Ancestry

[Geoff]

Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky commercial
enterprise rather that a serious research site?
What with "2 stage log-ins through Google", "back stories", "My
family stories", "Pet's DNA" It used to be a decent research site.
It still is I suppose, if you you can get through the tangled web it
has weaved.

Or of course perhaps it's just me, a grumpy old man sounding off.
p.s. I hope the hyphen is in the right place!! Re. previous remarks

[Colin Bignell]

Post by Geoff
Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky commercial
enterprise rather that a serious research site?
What with "2 stage log-ins through Google", "back stories", "My
family stories", "Pet's DNA" It used to be a decent research site.
It still is I suppose, if you you can get through the tangled web it
has weaved.
Or of course perhaps it's just me, a grumpy old man sounding off.
p.s. I hope the hyphen is in the right place!! Re. previous remarks

One of the more annoying aspects for me has always been that it appears
to be aimed at the American market. However, it is what other people I
know use, so I stay with it in order that we can share trees with each
other and help each other with research.

I have always ignored their story lines, but I think that pet DNA has to
be the silliest idea yet.

[knuttle]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by Geoff
Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky commercial
enterprise rather that a serious research site?
What with "2 stage log-ins through Google", "back stories",   "My
family stories",  "Pet's DNA"  It used to be a decent research site.
It still is I suppose, if you you can get through the tangled web it
has weaved.
Or of course perhaps it's just me, a grumpy old man sounding off.
p.s.  I hope the hyphen is in the right place!!  Re. previous remarks

One of the more annoying aspects for me has always been that it appears
to be aimed at the American market. However, it is what other people I
know use, so I stay with it in order that we can share trees with each
other and help each other with research.
I have always ignored their story lines, but I think that pet DNA has to
be the silliest idea yet.

The 2 stage login stinks. I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours. I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something. Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

As you say, my Ancestry subscription is become less and less valuable,
and is quick reaching the point where it is more bother that

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <ukuv4r$1nkf0$***@dont-email.me> at Fri, 8 Dec 2023 06:36:58,
knuttle <***@yahoo.com> writes
[]

Post by knuttle
The 2 stage login stinks. I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours. I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something. Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

I selected email as the delivery method, and it never arrived, despite
several "resend" attempts.

Post by knuttle
As you say, my Ancestry subscription is become less and less valuable,
and is quick reaching the point where it is more bother that good.

I've let mine lapse until they have a good offer: last renewal would
have been more than twice what I paid last year, so they can stuff that!
I much prefer FindMyPast's search anyway, with the on-screen hit counter
making it very easy to adjust what you're specifying.

[john]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

The 2 stage login stinks.   I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours.     I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something.   Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

I selected email as the delivery method, and it never arrived, despite
several "resend" attempts.

As you say, my Ancestry subscription is become less and less valuable,
and is quick reaching the point where it is more bother that good.

I've let mine lapse until they have a good offer: last renewal would
have been more than twice what I paid last year, so they can stuff that!
I much prefer FindMyPast's search anyway, with the on-screen hit counter
making it very easy to adjust what you're specifying.

I switched my account subscription from Ancestry UK to Ancestry DE.
Their International Deluxe is currently 59€ for six months. There is no
problem logging in to the UK website and using that.

I wouldn't be surprised if they get more signing up for a DNA test and
to find out their "ethnicity" than to do serious genealogy research. For
several years now, I've got a large number of DNA hits where there is no
or only a minimal tree so impossible in most cases to work out a
connection, possibly due to past Christmas gift promotions?

After the England/Wales 1921 census are there any major databases to add
which would attract researchers? I doubt many "millennials" will be
interested (and their parents/grandparents will possibly already have
done significant research?) It is mainly filling gaps so they will have
to invent "gimmicks"

[knuttle]

Post by john
I wouldn't be surprised if they get more signing up for a DNA test and
to find out their "ethnicity" than to do serious genealogy research. For
several years now, I've got a large number of DNA hits where there is no
or only a minimal tree so impossible in most cases to work out a
connection, possibly due to past Christmas gift promotions?I truly believe that is the case, otherwise when you try to contact a

DNA match, you would get more that about 7% response rate to your request.

Ancestry know that and have done nothing to make it easy for a person
seriously working on their ancestry, otherwise they would have a system
to better filter the DNA matches.

