mistake ancestry, your new site is amateurish and difficult to navigate. I hope you please reconsider this decision and revert to the old version.
    “The Classic is a great design – used and appreciated by so many”
    “I logged into my long beloved Ancestry website this morning and was dismayed to find I had been forced over to the “new” What a mess! It is far too busy. I am a longtime family researcher who prefers the CLEAN simple look of classic ancestry. I was so happy with Ancestry, and can’t believe the company would treat it’s customers this way!
    “I am a senior with vision problems. The new ancestry is simply terrible for me. I have had to greatly reduce the length of my sessions on ancestry and am disgusted with a company that does not support their old clients”
    “Forget the fancy, the stories are kindergarten level and the timeline just takes up space. Fortunately my full subscription runs out tomorrow – and I have cancelled.”
    The new Ancestry view is much too cluttered and difficult to read. I really prefer the classic version because \i just want to see the family tree simply and easily. I’m not on this site to read a story that’s been created by adding events?dates. It’s too cluttered. Keep the classic. It is light years better than your new site”
    Are you kidding me? I just renewed my ancestry membership (I’ve been a member for a long time) and am disgusted with the new interface. Who makes these decisions?! Ancestry is absolutely clueless! I just called and spoke with a talking head who would only offer to send “instructions” on the new mess. Bring back the old interface NOW!”
    “Tim Sullivan & the management team at Ancestry, this system upgrade is the biggest mess I’ve ever seen. We now have almost 4,000 signatures asking you to maintain the “classic” view, but you are not listening. Your staff routinely deletes complaints about the “new” on your facebook page and on your site. So I’m guessing you have no idea how bad this situation really is. I’ve cancelled my subscription and will wait for you and your company to come to their senses before I renew!!”
    “It is time to stop betraying your customers with ideas and new monetizing tactics that show how little you care about those you serve”



  72. Charmaine Getz

    The redesign is overblown — technically and visually over-complicated, with presumptuous features people were NOT clamoring for, and remaining glitches from the old design that they were but were ignored. There’s a count-down on my computer to remind me not to let Ancestry automatically renew when my annual subscription is up.

  73. Carol

    One thing stirs my curiosity…why has Ancestry made some small changes in the past months to the classic version that I would consider upgrades. Why bother if they are just going to dump it? I know they will dump it, but why spend time and money on a version they planned to discontinue. I noticed these small, mostly good changes.

  74. Anne Scott Frankland

    Carol — What things did Ancestry change and upgrade on the Classic version? I haven’t used either version of Ancestry very much in the last couple of weeks.

  75. caith

    I still truly believe that Ancestry will have an epiphany and re-instate some form of the Classic in the future. It is common sense. Doing genealogy has to be user-friendly, easy and comfortable because it is a Labor of love. Even thinking that these young people are going to use a mobile app for hours at a time is not common sense, or even good sense……

  76. Tim H.

    This is not my posting but that of someone by the name of Carol. It is by far, one of the best I have read anywhere and it sums it all up in the end. I particularly picked up on the constant use of “frustration” used by Ancestry in all their canned remarks they make to their subscribers. All that Ancestry will understand is lost revenue in the end and all the complaining in the world does no good, as it falls on deaf ears. Read the below comments by both parties and then make your decision.

    Posts between Carol Stewart and Ancestry yesterday at 1930…

    Has the penny not dropped yet that the “new” Ancestry is a total disaster and should be scrapped forthwith? I am acutely embarrassed that some of my family members whom I have invited to view my family tree on Ancestry will think I am a complete idiot when they see the way that Ancestry has corrupted my data. You have had months to sort this out and you have not delivered. I see little point in continuing to use Ancestry if all it does is ruin all the work I have done. Unless this is sorted out soon, you are going to lose members IN DROVES!

    Ancestry Hi Carol, we appreciate your taking the time to share how you feel about this. To clarify, the changes to the site have not altered user data in any way. While the new LifeStory feature presents your information in a new way, your information is still available to view in a more familiar fashion on the Facts page. We appreciate that there are still improvements to be made and we wish to assure you that we are working hard to make sure all reported issues are rectified as soon as possible. Feedback from our members is instrumental in this process, as such if you have any additional feedback about a feature you feel is not working the way it should, please let us know via the link included below.

    Carol Stewart Oh really???? Well it wasn’t ME who decided that my great-uncle was born in Cadiz, in the Philippines, when in fact he was born in Cadiz Street in Leith, in Scotland. My information is correct – YOURS IS NOT! It doesn’t matter that you say it is correct in one feature if it is completely WRONG in another. If it appears wrongly in one of your features, it is because YOU have made it so.

    Ancestry We appreciate your frustration Carol. The LIfeStory feature interprets the information entered in facts to generate a narrative. Location information in particular has been identified as an area of this that can be difficult, due mainly to the wide range of formats used by our many members (all of which are as correct as the other), and this is being looked into by our developers. Including town, county and country information can help minimize these sorts of misinterpretations, but again your information is still present as entered on the Facts page. We understand that this has been a difficult transition for some of our members but we are here to help. Feedback from members such as yourself is hugely important to us, we will continue to pass it along to our development team for as long as we continue to receive it.

    Carol Stewart Sorry, that is just not good enough. The whole point in this entire endeavor is to present facts – not fancy features… just FACTS! I’m not interested in all your gimmicks. I just want the thing to be an accurate representation of the facts I have worked so hard to discover. You have completely ruined the site with this unnecessary change and have angered all the people who pay for it. Your “excuse” for distorting facts is unacceptable. Presenting locations in a different format does NOT change their geography, so there is no excuse whatsoever for suggesting that my relative was born in the Philippines. Please tell me… in what way do you imagine that you are helping anybody?

    Ancestry Hi Carol, again we apologize for any frustration and appreciate your point of view. We appreciate that the LifeStory is not for everyone, for this reason the option to switch to the Facts view is available. Your tree and the facts contained therein are still there. As mentioned previously we are working to improve the ‘places’ algorithm and if would like to send us a link to your tree where this information is appearing incorrectly we would be happy to share with the product team.

    Carol Stewart No I will not. You know perfectly well what the problem is – you are just not willing to admit that you have screwed this up spectacularly. I am not going to renew when my subscription expires. You’ve had a great deal of money from me and I’m not going to give you any more. All you have done is railroad me into something I object to and which offers me no option to remain with the correct and preferable presentation of my tree on your site. You will not persuade me that this has been anything other than a total shambles. Well done for destroying your own website and the hard work that I and countless other people have spent many years working on.

  77. caith

    Ancestry says they “have not altered our user data in any way.” What is their definition of the word, altered? When they have given my Mother a husband she NEVER had; and his surname is the same as her surname at her birth (but their computer program does not know her surname at birth, because she was adopted and those records are still sealed). Their computers are NOT able , and cannot deal with correct biological and genetic info in the case of adoptions and NPEs. Only real people doing hands-on record-digging and dna segment matching can do this and get it right. Their computers cannot.
    This is a real glitch for Ancestry.

  78. Jade

    Edits to Facts page events do not save. Cannot add media to Facts pate events. Links to Messages (envelope), leaf, avatar thumbnail, username, etc. do not display on person Fact page.

    Firefox 42, Win8.1

  79. BobL

    The feature I miss the most from old Ancestry is the ability to add stories to facts and sources. I used this feature extensively under old Ancestry. Presently I go back to old Ancestry to add links to stories and update existing ones. With old Ancestry being removed next month, will this feature be brought back soon to new Ancestry? This is critical for documenting sources and I know many members besides me who use it extensively.

  80. Carmen

    @Tim H., Thanks for posting that. We all feel Carol’s exasperation! The issues she discusses are why so many, including myself, have made our trees private.

    I don’t know if Ancestry really understands (or cares) that many of us are going through something akin to a grieving process. The fact that many of us have been so meticulous about inputting our data exactly the way WE want it only to have strangers come in and scramble it all up has left us feeling helpless and despondent. The task of trying to check all the data on thousands of people in our trees for errors seems an insurmountable task. And probably pointless, since it will most assuredly get changed again before this is all over.

    I know that many people who only dabble in genealogy don’t understand why we are SO upset. But for a great many of us it is more than an occasional hobby. It is an obsession that we spend many hours a day working on. A labor of love that brings us great joy and excitement which we hope will someday be a timeless gift passed on for future generations.

    All of this tampering in our carefully constructed trees and the upheaval in the ways and means with which we conduct our research has been so upsetting that some of us have felt like giving up and finding another passion.

    Why, oh why would a company do this to its loyal customers??

  81. Roger

    “Why, oh why would a company do this to its loyal customers??”

    They hear what only they want to hear; they read what only they want to read. They do not take cognizance of these multitude of concerns for months on end.

    They have won. They have destroyed Ancestry.

  82. emam

    I have just had a look at my account to check on the expiry date for my subscription. I was on the top UK account (Worldwide), with Essential and Premium memberships at lower prices. I seem to think that the price for the Worldwide was £169.99 per year. It is now £179.99 and I see that they have now added another account; All Access Membership. This one is £224.99.

    There are no prices for the Essentials and Premium memberships.

    If you click on the icon to compare the different memberships, there in no information about the All Access one.

    So not only are they messing up our trees, but they are now charging us more money for the privilege.

    I think this may be similar to what someone posted earlier about them asking for more money to view some records.

  83. Beth

    I haven’t scrolled through all of the comments, but have seen enough to see that I am not alone in disliking the new Ancestry. Change is inevitable as new things become available, but a massive overhaul to make the site unrecognizable is totally unnecessary. I do not understand why the Classic version cannot be kept. I was really goint to town adding all of my genealogical information thatI have accumulated over the last 30 odd years. I have taken the time to cite and source each and every fact. I have downloaded photos and added additional information when found. However over the last few weeks I have almost stopped completely as it appears useless to go to all that trouble now. I really want to download or export my material into some other family tree maker program but am very hesitant to attempt this. I believe I may finally spend the money on the MAC version of Family Tree Maker and go back to using that. This is really going to make me do an awful lot of unnecessary repetitious data entry though when one considers how much data I have to move. Trying to be sure everything imports/exports properly is not a task I anticipate with joy. Really very very disappointed in Ancestry.

