Posted by Ancestry Team on December 6, 2015 in Australia, Canada, Germany, Mexico, United Kingdom, Website

Welcome to our weekly update on the new Ancestry website. Last week we posted an article that covered the List of All People feature and we plan to introduce features that make Facts view and Person Page even better in the upcoming week.

As a reminder, 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:

All Media Types Available on Facts Timeline: If you have previously attached stories, audio, or video recordings to a fact, these will now show as attached to that fact. In addition, any media that you have attached to the person is now available to add to all the existing and new facts you create.
CSU_MediaFactsView

Trees Pages return to the Person Page: Tree Pages menu options are now available on the person page. To access this, select the name of your tree. Now, to view your tree, you can either select the first option in the tree pages menu or the tree icon to the left of the tree name.

CSU_TreePersonPage

Tree Owner Information: We will also add the tree owner information to the person pages. When you are viewing a tree that you’re not invited to, the “guest” badge will no longer show – some of our members expressed confusion about this, and we agree that it’s more important to know your status as someone invited to the tree.

CSU_TreeOwnerInfo

Features we are still working on:

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

Issues reported this week:

  • Some users are finding it difficult to navigate the new site
  • White font on a dark background is hard for some users to see
  • Facebook import is not working
  • Relationship to me string is randomly not appearing
  • Some users dislike the color scheme

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

Help Links

Webinars

Links

Help Articles

Blogs

176 Comments

  1. Laura Walker

    Could the folks who have been using the New System for several months review the Ancestry blog above and comment on any outstanding issues or system instabilities you have? We have a request into Zach Pino (VP of People and Places) to pursue extending the migration of the Classic Users to the new site for six months. Your feedback helps identify what should be fixed to help you all out now and before a significant wave of new people get plopped in all at once. I sure hope we can get this extension so that the front-line Ancestry staff can take a little breather over the holidays.

    ADMIN EDIT: Please note this post is from a member in our community and not an Ancestry employee. Our team has been listening to member feedback about the new Ancestry since the beta launched in February and we have been providing updates in our weekly posts on features and functionality we are developing. The old website will be retired [globally] by December 15th and the new Ancestry website will be the only website from that point on. With that said, we will continue to listen to member feedback, positive and negative, and look forward to being your resource for researching your family history. Thank you.

  2. Linda Adams

    THANK YOU ! for not rolling out this site, with the magnitude of changes that were made all at once. In other words shutting down the old version cold turkey. I feel that giving the users the chance to test, to play, to beat up on the new version and to work out bugs that may not have otherwise been discovered (because different people use things aspects) was a fantastic move on the part of Ancestry. Especially when you consider the number of individuals that use Ancestry. I have experienced many total program upgrades in my life, and this was by far the smoothest transition of all of them.

  3. Cathy

    @Laura Walker. I’ve been using new ancestry since early July and have not felt the need to go back. The only thing that I want to see added is continue search, which ancestry is working on. People have been providing feed back for months and ancestry has been making some changes based on feedback. Not everything people have been asking for will actually happen as some things are personal preference, or there are conflicting wants ( what one group wants another group does not want). Ancestry will never be able to please everyone.

  4. Cathy

    I agree with Linda Adams. I am very happy that ancestry allowed us a chance to work with the new site and make suggestions. Not all companies do that.

  5. RobinH

    Thank you, Ancestry, for the re-attachment of the stories to facts/events. This will be a huge improvement for many people.

  6. B.

    Yesterday I worked on an ancestor in my tree adding specifically a marriage record. Today I switched over to New Ancestry Life Story and what do I see in the Life Story narrative for my ancestor….”ABC married DFG and had 8 children. ABC then married DFG…” So, what happened? Ancestry’s program inferred one marriage date strictly from a census record, and then when I added the marriage record, the program inferred ABC was married twice.
    I have no words to express my disdain and disgust with Life Story. I cannot believe that I work so hard at assembling an accurate tree just so that Ancestry can so quickly make nothing but JUNKOLOGY of my tree!! Yes, I know I can edit the Life Story narrative, but do you know how time-consuming it is to go through every single profile in my tree to correct the errors that Ancestry has inserted via Life Story???
    The first and most important thing I want from Ancestry is a button to HIDE LIFE STORY from anyone viewing my tree! The only current option I have to prevent Ancestry from spreading JUNKOLOGY is to make my tree Private, and I have done so! I have also printed out everything possible from my tree, and have also downloaded my tree to stand-alone genealogy soft ware.
    I also have several other issues with bugs, glitches, and poorly designed or missing features that others have addressed extensively and repeatedly.
    New Ancestry is NOT READY to be “the only Ancestry” on December 15!

  7. Karen P

    Rene, the redbook is in the Learning Center under ancestry wiki.

    Sure there are still some more tweaks with new but there were with old. Its time to move on and let all of the deelopers put their energies into a single platfrom. Nothing will be gained by waiting 6 more months.

  8. mary

    Absolutely agree about the need to completely hide Lifestory from anyone viewing my tree. The so-called “historical insights,” which can be hidden, are bad enough. But the whole concept that an individual’s life can be “canned,” results in ridiculous narratives. Twins, for instance: Ancestry finally corrected the opening narrative, but the last time I looked the “birth of sibling” part still announced that (the twin) was born when (his sibling) was less than a year old. Since all the sources and facts aren’t registering perfectly, and those of us creating trees aren’t perfect, there is also too much danger of “married 3 times” when it’s only 3 separate sources. I could go on, but those of us who have been begging for an OFF button know what I mean. Ancestry has been given more than sufficient examples by me alone.

  9. Lisa Lichtenberg

    I’m confused…..I see “Issues reported this week”, and “Features we’re still working on”, but where is the big list of all the unfixed issues??? That’s what I’d like to see! For example the one “B.” above outlined. And I’ve seen many many more issues on the ACOM facebook page, like subscribers data missing, error messages, pages coming up blank. How can you even consider forcing your paying customers to convert when the system clearly isn’t ready. Oh, and it isn’t ‘some people don’t like the new color scheme or can’t read it’, it’s almost all. Did your design team even look into the INDUSTRY STANDARDS? It’s white / light screens with black / dark text. Go look at your email screen, or Facebook, or Word, or Excel, or Google, or even the very screen where I’m typing this! Any system that people spend a lot of time on are based on the standards. You can fix the color problem in a snap, why hasn’t it been done? I have canceled my subscription and will take my tree private on the 15th if you roll out the New, along with rescinding my previous recommendation of ACOM to my friends & family.

  10. toni

    I have one question. Why would ANYONE pay for this site? It doesn’t work. Would you buy any other product that doesn’t work just so you can have it in case it would?

  11. nadinemi

    @ toni. You raise a very good question. I’m soon going to be paying “not’ to use it as I’ve canceled even though my subscription doesn’t run out until February. I will be deleting my remaining tree on 15 December. I’m taking a financial hit, but I can’t tolerate all of the juvenile garbage that comes with New. It’s vastly inferior to Classic Ancestry.

  12. Rebecca Sonnick

    From what I have seen of the “new” ancestry I dislike it. The thing is, because of the problems with your stupid “life story” automatic errors (“Life Story” was NEVER necessary) many people who now have a public tree will now change it to a private tree, thus making ancestry a much less desirable sharing site. Because New ancestry has so much messed up stuff. It appears you are not listening to people who have become “experts” on your old ancestry. I know a good number of them are quitting ancestry, because they are so discussed. I can’t understand why you are making a good thing into a horrible monster.

  13. sleuthjan

    “Continue search” is a critical feature that should be available, so I am glad it is still being worked on as it can be very disheartening to have to go back to a person and start a new search after you’ve tweaked the search as you desire. Family group sheet is still very much needed. I have mentioned previously that I would love to be able to SORT items in the shoebox according to surname so that I can weed things out more easily. Also, there are ~still~ unaddressed issues. Another issue is that some images (as from Library of Congress) cannot be attached to a person’s profile. I really wish this could be fixed. It is not the easiest site to navigate right now and I hope it will become more user friendly. I am happy for some of the changes made and less happy about others but I know Ancestry will address issues.

  14. Tony

    Why hasn’t Ancestry Corp. ever warned potential consumers that if they are dial-up,Broadband not available, like we are that their service won’t work worth a damn?

    I’ll tell you, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ !

    That’s why my subscription ends on the 14th.

    Sincerely,
    Mr. Moran
    God Bless America and Merry Christmas

  15. Steve

    When typing “notes” and during any delay while typing, the cursor goes to top of page causing out of place entries.

  16. gp_4hbc

    Tony Moran: You should add Happy New Year to us that are stuck until our subscriptions are up come the new year. We will not get our $$’s back. Wasted money on an inferior product.

  17. 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 drop-down on the FACTS page. The 6th December update lists this as one of the “Features we will introduce” – but it’s not on the Facts page – so it’s still on MY list.
    6. The ability to Hide the LIFESTORY – forever!
    7. Get rid of the stupid Purple lines. Put the list of Sources as a drop-down 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. The 6th December update lists this as one of the “Features we will introduce” – but it’s not on the Facts page – so it’s still on MY list.
    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. Will there actually be updates after the 15th of December?

  18. MKath

    New Ancestry is not ready for prime time. Still waiting for: List of All People on each profile page; Print Preview for each profile page; permanent shut-off button for LifeStory pages. Also needed: a username search box on DNA pages and return of HOVER function. I’m still trying to figure out the advantages of using New Ancestry. Nothing comes to mind.

  19. Bobbi

    I’ve been using the New version. I hate the Life Story and have no use for it. I would like the option to turn is off too.

    I have many scanned documents in my Media. The viewer in New A doesn’t enlarge them large enough to read. Also, can’t made a citation from the media gallery. Very frustrating for me.

    Since 99% of my work is from other sources now I really don’t see a reason to keep my subscription for aggravation.

  20. Vince

    To Ancestry: Anne Scott Frankland’s list of wants for New Ancestry is still my list, especially items #3 and #6 and the items you announced in the 23rd November and 6th December update lists as “Features we will introduce” complete with images showing them working somewhere but which are still not implemented on the actual website.

  21. JessicaMcManus66

    EVery week it is posted here that subscribers have problems with the color scheme. Why isn’t that being addressed? Why are people continually being told that the awful colors were suggested by subscribers when clearly based on the comments, it wasn’t.