All of my current research is in greater that the 5th generation. If
they were serious about help the researcher they would provide filters
that could screen out those matches where there is not enough
information in their online tree. I am not going to research a match
that is a 5th to 8th cousin and their tree contains ten people

[JMB99]

Post by knuttle
Ancestry know that and have done nothing to make it easy for a person
seriously working on their ancestry,  otherwise they would have a system
to better filter the DNA matches.

Don't most people download their DNA data and upload to sites like
GEDMatch. I don't think other DNA site allow that.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by JMB99

Post by knuttle
Ancestry know that and have done nothing to make it easy for a person
seriously working on their ancestry,  otherwise they would have a
system to better filter the DNA matches.

Don't most people download their DNA data and upload to sites like
GEDMatch. I don't think other DNA site allow that.

Judging by the instructions on GEDMAtch, quite a few of the sites that
do testing let you download their data and then upload it to GEDMatch. I
think some of the testing sites let you upload DNA data from other sites
to them, too. I know Ancestry do not allow that. (And have more people
who have tested with them than all the others put together.)

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Judging by the instructions on GEDMAtch, quite a few of the sites that
do testing let you download their data and then upload it to GEDMatch. I
think some of the testing sites let you upload DNA data from other sites
to them, too. I know Ancestry do not allow that. (And have more people
who have tested with them than all the others put together.)

But Ancestry do let you download the data so you can put on GEDMatch, it
has the advantage that if you do see an interesting connection then
there is an EMail address to contact and the person is probably more
interested and knowledgeable that many who are only on Ancestry or one
of the others.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by john

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by knuttle
As you say, my Ancestry subscription is become less and less
valuable, and is quick reaching the point where it is more bother
that good.

I've let mine lapse until they have a good offer: last renewal would
have been more than twice what I paid last year, so they can stuff
that! I much prefer FindMyPast's search anyway, with the on-screen
hit counter making it very easy to adjust what you're specifying.

I switched my account subscription from Ancestry UK to Ancestry DE.
Their International Deluxe is currently 59€ for six months. There is
no problem logging in to the UK website and using that.

Hmm - I might look into that; I can get by in German. Probably difficult
to connect without the UK stuff coming up, but shouldn't be
insurmountable. (I take it "International Deluxe" is the same as "world"
on the UK one.)

Post by john
I wouldn't be surprised if they get more signing up for a DNA test and
to find out their "ethnicity" than to do serious genealogy research.
For several years now, I've got a large number of DNA hits where there
is no or only a minimal tree so impossible in most cases to work out a
connection, possibly due to past Christmas gift promotions?

Yes, I suspect a lot are _either_ people who got it as a present and did
it (and sometimes a token amount of research) in order to not hurt the
feelings of the giver, _or_ (mostly USians) people who did it for the
"ethnicity estimate". (Pretty useless: mine's "47% England &
Northwestern Europe, 22% Scotland, 21% Wales, 9% Ireland, 1% Sweden &
Denmark" - yet of my 32 G3GP, only one is Wales and one is Scotland,
rest all England.)

Post by john
After the England/Wales 1921 census are there any major databases to
add which would attract researchers? I doubt many "millennials" will be
interested (and their parents/grandparents will possibly already have
done significant research?) It is mainly filling gaps so they will have
to invent "gimmicks" to keep the money flowing in.

I fear you're right. Though if they're not doing much adding, there
shouldn't be as much money needed anyway: sure, they've got to keep the
servers/searching engines going, but surely that's not expensive these
days.

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes, I suspect a lot are _either_ people who got it as a present and did
it (and sometimes a token amount of research) in order to not hurt the
feelings of the giver, _or_ (mostly USians) people who did it for the
"ethnicity estimate". (Pretty useless: mine's "47% England &
Northwestern Europe, 22% Scotland, 21% Wales, 9% Ireland, 1% Sweden &
Denmark" - yet of my 32 G3GP, only one is Wales and one is Scotland,
rest all England.)

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them. There seems to be a
lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England, Ireland and
parts of Scotland.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by JMB99

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes, I suspect a lot are _either_ people who got it as a present and
did it (and sometimes a token amount of research) in order to not
hurt the feelings of the giver, _or_ (mostly USians) people who did
it for the "ethnicity estimate". (Pretty useless: mine's "47% England
& Northwestern Europe, 22% Scotland, 21% Wales, 9% Ireland, 1% Sweden
& Denmark" - yet of my 32 G3GP, only one is Wales and one is
Scotland, rest all England.)