  84. Crystal

    You know, Ancestry, just because we may have stopped repeating to you over and over and over again all the repairs and fixes that need to be done, it doesn’t mean that those problems are resolved. You still have so much to do to make your “New Ancestry” a professional and workable tool. What it does mean is that many of us have just given up. You’ve finally reached your goal. You’ve totally worn down your former supporters, and left us wondering where to turn. I hope you’re proud of yourselves.

  85. Tim H.

    Mary R: Great tip on the Legacy sale. It is a bargain at that price and the bundle is well-worth buying. If that is the case about an image of an ancestor or media being posted,
    there is nothing one can do about it. Copyright only applies to anything YOU created. It is unfortunate but the price you pay for putting things on the Internet or any public place. It is unethical but not against copyright rules. May I ask you what you mean by “they had to be disconnected?” Was that in answer to some other post on this forum?

  86. Mary R.

    @Tim H. Thanks, and Sorry I wasn’t clear about what was “disconnected.” I know most everyone is upset that in the New format all media – stories, photos, etc. – have been separated [“disconnected”] from the people to which they’d been attached in the Old. I hear that they’re all in a Media pile now. I’d wondered if that had been done in order to send them to Google.

    Yes, I know whatever we post is acom’s forever. No copyright laws apply to items on trees once we post them; that’s stated in the “Terms.” I’d just not seen all the records and photos on Google Images like that before.

    I can’t imagine the LegacyFamilyTree link will stay up long here, but everyone’s said that’s a great, stand-alone genealogical site and, at Half-Price for Today Only, it’s worth trying, if only for the option to print out decent pages after Dec. 15.

  87. Tim H.

    Mary R.: No problem. I just wasn’t too clear on what you meant. Thanks for the explanation. I do not have any trees on Ancestry, so I didn’t know about the disconnection of media. You are probably right as Ancestry considers anything you put on the site is fair game. I know they take data from users’ trees and use that information to store in order to randomly select data for their source, “Family Data Collection” and other databases that are totally useless. I am sure what they will do with media and photos will be same baloney to make up their fairy-tales stories. You might be totally correct about media being sent to Google also. I’ll have to investigate that further. I’m sure Google would have a $$ arrangement with Ancestry in that case.

    I would also like to see if the Family History Library and some other organization will keep themselves affiliated with Ancestry’s new mess. Ancestry claims in those “terms and conditions” that you are not allowed to copy images of records to your tree/s w/o giving credit to them. Well, that is just not true, despite what they say. Any database that is public record, such as Federal and State Census, is just that. A public record and no need to credit Ancestry for owning the rights. The only thing Ancestry owns is their own transcription of a record and most of those are inaccurate.

    Legacy is a great software program; however, I do not recommend it for beginners or those that are not computer savvy. It is very different than folks that are used to entering data on Ancestry. They are better off with FTM2014 as that is designed to work with Ancestry. The problem with Ancestry data in trees as it does not conform to industry standards. Legacy does have a work-around for FTM2014 users for import into Legacy but it is not easy to fathom. It will however, give you your media if you do the import correctly. That is a whole other subject. You can go to the learning forum on Legacy to find out how to do it all. The problem with FTM is who knows if they will do an upgrade to conform to the New Ancestry (I fully expect that) and whether the old version of FTM2014 will continue to work, I cannot answer that question.

    At least users that are unsure and do not have genealogy software, they should at least download a GEDCOM file from Ancestry in the classic interface well before the deadline of Dec. 14. Time is short so do it now for those who haven’t as you will regret it later.

    That reminds me, Legacy accepts what is called a GEDCOM 5.5 so I have no idea what the results are if you have a different verson. I just use Legacy to import data so no need for me to have a GEDCOM file. Of course you can always export one from Legacy to other software.

    Thanks again for your post.

    • Kristie Wells

      @Tim: Your posts are not being deleted, but WordPress is picking them up as spam as you are posting a lot of links and it hit a filter. Just wanted you to know that we try not to moderate comments heavily here and it should be clear we let our members have their say.

  88. JM / UK

    @Crystal – I know what you mean – It feels as if we are being herded towards inevitable assimilation into The Borg New, all the while having our scope and choices chipped away at, item by item.

    I think we just have to keep on and on repeating ourselves, even after the deadline. As I said in a previous post – wherever I see an item concerning New that I agree with, I cut and paste it into the ‘this form’ button near the top of this page.

    Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad! I think Acom is hoping we’ll all go through the classic grief process – denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

    Don’t bank on that last one yet Ancestry – many will feel it’s time to jump ship!

  89. Elhura

    Thanks Robin H. for the email address. It comes and goes from this site. As suggested I have just sent an email to Tim Sullivan:

    Dear Mr. Sullivan:

    I sent you a registered letter in August 2015. It netted a call from a staff member and a free six month subscription to Ancestry. I doubt you saw the letter. I have sent emails to as many Ancestry department heads as I could identify. I doubt you heard of them. The Ancestry blog site, dating back to June and, possibly before (I had no reason to look for it until then), is filled with the disappointment, anger and deep concern of longtime subscribers of whose experience tells us the New is not genealogy-friendly and has too many problems to presently become a stand-alone site.

    It has been painful to watch and wait for the demise of the once first and foremost genealogy site. Problems range from the ill-chosen layout, color scheme and blinding purple lines that preclude extended visual use by so many older users; the cumbersome and illogical progression for adding and editing information; and the actual loss of valuable information between the old and the new formats. It is no wonder your own Howard Hochhauser is quoted as saying “the old site appealed to genealogists”!

    I have responded with specifics, as have so many, via the suggested links provided by Ancestry. I have signed the Petition to Save Old Ancestry – a petition that has grown by leaps and bounds since the announcement of the December 15 switch and, incidentally, whose link keeps disappearing from your public blog site.

    I have saved my tree in the best ways I know how; am also hurriedly printing the most important pages before the amount of ink necessitated by new shadings preclude economical printing; and, as in the “Pre-Ancestry Days” am once again reduced to storing those pages in a three ring binder. A real step backward for us all! I thought when I discovered and trusted it for the safekeeping of my hard earned research and in-depth tree that I had found the “treasure of a lifetime”.

    I am sure there are many good reasons for keeping up with the technology and updating the site. I am sure those changes are difficult from your end as well. I am sure Ancestry would like to attract a new and younger generation of budding genealogists. I am equally certain you are ready to throw a proven genealogy tool, PC and laptop users and a whole hoard of dedicated researchers whose trees contribute to Ancestry’s “search” reputation right out the window. should pay attention to the requests of its many tired – tried – and true users. Either (1) Keep the Classic/Old format until the bugs are worked out of the new; (2) Make a Classic/Old Work Page with its ease-of-use and colors as a fourth page beside Life Story – Facts – Gallery; (3) Offer an option for color scheme and purple line turnoff; and (4) Offer a Life Story turn off for those whose research has been compromised by that feature’s inefficiencies and glitches.

    It may be a financial issue to you. It is a moral issue to those of us whose well-done trees and longtime use have helped make what, until now, it has been.

  90. Tim H.

    Here’s another “free” site worth looking into. It is sponsored by NEHGS and is affliated with their database. Be sure to sign up for the bookmarks and also comments people make on postings.

  91. Mary R.

    @Tim H., I just now purchased the half-price LegacyFamilyTree bundle. It comes with “Legacy 8.0 Deluxe, a CD and download, a PDF manual and, free today only, a Use’s Guide for downloading. Total with shipping, $23.98, and a 30-day guarantee. (You select a page color at start-up; for those who need color.)

    In July, other than printing out my most important profiles, and having saved media already to my hard drive, I deleted 2300 people from my Tree in a fit of Irish anger and dismay at the New format. I don’t regret it. My British ancestors came along with the Mayflower fleet, so I’ve plenty on them, and my Irish ancestors are all printed out, coming here much later; most of their records came from FamilySearch anyway, and the rest were originals I’d obtained at town halls and from relatives. When I want, therefore, I start over and learn Legacy and I do NOT add every single child of every single child: SO unnecessary! (And I spend more time with my dog and my grandchildren, but have Legacy when I want it and NOT the New Acom and its crazy format designed to work on touch-screen desktops not expected to be finalized until “2017.”)

    FamilySearch and Acom signed a new deal in 2013, so they’re tight. As for Google and Acom and $$, as you put it, where to begin? So much news since July 2015: it can be Googled and, I put most on the last few Updates, but here’s one item: “On Tuesday [July 21, 2015], Calico, the medical research company Google incubated in 2013, announced it had cut a deal for access to genetic information from Ancestry, the largest family tree website. It’s among the first public moves from Calico, the secretive division born to extend human life. With its new DNA data — properly anonymized — Calico will look for genetic patterns in people who have lived exceptionally long lives, then make drugs to help more of us do that.” (Then see Google changing its name to “Alphabet,” etc.) Thanks for your links!

  92. Tim H.

    Mary R.: You are well on your way to doing well with Legacy and seem very organized in your research. I’m glad you purchased the bundle as there is so much to learn about this software, I discover new things everytime I use it, that I did know were there. Be sure to look in the help forum for tips, if you have questions on things. You will be getting a newletter once a week with valuable tips and some are in video form. You also might do a search on YouTube for helpful videos on the ins and outs of this powerful software. Don’t forget the Legacy Group on Facebook as well.

    Yes, you are right about deleting excess children in your tree; esp., on distant branches. You might want to put a note in the marriage fact how many children they had, etc. Of course, that is not necessary but I have done this myself for various reasons.