    And then the “relationship to me” thing you mention. It’s not just that it disappears, it’s that it just isn’t correct most of the time. I even posted a video of the issue on the Ancestry Facebook page. In fact, I posted several videos online this week of my continuing problems with the site. And it’s been a week and I still cannot access one entire line of one of my trees and nothing is being done about it even though it was reported and “forwarded” to the correct department.

    I’m embarrased to associate my genealogy business with anything Ancestry.com related anymore as your whole site no longer supports proper genealogical methods.

    I know it doesn’t matter to Ancestry.com, but I will no longer recommend your site to any of my clients.

  22. Vince

    Today’s update item “Relationship to me string is randomly not appearing” under “Issues reported this week” misses the point of the real problem. I have seen no disappearance at all of the “Relationship to me string” if what is meant by that is the display of the relationship line from an individual to the person defined as “Who you are in this tree” that appears when you click on the relationship name under the birth and death data on the individual’s Profile page. That function has been working without fail for me for months in New Ancestry.

    But, as I and others (most recently Anne Scott Frankland) have reported several times, what is missing from that function is the “(not you?)” link at the bottom of the relationship line in Classic Ancestry:

    The “Not you?” option, available from the Profile pages of Classic Ancestry, has survived at least through the All Hints list of New Ancestry. But the option’s presence via the All Hints list is of little solace in practice. The “Not you?” option, appearing right on the Profile page in Classic Ancestry, takes just seven (7) clicks and two data entries from the Profile page to see the relationship to someone other than “Who you are in this tree” and to return to the original “Who you are in this tree” setting. New Ancestry requires seventeen (17) clicks and two data entries to do the same thing by going into Tree Settings and changing “Who you are in this tree” back and forth. To do the same thing via the All Hints list in New Ancestry from a given Profile page, you still have to bring up the Tree View separately and select All Hints from Tree Pages, which gets you to People With Hints instead of to All Hints. Then you can click on the actual All Hints link to show the beginning of the entire list. Then you type the name of the person whose Profile page you had been looking at and search the list for it. But this procedure fails entirely for individuals in the the tree who have no NEW hints — those individuals don’t show up in the “All Hints” or “People with Hints” lists even after an explicit search and even if they do have accepted, ignored or undecided hints. If the person is on the All Hints list, you can click the link below the person’s name that states the relationship to finally get the full “Relationship to me” view, familiar from Classic Ancestry, complete with the “(not you?)” link at the bottom.

    The basic code needed to provide that feature is already in New Ancestry. Why not now just make a direct link to the applicable code segment from the “Relationship to me” pop-up view of the individual Profile page of New Ancestry?

  23. Donna

    I didn’t like what they did to the site the last time they ‘updated’ it and dislike this ‘update’ even more. I’ve downgraded my subscription, made my trees private, pay absolutely NO attention to those jiggling leaves and just access the search function for available records even though the search function isn’t nearly as useful or intuitive as it once was (and that’s the good news when it works!) I have no use for any of the new ‘features’ and now find I have to spend a lot more time trying to figure out how to just get around for the basics.

    I’ve been a member for 15 years and can remember when I looked forward to reading about site improvements, now I’m just going to unsubscribe from the blog. Yeah…just not happy with any of it.

  24. Karen P

    4 and 6 on that just aren’t ever going to happen. The new location of sources was a very deliberate decision to place sourcing front and center. LifeStory fits with their philosphy that Genealogy=Family History= Stories. I choose not to use that page and anyone with an ancestry subscription knows how that page is generated.

  25. Vince

    Crucial choice needed: Make an “Off” option for all LifeStory views.

    Please provide a way in New Ancestry for the tree owner to prevent the entire LifeStory view from appearing at all in trees that he or she owns, so that no one can see it unless the tree owner or an invited editor for the tree chooses to display it. This choice could be provided as an extension of the way the system currently refrains from showing the Historical Insights generated for the LifeStory view to anyone other than the tree owner and members invited as editors for a tree, unless a given Historical Insight is “accepted” for display to other members by the tree owner or an editor.

    While some people may find the LifeStory view useful and be willing to manually correct the misleading or plainly false data entered into it by Ancestry’s computer-generated narratives, tree owners who find the intrusion useless or offensive should be able to completely block viewing of the feature by anyone in trees that they have created.

  26. Ron

    The list of issues reported this week shows the same issues that have been reported for months. What is being done about all the glitches, hiccups, burps, slow or no response issues? About cookies that clog the users’ browsers? There are daily reports of features and functions that are BROKEN. Where is that list that has been compiled and curated? Surely it’s not the same handful of issues you have listed above.
    Ancestry should be embarrassed to force paying customers to use an unstable website.

  27. Ron

    I would like to know how some of the users who post on this blog are so positive about changes that Ancestry will or will not make. Does that mean that the rest of us should just rely on them for information and not expect action regarding some of the issues and changes? I was under the impression that input was still being solicited. Or at least it says so in the body of this blog. Does this still hold true?

  28. Karen P

    Logic and deductive reasoning by paying attention to what they’ve been willing to change so far, what they have said in their public presentations and in the original beta feedback calls. They’ve release training information for the new layout. If they were going to make major changes they wouldn’t be announcing an end to old and have already rolled out new as the only option to Mexico and Canada. They will continue to add features and tweak existing features. That’s my opinoin anyway…we’ll see if I end up being right

  29. Karen

    To Karen P above. Genealogy=Family History=Stories. I agree. Genealogy leads me to learning about MY family history and the ability to tell MY family stories. A computer generated program will never be anything but dull generalities filled with errors and no those errors aren’t because I have entered something incorrectly. If some people like canned stories then fine, let them have them. Just let me turn it off so no one thinks I wrote this. I doubt anyone on here would like another customer writing stories about our family and putting them on our tree. I also don’t want Ancestry’s computer doing that. I’d never let a computer write my resume or a family member’s obituary and I won’t let Ancestry write a stupid life story for all the world to see.

  30. Karen P

    I didn’t say I liked LifeStory..I just said they weren’t geting rid of it and won’t let people hide it. I simply choose to ignore the page. I try to focus more on my actual research .

  31. Diane Hall

    Why do you not listen to the users screaming about the color scheme! So many other things too. Purple lines, life story, functions not working. Is this a website ready for use? I don’t think so.

  32. Susan Shirey

    Many improvements have been made, but there are still enough features missing that I believe Ancestry is premature in making the final transition Dec 15th. I also echoes someone else’s comments about the headaches that this transition date will cause for Ancestry employees. A rollout after New Years would probably have made both users and Ancestry employees happier. Interesting that executives never seem to take employee holiday plans into consideration when setting deadlines.

  33. Susan Shirey

    I am really pleased with recent changes, e.g., ability to attach stories to facts, ability when adding media to see the tree the media came from. I see they have even gone back to the old obvious way to search for someone else in your tree in the tree view (no longer hidden in the magnifying glass symbol next to the tree name). Having said that, there are still a number of unfixed problems that are not mentioned in the update, which I find worrying. These include:
    * When adding a record, you no longer have the ability to select from a list of people if the right name doesn’t pop up (which happens often in my tree, because there are so many people with the same names).
    * When adding a record from a hint, you no longer have the ability to save it to someone else in your tree (either from the record page or the index page). This is troubling, because often the record is more appropriate for another family member (e.g., father, brother) than the one that received the hint.
    * Printer-friendly pages are still far too long! For one of my ancestors with an especially long timeline, the profile page in Old Ancestry is 8 printed pages, but in New Ancestry is 14 printed pages. This is because having the sources in the middle columns squeezes the timeline into the far left column, so that it takes more pages to print it all. I believe returning to the more printer-friendly two column page is possible by moving the sources under the names of family members. The lines connecting the sources to the facts could probably still be maintained.

    I’ll stop with these. Ancestry, please let us know that you are still working on the above problems by mentioning them in the update. Thank you!

  34. Cathy

    I have been using the new version for a while and have learned to navigate fairly well now, but it took a while. Like many others, I do not like or use Life Story and would prefer to see it gone.
    The new search feature cannot be filtered like the classic version; classic search worked much better and results were more accurate to name/date/place being searched. I cannot figure out why you think new search is so much better. Why do you “fix” what wasn’t broken?
    I am glad that round photos are gone. It didn’t work.
    Still getting a lot of hints that do not fit the ancestor’s time or place.

  35. Karen

    Karen P Thank you for letting me know we will never get the option to block Life Story. That truly is a deal breaker for me. I’ve always felt the new philosophy was the real problem. It’s so hard to list particular complaints when they all revolve around the “your family history will appear like magic, with little work by you” philosophy.

  36. Jade

    I am grateful that you are retaining the “detail” information on events in the Facts pages.

    But your LifeStory concoctions are still grievously defective as to locations. You seemingly randomly exclude parts of place-names.

    For example, here is one: “When Clarissa Clare E Bradbury was born on April 9, 1855, in Haynesville, Maine, her father, Jabez, was 24 and her mother, Anna, was 23. She married William Edwin Longley on October 21, 1874, in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania. They had five children in 13 years. She died on April 28, 1930, in Centre County, Pennsylvania, at the age of 75, and was buried in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania.”

    Should be **Haynesville, Aroostook County, Maine.**

    Marriage should be in **Bellefonte, Centre County, Pennsylvania.**

    Death should be in **Philipsburg, Centre County, Pennsylvania.**

    Burial should be in **Keewaydin Cemetery, Covington Twp., Clearfield County, Pennsylvania.**

    Omitting Counties and cemetery names is confusing and genealogically incorrect. The same goes for omitting place-name details in Canada.

    Adding useless and unrelated “historical” events (such as calling a Civil War battle hundreds of miles away “nearby”) could be abandoned with a no-harm effect, if you just want to save space.

  37. Henry

    I have a serious problem in one of my main trees. I’m responsible for the problem, but there are too many people with the same names in the same area and I think I messed up. I’m trying to fix my problem but I CAN’T do it with the new Ancestry. It’s such a mess, I can’t think through the problem. The problem wasn’t created by Ancestry, but I can’t work with this new version. It’s not logical. It’s cumbersome and awkward and has no “flow” of logic. I see changes have been made but it still is second rate compared to the Classic version. The new version looks like parts have just been thrown on the screen like pieces of a puzzle. I’d better solve my problem in the Classic. Dec 15th is looming!

  38. Carrie

    Some things have been adjusted but the whole thing just never will be efficient. I finally figured out what is wrong, among several other things. The whole site is just too busy! It’s trying to be all things to all people and that is not possible. People need to learn how to do genealogy before they tackle this site.