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them. There seems to be a
lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England, Ireland and
parts of Scotland.

That would match what they report for me. My _actual_ ancestry (that I
know of) is Northumberland, Norfolk, and midlands, including a couple of
hamlets straddling the Welsh border.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes, I suspect a lot are _either_ people who got it as a present and
did  it (and sometimes a token amount of research) in order to not
hurt the  feelings of the giver, _or_ (mostly USians) people who did
it for the  "ethnicity estimate". (Pretty useless: mine's "47%
England &  Northwestern Europe, 22% Scotland, 21% Wales, 9% Ireland,
1% Sweden &  Denmark" - yet of my 32 G3GP, only one is Wales and one
is Scotland,  rest all England.)

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them.  There seems to be
a lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England, Ireland and
parts of Scotland.

That would match what they report for me. My _actual_ ancestry (that I
know of) is Northumberland, Norfolk, and midlands, including a couple of
hamlets straddling the Welsh border.

I reckon my tiny bit of Scandinavian DNA may be due to the Danelaw and
King's Lynn, where my maternal ancestors lived for centuries, being a
Hansa port.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them.  There seems to
be a lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England, Ireland
and parts of Scotland.

That would match what they report for me. My _actual_ ancestry (that
I know of) is Northumberland, Norfolk, and midlands, including a
couple of hamlets straddling the Welsh border.

I reckon my tiny bit of Scandinavian DNA may be due to the Danelaw and
King's Lynn, where my maternal ancestors lived for centuries, being a
Hansa port.

Basically, if you go back far enough, populations moved around: it'd be
good to know roughly _when_ the percentages Ancestry give us are
supposed to be. 2000 years ago? 5000?
It'd be (moderately) interesting to know how many people _don't_ have
any, say, "Scandinavian" DNA.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by Colin Bignell

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them.  There seems to
be  a lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England,
Ireland and  parts of Scotland.

 That would match what they report for me. My _actual_ ancestry (that
I  know of) is Northumberland, Norfolk, and midlands, including a
couple of  hamlets straddling the Welsh border.

I reckon my tiny bit of Scandinavian DNA may be due to the Danelaw and
King's Lynn, where my maternal ancestors lived for centuries, being a
Hansa port.

Basically, if you go back far enough, populations moved around: it'd be
good to know roughly _when_ the percentages Ancestry give us are
supposed to be. 2000 years ago? 5000?
It'd be (moderately) interesting to know how many people _don't_ have
any, say, "Scandinavian" DNA.

I think when is a question that cannot be answered by DNA. It needs
traditional research.

In this article, for instance, the bit about the writer's grandmother
shows that a high percentage is no guide to actual place of origin:

https://whoareyoumadeof.com/blog/what-do-the-percentages-on-my-ethnicity-estimate-really-mean/

[JMB99]

Post by Colin Bignell
I think when is a question that cannot be answered by DNA. It needs
traditional research.

But often there is no paper trail so DNA is the only way.

One of my GG Grandmothers is probably Irish from her name. Her father
died before the 1841 Census and had a very common forename and a very
common Irish surname. The chances of finding any record of him are
minimal but some Irish ancestry has been linked to a particular area or
village through DNA.

Another GG Grandmother is also almost certainly Irish and I think I know
where from but probably need a DNA match to someone to confirm.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by JMB99

Post by Colin Bignell
I think when is a question that cannot be answered by DNA. It needs
traditional research.

But often there is no paper trail so DNA is the only way.

I was simply pointing out that the percentages are no indication of when
a particular ethnicity entered your bloodline. In the link I gave, a
woman had 95% of her DNA show as England Wales & NW Europe. However, the
closest ancestors who actually lived in that region were three out of
her 32 great-great-grandparents.

Post by JMB99
One of my GG Grandmothers is probably Irish from her name.  Her father
died before the 1841 Census and had a very common forename and a very
common Irish surname.  The chances of finding any record of him are
minimal but some Irish ancestry has been linked to a particular area or
village through DNA.

I wouldn't expect that level of precision from a commercial DNA test. It
would need a very large number of samples from people with a long
background of living in the area, which the commercial companies usually
don't have.

Ancestry can tell me that my DNA shows links to East of England, but not
that they are to North Norfolk, let alone which towns or villages my
ancestors came from.