    You sound like you really have your head on straight and have done the wise thing. I don’t know if you have unsubscribed yet to Ancestry but you can still use SOME of their databases; and I mean SOME. A lot of them are totally useless for source, as I alleged to in my last post. That is all I use Ancestry for are a few of their databases. I have a lot of other places I go to do research and one is (the online database for the NEHGS). I do not know where you are from but it is excellent for researching your N.E. ancestors and you mentioned the Mayflower and you’ll find plenty of records, if you need them. It requires a nominal fee to join but it is a non-profit organization and so tax-deductible if you are a USA citizen. Some of the records are free to view and download but you will have more results if you are a member. You can download anything that has a viewable microfilm image to your computer. They have all the Federal Census and also the new Probate and Wills that Ancestry introduced a few months ago and the complete Great Migration series by Charles Robert Anderson that is recent and excellent. They also have free webinars for you to take and Legacy offers them too and all are exellent.

    I know about the Ancestry deal with Familysearch and also about the Calico deal. Anyone is a fool to have DNA done by Ancestry. I for one, am not into that at all. I go back to the days of pen and paper, long before there were even personal computers. My research was done the hard way with a lot of legwork and the writing of letters to find my sources. It was a lot of work but it was genealogy. This new interface is anything but as you know. I have zillions of links bookmarked on my computer that I use all the time. One thing to avoid like the plague is websites that people create that contain genealogy information about a certain family and so forth. There are so many people lately that have gotten this genealogical bug and have no clue what it really entails. You will find some links to websites on your Legacy. Of course, they are connected to and rather than having to go out of the program you can connect directly; same with Ancestry, if you have a subscription in order to obtain some databases but if you do not presently have a subscription with Ancestry it is no loss anyway.

    These are just some comments I wanted to make in answer to your nice post but I should not hog this forum with my thoughts on what I do or recommed. Good luck with your tree on Legacy. It will be very different at first but just be patient and I believe you will succeed. I’ll probably be posting more links on here, if they do not get deleted, as time goes along. You have made a very wise decision and I would say that you are really a fellow real genealogist. Thanks for your post.

  93. Tim H.

    Mary R.: I forgot one thing and that is the color of your interface on Legacy. I would suggest you just pick the default to begin with and you can always change that later unlike, from what I hear most complaints is the background colors on Ancestry. Unlike Ancestry you can chose what color combinations work for you best in Legacy. I would think Ancestry would consider doing that for people who complain about it. Give ’em a choice!

  94. Trisha

    WAKED UP!!

  95. Kathy

    To any long time blogers that have been using the New Ancestry. RE: FACTS PAGE; I recently went into the new, printed off a fact sheet. What should be 1 page became 4 pages. I noticed on the timelines the age progression of the person did not show up. This can make for some serious errors. Has anyone reported this very bad mistake, and if so, what was their answer? I’ve been reading these blogs since June and haven’t seen any thing about this. Would someone respond

  96. Tim H.

    No questions have been answered by the moderator at all in this latest update and few and far between in other weeks that I can see. Don’t hold your breath, Kathy.

  97. Mary R.

    A comment was posted in the November 13th New Acom Feature Update stating that Family Tree Maker 2014 and Windows 10 are not compatible. Several tech sources say that in the beginning of next year, 2016, Microsoft will release Windows 10 as a “Recommended Update” for Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 users which means the update may be selected by default and the full Windows 10 setup files (offline ISO file) may be automatically downloaded on your computer without your knowledge.” If you have FTM 2014, you might want to be prepared. This link provides instructions:
    Also see:

  98. Chuck Crannell

    I’ve been trying to ascertain whether FTM 3 for Mac and the permanent switch to the New Ancestry website will be compatible? Are the database schemas the same? Is it really just the presentation that is changing? Sure, the raw data is likely the same in various fields. If the schemas are different, FTM may have issues.

    Others posts here have indicated that the back-end is changing significantly, EOL equipment and software is being abandoned. Indexes haven’t been updated in a while in anticipation of the cutover, etc. This is hardly suggestive that only the GUI is changing on the 15th.

    I’ve not read anything regarding FTM.

    I’ve posted on the customer forums requesting information if they actually know (beyond just a supposition). So far, just speculation in replies. Of course, I will be backed up prior to the cutover date.

  99. Mary M Zashin

    Chuck, I don’t know what the future might bring, but I’ve been syncing from New to FTM3 for Mac with no difficulties. I have been told that the underlying database has not been changed. . .

  100. TY

    The underlying data has not changed and that is the information that FTM uses in a sync. People have been syncing for months with no issues related to the change to new Ancestry

  101. Chuck Crannell

    For the time being, I don’t know how the each version of the ancestry site could work other than on the same schema. Once we have the hard cutover currently scheduled on the 15th, there is no guarantee that the schema isn’t migrated. Of course, the current website is compatible, but nothing being indicated whether tools like FTM will be afterwards.

    I have been syncing, too, without any additional difficulties for months.


    I’ve been a member of Ancestry for at least 20 years. I have been happy with it “as is”, but find the NEW version unacceptable for my purposes. Please revert to the original version. I will not resubscribe as it is now.

  103. Vince

    Regarding compatibility of Windows 10 with FTM 2014, I reported on November 22 on the November 13th Feature Update blog that FTM 2014 works normally on my Windows 10 Pro 32-bit laptop computer. According to the threads referenced by Tim H. in this blog, an incompatibility did exist last summer with an earlier version of FTM 2014 (version 22.0.01345) installed under the 64-bit version of Windows 10, while that FTM version did work under the 32-bit version of Windows 10. In mid-August, Ancestry issued an updated version of FTM 2014 (version 22.0.1404) that resolved the 64-bit problem. Wayne Farmer reported on August 11 in the 2nd thread listed by Tim H. above: “I’ve just run FTM 2014 again, and it automatically applied the FTM 2014 SP6 patch, upgrading my 64-bit FTM 2014 version from to It’s now running fine on my 64-bit Windows 10 Pro system. Compatibility mode is not needed.”

    I have not yet upgraded my 64-bit Windows 7 desktop computer, where I have FTM 2014 (version 22.0.1404) installed, to Windows 10. But I have run Microsoft’s Windows 10 Compatibility Checker on that computer, which reports “Apps: 0 incompatible”, presumably including my current FTM 2014 installation. So I expect to see no problem with FTM 2014 (version 22.0.1404) when I do upgrade to Windows 10 on the desktop computer. To check which version of FTM you have, including the complete version number, click Help > About Family Tree Maker from within FTM. If your version is older than 22.0.1404, you should be able to get the most recent version through Help > Check For Update. Note that the “1” before “404” in the current version number indicates that FTM is installed on a 64-bit computer. On a 32-bit machine, 22.0.404 is the current full version number.

  104. caith

    @Vince – I sense that some of the problems with compatibility are most probably “operator error”. I.e., dinosaurs like me who are not tech savvy. I do not blame Ancestry for my inadequacies. Also, I wonder if in some cases there are settings in our computers that need to be adjusted.

    As always, we appreciate your sharing of your insight.

  105. Cindy

    You are not ready to roll out December 15th. The new “experience” is not acceptable. More is wrong than is right. I personally need a lean, clean platform from which to conduct my research. New is klutzy, cluttered, slower, causes eye fatigue for me (the color palette must have been chosen by a kindergartener with ADHD), and has distracting elements. I have been a faithful subscriber for 13 years. Threatening me with a December 15th date when you are ill-prepared has strengthened my resolve to cancel my subscription. I just pray that none of your designers migrate over to FamilySearch. If you insist on imposing this on us, do at least consider simultaneously splashing a bare bones version for serious researchers who use Ancestry to find documentation.

  106. BEE

    I am getting very frustrated and downright disgusted! I’m trying to clean up a ton of “hints” so that I can do a gedcom download, but trying to verify anything with “classic” had become next to impossible! Information that I know is correct brings up nothing!! While the majority of “hints” are useless, sometimes there is a census, find-a-grave, or something I would want, so I have to check everything. I’m not checking “wills”, because I refuse to be tossed into “new” before the 15th! THE LEAST YOU COULD DO IS LET US CONTINUE TO USE “CLASSIC” UNTIL THAT TIME!!

  107. JM / UK

    @BEE – I sympathize with your ‘hints’ dilemma – many are useless and some are downright preposterous!

    Whilst checking hints from other trees, I came across the unfortunate Mary Evans, born Wales abt 1830, who apparently had 44 children [11 spouses] between 1851 and 1885 = 34 yrs. 44x9mths = 33yrs, so – busy girl. She died in the US even though she never left the UK.

    Let me make it quite clear that I am not mocking or belittling the tree-owner’s efforts in any way – we have all made inadvertant errors. Any genealogist who has Welsh Ancestry who comes across an Evans married to a Jones will have immediate sympathy with this tree-owner, knowing that what awaits them is a brick wall visible from a neighbouring galaxy.

    Imagine how this dismayed tree-owner will react when they see their efforts displayed in LifeStory. [Or ‘Lie Story’ as Martin James called it on FBUK !!]

    With all those children and spouses, plus appearing on 25 censuses in the UK and the US between 1841 and 1901 – Imagine her Timeline!

    My only hope is that this is a tree in progress and that they are using it as a repository of suggestions for further research.

    What I wish to highlight with this example is this: if Ancestry continues to focus on the ‘just click on these leaves and Hey Presto! – a ready-made tree in no time’ sales-pitch, there will be many more well-intentioned but bewildered and disappointed customers out there, with trees full of forebears and relationships they can’t fathom and have abandoned uncorrected.

    Chris Sidney asked on FBUK: ” I wonder how many new trees have been started but then never progressed, compared with more serious researchers who have consistently paid their fees to Ancestry over the years?”

    I’ve had my advisory Email – it said:
    “The improved Ancestry is ready for everyone [In BIG friendly letters, black on a white background!]
    After 14th December, everyone who logs in will see our new look and feel. This has been optimised to make the whole site easier and more intuitive to use on a variety of different devices.”