  39. Jade

    Henry, you said “The new version looks like parts have just been thrown on the screen like pieces of a puzzle.”

    You have it right. They cut up the single easy-to-navigate person pages into jigsaw pieces and commenced to add no-fit pieces around the edges.

    They have made a few fixes that make tree construction a little more sensible, but overall it is not a great result.

  40. Elhura

    Please restore the color scheme of Classic as an option in the New. It is visually friendly to all and will restore use of the new site to a great many who otherwise cannot see via the new colors. While familiarity is not top priority for vision, that in itself is also comforting as we plod through the other changes. The purple lines should also be opted out at choice for the same reason. They startle and blind, diminishing function of the site.

  41. Erica

    I’m not sure a majority of users dislike the colors – a majority of people motivated to come here and complain may be, but that is a different measure.

    Why do people not just ignore the Life Stories page? I do, just because I’m not interested – but that means it does me no harm.

    And I like the purple lines. It is helpful to me to be reminded where a source is used without having to click each fact.

    I agree there are some things I might do differently, but it is still providing a great deal of value to me. And in any event, I do not find it to be such a disaster that it requires vitriol.

  42. gp_4hbc

    Carrie: Your last sentence boggles my mind. It is no longer a site for genealogists, period. As a professional genealogist I would recommend to clients or anyone interested in real genealogy, NOT to even consider using this site. Ancestry itself admitted it was no longer for genealogists.

    Week after week, I read about your complaints and just wonder why on earth, as a paying cutomer, you put up with this nonsense. You are paying for a product you expect to work correctly and it does not deliver. You complain about the color scheme and this and that; plus, glaring errors you would like to see improved and yet the bottom line is Ancestry is making $$’s on your subscriptions for what is now just a sorry mess. I do not understand it.

  43. Ivy MacMahon

    Please make it more evident how to make the desired photograph in an individual’s gallery the profile photo instead of pictures such as gravestones. Thank you and Happy Holidays. You are doing a great service!!!!

  44. In the old version of Ancestry, Media that is attached to someone in your tree that was originally uploaded by another person allows you to click on the user’s tree and took you directly to the person in their tree that they had attached the media to. Now it only lets you see the profile of the person who attached it and doesn’t have the link of the tree that the media was originally attached to. When researching a person or family it is helpful to be able to see the tree of the person who submitted the media. Please add back in the link of the name of the tree that the media was attached to before you convert to the new ancestry!

  45. Vince

    To Erica: I also do ignore the LifeStory pages of my trees, like the plague they are. But I have no control over whether other Ancestry members choose to view the pages other than to make all my trees private, which I have done. I don’t want anyone thinking that I added the LifeStory fluff myself or sanction its forced inclusion in my trees. Editing every fact on every LifeStory page in existing trees with thousands of individuals to correct misleading or plainly false narratives generated by Ancestry is not a reasonable option. But if tree owners were allowed to block the entire LifeStory view in trees that they have created, then people who want to deal it could do so and those who find it useless or offensive could prevent other from being misled by it.

  46. James Curtiss

    Finally, pdf documentation is attached to the facts documented! Thank you for eliminating the default “Stories” designation for pdfs, which was misleading and confusing for trees with multi-page records attached to facts. It would have saved a lot of aggravation if it could have been clearly communicated in this blog or through Ancestry customer reps that this improvement was definitely going to be made. I came very close to canceling my subscription last week. Although there are things abut New Ancestry that I am not all that crazy about, this is welcome improvement over Old Ancestry.

  47. Kitty McLamb

    Why did you change to the new Ancestry when you had
    a great Ancestry going all these years. I have been a member for over 15 years. I have yet to find anything that I really like. The quality of the pictures of my family members were far superior in the OLD and BETTER Ancestry. Why Oh Why did you change when you had a great site going all these years?

  48. Kar T

    I have been researching for well over 30 years and have been on Ancestry.com since the beginning. I realize the site is now geared to people with a casual interest in genealogy, which is why I question all the complicated and confusing additions to the basic tree. A beginner needs a simple easy blank tree to start. I agree with those who want the removal of the story page; unless it becomes a page where we fill in the blanks ourselves (not computer generated) I will continue to ignore it. I have always used familytreemaker as my working tree with an Ancestry tree for sharing and meeting new relatives, but it sounds like many people are making private trees and the new ones are so confused they will stop using the site. I will continue to plod through hoping for the best as changes are made since some of the concerns have been addressed already.

  49. douggrf

    Items that have a need for correction and restoration:
    1) Provide a global switch for tree owner/editor to turn off the LifeStory pane for the tree. The provide a local switch in each profile page to be able to selectively turn-on a given Lifestory for viewing by public guests.
    2) Restore the summary of comments that appeared for an entire tree on the Tree Overview page. This was unexlpainedly lost as of May 27, 2015. Must be restored.
    3) The link in the individual media gallery for a given media shows sharing by other tree owners with their circle icon. Holding the mouse icon and click on the member name, and you are taken to their profile summary page. Fine. BUT ! BUT! Click on the associated tree name and you are taken to the Tree Overview page – this is wrong!
    As in Classic you should be taken to the individual profile page where the media exists in the alternate tree. Not doing this – is a real headache and frustration to research and validation of other’s trees.
    3) Adding text and .pdf to facts is great – except the trace of the link back to the media is horribly convoluted and only presents what is a huge failing of the New site for enhanced productivity. Compare to Classic where you can clik the media link, and you will be taken to a summary page of metadata about the media as well as the media itself. The Classic site is a sheer monument of productivity. New site as of the turn December 15, 2015 is a horrible presentation of just the opposite – so poor in design and effective usage by members.

  50. Debbie

    I would really love the “list of all people” to have the ability to sort by location as well as by name. It would make it so much easier when new records are released to see who in my tree is from that area as opposed to going through all 10,000 names to find them.

  51. Carrie

    To gp_4hbc Regarding your post directed to me: I was a paying customer for 14 years. I no longer pay, not a dime. I agree the site has become a pain in the a– to use if you are using the new version. I continue to use the Classic and will until they drop the new one on us, Dec 15th. They have a monopoly on scanned records and that is important to any real genealogist for confirmation of sources. Other sites have records as well and I do use all that’s available. I leave no stone unturned.

    I went to the new version last evening just for a look-see because I know they were making small changes. I wanted to see what those changes might be. As in my post, I finally realized that Ancestry could make tweaks here and there, but the way the site functions with the new Ancestry will never be efficient or intuitive. And to a new person, it will be confusing. They won’t stay long. Like many others they will make a small tree with a few people, limited sources if any, and then abandon the whole thing. The true genealogists will glean from the site what they can and ignore the silly, unreliable stuff like Life Story. It will be harder because the site is so busy.

    I am not a name gatherer and I don’t copy trees. I snoop because you never know where a hint may come from. You won’t even see my trees, as they have always been private and un-searchable. There will never be a reference to “Ancestry trees” in any of my source lists. Indeed I feel like those are dirty words. But even a bad tree will have one or two things that are correct. I write the info on a piece of paper and then do the research myself. You remember paper, the stuff you use with pens and pencils?

    So it is not so mind-boggling when you see it from my perspective. I know what I am doing. I am a perfectionist, and that makes some people crazy. So be it. I don’t use FTM. I use stand-alone software, actually several of them. I will help other people when asked, but I don’t have time to correct all the others who make crazy mistakes. There definitely are some nightmarish trees on Ancestry. And they will multiply because many folks will find the site tough going and give up.

    I stand by my last sentence in my last post, “People need to learn how to do genealogy before they tackle this site”

  52. Kristie Wells

    @Laura Walker: Thank you for thinking of the front-line staff, but please know the team is fine and is happy to respond as needed throughout the holidays, and beyond. What would be helpful for us is to get a better understanding of what specifically you have issues with on the new Ancestry so that we may try to resolve those for you. I know from your posts on this blog, emails you have sent and posts on our Facebook page that you are frustrated and would like Ancestry to keep the old website available for a while longer. Please know that cannot happen, and all members will be migrated into the new website by the 15th of December. Without exception.

    We will continue to take feedback from our blog, our Facebook page(s), via email, phone calls, in product surveys, and at in-person events. We will continue to share what features Ancestry is working on so you understand where the product is headed. I truly appreciate your passion around this subject, but I encourage you to start using the new Ancestry and provide specific feedback so we can continue to help you research your family history.

  53. JessicaMcManus66

    Karen P…..Where on this page has anything been mentioned about this comment you made yesterday?

    “A professional genealogist should be more embarrassed about producing fantasy tress (people from 11AD!) than about appearance ”

    Is this a personal attack carried over from the Ancestry Facebook page?

    No where in this weeks blog has ANYTHING been mentioned about anyone’s tree and the date 11AD. But I DID post a video on the FB page showing an issue I had with a profile not loading correctly in my tree that was from this time period. And it was the only such thing posted all week on any Ancestry related page. But the funny thing is….I have you blocked from seeing MY FB posts. How many profiles do you have? I know I’ve blocked two already because of mean attacks just like this on the FB page.

    I don’t know who you are, but the more you write, the more it appears you have inside information concerning how Ancestry does things that we don’t have. So if you are associated with Ancestry in any professional fashion, your blatant bullying is very unprofessional and quite unethical. And they really need to shut you down.

    The next time you want to make a stab at me, visit the “Is Ancestry screwed up Today” Facebook page and do it personally. If not, please refrain from commenting about posts I make on other sites.

  54. Kristie Wells

    @Ron: The only people who know what changes will and will not happen with regards to Ancestry are our executive team. Members can speculate, but until you read it in an official announcement from our company, it is just that – speculation. I can promise that we will continue to listen to (and respond to) member feedback long past December 15, 2015 so please continue to provide it.

  55. Monika

    @douggrf. I am addressing that to you because I am more likely to get an answer from you than Kristie Wells. I have hundreds and hundreds of comments in my trees. Are you saying that the summary of comments disappears in New Ancestry? The thought of that has me hyperventilating around here. I have put too many important issues in the comments section to see my comments disappear. This goes back to my original complaint: NO ONE but me should have the right to add or delete something from my tree. That is my major complaint with New Ancestry. The rest I can live with!

  56. BEE

    “What would be helpful for us is to get a better understanding of what specifically you have issues with on the new Ancestry so that we may try to resolve those for you.” – HUH? Have I missed something? I thought that is what all the hundreds of posts on this subject did! How about starting with “ghost” hints! I’m sick of them!!