Post by JMB99
Another GG Grandmother is also almost certainly Irish and I think I know
where from but probably need a DNA match to someone to confirm.

The problem is that DNA gets passed in chunks, not a nice even division
of 50% of everything each of your parents had in their DNA. This means
that even siblings might have different ethnicity estimates, depending
upon which chunks they got.

[JMB99]

Post by Colin Bignell
I wouldn't expect that level of precision from a commercial DNA test. It
would need a very large number of samples from people with a long
background of living in the area, which the commercial companies usually
don't have.
Ancestry can tell me that my DNA shows links to East of England, but not
that they are to North Norfolk, let alone which towns or villages my
ancestors came from.
The problem is that DNA gets passed in chunks, not a nice even division
of 50% of everything each of your parents had in their DNA. This means
that even siblings might have different ethnicity estimates, depending
upon which chunks they got.

Might have hoped with the amount of interest in Irish ancestry from
Americans that might have built up a lot of data.

One of the TV DNA programmes did manage to identify a village in Ireland
and family of someone but I think they did some DNA testing of people in
the area.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by JMB99

Post by Colin Bignell
I wouldn't expect that level of precision from a commercial DNA test.
It would need a very large number of samples from people with a long
background of living in the area, which the commercial companies
usually don't have.
Ancestry can tell me that my DNA shows links to East of England, but
not that they are to North Norfolk, let alone which towns or villages
my ancestors came from.
The problem is that DNA gets passed in chunks, not a nice even
division of 50% of everything each of your parents had in their DNA.
This means that even siblings might have different ethnicity
estimates, depending upon which chunks they got.

Might have hoped with the amount of interest in Irish ancestry from
Americans that might have built up a lot of data.
One of the TV DNA programmes did manage to identify a village in Ireland
and family of someone but I think they did some DNA testing of people in
the area.

I didn't doubt it was possible, but it takes a lot of effort and a lot
of people, which would not be financially viable for the commercial labs
that do the testing for Ancestry etc. I had thought it might have been a
university project. I hadn't thought of a TV programme.

[john]

Post by JMB99

Post by Colin Bignell
I wouldn't expect that level of precision from a commercial DNA
test. It would need a very large number of samples from people with
a long background of living in the area, which the commercial
companies usually don't have.
Ancestry can tell me that my DNA shows links to East of England,
but not that they are to North Norfolk, let alone which towns or
villages my ancestors came from.
The problem is that DNA gets passed in chunks, not a nice even
division of 50% of everything each of your parents had in their
DNA. This means that even siblings might have different ethnicity
estimates, depending upon which chunks they got.

Might have hoped with the amount of interest in Irish ancestry from
Americans that might have built up a lot of data.
One of the TV DNA programmes did manage to identify a village in
Ireland and family of someone but I think they did some DNA testing
of people in the area.

Ancestry have several web pages of information on their ethnicity
estimates and methodology
e.g.
https://www.ancestry.com/c/dna-learning-hub/reading-your-ethnicity-estimate
https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/AncestryDNA-Ethnicity?language=en_US

and a detailed (41 pages) Ethnicity Estimate 2023 White Paper giving
methodology, sample sizes, etc
https://www.ancestrycdn.com/support/us/2023/10/ethnicitywhitepaper2023.pdf

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Basically, if you go back far enough, populations moved around: it'd be
good to know roughly _when_ the percentages Ancestry give us are
supposed to be. 2000 years ago? 5000?
It'd be (moderately) interesting to know how many people _don't_ have
any, say, "Scandinavian" DNA

Wasn't there a project in Yorkshire that investigated Scandinavian
ancestry through DNA?

I can't remember what they found.

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
That would match what they report for me. My _actual_ ancestry (that I
know of) is Northumberland, Norfolk, and midlands, including a couple of
hamlets straddling the Welsh border.

There oddities as was found when a well known Scottish 'historian' from
the Scottish Borders who in a TV series based around DNA was surprised
to find his ancestry was East Anglia (if I remember correctly).

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <ul6ptj$34m73$***@dont-email.me> at Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:56:51,
JMB99 <***@nospam.net> writes
[]

Post by JMB99
There oddities as was found when a well known Scottish 'historian' from
the Scottish Borders who in a TV series based around DNA was surprised
to find his ancestry was East Anglia (if I remember correctly).