    @Ancestry: have you thought what the site will be like at the end of the year, when all those young hopefuls you’re aiming to attract apply their gift-vouchers and find out that Santa has brought them a shiny new toy full of bugs and glitches for which they will need workarounds from Day One?

    Do you have sufficient savvy staff booked to man the phones and keyboards, read the feedback and pass things on to the Relevant Deparment? Will there be anyone in these departments over the holiday period? If so – will their shredders cope with all the extra activity? [Thanks again, Martin!]

    How will the new ‘tap-screen-and-get-it-now’ generation of users feel about constantly being told to clear their caches, change browsers and all that other stuff, not to mention having to look at all those webinars and articles etc. etc.

    Please Ancestry, remember: ‘Customers’ means people who have paid for goods or a service as described and promised. As far as I know, ‘obtaining money under false pretences’ is still actionable here in the UK. I’m sure you have a whole department of lawyer types who have workarounds for any Trades Descriptions Act – but – what price your reputation?

  108. Tim

    Simple answer…the old bait and switch game! Once you agree to their terms and conditions and hand over your credit card number, they are protected. Only thing to do is get out when your subscription is up and download any trees you have on this site well before the deadline date. Nobody needs the grief that Ancestry has brought users since they introduced this failure called the new Ancestry. They clearly designed it for new technology and even then, released it long before it was even usable. It is no longer a site for genealogist of any level anyway.

  109. Tim H.

    Pat Kennedy: They felt they need to change to adapt to the cell phone and tablet configuration and they certainly have created a mess. Their CEO, Hotchhauser stated the fact that Ancestry USED TO BE a site for genealogist but that is no more. What will bite them in the end is lost revenue and people will leave in droves that really want to do genealogy and not be subjected to fabricated stories of the ancestors and all the rest of it’s bugs. The novelty of it all will soon wear off to new users. They are doomed in many users’ opinions. Be sure, if you have not already done so, is to sign the petition which is on Facebook. I’d put the link on here for you but it will quickly be deleted by the moderator.

  110. emam

    My tree is private and I have added a note onto my profile telling people who are invited to view my tree, not to do so in Ancestry’s new Lifestory as the information does not show correctly.

  111. Tim

    emam: Well, it won’t make any difference if you tree is private or not come D-day. It will reflect the New Ancestry, like it or not. You better do something before Dec 15 or you’ll be sorry as all get-out when the ax falls.

  112. Ancestry says that “millions” of happy people are now using the New Ancestry ‘experience’. I was wondering exactly how many ACTIVE and subscribing members Ancestry actually has. On Member Directory, there are 477 pages (of 25 people per page) named Smith. Just glancing through the first few of those pages shows an awful lot who haven’t logged in for over a year (no I haven’t counted them & worked out any percentages!). Presumably they no longer subscribe (or otherwise have money to burn) or tried the trial and gave it up. The Jones’es are similar. (Note that Directory is playing up so the page needs to be F5 refreshed to see anything. Another ‘glitch’?) I really would be interested if anyone knows the figures

  113. nadinemi

    @karen in england: I think you are right on two counts; I have also noticed that a lot of my DNA matches haven’t logged on in months, they might have let subscriptions lapse, or if not, probably have no clue that New is about to descend on them; 2ndly, given that Ancestry claims about 2 million subscribers, that pop-up claiming that “millions” are now using New Ancestry is a huge exaggeration.

  114. To nadinemi. Totally agree about the exaggeration – that was what made me wonder about the real numbers. Also, I still haven’t received the email notification, although others in the UK have, so if I hadn’t been following these blogs & facebook (which I normally avoid like the plague!), I would have had no idea of the end date for Classic. Wonder how many others haven’t received theirs?

  115. emam

    Tim, I know my tree will reflect in the new Ancestry, hence the note to people telling them not to look at it in the life story view. Thanks for the advice.

    I have been using FTM to sync my tree for a couple of years now, but it is showing not uploaded or linked to Ancestry. When I go to the plan for a new tree all my trees are there and so can’t be downloaded. Also on Ancestry it shows my trees as being linked to FTM.

    This is the second time something like this has happened in a few weeks. Previously I have used it for 3 years with no bother.

    Karen in England, I haven’t had an email, just a notice that comes up on old Ancestry to say that on the 14th not 15th there will only be the new. It also said something along the lines of being ready for everyone. I will have to check that tomorrow and let you know.


  116. elhur

    Horror of horrors! The new has now invaded the Classic with family members not added by the tree owner! Case-in-point. A well-done tree previously in Classic until an unexpected switch today to the new. A check of the new reveals a mother of three children, but only one appearing via Classic, but three now appearing via the FACT and LIFE STORY pages of the new. They were certainly not added by the tree owner. Adding insult to injury, the surname was spelled correctly, as per Classic, for the mother and the original one child. While that spelling was retained for them in the new, the surname of the added children was spelled differently as it is found in several other trees and some census. This happened today to a friend’s tree. I saw both examples from the old and the new myself. IS ANCESTRY NOW DECIDING THAT ANYTHING IN A “TRASH” OR “TRESURE” TREE IS GOOD FOR ALL AND DUMPING COMBINED NAMES AND DATA INTO EVEN THE BEST-DONE TREES? OR IS ANCESTRY TAKING ALL NAMES FROM COMPILED CENSUS AND DUMPING THEM INTO TREES? EITHER SCENARIO IS DESPICABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE!

  117. Tim H.

    Ancestry is a real horror show according to the last posts and it seems to me that the end is already here. If that is a fact, elhur, that is beyond belief. A good example why your data is never safe on any site. Will be interested to see if there are any more posts on here about that intrusion of trees. Unbelievable!

  118. Mary R.

    @elhur, In FamilySearch, all trees are edited by anyone who wants. I wonder if the New – purposefully or accidentally – is linked to FamilySearch? Acom and FS have some business arrangement…

    On another subject, I’ve been in the Old format for the last hour deleting people from my Tree, and it took about five minutes for each person’s page to reload after I confirmed “Delete this person?” I sure hope subscribers aren’t going to wait much longer to move their trees or download them as GEDCOMS, because it’s possible the whole Acom site will crash a few days before the 15th.

    • Kristie Wells

      @Mary: Our trees are not linked to Family Search in any way. I am sorry you feel the need to remove your tree from Ancestry. The product team has been listening to member feedback and will continue to develop more features and functionality over the next couple of months (and years) and I hope you will give Ancestry another chance in the near future.

  119. calyx

    Bye, bye Ancestry! Everybody get your own GEDCOM! I can’t believe how this site has been run into the ground by moneygrubbers. Well, they will think again when people start cancelling. I cancelled membership in July of 14. I do NOT regret it. I have no idea what happened or who did it but someone at the top ruined Ancestry and then started buying up Genealogy and MyFamily to corner the market and charge exorbitant fees and then play with site to the point that it is no longer a service. I have gone back to printing on paper. A Dieu!!!!!

  120. Elhura

    Please see my post of earlier this evening regarding the “horror of horrors” of children being automatically added to an otherwise well-researched tree.

    I have talked with an Ancestry rep who confimed this is now an occurence when adding a census record while in the New View. It is cause by Index Relationships found in the new. He indicated the children are being added as “hints” and, when referring to the PEDIGREE PAGE (some of us don’t even look at that page), will show up as a blue line for a “confirmed” child and as a red line if still a “hint”. WHO NEEDS HINTS SHOWING UP AS REAL CHILDREN ON THE FACTS PAGE!!!

    His suggestion was that if enough people put the same message across that the developers will take another look and hopefully reconsider this feature. The suggested buzz words (I would encourage everyone to send to Ancestry via THIS FORM above or via or with subject identified as NEW FORMAT were:

    “Index Relationships should not be automatically associated (even if parents are correct), and should be prompted, not automatically added.”

    • Kristie Wells

      @Elhura: With regards to data being added from a census record, the new site functions the same as the old. When the record is found, the only way new individuals will be added to the tree is if the tree owner manually adds them from the merge or “Add new information to your tree” page. This will include the person that was searched as well as any family that is attached to them. Information will not be added from a record without this process. I am sorry if you were told otherwise, but the process has not changed in the new Ancestry experience.

  121. Henry

    Am I understanding what I just read?

    If the new version is automatically adding “assumed” children from the index or summary, to “assumed” parents, then that is the scariest thing I have read. If so, then I would say the new site would be totally un-trust worthy. I have not seen this myself, but I am not checking on every family situation all the time. Once I have exhausted by researching all the hints and everything I can think of at the moment, I go on to a different family. Maybe I still need to find a cemetery or some other event, but I can tell by what I have; what I could be missing. In the classic version, anyway. The new is an unknown to me regarding bugs.

    If this is true and I’m not saying it is or it isn’t, and I’m not saying anyone is writing an untruth, how can we expect to create a quality tree? I agree we should notify Ancestry every time something weird happens. It is the most poorly designed piece of software I have seen in almost 30 years! Ugly too!

  122. Anne Scott Frankland

    Elhura — When you say PEDIGREE PAGE, do you mean the tree page in pedigree view? How do these children get added? Are these children added to the list of all people — thereby increasing the total?

  123. Henry

    Family search has only ONE tree. You start out entering your personal information and at some point, it combines with other people and information that someone else has added. Like different branches of the same tree. It eventually become ONE tree. That’s when others can edit the common ancestors at any time with any information, right or wrong. Also the system will sometimes fill in your ancestors when it thinks there is a match. Hence: ONE tree. It is the way the system was designed.

  124. emam

    Karen in England, this is what it comes up with after logging into the old Ancestry.

    What a laugh it is, the improved Ancestry ready for everyone. Obviously they aren’t reading these comments. Actually as someone pointed out there has been no comments from them.

