My cousin wrote to me this morning in complete frustration with the Censuses Online at Genealogy.com. So I spent a few hours looking up people on both this service and Ancestry.com. Here's my thoughts and findings: My cousin said œ the time he only gets a œ page of the census on Genealogy.com so when I got on I tried page after page. The only time I got a œ census page on screen, pressing 'reload' cured the prob. Genealogy.com says to change your printer to landscape which he did and had a lot of problems with the printer and connection, etc. [He says computers hate him. Sometimes I'm tempted to believe it.] I, too, noticed that Genealogy.com said to set the printer to landscape [which I did by the printer's control panel as well as in the printer properties button on the print popup menu] and it printed out in landscape but from looking at the width of it, it would've fit fine in standard mode. Genealogy.com didn't seem to have a zoom function like Ancestry where you can print an enlarged portion that's readable. The screen view of Genealogy.com's census image I believe is substantially clearer than Ancestry's but it doesn't have the functionality of Mr. Sid which lets you do all sorts of enlarging, moving and printing. The Genealogy.com's printout was too small to read. If anyone has figured out how to make it bigger, please let me know. What I did do, however, was save it as a graphics file [.tif, a huge format, was the only choice but tif's can easily be enlarged without loss of quality]. So, hopefully, I can dump it into my PaintShopPro, enlarge, copy and crop it to go onto two pages. The down side is that'll take maybe 10 minutes of fussing per image whereas Ancestry has that function already built into it's service . The search engine for Genealogy.com didn't pick up several people who I knew were in the Gloucester City, NJ 1900 census. There was no indication that the NJ census was partially on line so subscribers could very easily assume the people they were searching for were not in that census when in fact they were. That very misleading and WARNINGS SHOULD BE ISSUED! On Ancestry.com, however, everyone who I knew was on the census and I had the ED & page # for were there. I have no problem getting to specific pages once I knew the secret of sticking the ED on the location line but I admit to being a 'geek' and most people would have difficulty using that. Ancestry's new 'go to' at the bottom of the page apparently alleviates that problem. The REALLY BIG problem with Ancestry.com is the lack of an index. I gave them my money over six months ago in the belief that everything would be available come the new year. Three months into the new year there is still no index and the 1920 is still not complete let alone all the other years that were promised. I was willing to give Ancestry my money as an act of faith knowing that research always seems to cost more than budgeted and didn't want $$ to stop them. I don't know what's their problem. I was happy as a regular subscriber. The online census subscription is a concern to me. Why haven't they sent their subscribers a note apologizing for the delay and mollify us with an extension? They're still offering subscriptions with unkept promises. That disturbs me. It's time they dealt straight with their clientele. I don't have any census CDs because of their cost. Can someone compare the census CDs to the online services? judy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Judy Picard =============================> judypicard@hotmail.com Furlong site ======================> http://Best-spot.com/Furlong Normore site ======================> http://Best-spot.com/Normore Normore Messages Group ===================>http://yahoogroups.com The Geberts ==========================> http://Best-spot.com/Gebert Gebert Messages Group ====================>http://yahoogroups.com Kelly Brown Coulter ===============> http://w3.tvi.cc.nm.us/~judyp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

Judy, I whole-heartidly agree with your findings. The lack of a census index at Ancestry.com not to mention the snails pace at which they are adding to the collection in general are my primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the service. Another issue I have is that there are problems with viewing many of the ED's of the Middlesex County MA 1920 census images. I had to write to them nine times (no exageration) before they would even admit there was a problem and ask me to supply more detailed information so that someone would have a look into it. They WILL NOT advise when a problem has been fixed. They like to send those obnoxious 'scripted' e-mail replies as if to say 'screw you we don't really need to supply techsupport'. It's been a week and a half and they still don't have ED374 fixed in Middlesex County, MA and they WILL NOT provide an estimate as to how long it will take. I can't believe the majority of Ancestry census subscribers are happy with the service (or lack there of). All I can do I guess is demand my money back (refund) or ask for an extension of the yearly subscription. I haven't had any problems downloading images at Genealogylibrary.com but I haven't tried printing them. The quality of the ancestry.com images is much better. I save the Genealogylibrary.com images to my hard drive then open them in Ulead Photoimpact which allows for formatting, etc. I would assume this would enhance printing capabilities as well. Nancy -----Original Message----- Judy wrote: My cousin wrote to me this morning in complete frustration with the Censuses Online at Genealogy.com. So I spent a few hours looking up people on both this service and Ancestry.com. Here's my thoughts and findings: My cousin said ½ the time he only gets a ½ page of the census on Genealogy.com so when I got on I tried page after page. The only time I got a ½ census page on screen, pressing 'reload' cured the prob. Genealogy.com says to change your printer to landscape which he did and had a lot of problems with the printer and connection, etc. [He