There was a major diaspora from Norfolk to Northumberland and Durham
when mining really got going (sort of late 19th century) - I think the
mining companies may even have run special trains. Not sure it went as
far as Borders, though. I know some of my family (Neave and other names)
got caught up in it.

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
There was a major diaspora from Norfolk to Northumberland and Durham
when mining really got going (sort of late 19th century) - I think the
mining companies may even have run special trains. Not sure it went as
far as Borders, though. I know some of my family (Neave and other names)
got caught up in it.

From what I remember (it was some years ago) it was a large landowner
moving agricultural workers. I don't remember any mention of mining.

Part of my Welsh family moved from mid-Wales to the North East of
England because of the coal mining and iron and steel works (via Merthyr
Tydfil).

If you look in the late 19th Century censuses, there are whole streets
full of Welsh people in places like Middlesbrough, Stockton ..

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by JMB99

Post by J. P. Gilliver
There was a major diaspora from Norfolk to Northumberland and Durham
when mining really got going (sort of late 19th century) - I think the
mining companies may even have run special trains. Not sure it went as
far as Borders, though. I know some of my family (Neave and other
names) got caught up in it.

From what I remember (it was some years ago) it was a large landowner
moving agricultural workers. I don't remember any mention of mining.

Ah, that might be more correct for specific trains: would make more
sense for a specific landowner. But I think in general there was a
considerable movement from agriculture - and agricultural areas - when
the industrial revolution and subsequent developments were in swing,
just because of jobs: agricultural employment opportunities remained
fairly static (or even were reduced by some of the mechanisation),
whereas industry - and mining - were growing.

Post by JMB99
Part of my Welsh family moved from mid-Wales to the North East of
England because of the coal mining and iron and steel works (via
Merthyr Tydfil).

Mine from (mostly north) Norfolk to mostly south Northumberland
(Bedlington and environs).

Post by JMB99
If you look in the late 19th Century censuses, there are whole streets
full of Welsh people in places like Middlesbrough, Stockton ..

There's an excellent (long!) essay at the Durham Mining Museum site
about it (and much else). dmm.org.uk - despite the name, it covers much
of mining nationally. Especially disasters (if an ancestor of yours was
killed in any such, there's a fair chance you'll find an individual
entry for him there), but much other info too (such as an explanation of
terms, such as hewer [fairly obvious], putter, banksman, trapper, and so
on).

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Ah, that might be more correct for specific trains: would make more
sense for a specific landowner. But I think in general there was a
considerable movement from agriculture - and agricultural areas - when
the industrial revolution and subsequent developments were in swing,
just because of jobs: agricultural employment opportunities remained
fairly static (or even were reduced by some of the mechanisation),
whereas industry - and mining - were growing.

There was a lot of movement from agricultural areas as farming became
less dependent on manual labour. I have seen mentions of mills and
factories in the Midlands and North of England advertising in these area
for workers.

[john]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

Post by JMB99
There oddities as was found when a well known Scottish 'historian'
from the Scottish Borders who in a TV series based around DNA was
surprised to find his ancestry was East Anglia (if I remember correctly).

There was a major diaspora from Norfolk to Northumberland and Durham
when mining really got going (sort of late 19th century) - I think the
mining companies may even have run special trains. Not sure it went as
far as Borders, though. I know some of my family (Neave and other names)
got caught up in it.

A long discussion Norfolk farm labourers in the Northumberland/Durham
coalfields
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=649914.0

[Graeme Wall]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
Yes, I suspect a lot are _either_ people who got it as a present and
did it (and sometimes a token amount of research) in order to not hurt
the feelings of the giver, _or_ (mostly USians) people who did it for
the "ethnicity estimate". (Pretty useless: mine's "47% England &
Northwestern Europe, 22% Scotland, 21% Wales, 9% Ireland, 1% Sweden &
Denmark" - yet of my 32 G3GP, only one is Wales and one is Scotland,
rest all England.)

I think the UK is particularly difficult for them.  There seems to be a
lot of genetic overlap between Wales, North of England, Ireland and
parts of Scotland.

Hardly surprising.

[miked]

Post by john

[]

After the England/Wales 1921 census are there any major databases to add
which would attract researchers? I doubt many "millennials" will be
interested (and their parents/grandparents will possibly already have
done significant research?) It is mainly filling gaps so they will have
to invent "gimmicks" to keep the money flowing in.

dunno if this is already answered but they do hold the 1939 register,
although anyone deemed still alive when it was uploaded is redacted,
but i've found it very useful even so. Personally I find ancestry
much more informative than FMP; ancestry generally finds more accurate
hits than FMP, but occasionally FMP finds something ancestry cant.