    The improved Ancestry is ready for everyone
    After 14th December, everyone who logs in will see our new look and feel. We’ve continued to work on the improved Ancestry since we first introduced it back in August, based on the feedback we’ve received, and we believe that it represents the most effective way to enjoy the Ancestry site.

  125. Tim H.

    calyx: Now you are making a lot of sense here. The only thing for users to do is end their subscriptions, period. It is not a site for genealogy, no matter what your level. You have made a wise decision. I agree with everything you said. I am so glad I never got involved in putting any trees on Ancestry at all. I use it only for their databases but I don’t need them anymore. I use my own stand-alone gen software and have plenty of other sources from where I obtain records. I feel sorry for those users who have hung on in hopes that Ancestry would retain the classic version. I just have to wonder how you can stand the fact that you are a paying customer and would tolerate this awful new interface and all its problems. I also am concerned about “some” of the databases that might be available or not and be useful at all. It is definitely a tragedy for the genealogical community for the would be genealogists and everyone else for that matter.

    To Mary R.: You are exactly right about It is a good example of why not ever to put your tree on a public site for viewing and possible editing by others. It sounds like to me that for Ancestry users to download their trees is almost too late by others that have posted on here. I do not personally know at all what you will end up with in a GEDCOM file as of this date. I am only judging but comments other users have posted on here.

    Henry hit it right on when he said that Ancestry is “untrustworthy.”

  126. emam

    Is anyone else having any trouble with FTM (see previous post). I phoned Ancestry today to be told that I have to unlink my trees then download them again. I tried that but the trees aren’t coming up. I tried it twice and the files are in my document folder but don’t show up on FTM.

    Now if you go to download a new tree it says you can’t because they are already linked. Then when I try to open a tree it isn’t there.

    It’s funny I can’t even uninstall it as it’s not showing in there either.


  127. Patricia Harris

    Regarding the color scheme of New Ancestry: I visited my cousin last weekend to work together on genealogy. I noticed that the colors on her computer screen were very different from mine and it brought to mind the many comments I’ve read about the garish color scheme. On my Mac computer the banner is a warm gray with a subtle pattern, the lines are a subtle eggplant and the blue and green used in some text is nice and subtle. But on my cousin’s PC I saw an almost black banner, bright purple lines, and bright blues and greens -not at all pleasant. If you plan on staying with Ancestry and are seeing garish colors you might be able to adjust the color setting on your monitor. I sympathize. Purple is my least favorite color, but the eggplant is not bad.

  128. Tim H.

    emam: Do you mean that your file is not in the Family Tree folder under documents? Did you unlink on both Ancestry and on FTM? Why would you want to uninstall your file? Sorry but I’m not too clear on what you stated to be able to help. You should be able to launch your file if you go to the FTM folder in documents. Do you get any sort of message if you launch FTM? Please let me know and maybe I could try to be of assistance.

  129. RobinH

    If what Elhura has reported is true (and there has never been a reason to doubt what she says), that’s the end of Ancestry as a platform on which to build a tree (if you happen to want it to be accurate).

  130. As a general rule I try to see the other side when I don’t agree. Not this time!!! I hate what you are doing, especially with FACTS page and the ugly brown and orange color. It is an overwhelming big blob. Please, please don’t change it. Yesterday I clicked onto the new site six time. Each time was more confusing. Today I have tried again and it is not any easier to see and work on my project. What a mess you are making of a good site!!!
    It makes me sick to my stomach to know I have spent six years gathering my family history on the Old Ancestry Site and now is making it impossible for me to see my overall work at a glance and understand it. You should be able to add new things without messing up a good thing.

  131. JM / UK

    @Elhura – Re:

    “IN NEW FORMAT: Index Relationships should not be automatically associated (even if parents are correct), and should be prompted, not automatically added.”
    from your post of December 1, 2015 at 10:37 pm.

    Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I have cut and pasted this in the places you suggest and hope that EVERYONE does the same, not just those who oppose New, for whatever reason.

    This is an issue that affects EVERY customer and which could generate an unbelievable amount of dross on the site, not to mention the nuisance factor of having even more ‘hints’ to individually delete.

    The thought that Martha and her 44 children might creep into my tree through a computer-generated back door is horrendous. [See my post of November 30, 2015 at 12:29 pm for explanation.]

  132. Bailey

    I have read through all of the posts and agree that “New Ancestry” is not a well thought out product. I also believe the comment about off-shore programming is true. All that being said, clearly Ancestry is in the money making business or using less costly labor (off shore) would not have happened. Seems to me using people who have used the product, have a vested interest in keeping Ancestry a desirable product, etc., would have been better suited to working on this new product. Although I don’t really know why they chose to make changes. I understand programming is time consuming etc., but as it was so brilliantly said, who cares. That’s what you get paid for. If you don’t like it, work somewhere else. Harsh, but that’s life. Since Ancestry has spent so much money in creating a less than desirable web site, they won’t back down and tweak the “Old Ancestry”. I still say money would have been better spent in their search engine, in obtaining records that one can actually see instead of just some listing, and when I ask for a search with a man’s name quit giving me women with no connection to what I am searching.

    I would be curious to know more about the comment above saying they had called Ancestry, asked for the president and got his office. Were you able to speak with him? Or was it someone from his office. I’m just curious as I used to work at a company that when someone wanted to talk to the president of the company they never were transferred to his office. Rather, it was 2 women who would answer as if they were the president’s admin. They were not even in the same town. And, not everything discussed with the caller was actually forwarded to the president and / or his admin.

  133. JM / UK

    Sorry to confuse – Martha was given as an alternative name in some of the records assigned to the unfortunate Mary!

  134. emam

    Tim H. Thank you for your help.

    I launch FTM from my desktop, I then go to one of my trees, then to plan. Usually this would show that my tree is linked to Ancestry and whether there was changes and if it needed to be synced.

    What it is telling me is that my tree is not uploaded or linked to a tree on Ancestry.

    I then went to add a new tree and my trees show as unavailable for download from Ancestry.

    Next I looked on Ancestry and it shows that my trees are linked to FTM. But FTM still shows them as not being linked in the plan page.

    From the new tree page I tried to unlink a tree, then download it again from Ancestry. It said it couldn’t be opened as the file is in use.

    I then went back to my list of trees and the newly download one does not show.

    I then went to my document folder where my FTM files are kept there is another folder for the newly downloaded tree, it contains blank icons.

    No media was downloading in FTM, with no green bar. I closed the program then reopened it, no tree’s at all were in the list.

    I went to uninstall but FTM did not show up. I was going to reload the whole thing, thinking that some errors had occurred.

    I reopened FTM and my original trees are back still showing as not linked. That was earlier today and I haven’t opened it since.

    Sorry for the long post, I hope you can get my drift.

  135. Tim H.

    emam: OK, let’s try to figure out what is going on here. As I understand, you are saying that your tree on Ancestry says it is linked, correct? I gather you unlinked it on your program, FTM. To be able to download you have to unlink it both on Ancestry and in the program.

    The next thing you should do is check the FTM folder itself and see if there is any media file at all, which there probably is not if you have not unlinked the file on both Ancestry and FTM.

    You say you have some blank icons in the FTM folder what happens if you right click on the icon itself to check properties and what does it say?

    Unfortunately, as they say you cannot unlink and link it again but there is a way around that. You can upload your tree if you have another backup copy of it but it will not include any media. All you do in that case, you just give it another name. You data and sources should all be there and where you had media before it will show up in Ancestry as a gray symbol.

    But let’s try to deal with your delimma here first. How many trees do you have on Ancestry right now and were they all linked to the old Ancestry? I assume what you are saying is that if you launch FTM from your desktop that none of your trees appear on the list? Do you mean the right hand side of your pane that lists all the trees that are presently on Ancestry?

    Next question is, how large is your files on Ancestry (individuals, approx) and have you tried download a plain GEDCOM file/s from Ancestry as of yet? I would do that as a matter of course despite this problem with FTM. At least you’ll have copies of your files but it will not include media.

    I really want to help you out, if I can so please let me know the answers to my questions before we go any further.

  136. JessicaMcManus66

    First comment, Abusive comments will be moderated…..I hope not like on the Facebook page. I’ve been beat up by people with nearly every post I’ve made and Ancestry has NEVER moderated one bit of it. What they have moderated was my truthful comments about their product, about how they have agreed to sell DNA to Calico, and about the fact they don’t give the latest information about Native American DNA, particularly Cherokee DNA. (And I fully expect they will delete this comment as well.)

    As a professional genealogist to have individuals automatically added to ANY part of ANY tree I create is something I WILL NOT have! It is NOT a sound genealogical practice and I don’t care if it’s a hint or what it is…..It’s garbage!

    And when Ancestry starts doing things with MY onine trees that makes me look unprofessional….well, then Ancestry has to GO! I follow the Genealogical Proof Standard, but it appears that Ancestry no longer cares about that.

    It appears that I will continue to remove my online trees as I have been doing and will no longer be encouraging my customers to use as I have in the past.

    There are too many companies out there now who offer software the syncs to the trees on their websites. Ancestry is NOT the only one in the game any longer…..and it appears that it wants to cut it’s own throat by focusing more on those who want bells and whistles while they merge unreferenced online trees into their own and call it research. (Why not? That’s what Ancestry calls it……just like they call the Family Data Collections and the Millenium File records!)

  137. Tim H.

    Jessica, I just loved your post. Thank you for speaking up in behalf of the genealogical community. Everything you said is the absolute truth and even citing some of the databases of Ancestry are useless as you named. I too am a professional genealogist so I know where you are coming from. I do hope your post and mine are not deleted. Truer words were never said! Wonderful summary.

  138. Tim H.

    Kristie: First of all who is WordPress? Second my links were all to forums on Ancestry itself about Win 10 and compatibility issues that I felt were helpful to users. The other link I posted was about genealogy legalities that everyone should know. Others have posted many links on here so why would this WordPress, as you call it, zero in on me?