  57. Ron

    @Kristie – maybe it would be of benefit if people would stop posting about what they KNOW Ancestry is going to do or not do, whether it’s by deduction, secret documents, crystal balls, however. Unless of course it is the executives who are posting under pseudonyms. I understand that some people like to appear to be the cog that keeps the Ancestry wheels turning, but all it’s doing is create more dissent with users who are already pretty unhappy. I thought people were encouraged to post here, and they really should not be subjected to ridicule or be demeaned for expressing their views.

  58. Walt

    I think I’ve finally broken my Ancestry addiction.

    Since I first became aware of all the flaws in the New Ancestry, I’ve been an avid reader of these blogs and a frequent poster. But I’ve come to realize that the few improvements and corrections of this disastrous redesign have been only grudgingly done.

    I couldn’t even stomach reading through all the comments on this week’s blog. I mean, really, how could we possibly still be asking for a Family Group Sheet. Isn’t that one of the basics of genealogy? I guess not in the new “reinvented” genealogy that Ancestry is promoting.

    After some 12-plus years as a subscriber, I finally ended my $299 World subscription a few weeks ago and I am now coasting through the three free months I got with my Family Tree Maker purchase. The greatest lesson for me out of the New Ancestry debacle is that it has forced me to look around at what else is available. It’s been a weaning process and I now know that there is a lot more out there.

    I would love to continue my relationship with Ancestry, but it’s pretty clear that I’m not really the sort of customer they’re wanting these days.

  59. FHC Librarian

    To Walt: Yes, the family group sheet is the basic form for genealogy. Then there are the pedigree charts (trees). Things haven’t changed in that regard.

    To Ron and Kristie Wells: Suspicions confirmed; the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing at Ancestry. And those that know are keeping it all secret. Even the support people are in the dark.

    To Kristie Wells: I think we all KNOW we are losing the classic version. It’s the main reason these blogs get so many posts. I agree with BEE.

  60. Kristie Wells

    @BEE: That comment was directed to Jessica as I had not seen her specific issue and I was trying to help resolve it. I read through the comments and try to help or provide additional information where I can. The product team is reading every single comments and logging issues they see. I have also requested that our Member Services team also review these posts and offer support where they can.

  61. Terry

    I am most unhappy with the new version of ancestry. The new version looks like it is set up for grade school and junior high school people who have been given an assignment. This is insulting to the intelligence of current users. Why does ancestry continue to make stupid changes that are irritating for current users. You are going to loose a lot of customers. I, for one, will cancel my subscription. and I know lots of others will do the same. What is this? Big Brother!

  62. Debby

    This site is all but unusable. It tells me I have to disable third-party storage to use hints. I do that, but the same box pops up every time I open a page. It lets me review hints, but it thwarts my attempts to do it every time. I was in the middle of reviewing pertinent hints from seven other family trees when Ancestry cut me off with “this information is no longer available.” They added, “What can we do for you?” I suggest you try restoring the family tree information you just blocked, apparently permanently. I suggest you stop the third-party storage box from preventing me from viewing hints. I suggest you make this site usable. Ironically, Ancestry has been sending me reminders that it’s time to renew. I am not going to that until the above errors are corrected.

  63. dmarshall

    @Kristie Wells I for one thing, like the new higher contrast colors. I’m an old fart with much less than perfect vision. Hopefully, if color changes are made, it is in the way of user preference themes.

    I really have not spent much time on the new version. I’ve been entering a lot of people from paper sources and wanted to get that done before the holidays. I do remember some things that I tried while previewing the new site took many more mouse clicks than it did on the Old site. Is anything being done to resolve that problem?

  64. Monika

    This may be one of the things that Chuck Crannel was talking about in the November 23 post. But I took a look at the Life stories again today and found the following: When I type in the name of a city where somebody was born, married, or died, I use the “prompt” that ancestry.com sends out. E.g., I start typing “San Francisco” on a profile page and ancestry.com prompts me to press on “San Francisco, California, USA.” So, I am using these ACOM prompts for all the cities worldwide. Yesterday, I could not resist looking at the computerized “Life Stories” again and what do I discover? San Francisco, California, USA became 37.793247276769, -122.554755646011,7. So, I looked at dozens and dozens and dozens of these “stories” and found that this is happening to every city mentioned in my trees. So, I sent an e-mail to Customer support with an example and promptly received the following reply: “Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regard to why the city, county and country are coming up as numbers. As a temporary fix, you can just click on the green button that says “Learn more about (e.g.,) Anna Maria” and it will pull up the correct place of birth. I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REPLICATE THIS ISSUE (italics added) and our developers are currently looking into the issue. The moment there is an update we will be contacting you!” Why waste so much manpower on creating a program for these silly LifeStories that nobody of any intelligence can possibly want instead of using that same energy and time on fixing things that we have asked for years to have fixed (like e.g., the ghost hints that I have had for years.) Why invade my trees with something I do not want and force this on me instead of fixing things that need to be fixed? Why not have the developers figure out a way that permits me to “decline” having the LifeStories on my tree?

  65. Elhura

    I have just sent the following message to Ancestry Support. Am wondering if anyone else has encountered this problem and want to warn you to BEWARE!

    “There is a glitch in step-parent situations when adding multiple family members via Ancestry’s Find-a-Grave records. Children, even when parentage is already established in the tree, will be added to multiple parents. In this particular case, the child was the son of the husband and a second wife. When downloading his Find-a-Grave record, he was also added as a child of the first wife – however the first wife was assigned the role of “father” and his own father became “mother”. This is an unbelieable mess! It happened twice, even when taking great care to readd. If the relationship was deleted from the child’s page, he was also deleted from the tree. I am in tears, having messed up a family that, otherwise, was complete 5 hours ago !!! Your trying to recognize parents, steps, adoptees, etc. is a nice idea, but totally unready for use.”

  66. douggrf

    @Monika who wrote ” @douggrf. I am addressing that to you because I am more likely to get an answer from you than Kristie Wells. I have hundreds and hundreds of comments in my trees. Are you saying that the summary of comments disappears in New Ancestry?”

    To be very clear the Classic site has been designed with a Tree Overview page for many years. On that page a tree owner/editor had access to a summary of comments that are made throughout the tree. Comments that were made by anybody.BUT these are not tree notes – comments are a class of data all in their own. Comments are made at the profile level in the tree. This feature was dropped May 27, 2015 by the team without explanation but apparently was timed with the public beta phase of New site beginning June 1 2015.
    IT is a very important feature for everyone, and should not have been dropped.
    IT has not been restored to the New site implementation of the Tree Overview page since. And it -the problem- has been reported directly to the support team without response.

  67. Roger

    It doesn’t matter how many platitudes Ancestry representatives make, for me, they have ruined a wonderful hobby and I rarely log in to my tree now. It was small, concise and very accurate. I loved working on it. I don’t now.

    I loved the presentation of my tree; I hate the colours of the new; the black bars backing my ancestor images and the drab background. I hate the tampering with my ancestors lives in life story; I find the snaking lines tedious and unhelpful. All ruined.

    Once I am forced in to using ‘New’ I shall see how it goes but I’ll probably cancel and be done with it.

    And Ancestry can get on with their finger-jabbing/mobile/smartphone customers that make little or no valid contribution to Family History.

  68. Please, PLEASE, so something about the colour scheme and move the sources back under the family. My dyslexic brain can’t cope with it, Seriously, the page is too busy and buzzy.

  69. Laura Walker

    Reference my request for Mr. Zach Pino’s assistance, yesterday I received a nice letter from the Ancestry Executive Office at least confirming receipt of my request and an Ancestry Support incident tracking number of 151208-000366. My goal to even try to do this – I don’t want to see any Ancestry user leave because of all the issues described above and I feel sad every time I see that. Perhaps the person who leaves is that 3rd cousin DNA match I was just getting ready to contact or had a family tree that would have solved a mystery in mine. Who knows?

  70. May

    Need advice. Switched back to the classic Anc when FORCED into the “new” mess, had to clean up a lot of incorrect information that was automatically added/messed up. My trees are linked to FTM. Has the New added any incorrect data to FTM while in the new Anc? Should I or should I not unlink to FTM before dooms day the 15th? Thank You.

  71. Karen P

    both old and new pull from the same data but because of the change in displays errors that were previously unseen are now more noticeable.
    Family Tree Maker syncs to the underlying data not to the layout so nothing will change in your ability to sync when the final switch over happens. People who have used new exlusively for months are syncing successfully

  72. Wendy Negley

    There is no way to select which image is to be the primary photo. I want to be able to do that as I could in the old Ancestry.

  73. Karen P

    sure there is Wendy…all you have to do is click on the profile picture and it will give a choice of what picture you want to use. if a picture already is in place you can change it .

  74. CH

    Ok, here goes: What are “ghost hints?” I get hints that don’t apply and just click on “Ignore hint” after reviewing. There usually aren’t too many.

    I feel somewhat dumb asking this but I’d like to know. I don’t and never have used all the features of Ancestry trees. I go for the vitals and sources. No media, pictures, notes, comments, or use of syncing or FTM. I use stand alone software. That’s where my true genealogy is. More work, yes, but more accuracy. Thanks for an answer.

  75. caith

    @Laura Walker – The response rate is very low from our DNA cousins/matches. Maybe because after they dna test, and finish with their free 2-week trial subscription, they lose interest and go on to the “next big thing”. Or because they do not want to be burdened with an additional ~ $17.00 a month; and the cost benefit is not there for them.

    Ancestry’s customer base, is and always will be, traditional genealogists; and those of the older generation, like me.

  76. Martin

    So how many of the errors, missing features and layout issues will be left unresolved by the time the switch over is made?

    As subscribers have been undertaking testing that Ancestry has failed to do, shouldn’t they be automatically rewarded with a 20% discount at time of renewal for the effort put in as unpaid testers.

    When will you provide an opt out setting for life story, the only way to do that at the moment is to delete your tree.

    As for the colours & design have you consulted with organisations who represent people with sight issues both in US and overseas?

  77. BEE

    “ghost hints”, also known as “phantom hints” are hints that aren’t there. In other words, “phantom hints” means NO hints. When I go to the list of people, it shows “7 hints”, but there is nothing there! No names, nothing. On the left in a column that says (hints 7) {in another tree it might be 2, in another, it might be 10} – then there is a list: All hints 7: People with hints 5: Records 4: Photos 0: Stories 0: Member trees 3 – which of course adds up to 12!! but who’s counting? While there is a drop down to “Sort by”, nothing appears! So that is what is meant by “ghost/phantom hints”. Sometimes the message was “Currently there are no hints in this tree. Try Please try another search” – even though it showed 10 people under “All hints” and “10 records”. At one point it had 198 “hints” that weren’t there! This has been going on for over 3 years, and it appears it will continue with “new” ancestry. Now that I have finished checking through a 700+ tree alphabetically to copy any comments into notes, I now have almost 500 “hints” to check out. While most will be useless to me, I do it just to be sure that isn’t something like the latest SS Applications and Claims Index which has given me some great information.