My main gripe with ancestry is that sometimes sources I find 1 day seem to
vanish or not come up when I search for them another day, plus there
is the problem with all digital collections, they depend on the
efficiency of the scanner and the state of the original document.
Sometimes names are terribly mangled. Thats why I find UK govt
proposals to destroy millions of old wills and just rely on
digital versions quite alarming.

Mike

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by miked

Post by john

[]

After the England/Wales 1921 census are there any major databases to
add which would attract researchers? I doubt many "millennials" will
be interested (and their parents/grandparents will possibly already
have done significant research?) It is mainly filling gaps so they
will have to invent "gimmicks" to keep the money flowing in.

dunno if this is already answered but they do hold the 1939 register,
although anyone deemed still alive when it was uploaded is redacted,
but i've found it very useful even so. Personally I find ancestry

Both have it - and it may still be that only FMP have the facility to
tell them someone's died and thus have their record un-redacted (that
was certainly originally the case).

Post by miked
much more informative than FMP; ancestry generally finds more accurate
hits than FMP, but occasionally FMP finds something ancestry cant.

They each have better parish record scans than the other for some
counties (LostCousins very occasionally does a list of which has which
county), though I think some are increasingly on both).

Post by miked
My main gripe with ancestry is that sometimes sources I find 1 day seem to
vanish or not come up when I search for them another day, plus there
is the problem with all digital collections, they depend on the
efficiency of the scanner and the state of the original document.

I find FMP's instant-hit counter very useful - plus they accept more
versatile wildcards.

Post by miked
Sometimes names are terribly mangled. Thats why I find UK govt
proposals to destroy millions of old wills and just rely on
digital versions quite alarming.

I mostly agree - though in cases where the scan is more than adequate to
capture every last nuance of the original (which certainly isn't the
case for black-and-white high contrast scans of old microfilms!), there
may be some validity. (There needs to be adequate provision for periodic
refresh of the digital images, of course, so it's not a no-cost option!)

Post by miked
Mike

[knuttle]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
[]

The 2 stage login stinks.   I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours.     I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something.   Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

I selected email as the delivery method, and it never arrived, despite
several "resend" attempts.

As you say, my Ancestry subscription is become less and less valuable,
and is quick reaching the point where it is more bother that good.

I've let mine lapse until they have a good offer: last renewal would
have been more than twice what I paid last year, so they can stuff that!
I much prefer FindMyPast's search anyway, with the on-screen hit counter
making it very easy to adjust what you're specifying.

It is my impression that Findmypast is oriented toward Britain and Europle.

Would a person whose family is mainly in Pennsylvania and Northern
Indiana see any benifit for Findmypast?

Right now my research has progressed to the point that my families are
now in the late 1700's, so since Ancestry is mainly focused on the late
1800's and 1900's I am not find the informa

[Peter Johnson]

Post by knuttle
It is my impression that Findmypast is oriented toward Britain and Europle.

That's because you're using the .co.uk version

Post by knuttle
Would a person whose family is mainly in Pennsylvania and Northern
Indiana see any benifit for Findmypast?

If they use the .com version, yes.

[JMB99]

The 2 stage login stinks.   I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours.     I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something.   Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

Unfortunately we are just going to have to get used to 2FA, more and
more sites are using it.

One website that I use a lot adopted it (with no opt-out), you just load
a small utility every day when you first use the PC each day and then it
operates in the background.

[knuttle]

Post by JMB99

The 2 stage login stinks.   I had been working on Ancestry yesterday,
and left it for a couple of hours.     I think was running out of time
and wanted to quickly check something.   Could not because of the
Ancestry 2 step.

Unfortunately we are just going to have to get used to 2FA, more and
more sites are using it.
One website that I use a lot adopted it (with no opt-out), you just load
a small utility every day when you first use the PC each day and then it
operates in the background.

Could you t

[JMB99]

Could you tell us more about the utility?

Do a search on 'AUTHY'. I know nothing about it, it just works in the
background and was supplied by the organisation whose servers I access.

[JMB99]

Post by Colin Bignell
I have always ignored their story lines, but I think that pet DNA has to
be the silliest idea yet.