    • Kristie Wells

      @Tim: WordPress is the platform that powers this blog. There is code within this platform that automatically marks someone adding several posts in a row with too many links (no matter where they go), as spam. This has happened to several people and when we notice it happening, we go in and approve them. You should see your comments in the posts as they are all live now.

  139. Monika

    @Kristie Wells. Please stop calling this the “Ancestry experience” or “enhancement”. This is tantamount to your enjoying insulting us and getting away with it. You should be ashamed at yourself. I would feel like a prostitute if I were paid to sell what ACOM has done as an “enhancement” or an “experience” THIS EXPERIENCE IS A NIGHTMARE!

    • Kristie Wells

      @Monika: I was a customer long before I ever became an employee. I also use the site regularly and while I find the color scheme a tad darker than I personally prefer, I find it functions for what I need it to do – I can search the record collections, I can build my tree and I can connect with other potential family members.

      I understand you are frustrated, but I would appreciate it if you withhold your insults towards me as I find them inappropriate here.

  140. nadinemi

    @ Kristie Wells. “Another” chance?? After innumerable “chances” to make things right for months now, all I’ve seen Ancestry do is screw things up royally, not just with the site, but also with your customers. Who in their right mind would give Ancestry yet another chance in the far future, let alone the near future?

  141. Chuck Crannell

    I’ve seen it written (without any supporting proof) that the new Ancestry website does not deal with the data any differently than the legacy version. If this is the case, then either the months of work and headaches is created by a trove of incompetent programmers, or (more likely in my opinion) there is massive infrastructure project going on in the background. The hard cutover on the 15th severs the ties to the previous schema. The website is the customer-facing part. I suspect this is not the end, but the beginning of an evolving experience (which I’m not liking a great deal). You noticed that stand-alone stuff like the document viewer was done a while ago (although it still gets tweaked into less functional tool – flipping pages has to be done on the outside edges only, the tools to mess around with contrasts for poorly scanned docs has gone, the index functions have become dumber, too). Also the fact no mention of any sort (reassurance or warning) about FTM and its ability to sync with the online account.

  142. Monika

    @Chuck Crannel. You suspect this is not the end? How much more harm can they do? I have spent the last 8 years traveling to various archives all over Europe, writing down in which church books I found the individual birth, marriage and death records. Then I decided that was the safest place to keep all my data, so it would be protected and I would not have to look in more than one place for all my data. So, for 8 years I have used the “Description” section of the birth, marriage, and death section on EACH of thousands of profile pages, to type in e.g., Baptismal date: 9 January 1739, Church book of the Parish of Sitzendorf, Volume VIII, page 55. Godparents: Michael and Rosina Schmidt.” Same in the Marriage Section. I would under the Description section, give the name of the church where they were married, the Book volume no. and page number where the marriage is recorded, etc., and the same again, when it comes to the death records that I found. In the descriptive section of each person’s death, I would write in which church book I found that information and on what page. The description section in the “Vital Birth Information” the “Marriage Information” and the “Vital Death Information” seemed to be the perfect place to put this data. In New Ancestry all this data has disappeared. Years of traveling, years of work,. invaluable data. Who gave them the right to remove this data from my tree? People like Ty and other amateurs may not care about that, but I do! I will still be consulting an attorney. I spent too much money and too much time trying to create a superb record of my ancestors. For what? So that ACOM can come along and turn it into the nonsense it has turned it into and then have the audacity of calling that an “enhancement” and an “experience”? AND remove extremely important research data from my tree without my permission?

  143. Monika

    I forgot to add that had absolutely zero data on my ancestors. All the data I put on MY trees is data that I found on my own outside of, using as a place to safely store this information. Fool that I am!

  144. Mary R.

    @Cheryl and hundreds of others: Regarding the colors, this was on acom’s Facebook page Dec. 2: “Hi everyone, the color was a choice by our team and we are curating feedback from members on what they like and what they do not like. We have made some adjustments over the last couple of months based on member feedback and will continue to evaluate it. We understand you do not like the palette, but please understand that based on survey feedback we have received, a large percentage of our members do.”

    @nadinemi: You are SO right! Give them another chance? I gave them my money and ten years of research done carefully and methodically. –Research that they felt free to invade and surround with purple graffiti and stupid pictures. –Research carefully laid out so I could print it for relatives unable to use computers. I trusted them with invaluable information. They tampered with it, replaced my work with an inferior, dysfunctional copy and said, “You’ll adjust.” I say, “No way!”

  145. caith

    My yearly subscription expired in November. My plans are to use a subscription for one month every 6 months. This is my protest. I am not going to penalize myself. I.e., they cannot depend on me as a regular customer. My only interest in Ancestry is as a dna customer and my dna account.

  146. JM / UK

    @JessicaMcManus 66 ~ Well Said – I watch the Ancestry FB [US and UK] visitor posts and have seen the sort of response you describe.

    Yesterday, Mary Zashin posted on FBUS seeking an official response from Acom concerning the Index Relationships found in New which Elhura kindly posted on this Blog.

    Among the many replies was this one from Janet Carlson: ” Sadly there is an anti new ancestry group that delights in starting rumors and perpetuating them. I would put this in that category.”

    Nadine Markham-Itteilag responded: “Janet Carlson, Do you have any examples of anti-New people “starting and perpetuating” rumors other than this? I’ve been following the Ancestry’s blogs and the “other” Facebook site we’re not allowed to mention here for a couple of months, probably read about 90% of the posts and, while I’ve seen tons of anti-New sentiment, I’ve not seen rumors or “delight” in starting and perpetuating them. The blog poster in this particular instance has always seemed to be a straight-shooter. If she’s mistaken on this point, it’s likely only a one-off, and she did say she was advised by an Ancestry representative.”

    I am curious to know if Janet Carlson is employed by Ancestry as I see her name regularly answering queries from users, and have frequently thought that her replies were a bit acid – more curt dismissal than straight answer.

    Maybe she could tell us if she is the same ‘Janet’ who suggested in August that “Those behind the petition are pushing half-truths and rumors” in the Comments following Dave Eastman’s Online Genealogy Newsletter at

    In September, in a detailed and polite response, Elhura asked: “Are you an Ancestry employee, Janet?” but answer came there none!

    Elhura closed by saying: “These are NOT “half-truths”, they are real. This is NOT about change and unwillingness to acclimatize to a new product. It is about a product that is not yet worthy of “acclamation” and may never be. In the meantime, the imminent threat of taking away Classic is not the way to get helpful feedback for product development.”

    What in September was a threat will soon be a fact – but this sad state of affairs continues.

  147. Diane

    I spoke with a representative a few weeks back because as a long term Ancestry member, I am seriously considering this as my last year of membership. I can’t abide by the new format that is being shoved down our throats. I tried it and can’t find any benefit. Quite the contrary! Ancestry should be working on better records and putting it’s money where its proverbial mouth is! I can’t work with that dark and dank background. Find it hard to read and navigate. Some things take several more steps nto do. I have been working on Genealogy for approximately 25+ years and have never flt so frustrated as when I see research turned into a “fluff game”. We need hard facts and more detailed validation to our research, not prettying up a page so it looks good! Thee is so much misinformation on Ancestry that need to be addressed. Spend time on correcting that instead of making it more difficult to function. I will not being renewing next year when my annual membership expires thanks to your new changes and lack of quality that permeates this site.

  148. Monika

    @Caith – ACOM does not care whether they get your money in one installment or two. They know that barking dogs don’t bite. When I cancelled my membership, ACOM wrote back that “Your status will be changed from a paid subscriber to that off a free Registered Guest. As a Registered Guest, you can still access your account at no charge and you will have access to our free data bases as well as any content you personally uploaded and attached to your tree.” Good deal!

  149. caith

    @Monika – You must be a VIP, and I am not, since they offered me nothing when I cancelled. I can now only access MY trees, but cannot access the trees of my dna matches to see if we have a tree match so I can hopefully go forth to see if we have a dna segment match at Gedmatch (if they have uploaded there).

    ACOM is not interested in a 1-month subscription per se. They are interested in 6- or 12-month subscriptions which can be considered a customer base. These give them “bragging rights” to help them sell the company.They will never get more than a 1-month subscription from me, which is probably just a nuisance to them. Just my personal thoughts.

  150. Jolene

    There is still much to be done on the Tree Profile pages of the New Ancestry: #1) no way to post media to specific events as was the choice in Classic Ancestry. #2) profile page is still cumbersome to view. The revamp of the profile page has added much fluff and embellishment. The middle source column is unnecessary and was previously handled with hotlinks on the actual timeline column in Classic Ancestry. Now there is much clutter on each profile page that the user cannot edit. Sadly, I will be switching my trees to a third party static program which will reside on my hard-drive and not be able to be manipulated by an outside source again. It is a shame. is a great research tool. But as a tree building source, it is just too unpredictable with its ongoing changes each year.

  151. Monika

    @caith – Interesting!!! I guess, I’ll take the VIP status as long as it is free! 🙂 But, yes, if I ever was to renew it would be on a month to month basis. Fortunately, I was smart enough to download all my trees (and to erase the majority of them on ACOM) onto Rootsmagic and all the important notes that I put in the “Descriptive Section” on the Classic Ancestry show up on Rootsmagic, even though they will no longer be there in New Ancestry. Warning to everyone: Make sure to transfer any data you have in the “Description” sections of your profile pages into a safe place, because as of December 15, anything you put in these Description sections will be gone.

  152. Vince

    To Monika: I don’t understand your comment, “Warning to everyone: Make sure to transfer any data you have in the “Description” sections of your profile pages into a safe place, because as of December 15, anything you put in these Description sections will be gone.” I have text in the Description fields of numerous facts such as Birth, Death, Marriage, Residence, Military and Occupation for multiple people in my tree. The same text currently appears in both the Timeline section of individual profiles in the Classic interface and in the Facts section of individual profiles in the New interface. Those text items are also fully transferred to the Place / Description field of FTM 2014 during synchronization with the on-line tree through either the Classic or the New interface. Are you speaking of some other Description field?

