Archive for March, 2010

March 23, 2010

Ancestry’s search

Seems that Ancestry.com just loves their new search and won’t give it up no matter how much we users, who are paying for this disservice, complain. I dislike cluttered organization. Ancestry, how many times do we have to tell you? Keep the old search!
Below are screen shots of the two searches. As you can see, the old search has census results organized by year. My ancestor was born in New York, according to what I know and likely died in Illinois before 1834. The old search results were Jonathan Case, USA, Illinois. The new search is Jonathan Case, b: 1800, USA New York, d: 1830, USA, Illinois. The new search just makes me wade through a lot of junk.
Ancestry, don’t waste my time.
For the record, there is a clumsy work around. The “new search” results were generated by clicking on the “old search” hyperlink on their site. If you want to get to the old search engine and result layout, replace the 1 with a 0 for the rank= parameter and search again. This brings you to the “No Matches found” error page, just click the search button again.
Before: http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?rank=1&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&gsfn=,...
After (old search): http://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?rank=0&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&gsfn=,...

Ancestry's old search results

Old search results, much more precise


New Search, Don't waste my time

Junky layout imprecise search, note the Jonathan Carr