I can see there could be a market for pet DNA testing but it will
(hopefully!) be completely separate from the normal human DNA service.

There is always going to be a bias towards the USA because of the size
of the customer base.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by JMB99

Post by Colin Bignell
I have always ignored their story lines, but I think that pet DNA has
to be the silliest idea yet.

I can see there could be a market for pet DNA testing but it will
(hopefully!) be completely separate from the normal human DNA service.

For people with pedigree animals, perhaps, but I doubt any of the
moggies I have ever had cared who their parents were.

Post by JMB99
There is always going to be a bias towards the USA because of the size
of the customer base.

[JMB99]

Post by Colin Bignell
For people with pedigree animals, perhaps, but I doubt any of the
moggies I have ever had cared who their parents were.

Owners of pedigree animals have detailed records of the animals 'family
tree' so might find such a service useful. It is a niche service but
can run alongside the normal DNA testing service.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by JMB99

Post by Colin Bignell
I have always ignored their story lines, but I think that pet DNA has
to be the silliest idea yet.

I can see there could be a market for pet DNA testing but it will
(hopefully!) be completely separate from the normal human DNA service.

I like your "(hopefully!)"! Reminds me of the introductory patter to one
of Tom Lehrer's songs: "He practiced animal husbandry, until they
[pause] caught him at it."

Post by JMB99
There is always going to be a bias towards the USA because of the size
of the customer base.

And, one gets the impression, greater interest in ethnic origin.

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
And, one gets the impression, greater interest in ethnic origin.

There are many who only have a darker skin to indicate some unknown
ancestry. It does seem easier to differentiate different areas than it
is to separate some of the British regions.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by JMB99

Post by J. P. Gilliver
And, one gets the impression, greater interest in ethnic origin.

There are many who only have a darker skin to indicate some unknown
ancestry. It does seem easier to differentiate different areas than it
is to separate some of the British regions.

Indeed; for me, under "England & Northwestern Europe", it has "The
Midlands, England"; fair enough so far. But under "The Midlands,
England", it has two regions which it seems to give the same
hierarchical level:
"The Potteries", and
"East Midlands & the Potteries".
Although, as you'd expect, the blob on the map for the former is
entirely within the blob for the latter, it does seem to list them both
as at the same level of hierarchy - two down from "England &
Northwestern Europe". And it lists "The Potteries" _first_.

[Peter Johnson]

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 10:03:04 -0000 (UTC), "Geoff"

Post by Geoff
Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky commercial
enterprise rather that a serious research site?

It's never been a 'serious research site.' You can tell that because
it assumes that every user is researching their own family.
And you can tell that its focus is the US market by the way that it
incorporates US place names in the database of UK placenames, despite
knowing that UK users are not in the US.
Having said that, I have got used to its search quirks over the years
and can get more out of it now than used to be the case.
I don't like the way that FMP works although I do make use of it
occasionally, for things not on Ancestry.

[Ian Goddard]

Post by Peter Johnson
And you can tell that its focus is the US market by the way that it
incorporates US place names in the database of UK placenames, despite
knowing that UK users are not in the US.

Geography seems to confuse US programmers in many way

[JMB99]

Post by Peter Johnson
It's never been a 'serious research site.' You can tell that because
it assumes that every user is researching their own family.

I researched some friends' family and did not have any problem doing so.
I have looked at others as well.

[Peter Johnson]

Post by JMB99

Post by Peter Johnson
It's never been a 'serious research site.' You can tell that because
it assumes that every user is researching their own family.

I researched some friends' family and did not have any problem doing so.
I have looked at others as well.

I wasn't saying that it's a problem. Just commenting on the assumption
that they make.

[J. P. Gilliver]

Post by Peter Johnson
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 10:03:04 -0000 (UTC), "Geoff"

Post by Geoff
Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky commercial
enterprise rather that a serious research site?

It's never been a 'serious research site.' You can tell that because
it assumes that every user is researching their own family.
And you can tell that its focus is the US market by the way that it
incorporates US place names in the database of UK placenames, despite
knowing that UK users are not in the US.
Having said that, I have got used to its search quirks over the years
and can get more out of it now than used to be the case.

Indeed.

Post by Peter Johnson
I don't like the way that FMP works although I do make use of it
occasionally, for things not on Ancestry.

I guess it's familiarity; I don't like the way Ancestry works, although
I have used it, for things not on FMP.