  153. caith

    To clarify my last post, without a subscription, I cannot access any other trees, including my dna matches. There is an exception: If someone uses the invite system and invites me, I can then see their tree. The invite system does not always work.

    Even if we delete our tree from ACOM, they have a back-up copy, according to a rep with whom I spoke a few months ago.

  154. Karen

    For those thinking about going to a month to month subscription, nothing would thrill Ancestry more since a month-to-month costs 40% more than a yearly subscription. Be careful how many months you sign up for and remember they will still be able to count you as a subscriber.

  155. Elhura

    Thanks to you who responded to my post about the Index Relationships and to those who defended the validity of my information. I am sorry for being so long getting back, but life calls – something we all should “experience” more of after December 15th.

    I hold to my previous post of what I saw on my friend’s tree (witnessed by both of us), what I encountered myself when attaching a census record from Classic view that same day and what the Ancestry agent told me that evening.

    My friend was switched to New and viewed her tree while in that mode. She was appalled to find two additional children added to her close relative’s page. The two whose surname was in an alternate spelling she would never use were children she knew she herself had not added. She also declares she had not recently added any census searches for the children or their parents, which confounds the Ancestry agent’s explanation that the additions can now happen in the New only while adding records. The extra children did appear only in the New View. Classic continued to reflect only one child.

    In hindsight, and now with perspective, I experienced that same day a sort of “backwards” process when adding census records to persons in my tree. Family members, as always, were appearing in the left (Ancestry’s) and the right (my side) columns – only this time I had to UNCHECK rather than check in order to keep extra people from appearing in my tree. It was confusing and annoying. I thought at the time it was just a “new” glitch and tolerated it. I know now, based on the Ancestry agent’s explanation, that it was a definite process created by the new. We have seen somewhere on Ancestry’s brags that the new can now recognize children, step-children and adopted children. I suspect this has something to do with that.

    I was told by the agent that children’s names may now appear on the pedigree page as “hints” with a red line and with a blue line if “confirmed”. I have not confirmed this by viewing the pedigree page in the New (I fear leaving Classic while struggling to finish a few things in my tree). The pedigree page, I was told, is now the default “diagram” type page that appears when you first go to a person in the New.

    I was also told by the agent that enough requests to Ancestry via the suggested links, THIS FORM,, etc. might encourage their returning to the tree owner’s option rather than Ancestry’s to add a child. Thanks to those of you who have sent or will send the following message suggested by the agent:

    “Index relationships should not be automatically associated (even if parents are correct), and should be prompted, not automatically added.”

    It must have worked – or Ancestry is jerking us around. As of today, I have no longer encountered the “backward” process, at least from Classic. I wonder if any of you have “experienced” the same events in either view? Whatever the cause or explanation, it behooves any of us, whether pro-New or pro-Classic, to pay careful attention to our trees while all this is going on, especially when adding new records – and to alert each other and to provide feedback to Ancestry via the proper channels.

    I would be glad for anyone to pass this along to the mentioned Janet Carlson on FBUS. None of us “delight in rumors” and we are not “anti-new” as much as we are “pro-Ancestry”. We know from experience what a workable genealogy site requires.

    And @ Kristie Wells. We take issue with you when you don’t post and we take issue when you do. I am sorry you “experience” that. I know at times Ancestry puts you in an almost indefensible position, but, with due respect, the new site does NOT “function the same as the old”.

  156. Don

    @Monika Everything I’ve put in the description field is all still there, even in the useless LIFESTORY view.

  157. Tim H.

    Kristie: I already investigated this WordPress and know what it is. I was trying to help people out and if you set it up to reject “too many posts” or “too many in a row.” don’t worry as I’m done posting any further on this blog and future ones. I got the message. I was just trying to help users out and answer their questions that you have failed to do. I’m done with these idiotic excuses. I will definitely be ending my subscription with Ancestry when it is up and never use your site again after that and will tell my clients not to entertain joining this site under any circumstances. Your company has made a mockery out of genealogy.

    • Kristie Wells

      @Tim: We didn’t set up the spam filter to prevent folks like yourself from helping, but this blog attracts quite a bit of ‘natural spam’ from the makers of tennis shoes and luxury handbags for some reason (100s of comments actually) and the system does a great job in removing that automatically. Sometimes, it grabs valid posts, but that does not happen often. When it does, we remove them from the spam filter as in what happened with yours. All that said, I truly am sorry you feel we have wronged you. I sincerely appreciate the help you have been giving here in the comments – even when recommending alternate products for some – as I live by the ‘use the product that is best for you’ rule and while I would hope that is Ancestry for genealogy, it may not be in all cases. I do wish you all the best.

  158. BEE

    Apparently, is behind the times with colors! “Pantone’s color of the year grows to 2 colors: NEW YORK — Serenity now, people, with some Rose Quartz mixed in.
    The experts at the Pantone Color Institute have chosen not one but two colors of the year — named thusly — in a complementary pairing that spans fashion, media, packaging, housewares and a desire for more tranquility and calm in actual life.
    Or so they say — they being color analysts, who span the globe in search of trends. Rose Quartz is a pale pink and Serenity is close but not quite what once was referred to as baby blue.” – how about that!

  159. Monika

    @Kristie. I have the right to say how I would feel if I were you. Nobody is asking you to feel that way. “Functioning for what you need it to do” is not the same as having a quality product that is as good as the Classic Ancestry was. For you to respond to frustrated people in an “upbeat” attitude that implies that they will learn to love the “experience” is insulting! @Vince (and indirectly that might apply to Elhura’s comments). You won’t believe that: last night and early this morning, the “Descriptions” were totally absent from my trees, which is why I had a hissy-fit!. NOW they are back. (Maybe as a result of my complaint!?) But now when I check for my pictures, it claims that I do not have a single picture in my trees…pictures that were there yesterday. And that later thing has happened to me before. Some days all the pictures are there, and some days it claims that I do not have any pictures on my trees. And, no it is not the browser, the cookies nor the pumpkin pie!! (And, yes, I have all this data on the unlinked Family Tree Maker as well as on Rootsmagic!) The only reason I am still keeping a couple of trees on is because I have family members in Europe who, thereby, can have access to these trees. They can’t access my stand alone software. Where the new site also becomes problematic for me is that I also have many family members that do not yet have computers. Yes, believe it or not, in the real world that is still the case. Some family members that I tracked down when I was in that little village of 400 people in the Czech Republic where my great-grandfather was born or in that little village of 1000 people where my grandmother was born, they don’t even have a refrigerator yet, let alone a computer. Even some cousins in Germany and a cousin in France do not have a computer yet. Not everybody in their 80s thinks that a computer is a necessary part of life. But they are very interested in my sharing my tree with them. Try and print out a profile page for them now in New Ancestry which contains all the information that I was able to print out in one page before!!

  160. Monika

    @ Elhura, When I said that my comments might also apply to you I was referring to your statement …”or ancestry is jerking us around”. The new program definitely is!

  161. emam

    Tim H: sorry for the delay in replying. Yes my tree on Ancestry says it is linked and yes I unlinked it on FTM. (I have had to re-download my trees before and those times I unlinked them in Ancestry)

    I tried to download the tree twice so I have two new media files in my FTM folder. I right clicked on the yellow folder of both of these and they both say that they contain 59 files and 0 folders. If I do the same on my original tree it says I have 8,128 0 folders.

    If I right click on one of the 59 blank icons, it tells me that it is a Chrome HTML document and opens with Google Chrome. I have figured out that these are the stories that are written on my tree.

    I have 4 trees on Ancestry all linked to the old, I have not been using the new. If I launch FTM and on the top bar go to plan, my trees are now showing again, 5 in total. I had to download one of them again at the end of October.

    If I then go to the top bar again and pick a tree and then go to current tree, this now shows,
    TreeSync-access via Ancestry:–Not uploaded &
    This tree is not linked or shared online.

    My trees on Ancestry aren’t very big compared to a lot of others on here. My largest one which is my family tree has 3,767 people and 2,930 photos. The next one has 1,152 people and 1,130 photos. the other two only contain 89 and 27 people.
    I have downloaded GEDCOM’s for all of them and when I have changed my tree downloaded them again, until this problem occurred.

    I am going to go onto Ancestry and unlink two of my trees from there (the only ones I have worked on and that need syncing) then download it again. This worked in October. I would have just left them as they are but I want to do a final sync before we move over to the new Ancestry. Thanks.

  162. Tim H.

    emam: I am sorry that you did not read previous posts by Kristie and my final goodbye’s to this forum and will not be posting anymore or any future ones. However, I do feel I should at least acknowledge your nice post.

    Also, your trees sizes are very manageable so you should have no issues.

    Yes, to the right click on the one you feel contains your stories. Go into the folder and click on each link and the do a copy and paste into the individuals in your FTM and paste the story into your note field, if you know who the story belongs to.

    Another way of doing that is to do an individual as you come across them in FTM and in the pane at the bottom of their profile and if you see a link then click on that and you’ll have your story. It is rather tedious and you will have to reformat them but at least you know they are safely on your computer.

    You should be able to download your trees now if you unlinked them on both Ancestry and in FTM. Yes, by all means sync before you unlink and then your tree should say “download” in the plan plane. You were very wise to download GED’s of all your files. I wish you the best of luck and hope I was able to assist in some small way. Do post on the forum and let use know how you made out. I’ll read it but will not be able to answer. Nice to have met you. Thank you.

  163. Tim H.

    emam: I forgot to add one thing…when you copy and paste the links, it should go into the individual’s note field.

  164. Elhura

    @ Monika Thanks, and I appreciate all your efforts to try to preserve a good genealogy site! As much as I hate to see it’s coming, December 15th will “live in infamy” and, in a negative sort of way, something of a relief!

