The dreaded change of Ancestry

[jan57]

 I've  been 'changed' over to  the  new  version   ,   haven't  been on  Ancestry for a while   and  today   found   the change   having to make a few alterations  as to  Place  names, they have  my  husbands grandmother  living  in  Papua New Guinea  in 1963! (should  have been  Hackney )   

[coombs]

I have been switched over to the new Anc and you need a degree to work it out. Before anyone says, "you were told in August", I wanted to stick to the old format for as long as I could. I may get used to it but I am not holding my breath.

[mike175]

I must be missing something. When I search, the results seem to come up pretty much as before. The page looks a little different but that's only cosmetic.

Maybe it's because I don't have an online tree, and rarely look at other people's because, from what I've seen, there are plenty of Ancestry users who neither know nor care if the information is wrong . . . as long as they have plenty of it 

Mike.

[msr]

You mean that despite being warned in August, you've only now decided to take a look?!

We've also been warned that the end of the world is coming, but do I want to experience it?  No!  Unhelpful comments to be expected I suppose!

Anyway, logged in, and Yikes, there it is!  Didn't like it when first introduced and still don't.

First person I look at was married in Leeds, Yorkshire but his daughter is born in Leeds, Ontario.   Smart isn't it?   I haven't changed it so it was THEM. 

The dark bar is gloomy, nothing else to say yet.

[KGarrad]

I must be missing something. When I search, the results seem to come up pretty much as before. The page looks a little different but that's only cosmetic.

Maybe it's because I don't have an online tree, and rarely look at other people's because, from what I've seen, there are plenty of Ancestry users who neither know nor care if the information is wrong . . . as long as they have plenty of it 

Mike.

Thanks. Mike.
Exactly what I have been saying on the other thread!

First person I look at was married in Leeds, Yorkshire but his daughter is born in Leeds, Ontario.   Smart isn't it?   I haven't changed it so it was THEM. 

So you entered their place of birth as simply "Leeds", rather than "Leeds, Yorkshire, England"?!

[davidft]

I changed to the new version about a month ago. Not having any problems with it, other than it has moved some places to other parts of the world when I had not stipulated England. That is not a problem as I only have small trees on there but I do feel sorry for those with several thousand people in their trees, still I am sure they will assiduously check each and every one to ensure they are still correct. 

On a side note in the tree I was building recently the drop down label for Scalby, near Scarborough is

Scalby (near Scarbprpigj), Yorkshire, England   

Oh dear !

[Finley 1]

I have just managed to access the old version??? the one I was using yesterday  

so today I have been on old and new... and cos MY Mind had decided to put up and shut up, just get on and learn the new ................  the old format came back!!!   how long for I don't know..

xin

[Treetotal]

That's hilarious David...try putting that into your Sat Nav....who knows where you'll end up 
Carol

[Hampshire Lass]

Well I only changed today and although I was absolutely dreading it, I'm pleasantly surprised to find it not as bad as feared.

Nothing too awful seems to have happened in terms of people popping up in another country.  Perhaps I've been lucky there because I have omitted England in many instances. The facts page is ok.  I like the gallery page.

It is certainly different and will take some getting used to. Especially when actually working on the tree........  but I'm sure I'll get there