  78. Martin

    You say the changes were made in consultation with subscribers.

    Can you supply the numbers of subscribers who asked for the grey & purple colour scheme and also number of subscribers who asked for Life Story prior to development taking place.

    I would also like to know how and when you consulted subscribers over the changes, I did receive any request or survey from Ancestry on proposals for a new site, did anyone?

  79. Vince

    OK sports fans, here’s an announcement that came to me by e-mail this afternoon directly from Ancestry@ancestry.com that I bet no one expected:

    “Dear Family Tree Maker™ community,

    “Ancestry is proud to have made a significant investment this year to bring valuable new content and records to the Ancestry site. In 2015, we’ve made 220 million searchable historical records from Mexico available, more than 170 million pages from the largest collection of U.S. will and probate records, among others. We’ve also introduced new features such as Ancestry Academy, and major advancements for AncestryDNA.

    “As we strive to provide our customers with the best experience possible, we are constantly evaluating our services and product offerings. True to this focus, we’ve taken a hard look at the declining desktop software market and the impact this has on being able to continue to provide new content, product enhancements and support that our users need. With that, we’ve made the tough decision to stop selling Family Tree Maker as of December 31, 2015.

    “We will continue to support existing Family Tree Maker owners at least through January 1, 2017. During this time, all features of the software, including TreeSync™ will continue to work. Our Member Services team will also remain available to assist with questions or issues you may have.

    “These changes are never easy. But by focusing our efforts, we can concentrate on continuing to build great products for our loyal Ancestry community.”

    See also — https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2015/12/08/ancestry-to-retire-family-tree-maker-software/

  80. DeDe

    The other shoe drops, weighted with concrete. So glad I purchased Legacy during their Black Friday half off sale. Be assimilated or move on.

  81. Dave

    They (Ancestry) really likes scrooging everyone over! The gift that keeps on giving… The laughs just get funnier as the days go on…..

  82. So it was a “tough decision to stop selling Family Tree Maker”? I doubt it was tough at all. Key words are “the declining desktop software market” – read as ‘those mobile users we’re chasing won’t want desktop software and who cares about those loyal customers who’ve been with us for years. Where are they going to go?” What next. No private Trees without a subscription? Extra charges for ‘special’ records? Well, I’m going and I’m not coming back. 9 years of continuous Worldwide membership to be treated with no respect & no consideration? I’ve lost my respect for you too

  83. Mary R.

    @Karen, They’re not afraid of anything. They have all the information from our “seven million” family trees so they’re cutting us loose. Maybe some haven’t seen this from July, so I’ll re-post it:
    “The Long Game: Google-Backed Calico Partners With Ancestry to Beat the Specter of Aging. How much would you pay to live longer? What if Google were making the pill to do it?
    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 (gasp!) 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. The deal also marks another step in the next chapter of tech’s ambitious experiments with biology: After collating medical data, it’s marching the research to market… Tim Sullivan, Ancestry’s CEO, said his privately held company has fielded requests from multiple medical research firms. It has spent over 20 years amassing its databank… Sullivan’s company had some scale from the get-go. Its subsidiary that partnered with Calico, AncestryDNA, has genotyped the DNA sequence of over one million customers. Two weeks ago, the company launched AncestryHealth, a portal for its customers to track personal health and wellness, and marry that with their genetic data.

    But its treasure trove — and what Calico really wants — is the extensive, detailed genealogical data. Ancestry.com claims to have more than two million paying subscribers, who have created some seven million historical family trees. It’s a rich well for tracking longevity trends. Neither company shared financial terms of the deal. Sullivan also dodged a question on any future deals between the two. ‘We have a lot of business relationships with Google, but nothing else that I can speak to,’ he said…” http://recode.net/2015/07/26/the-long-game-google-partners-with-ancestry-com-to-beat-the-specter-of-aging/

  84. RKK

    If I buy the 2014 FTM software while it’s still available, by direct download from ACOM, will I be able to download my entire online family tree (pictures, comments, etc.) to the FTM software on my computer? I will ask the customer representative, if I ever get through on the phone, but I don’t trust them to tell me the truth. How do I get a complete back-up copy of my online family tree that ACOM cannot mess with in the future or take away from me? If I sync the FTM software for a few weeks, will I then be able to sever the connection to ACOM? What about reconnecting later? Can I delete my online tree after downloading it to FTM on my computer? I’m in no mood to leave any of my work permanently on ACOM to enrich their for-profit database. I have used an earlier version of FTM in the past and I’m more familiar with it than with other software family tree makers some of you have suggested, so I would like to stick with it if possible as long as I can sever the connection to ACOM. Any advice?

  85. Karen. Was just wondering the same. As several of them have previously mentioned their use of FTM in Facebook responses, they must feel truly screwed. Reading the responses on the blog announcing the withdrawal of FTM (I gave up half way through – it goes on forever – all appalled) it’s also noticeable that many people are also negative about New. For a company that “cares about our loyal members”, they’re remarkably out of touch with them // Mary R. Calico are going to be in for a shock when they see quite how accurate a lot of those 7 million trees are. Might not be the “rich well” they’re expecting

  86. Crystal

    @RKK: You might check today’s blog about the FTM news. But there are already more than 2300 comments. So I’ve copied one that provides some good info:

    Stephen Keene-Elliott I really hope that you will reconsider – not having new versions of FTM is one thing,… not having the TreeSync feature after Jan 2017? That is not a good idea at all!

    Can I just ask for clarification about what exactly will not work after Jan ’17? You’ve implied TreeSync – but will searches not be able to work? At the moment, I can go to another website (like FindMyPast) onthe Web Search, and then clip text/images from that – will we still be able to do that? (ie even if the built-in Ancestry search don’t work, we can go to the website, do the search and clip from the website)

    As a note to some of the people commenting here:
    (1) The software itself will still work (although after the support ends, it won’t necessary work on any new version of Windows after that date) – it’s only the link to Ancestry trees that will not work. Your version of your tree will still be on your computer (including media and notes) – it just won’t link to the one on Ancestry
    (2) Although I hate the lack of notice (just about 3 weeks notice that the software will no longer be available?), the fact that they guarantee support for another year is good… more would be better, but many companies do not support software much beyond a year after it is discontinued
    (3) You will still be able to create reports in FTM, and to add data/remove data/amend data… everything that you can do in the software itself, without linking to the Ancestry website, you will still be able to do. (If you want to verify this, turn off your internet connection and use FTM… you’ll find what you can’t do is TreeSync, get hints, use the integrated Search Ancestry function, etc)
    (4) The lack of FTM software and support will not make Ancestry lose all their business. The majority of users of Ancestry do not use FTM (that’s the whole point of this decision… most of their users only go to the website, there is not the call for the software) – even if all the FTM users were to leave their membership, Ancestry would still have a large user base.
    (5) I have not had a membership with Ancestry for a couple of months… I’ve been able to use FTM to update my family tree… I just have to use other techniques
    (6) We can all try to find another software company that syncs with an online family tree site – let them get all our money!
    (7) For those of you who aren’t keen on Ancestry having your family tree online after Jan 2017, just make sure you delete it from your Ancestry account, and stop your subscription. Maintain it on your computer using FTM (or export it to another piece of software)…. as I said above, Ancestry haven’t had any money from me in the last couple of months (purely due to financial restructuring), and I’ve still been using FTM to update my family tree with a new granddaughter and a new nephew…

    December 8, 2015 at 5:00 pm
    – See more at: https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2015/12/08/ancestry-to-retire-family-tree-maker-software/#sthash.5rV6rGJu.dpuf

  87. Mary R.

    @RKK: Before you buy FTM, please read this Jan. 2015 review I just now read. (I don’t have FTM so I don’t know if this review is accurate.) It begins:

    “Everyone has an interest in tracing their family tree, which is why Ancestry.com and their software robber barons Family Tree Maker have come up with a way to fleece you of a lot of money each year and prevent you from actually using the data that you collect from your family archives and history. Yes, Ancestry.com is a multi-million scam designed to generate huge profits at your naive expense. You think you are creating something that you can share with your relatives and family, but you’re not. What you are doing is helping Ancestry.com to build up its own database, at your expense, and then build up its profits…” http://www.illinoisnewsnetwork.com/2015/01/06/ancestry-com-historic-faults/

  88. RKK

    I did read the extremely interesting article on http://www.illinoisnewsnetwork.com/2015/01/06/ancestry-com-historic-faults/ — but got a little loss when it got technical. The writer seemed to say that it is not possible to download an existing online tree to a new FTM, and that it only works the other way around, i.e. first do a family tree on FTM and then upload it to ACOM. Is this true? (Also, the customer rep on the phone told me that the 2014 FTM is completely compatible with Windows 10, but apparently this may not be true.) Anybody know?

  89. douggrf

    FTM 2014 is partially compatible with Windows 10, but the end is spelled out clearly – the last versions of FTM which include the 2012 version which I like best for example are most certainly geared to co-exist with Win7 platform. Don’t bring up Mac!

    So the summary here is that since Win 7 was the last truly viable platform which Microsoft is retiring – the desktop market will be finally relegated to antiquated software (FTM, eg.) and OS (Win 7 eg.) on antiquated hardware of the period of year 2010-2015 for ever more.

    Tree sync appears to have a short life option planned by Ancestry, which means members should just give up on the site if they want true tree sync with media interchange. The service has a planned extinction according to the message today.

  90. BB

    I dislike this new site SO MUCH I am considering giving up this whole genealogy thing and NOT continuing the World plan I have paid about $300/yr for a good many years now to get extra info. It is hard to translate this new site as per the old site, as things just don’t work like they used to, are harder to read, hard to follow a person path like the old site. Just aggravating. If I can talk myself into it, I might go ONE more year and see if I can make any heads or tails out of this new mess.