  165. Mary R.

    @Tim H. I know I speak for many here when I say “Thank You” for all the help you’ve provided to us. You’ve been patient, knowledgeable, and respectful. Mary R.

  166. Tim H.

    Kristie: Apology accepted. I realize that you are only a spokesperson for the company and it must be very difficult to deal with all the negative complaints on here day in and day out but it comes with the job. I would not like to be in your position at all; you are doing what you are told by your supervisor. Frankly, I could not take it as I do not like conflict and couldn’t handle it. I just hope that I have, in small way, helped other users out.

    Also, I want to take this opportunity to than Mary R. for her nice comments and to others that have contributed to this forum. Thank you all and best of luck in your genealogical efforts.

    Tim H.

  167. Chuck Crannell

    @Monika: I think the December 15 cutover is reckoning day of sorts – where the large an permanent change in how Ancestry works, occurs. It will likely experience a period of intense issues which will settle down as new bugs are resolved. I’m a software test engineer. ABout 15 years ago I worked on a product which went through a massive schema change to become a better product in the end. This process took at least 6 months of work to verify the change before it happened. And this did no involve millions of customers modifying their data as we went along. Then, once the new schema was verified, we had to convert the actual data and make sure the new products that used the schema worked correctly. I suppose they couldn’t just make changes in the background without making the customer-facing side change, too. Otherwise customers would wonder (and it deflects criticism). I synced my trees with FTM a bit ago when I noticed that the classic version was exhibiting similar behavior to the new version. I find tampering with the classic version without explicitly notifying customers in an obvious way to be unprofessional. People use the classic version to avoid the new version. Either the cut-off is the 15th or it isn’t.

  168. Monika

    @ Chuck Crannel. I think that proper English is “It is VERY refreshing!” What can I say? I speak Franco-GermanEnglish! You are lucky that I did not throw in some Portuguese and Spanish! 🙂

  169. James Curtiss

    I have the same issue as Susan Aaron Moller, Tony Australia, and echohermes. I, too have been given assurances that the inability to associate pdf files with facts/events will be addressed, but it never shows up on any Ancestry list of planned improvements. I was told by an Ancestry rep back in September not to worry, because she had verified that it was a planned improvement for New Ancestry and that Old Ancestry was not going away any time soon, because it was only a beta program. Yesterday I was told by another Ancestry rep that there was no indication that Ancestry was going to do anything about this issue. Ironically, the Chairman of the Operating Committee for, LLC, Bruce Chizen, is a former CEO of Adobe! Is anyone aware of any family tree software or family tree website that offers this capability? Any thoughts why Ancestry has chosen not to respond in any way to the concerns voiced by subscribers?

  170. nadinemi

    @ James Curtiss, I’ve given a lot of thought to why Ancestry seems to ignore subscriber concerns. In discussions with friends who are in no way related to Ancestry, but are up on current business practices, the best answer I’ve been given is that companies are driven more by their accounting departments these days than anything else. There is a laser-like focus on “acquire new subscribers” to be able show increased profits, but current subscribers are ignored because the revenue from them is already on the books so they are taken for granted. The fact that they might leave apparently doesn’t factor into the quarterly statements. Yes, this is ultimately all smoke and mirrors, but by the time the real day of reckoning arrives, the company leadership hopes to be long gone.

  171. Diane

    It saddens my heart to read all these comments/suggestions because I agree with them. I hoped I was missing the point somehow and I would see the light at some point: that somehow the NEW ancestry is a good product. I seriously doubt that is anything but delusional. I agree with ALL the serious critiques of the new product. At best, let us have the option of keeping the classic website, please. I have been a member since July 2001 and for the first time seriously considering cancelling or at least not renewing my subscription. If I feel forced to do that in order to make a statement, I will be deleting my numerous trees of some 88,000 people. Over the years I have helped numerous people break through their brick walls. I belong to the Daughters of the American Revolution (my father’s family on both sides have been in this country since colonial times and I have at least 6 direct ancestors who are recognized as patriots of the American Revolution) and have used my skills and resources to help others. You see, I inherited over 30 years of pre-network genealogical research from people who took their research seriously and documented their work–that will no longer be available to others online. Looks to me that the new is targeting/marketing to scrapbookers and social media mavens. Perhaps the bean counters at Ancestry are more concerned about netting money from dilettantes rather than the those in pursuit of actual history. Woe to the serious family researchers who have made their years of research available to others. We obviously aren’t appreciated by or they wouldn’t be alienating us in such a blatant fashion. What next, the dystopian world of Bradbury’s ‘Fahrenheit 451’ or the historical revisionism of Orwell’s ‘1984’ in terms of what is valued as family history?

  172. Laura Walker

    I posted the following question on Ancestry Facebook but did not receive a response from the official moderator, so I’ll try asking here – “Who in Ancestry has the authority to stop the demise of the great product Classic Ancestry on 15 Dec?” Names and titles would be helpful if you can provide.

  173. gp_4hbc

    Laura Walker…sorry you did not get an ancestor to your question. Have you signed the petition or even know about it. Sorry I cannot post the link here as it will get deleted but try the group on FB called “Save the old classic” and you will get a definitive answer, I promise you that. I doubt you will get one on here.

  174. emam

    Tim H. Thank you again for your help. Your post saying you aren’t going to add any more wasn’t there when I started to type mine. It took me a long time to write mine and I only saw yours after I added mine.
    I haven’t had a chance to get any further with FTM and might just leave them as they are. If I download them again, it will mean more of the same photos on my pc.

  175. echohermes

    Thank you ancestry for putting all of my attached stories back on the facts page in new ancestry!!! I just noticed they were back on last night. This is a huge improvement.

  176. gp_4hbc

    @emam, I have been reading about your plight, so may I suggest to you that if you decide to download your file again, you can always go into your FTM folder and delete the old one that contains your media (photos). Check the dates to make sure you do not delete the latest one.

  177. Susan Shirey

    Will there be a New Ancestry Update this week? I find it very helpful to know what is being worked on, so that I can submit the appropriate feedback.

  178. emam

    gp_4hbc: Thank you I will think about that. It’s also to do with my cloud sync. If I download the tree again I will have 3 sets of the same photos in there and don’t know which ones to delete. I really need to read up on it.

  179. gp_4hbc

    emam: What software do you use to link to the cloud and why not just delete all the old files including the media ones from your software? Then you can just download the new ones and put those in the cloud. As long as you have some old ones you can eventually just archive or delete, why not? I know you feel; the more the merrier as you do not want to lose them but too many can be confusing and take up space on both your computer and the cloud. Just a thought.

  180. Richard Lesses

    I think it’s fine, and I’ve been working on my trees since 1990. I have not had syncing problems for years now. My data hasn’t been mysteriously changed.
    I just did a three-for one split on one of my trees, something I had been planning to do for years but had been dreading. I split my grandparents’ data into two trees; unlike my other grandparents they weren’t related to each other (they were 11th cousins); the third tree was my wife’s family tree, which I do when I get bored with my own. No problems with FTM 2014 because I found the PDF on splitting trees through the Extended Family Chart. It’s no Reunion for the Mac (I switched to Windows in 2003), but it is what it is.

  181. emam

    gp_4hbc: I have a BT cloud. I have just recently put it onto my pc, but I must have had it on others as I have records off a long time ago in there. When I downloaded it to this pc, it immediately reached the limit and so I had to delete some items. I’m still learning about it.

    I downloaded my tree again and would you believe it but there is 97 less media items this time around to what was previously in the tree. Now I don’t know which folder to delete.

  182. Jo

    I can’t use the new style. It takes me 4 min. to load all the pages for my gr-r-grandmother that used to load in 45 seconds. I don’t need a 2 inch banner that tells me every time a brother or sister or son or daughter was born or died. I could already see all that on the Classic ancestry and didn’t have to scroll for 4 min. to see the data about her death. This is absolutely dreadful. I wish they’d told me about this before I made my last payment because I can’t use this anymore and they’ve got my money.

  183. gp_4hbc

    emam: Well, for one when you downloaded your tree from Ancestry, did you leave the box checked that comes up “download all Ancestry citation media?” That will include a bunch of junk that I feel is not necessary but if you want it all, I would just compare the larger media file to the smaller one to see what the differences are.

    As to your software you use for the cloud, I really can’t help you much there. I have an NTI backup that does include the cloud but I prefer not to backup to the cloud at all. Maybe someone else that knows more about it can help you in that regard. I know there will be a limit of how my KB’s of storage but do not know what yours would be.

    I can see your dilemma about which file to delete. You could try merging the larger one into the smaller media file but in that case you probably will lose the pointers where the media is attached to. I’d delete the last one ftb file and it’s media file (make sure you are deleting the ones you just downloaded to your computer by right-clicking and checking properties). It will give you the date. Then try downloading it again.

    Another suggestion would be to check the forums on Ancestry about FTM and ask your question there. I’m sorry I cannot help you more regarding the cloud issue.

    Jo: A lot of people are in the same boat. They were hoping that the classic would be retained and so they subscribed again as nobody knew what the date of inception of the new would take place. “Bait and switch” I call it.

  184. I agree entirely with Anne Scott Frankland, please give us back the old style of viewing our tree and making tree entries,
    I have been a user of Ancestry for many years and think what you already had is getting ruined.
    I really think you already had something good, keeping up forcing something which is so messy on everyone isn’t being helpful, I would like to see the old style retained, I certainly wouldn’t give you one gong for where you are heading with your new innovation.

  185. mike d

    Rather than redesign the web site, why not design a web site that doesn’t crash and lock up so much? Also why also insult your users y dropping support of the desktop software? Are you trying to drive users away?

  186. gmokin

    Why change a good thing to something that is very hard to use? It used to be very enjoyable to work on family trees but now it is a chore. Give us a choice to use the old or the new.

Comments are closed.