The LostCousins newsletter _very_ occasionally lists which of the two
companies has which counties (parish records), which is useful.

[JMB99]

Post by J. P. Gilliver
I guess it's familiarity; I don't like the way Ancestry works, although
I have used it, for things not on FMP.

I had used FMP for many years before they 'improved' it and well used to
it but many of the searches that I had used regularly became impossible.

[Geoff]

Post by Geoff
Is it me or is Ancestry.com becoming more and more a gimmiky
commercial enterprise rather that a serious research site?
What with "2 stage log-ins through Google", "back stories", "My
family stories", "Pet's DNA" It used to be a decent research site.
It still is I suppose, if you you can get through the tangled web it
has weaved.
Or of course perhaps it's just me, a grumpy old man sounding off.
p.s. I hope the hyphen is in the right place!! Re. previous remarks

Interesting set of answers. I'll probably stick with Ancestry despite
it's quirks.
Out of interest, is it possible to upload the media as well as the GED
file from Ancestry to FMP? I have it all downloaded onto RootsMagic if
it can be done that way.

BTW Just in case anyone doesn't know, there is a very old but very
useful piece of software called Simple Family Tree which I have used
for many years. As I say it is simple but so useful for quick
references, it is still available at
https://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=922

Geoff

[J. P. Gilliver]

In message <ukvhpi$1qfel$***@dont-email.me> at Fri, 8 Dec 2023 16:55:14,
Geoff <***@btinternet.com> writes
[]

Post by Geoff
Out of interest, is it possible to upload the media as well as the GED
file from Ancestry to FMP? I have it all downloaded onto RootsMagic if
it can be done that way.

Harrumph. If you mean what I think you mean, it isn't possible to upload
anything other than the GED file even from Ancestry to Ancestry. I keep
my master data out of Ancestry's clutches, uploading a GEDCOM
occasionally; they turn that into one of their trees, and things (media,
links to records) get attached to it. But they have no way of
transferring such foliage from one tree to an updated one. (They even
suggested I do it manually; for even my relatively small tree of only a
few thousand people, no thanks!)

Post by Geoff
BTW Just in case anyone doesn't know, there is a very old but very
useful piece of software called Simple Family Tree which I have used
for many years. As I say it is simple but so useful for quick
references, it is still available at
https://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=922
Geoff

What is it, a GEDCOM editor/viewer?

[Geoff]

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Geoff
Out of interest, is it possible to upload the media as well as the
GED file from Ancestry to FMP? I have it all downloaded onto
RootsMagic if it can be done that way.

Harrumph. If you mean what I think you mean, it isn't possible to
upload anything other than the GED file even from Ancestry to
Ancestry. I keep my master data out of Ancestry's clutches, uploading
a GEDCOM occasionally; they turn that into one of their trees, and
things (media, links to records) get attached to it. But they have no
way of transferring such foliage from one tree to an updated one.
(They even suggested I do it manually; for even my relatively small
tree of only a few thousand people, no thanks!)

Post by Geoff
BTW Just in case anyone doesn't know, there is a very old but very
useful piece of software called Simple Family Tree which I have used
for many years. As I say it is simple but so useful for quick
references, it is still available at
https://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=922
Geoff

What is it, a GEDCOM editor/viewer?

Yes, exactly that, a very simple one but you able able to scroll the
tree around the screen in the same way as Ancestry etc. I just keep
it open on another tab while doing other things. I've been using it
for over 20 years. You can edit on it but I just use it as a quick
go-to instead of losing my place on my main package. Also has a column
listing all the names in your tree. Oh yes, and it's free.

[J. P. Gilliver]

[]

Post by Geoff

Post by J. P. Gilliver

Post by Geoff
https://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=922
Geoff

What is it, a GEDCOM editor/viewer?

Yes, exactly that, a very simple one but you able able to scroll the
tree around the screen in the same way as Ancestry etc. I just keep
it open on another tab while doing other things. I've been using it
for over 20 years. You can edit on it but I just use it as a quick
go-to instead of losing my place on my main package. Also has a column
listing all the names in your tree. Oh yes, and it's free.

Thanks: I had a look, and also looks a good starter: the fact that it
uses GEDCOM natively means anyone who starts with it can import it into
something more sophisticated without having to start over, so I've
recommended it to someone. (I'm sure there are many others similar - a
friend uses GRAMPS, which I think is also GEDCOM-based, and might be
multi-platform.)