  91. Trish

    I’m very thankful I have minimal information from my family tree online. I use ancestry for the source information about people – not for the genealogy of other users which in so many instances is pure imagination. When something works there is always a fool to come along and change it. I will continue to use FTM offline to record my family history for future generations. If it stops working, there are other programs to which the data can be transferred

  92. CAF

    Trish, do you have a crystal ball? Ancestry is going to stop selling FTM and will support it for only one more year.

    I personally like Roots Magic and they have a good deal available now. You are so right about the “fools” out there.

  93. CH

    Thanks BEE for your answer. I don’t think I have ever gotten a ghost hint. Some dumb ones, sure, but there has always been something there.

    I hope you get this response. The main concerns right now on the blogs is the discontinuation of FTM. I used to buy it and have several versions, but stopped when it seemed the upgrades were not important to me and the whole program became more complicated with things I never used.

    I use another stand alone software.

  94. Margie

    I dislike the new version and will not post any more information to my trees on there. I will continue to use the site for research tho

  95. Kenneth Powell

    This new user interface IS NOT READY to be FORCED on all your CUSTOMERS! Amateur hour at Ancestry.com.

    WHAT A MESS the “new and improved” interface is! A poorly designed interface that is 49 ways out of 50 INFERIOR to the “old” crisp, clean, classic and easier and more efficient to use interface!

    The new interface is much harder to work with, all spread out and things running together so it is hard for the eye to quickly scan the page and find things well organized (e.g. date on same line as place in Facts page so have to read everything to find what should just pop out).

    The AWFUL and GAWDY colors and OVERUSE of colors is atrocious! and just a distraction. The dark backgrounds make things hard to see and read and just LOOKS bad. For a recommendation on how to BETTER use color, please go see the OLD Ancestry format! They got it pretty much right. You are getting most of it wrong. Same with the layout – the OLD is superior and easier to use.

    Hint: DARK text on WHITE or pleasant light background. White background for documents and photos.

    And now it takes more clicks to do things, taking longer, to the point of being IRRITATING.

    Someone forgot the adage “If what you have works, don’t fix it!” – from the practical user perspective, the old format could have had a dozen clever improvements, but all the GOOD user experience there has become a poorer user experience in the new format. Fundamental user design, interface, and experience essentials – some of it is like going back to the 1990s internet experience, ignoring professional look and feel and basic standards.

    Not to mention all the things that don’t work right. Not ready for prime time.

    The new media gallery is another case in point – instead of using the opportunity to make the photos and records a bit larger so they would be easier to see, they are all scrunched up with the caption text COVERING THE PICTURE – worse than before!

    Forcing users into this “new & improved” interface is a slap in the face to the loyal customers who expect much better. The ultimate irony is the old interface is BETTER in more ways than the new format and all new bells and whistles, which have created a mess of problems in themselves! On top of this, some of the bells and whistles just make things more DIFFICULT, not easier, and DISTRACT from the ESSENTIALS. One simply gets lost, or has to spend inordinate time trying to clean things up like the automatically generated life stories, when one really just wants an option to create one for a profile now and then, and otherwise would rather have nicely formatted reports to print out, like in the FTM Family Tree Maker Software. (Oh, did you hear – Ancestry.com is now DISCONTINUING the ESSENTIAL FTM software and Sync function, so soon won’t be able to do that anymore – a BETRAYAL of your heretofore loyal CUSTOMER users).

    Such poor management, marketing and product decisions. Similar to Microsoft’s Windows 8 abandoning long used and useful features with such drastic user interface changes that went against the gained experience of their users for the prior decade, then learning from their big mistakes and actually reversing direction in Windows 10 to look like the old Windows again.

    One cannot overstate the DISRESPECT for the CUSTOMER these two choices for new direction with the forced, POORER online interface and discontinuing the offline FTM software and Sync function – a BETRAYAL of LOYAL CUSTOMERS and inability to understand the Ancestry.com CUSTOMER AND USER.

  96. Kenneth Powell

    Message to management, marketers, product developers, decision-makers and Ancestry.com Board members: Did everyone here forget two key lessons:

    “If it works, don’t fix it” – you are bound to make things WORSE – What you had before was more or less satisfying and it was in this case BETTER!

    “Understand your Customer” “Never Betray Your Customer” ” Customer (use, experience, loyalty) First!”

    Kendall Hulet and the Product and Marketing Management Teams are BETRAYING THE LOYAL CUSTOMERS and harming the Ancestry.com Brand.

    Is anyone listening? Is there a decision maker or board member at Ancestry.com who “gets it?”

  97. Kath

    I have been using FTM for years and was thinking about upgrading. Will we still be able to access our research from our own computers or do we have to upload every little bit on to your site. If this is the case then I am not happy to do this as I won’t put all my research on your site or any other site. I want to feel that all my research is safe on my own computer and that I can access it 24/7.
    You need to listen to your customers, we know what we want, it works well so why change it.

  98. caith

    Bait and Switch? Is Ancestry planning to introduce a new software product to replace FTM? Wiping the slate clean with FTM; and starting the process over with a new software product and new dollars for their coffers?

  99. Ty

    Its not bait and switch when you have a years notice that support is being stopped. Its not even bait and switch if they introduce a new product to replace FTM.

  100. Karen

    I had a few lightbulbs go off last night.

    I realized one reason some people aren’t that upset over the New look, is they have been using FTM for their trees and could care less what New looks like. I would imagine most of the FTM users are long-term, serious researchers, with larger trees and more records. This is the category that seems most upset with New and it’s cumbersome feel and horrible look. Up until now a portion of them, however, weren’t too worried because they had FTM.

    Reading some of the FTM comments also made me realize a lot of those people ONLY use FTM for their trees. How does that effect Ancestry? Ancestry doesn’t have those trees to sell to the amateur customers who copy trees and call it research or to Calico.

    FTM users also are not bound to Ancestry. They have all their information safely on their computer and can take a break from paying Ancestry for a subscription whenever they want. I know there are other softwares out there but only FTM has a synch feature with everything moving, unlike using a gedcom, and feels (well felt) like a safe place to keep a complete tree. Ancestry can’t be happy that those people can walk away from Ancestry so easily and take their $$ with them.

    Now we throw in a bunch of hotshot, young developers who live for the latest fad technology and a company thinking they can build their customer base if they can just get 25-year olds interested in genealogy. Of course they are going to think phones and pads are the way to go and who wouldn’t trust having all their research only in the cloud. What kind of fuddy duddy do you have to be to want copies of your information on a disc or in your computer? Trust us. We will protect it on our Ancestry cloud (oh and you have to pay us every year to see your work).

    My prediction is the next thing to go will be the ability to download records to our computers. What silly outdated thinking they will say. Or if we want to keep that option, there will be a fee per record. Once again tying us to the company or making us give them more $$.

    I’m not just pulling this prediction out of the air. A couple of months ago on one of my trips to the library to use Ancestry and send records home to myself electronically, I arrived home to a survey. The questions were all about how important was it to me to be able to send records electronically home from the library and how important was the printer friendly page attached which gives you the summary of what the record contains. I’m pretty sure the more important I said it was, the more Ancestry will want to take that away from a non-paying customer. I’m sure they will say it wasn’t a popular option (which it might not be because I’ve taught people who are sitting there copying information with paper and pencil). But what company is going to give free services when they think they can charge for it? Certainly not Ancestry.

    Now my only concern is, should I risk putting all my information on any other software? How long until Ancestry buys them and closes them down? I feel like every year or two we will all be forced into moving our trees from place to place, wasting time and trying to get all of our information to transfer. Or spending a ton of money and trusting Ancestry.

  101. BEE

    @CH – yes, I read through the whole blog. Of course, I won’t be reading the thousands about the demise of FTM! I purchased one years ago, but lost it with either a new computer or going from one “windows” to another.
    Could you name the stand alone you are using? I’ve been using ancestry.com for at least 8 years? and while I’m not looking forward to trying something else, I might have to, even though I’m not that “computer savvy”. Is it possible to have different trees on this type of software? I’ve read all the comments, went to the “comparison” chart, etc, but I’m confused and reluctant to try anything new and different. Thank you for any help or suggestions you can give me.

  102. Tania

    Why roll out something with sooooo many glitches????? How about fixing it before making it permanent????? Oh….because that would actually make sense!!!! Between this and the decision to kill FTM….my subscription will be cancelled as soon as I can get through to someone on customer service…which by the way has declined tremendously over the years.

  103. Mary R.

    From Legacy Family Tree: “On December 8, 2015, Ancestry announced it will stop selling Family Tree Maker as of Dec. 31, 2015. As a result we are receiving many inquiries asking how to move data from Family Tree Maker to Legacy.
    Watch the free 90 second video showing how: http://familytreewebinars.com/video-detail.php?video_id=76
    The Legacy for Beginners training video shows how to import a GEDCOM file. You can view the video at http://www.legacyfamilytree.net/videos/beg8/LegacyForBeginners.html and select Getting Started.
    The import will be very faithful, but please be aware of the following Family Tree Maker quirks:
    1. Facts are exported from Family Tree Maker with a PLAC tag, which in all other genealogy programs is reserved for Locations. Any program would import that as a Location and not an event. In Legacy, we have accommodated this by giving the user the option to determine at the time of import if the data is actually a location or an event and where to direct it. Just click the Save button.
    2. Pictures and documents inserted in the older versions of Family Tree Maker scrapbooks do not move to Legacy correctly, or not at all, depending in the version of Family Tree Maker. The article “Import GEDCOM” at http://wiki.phpgedview.net/en/index.php?title=Import_GEDCOM states, “Family Tree Maker is one of several off-line editing programs that does not properly handle media object pointers within the GEDCOM. Legacy, among many others, does handle these properly.” (Media object pointers is another way of saying multimedia links, or in other words pictures, sound, video and documents.) There are some other comments in that article on issues with FTM’s gedcoms.”
    http://support.legacyfamilytree.com/article/AA-00507/0/GEDCOM-Export-from-Family-Tree-Maker-into-Legacy.html

  104. Karen

    Bee I’m not CH but RootsMagic and Legacy both have free versions to download. I did that a few weeks ago and am currently playing with both of them to see what I like.

  105. James Curtiss

    Attaching pdfs to Facts in New Ancestry is more convoluted than with Old Ancestry. In Old Ancestry, you could simply upload a pdf to a specific fact. Old Ancestry would call it a “story” by default. In New Ancestry you cannot upload a pdf directly to a Fact. You can only do direct uploads for jpg files. You have to upload the pdf to the Gallery for the person, then go to the specific fact to which you want to attach it, select “EDIT” and then select “MEDIA.” You will then be given a choice to upload a jpg or select an item (including a pdf file) from the Media Gallery for the person, which will be displayed in a box titled “Other Media for ________.” You select the pdf you want attached and then click the + sign to the right of the box, and it’s attached. It will then be categorized as “media.” The number of media items attached to the fact will appear directly below the fact. If you click on “1 Media,” “2 Media,” or whatever, it will display a listing of the titles of all the media attached to the fact. You double click on the item you want to see, and you are taken to a download screen, where if you click “Download to view,” the pdf will download and can be opened or saved. The improvement of New Ancestry over Old Ancestry is that pdf documents are no longer automatically labeled as “stories.” The downside is that there are many more steps required to attach a pdf to a fact. Although I am pleased that this functionality was finally incorporated into New Ancestry, it seems that if Ancestry was looking to improve the product, it would make it less difficult rather than more difficult to accomplish something.

  106. CH

    BEE: I actually use a few different stand alone software programs for different things. But you might try Roots Magic.

    There is a free online download of a “light” version. The free one is not the full featured one but it’s free and you still can see what the full version tools will be if you pay for it. I got an email from them. They have pretty good offer right now. $20 for a full program with $5 for S&H. You get a CD, and a book. (What programs offer books now-a days?) They are aware of FTM going away and they are hustling. They have customer service but if they can’t pickup right away, you can leave a message and they will call you. Not the most ideal, but they are a much smaller company than Ancestry.

    I don’t know what Roots Magic doesn’t have that you may need or want, but you can ask them. I know you have been on the blogs for years so I would guess you would like lots of features. They don’t have records like Ancestry, and Family Search has some records but they draw on Ancestry for things like the censuses at times. FS is of course free unless you want to order a film to use at your local FHC.

    I have never used Legacy and The Master Geneaogist has been dropped. I don’t see how anyone can do real genealogy with a hand held device. A casual look or check, yes, but I run into some serious problems which take hours, sometimes days to solve. I need a full sized computer with a full sized keyboard and a monitor.

    Ancestry is a monopoly. They acquire some excellent free or pay-for sites and then drop them which reduces our options. Bad business for us.

    Maybe others will have some suggestions, but I know from many years of your posting you are no slouch when it comes to family research. Good luck.

  107. Mary

    Why do my ancestors appear as inferred bastard children in family story? …”had 3 children by an unknown father…”? Why are other unknown people allowed to change or supplement data in MY trees?

  108. Brian

    Looks like Ancestry is going out with a bang this year. First we are getting the terrible new website in the near future, and the latest news yesterday they are discontinuing FTM. I’m seeing little reason to keep a tree here and will look for other options.

  109. Mary M Zashin

    I tried hard to use the new interface and in fact I was finding some benefits. But now ACOM is dropping FTM. As it stand now, apparently the only way to continue using ACOM after January 2017 is to maintain a subscription. There will be no way to save your tree to your home computer using ACOM. To me, these products were a package deal. I don’t want to be forced to maintain a subscription if I want full access to my trees. As I understand it, ACOM is owned by a venture capitalist firm. Such firms make a habit of buying companies, “streamlining” the business by chopping off any parts they believe are unprofitable (and incidentally firing people), outsourcing (often overseas) whatever can be more cheaply done in that way, then reselling what’s left. Another name for these companies is vulture capitalists. I think this is what’s happened to ACOM. It’s “just business,” and they’re going for the market of millennials who want cloud-based services. It’s naive to think they care at all about their users. It’s a waste of breath to beg them to reconsider anything. This party is over. I quit.

  110. Shannah TWISS

    I have never liked this present version. I can not seem to browse for my TWISS family. To where did it go? I always ask myself. To me, all Ancestry wants is $$$$ and with their Free bit, it turns out that they “always” want our Visa, etc. for certain times and $$$. They are getting ridiculous in their thinking of what this website is supposed to do! I even have TWISSes in S. America and they do not have anything there and always thinking $$$$. I will never look into the new one (shaking my head). I am very disappointed in Ancestry!!

  111. Robert Bowman

    I have used FTM for reports, charts, etc. I don’t see any way to do this in Ancestry.com. What, if any capability to accomplish these are planned?

  112. Steven Sherlin

    I HATE the new website. Go back to the old one! And, you must have a bunch of idiots making decisions to get rid of FTM. You will lose tens of thousands of loyal customers like me. UNBELIEVABLE!!

  113. Chuck Crannell

    @Karen – I think your most recent post is spot-on. Particularly about the ability keep local storage of records. FTM’s ability to do this was one of the primary reasons for me purchasing the software. I thought about all the records (media) that would be abandoned if I ceased my subscription for some reason. FTM alleviates that worry for me. Of course I fell in love with many of the tools along the way. The syncing was great (when it worked), too.

    Ancestry.com has turned into big-data exploitation company (with a genealogy-based data acquisition toolset) from a genealogy company. There nothing wrong having genealogy as a secondary purpose, just be up front about it.

    I feel used and betrayed by this mid-stream change in company charter. I suspect that is the reason for the outcry about FTM and the change in website format.

  114. dmarshall511

    @Caith I use GRAMPS. It is a good but not easy to use. It is more like working with a database than the GUI you are familiar with if you have used FTM. GRAMPS is Open Source software and is free. I normally sync my Ancestry tree to FTM then export a Gedcom for use in Gramps. Is Ancestry ever eliminates the ability to sync to FTM, I will stop using FTM and probably stop using Ancestry. One other thing…Gramps displays a lot of information so the text on the screen is small.

    It would really be nice, if Ancestry would consider doing something for their subscribers that use computers, to allow all genealogy software providers to sync their Ancestry tree
    Saturday to the programs. They should provide a SDK for all genealogy software providers to enable full and complete tree sync for offline use.

  115. nadinemi

    @Karen, I appreciate and second your thoughtful comments. @Chuck Crannell, you are spot on that Ancestry’s primary mission seems to be data exploitation, and Genealogy seems to be a distant second. Ancestry, I hope you are hearing the subscriber feedback.

  116. Karen Wilkinson

    Ancestry, please fix all the issues that are still occurring with the New Ancestry before you go and cancel FTM. If you cancel FTM at end of 2016, who are with to do back-ups? I am not a consistent user of FTM, but I back-up my tree using FTM. You need to add this feature to the New Ancestry. Thanks.

  117. Donna

    Very disappointed in the new format and Ancestry’s unrelenting commitment to forcing users to “upgrade” to it. Classic Ancestry was user-friendly and simpler to read on a mobile device. New Ancestry is neither; for instance, I was unable to click and drag or enlarge any trees to the point that they were even legible. As a long-time amateur historian, I find the image-heavy, canned historical factoids simplistic and mostly irrelevant (a supreme waste of space), and dread having to delete all of them from my family members’ timelines…not to mention that we are rural internet customers who still have dial-up service! I have finally backed up my existing files out of sheer terror and sadly am considering canceling my subscription. Thank you for listening.

  118. Barb

    The Old Ancestry ability to navigate the online trees was useful. I cannot see anything except the small one or two individuals on my screen in the “new and improved” Ancestry and cannot move the screen view – it’s totally static. This is a great disservice to determining whether this tree is useful to my research or whether someone just pasted some of my family to another family and the data is incorrect. Give us the chance to be able to do research rather than importing and having to remove all of the erroneous details.

  119. Rick Bisker

    I have noticed for sometime that when you are in the profile view under facts or gallery, one can not look at any of the media or stories that were uploaded by me. In classic ancestry, one could select the media, see the item and enlarge if you needed it to be larger. I don’t like the story line tree so I don’t use that at all. I use the fact tree for my research.

    Will this ever be corrected? Why is it shown in the gallery or fact if it can not be accessed? It is not listed as a problem or something that will be done. If I am not mistaken, this feature worked early on, but I could be confused as I continue to go back and forth with my research.

  120. Mike D

    I’m still trying to determine one good reason, from a customer aspect, why ‘New Ancestry’ is ANY improvement over ‘old’ Ancestry.

  121. BEE

    I wonder how many people who only have a few names on their trees and “Last signed in Over a year ago”, are counted as “customers”? I’m sure they gave up when they couldn’t find any information, especially if they were dealing with ethnic names. I found three unbelievable examples today of people just clicking on information with no research. The first person attached a death index to someone years before this person actually died and half a country away, just because the name was the same. The second person attached information to a woman, again because the name was the same, but the information was for a married woman, while the name on the tree was the woman’s maiden name! The third was for a ship manifest for a woman named Teofila. The manifest that was attached to this person had the same last name, but it was for a male named Teofil! Yes, I actually LOOKED at all these documents! And this is the kind of nonsense I have to go through with the hundreds of “hints” that have shown up on my trees!

  122. Patricia Harris

    I think the new colors and interface are beautiful! It appears you’ve done some tweaking during the past few days and it looks great. I appreciate the return of some necessary functions and that you continue to work on the things we need.

  123. Mary M Zashin

    You know, it’s a shame. I shed my “skin” to see how the online tree was looking, and lo and behold! Still grey, but lighter and the dead-and-rotting-alligator texture was gone. It’s ALMOST visually palatable now. But, again, too bad because I’ve canceled. The decision to kill FTM was the last straw. I don’t want to keep a “cloud” tree (and continue a subscription if I want full access to the ACOM records I’ve attached to it) if I can’t have a synced copy on my desktop. I would probably have re-upped if FTM had remained.

  124. Anne Scott Frankland

    I have Family Tree Maker 2012 that I have never installed. Should I install it? I’ve been wary about installing it. And I feel y’all could give me better information and assistance than Ancestry can.

  125. RKK

    I bought the 2014 FTM today in order to download my complete family tree from Ancestry, not just the GEDCOM version, before being forced to accept New Ancestry next week or leave Ancestry.com. I had no trouble downloading the FTM software with my Windows 10. Now I cannot complete the process of synching my online family tree to the FTM on my computer. It seems to be working, up to the final step of downloading, and then I get a “sync error” notice. The “help” suggestions are NOT helpful. They say the internet may be too busy, my computer may not be close enough to my router, etc. What do I do now? Has anyone found a solution for “sync error”?

  126. Dave

    In February of this year, I bought a copy of the book “Unofficial Guide to Ancestry.com How to Find Your Family History on the #1 Genealogy Website” by Nancy Hendrickson ISBN 978-1-4403-3618-8. Since your forced without choice move to the new website will make that investment totally obsolete, are you mailing out a replacement printed “ink-on-paper” copy covering the new site and will it be in my mailbox on or before this forced changeover on 15 December 2015? An online blog with a few videos is not an acceptable replacement. If you are not providing such a printed replacement, I suggest to all of Mr fellow genealogists who have purchased that very helpful book band together for a class-action lawsuit to force provision of a free replacement of equal quality.

  127. dmarshall511

    @RKK I had that problem when I first installed FTM 2014 last year, but I don’t remember how I fixed it. It would be a good idea for you to check for updates (there has been I think 4 since I installed it new). If that does not fix it, there is a very good message board for help with the program. You will find it in the Message Boards u Der the Collaborate menu (if you are still using “Old” Ancestry…I am not sure where you will find it on “New”).

  128. BEE

    “We’re sorry, this page is temporarily unavailable.” – this is the last thing I need as I’m trying to clean up a tree of “hints”!

  129. MPrault

    Like BEE above, I am suddenly getting weird errors in Ancestry. Is there some background conversion going on in prep for 12/15 cutover?

  130. Sandra

    Give serious researchers the option to continue using the “old” ancestry. I simply do not need for you to tell me what was going on when. A good genealogist knows how to find this out on their own. The “newbies” whose goal is to get their tree back 25 or more generations in two or three months might like this. However, when they get this done they are finished and will no longer have any interest in the ancestry website. I hope that ancestry gets the message that all of the people I know hate the “new” format.

  131. kathy

    This is to Kristie Wells if she should ever come back this way. The format for printing needs to change. the boxes for each event is over 2 inches wide. What should be a 1 page print turns out 4 pages in the new. When you have people who have 18 children What do you think that looks like. AGE PROGRESSION for each event does not show. A receipt for bad mistakes. How may times should this be stated. Tell your bosses thanks for the Merry Christmas

  132. Mary R.

    I would not transfer my trees to either MyHeritage or FindMyPast! See: “All LDS Members, Including Youth, Can Now Get Free Access to FamilySearch Partner Websites. All members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as LDS youth ages 13-17, can now create their own personal accounts with Ancestry.com, findmypast, and MyHeritage. These resources are helping Church members find more ancestors needing temple ordinances…” https://familysearch.org/blog/en/create-free-account-familysearch-partners/

  133. Cathy J

    There are STILL WAY TOO many features missing from the new Ancestry. It is still WAY TOO confusing with the lines showing up. Too hard to figure out which sources go with which facts. Please consider keeping the older version as an option!!!

  134. Graham Taylor

    Surely Ancestry have realised by now that the new version is not popular for a host of reasons. Why mend something when it’s not broken, it’s just change for change sake. The programme has obviously been written by a programmer who has no interest or knowledge of family history. It’s cluttered, confusing, the colour scheme gives me a headache, it’s full of unwanted, boring, unhelpful information. It’s impractical to edit out all the rubbish from over 3000 profiles and life stories.

  135. Mary R.

    Downloading your tree as a GEDCOM to your hard drive will not change anything about your tree on ancestry. Anyone who hasn’t done this, do it NOW, while your tree’s still in the Old format. Within 16 hours, you’ll only have the New format to download. Once it’s on your hard drive as a GEDCOM, you can upload it to another site, should you want in the future. Your tree does not get deleted from ancestry until you press that “Delete Tree” button. Here are ancestry’s instructions: http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/472/~/uploading-and-downloading-gedcom-files-on-ancestry

    Here are YouTube instructions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWm5E-ShvVA

  136. Just relooked at the imposed New Ancestry. What a mess. Now not very readable the BLUE is very bad for vision. The Original Green was superb. Give us back the ORIGINAL version. Be tough enough to admit that you have made an error. All the posts in the Blogs say that you have in some shape or form. I suspect that the actual number of people that dislike what you have done is far far in excess of the number of posts shown. If this post of mine gets onto the Blogs I will be surprised as I have found it extremely difficult to being able to access it.

  137. Based on there being well over 8,500 protesters listed in the Blogs that are going to cancel their subscriptions ASAP. The 8,500 after say 4 days plus those that have not been able to put up on the Blogs which could double that fig. in 2 weeks when word gets round !! what will the number be ???. Just take the 8,500 at an annual subscription average of about £ 107per year, gives a potential loss of revenue to Ancestry of near £910,000 in 4 days !.

    Not only that – the FTM farce means that as of today – ALL the Public & Private Trees on Ancestry are now suspect – whether or not they have been or will be sabotaged by their “owners”. What a disaster. The Next board meeting of “Ancestry” should be interesting. Of course that is if any of them have a clue about Family Research.

  138. Jack

    Very disappointed with the new format. Classic ancestry was streets ahead of this new look. Very poor business decision & is completely putting me off ancestry altogether. It’s a complete mess.

  139. Brian

    If it’s not broke why fix it. Not saying the old site was perfect or without faults. So far not finding much to like about the new design. The old look was much better. Do not care for the new profile pages. It’s now harder to open or add pdf documents. Still stuck with the dreadful enhanced image viewer that requires refreshing a page 3 to 4 times to view an image. Everytime you try to turn it off and use the basic viewer it keeps forcing you back to the enhanced viewer. Wish Ancestry stuck with what was good from the old site and tried to improve and enhance it.

  140. Brian

    A few more annoying things I discovered with the new website. In the past when you added a image or document from another persons tree it would list everyone else that saved it. That’s now gone. Was useful on finding other people researching the same family groups.

    When I was viewing a profile image of a person in my tree when I clicked to go back to the profile page it removed the photo. WTF?

    IThink I’m not going to use the web site for a while. I feel like I’m walking through a field of landmines trying to use it. This web site is not ready for prime time. Unfortunately my subscription runs through May of next year. I have been in the mood to do a lot of new research and the web site is sucking the fun out of it.

  141. Deb

    I agree with Brian, Jack, Allan and Graham just to name a few. Ancestry has our $$$$$ do they really care? It takes so much longer to work 1 hint. I seriously hope Ancestry brings back the OLD VERSION and give their customers a choice. My subscription runs out in May maybe I will have one hint worked by then.

  142. Patricia

    This is the worst thing I have ever seen. I can’t find anything in the trees. I am just going around in circles. What is wrong with these people who are running ancestry. How do I get help? There is nothing to connect to complaints on their websites.

  143. Donna Harrison

    The new ancestry is awful, so is your company for forcing this on subscribers! You are a bunch of pinheads, this is the proof.

  144. The format is good only for visitors and not the ones contributing to the website. The old format was perfect for researching. The new one is confusing with many mistakes. I will not tolerate this. If you want my business either give us back the old format or change the new one to be more like the old one unless of course you don’t want a lot of steady customers money’

  145. Martin Goodson

    What has happened to the “find a person” icon, it seems only to be on the “home” page. The life story is pure fiction, it doesn’t take into account real life events like divorce. Quite a lot of the records and photos of places Ancestry have are available else where for free. The main thing Ancestry has going for it is they are in one place. The old format was straight forward and to the point. There are only so many records out there. Ancestry may be a business but it cant expect people to keep paying, for what is now an inferior product to the old one.

  146. Susan

    I’m not happy with the new Ancestry. Its not able to be copied(you get 4 pages or more), cumbersome to view data compared to the old one for data on just one screen with photos and comments. Why on earth ruin what was a good product. I’ve used Ancestry.com since sometime in the 1990’s – that’s a lot of $$$ spent on this site. I’m ready to quit ancestry. Plus unhappy that I cannot do a Y DNA test on either. Not good customer service on that issue.

  147. June S.

    You have just ruined my favorite hobby. I hate the new look and format and am finding so many errors……..I cannot believe I have to go thru over 30,000 people on my trees to see if there are errors. I used to get many compliments on my trees and I was proud of the ……..now like many I am going to go private bec. I don’t want to ruin my reputation with this new fiasco! I agree that we should all ban together to have a Class Action suit against Ancestry. Kendall Hulet should be fired today! I actually am sick over all the NEW changes. Totally worthless waste of time and space. I have tried for 5 days to get back into my joy in life….and now I don’t think can bear to con’t. I can’t trust the new ancestry. And who says desktops will be obsolute……..we true genealogists will continue to use them.
    Ther is no way to do real research on a phone app or tablet. This is a joke……..a very bad Christmas gift from the Grinch! Please someone with legal connections ck into that class action suit. I would sign up today if I could. Thanks.

  148. lyn

    i mostly do searches and follow records to find more about my ancestors. i do not post much at all but i always did find info that was correct when balanced with other sources. now everytime i do a search on the new site there is nothing but misinformation. an item here and there you just go “oops, that’s wrong” and move on—but when you fine 5,10, and more—that’s just a broken program/site. and not worth time or money. stupid and sad….

  149. Barbara Babbitt

    Thankfully I have kept all my information in a stand alone program. I hate the new format and also the life story. Time to discontinue Ancestry.com and save my money. Not a happy customer!

  150. Laura Walker

    Well, here we are, at the end of 2015. When this Dec 6 blog was posted, we the customers had no clue that the demise of the FTM software was going to be announced two days later, a rather vague follow-up message would be given and then the FTM users were pretty much abandoned with their questions unanswered and concerns festering for weeks. The Classic users were moved to a product still floundering around in a Beta testing mode, with valiant New Users trying their best to continue providing feedback to make the site at least tolerable. It was clear much of the feedback submitted from Classic users (those who tried the New product and made the choice to bounce back to Classic) these past months was pretty much ignored (the ignored feedback is evident as early as the 19 Feb 2015 and the 01 Jun 2015 blogs and consistently showed up over and over in later blogs). The strange timing and lack of company response for all of this, right before the holidays, gives me the impression that Ancestry simply made the decision to be rid of a sector of their customer base for economic reasons and do it as quickly as possible. Thus, the feedback from customers is immaterial – we are expendable.

    If however, there is recognition that maybe culling the customer base may not have been the wisest decision, here are my recommendations for senior leadership when they get back to the office from the holidays: Bring back the Classic Ancestry user interface, palette, and screen layouts as a toggle choice, get more resources on fixing the instabilities and shortcomings of the New Ancestry product, figure out a way to quickly provide a way forward for the FTM users so they don’t feel like they have been abandoned and conduct an internal company After Action Review of how the decisions of 2015 played out, learn from it and try to improve customer relations going forward. You probably are very aware that any Ancestry actions and blogs coming out in January are going to get an extraordinary amount of scrutiny by customers who still care about any of this. Let us hope 2016 turns out to be a better year for us all.

Comments are closed.