says computers hate him. Sometimes I'm tempted to believe it.] I, too, noticed that Genealogy.com said to set the printer to landscape [which I did by the printer's control panel as well as in the printer properties button on the print popup menu] and it printed out in landscape but from looking at the width of it, it would've fit fine in standard mode. Genealogy.com didn't seem to have a zoom function like Ancestry where you can print an enlarged portion that's readable. The screen view of Genealogy.com's census image I believe is substantially clearer than Ancestry's but it doesn't have the functionality of Mr. Sid which lets you do all sorts of enlarging, moving and printing. The Genealogy.com's printout was too small to read. If anyone has figured out how to make it bigger, please let me know. What I did do, however, was save it as a graphics file [.tif, a huge format, was the only choice but tif's can easily be enlarged without loss of quality]. So, hopefully, I can dump it into my PaintShopPro, enlarge, copy and crop it to go onto two pages. The down side is that'll take maybe 10 minutes of fussing per image whereas Ancestry has that function already built into it's service . The search engine for Genealogy.com didn't pick up several people who I knew were in the Gloucester City, NJ 1900 census. There was no indication that the NJ census was partially on line so subscribers could very easily assume the people they were searching for were not in that census when in fact they were. That very misleading and WARNINGS SHOULD BE ISSUED! On Ancestry.com, however, everyone who I knew was on the census and I had the ED & page # for were there. I have no problem getting to specific pages once I knew the secret of sticking the ED on the location line but I admit to being a 'geek' and most people would have difficulty using that. Ancestry's new 'go to' at the bottom of the page apparently alleviates that problem. The REALLY BIG problem with Ancestry.com is the lack of an index. I gave them my money over six months ago in the belief that everything would be available come the new year. Three months into the new year there is still no index and the 1920 is still not complete let alone all the other years that were promised. I was willing to give Ancestry my money as an act of faith knowing that research always seems to cost more than budgeted and didn't want $$ to stop them. I don't know what's their problem. I was happy as a regular subscriber. The online census subscription is a concern to me. Why haven't they sent their subscribers a note apologizing for the delay and mollify us with an extension? They're still offering subscriptions with unkept promises. That disturbs me. It's time they dealt straight with their clientele. I don't have any census CDs because of their cost. Can someone compare the census CDs to the online services? judy

And when you try to cancel you have to do it by phone except noone ever answers. What a scam! Irene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy M. Atkinson" <rascalz@worldnet.att.net> To: <MA-CENSUS-LOOKUP-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 5:36 PM Subject: [MA-CENSUS] RE: Ancestry.com vs Genealogy.com on-line censuses etc > Judy, > > I whole-heartidly agree with your findings. The lack of a census index at > Ancestry.com not to mention the snails pace at which they are adding to the > collection in general are my primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the > service. Another issue I have is that there are problems with viewing many > of the ED's of the Middlesex County MA 1920 census images. I had to write > to them nine times (no exageration) before they would even admit there was a > problem and ask me to supply more detailed information so that someone would > have a look into it. They WILL NOT advise when a problem has been fixed. > They like to send those obnoxious 'scripted' e-mail replies as if to say > 'screw you we don't really need to supply techsupport'. It's been a week > and a half and they still don't have ED374 fixed in Middlesex County, MA and > they WILL NOT provide an estimate as to how long it will take. I can't > believe the majority of Ancestry census subscribers are happy with the > service (or lack there of). All I can do I guess is demand my money back > (refund) or ask for an extension of the yearly subscription. > > I haven't had any problems downloading images at Genealogylibrary.com but I > haven't tried printing them. The quality of the ancestry.com images is much > better. I save the Genealogylibrary.com images to my hard drive then open > them in Ulead Photoimpact which allows for formatting, etc. I would assume > this would enhance printing capabilities as well. > > Nancy > > > > > -----Original Message----- > Judy wrote: > > My cousin wrote to me this morning in complete frustration with the Censuses > Online at Genealogy.com. So I spent a few hours looking up people on both > this service and Ancestry.com. Here's my thoughts and findings: > > My cousin said œ the time he only gets a œ page of the census on > Genealogy.com so when I got on I tried page after page. The only time I got > a œ census page on screen, pressing 'reload' cured the prob. > > Genealogy.com says to change your printer to landscape which he did and had > a lot of problems with the printer and connection, etc. [He says computers > hate him. Sometimes I'm tempted to believe it.] I, too, noticed that > Genealogy.com said to set the printer to landscape [which I did by the > printer's control panel as well as in the printer properties button on the > print popup menu] and it printed out in landscape but from looking at the > width of it, it would've fit fine in standard mode. > > Genealogy.com didn't seem to have a zoom function like Ancestry where you > can print an enlarged portion that's readable. The screen view of > Genealogy.com's census image I believe is substantially clearer than > Ancestry's but it doesn't have the functionality of Mr. Sid which lets you > do all sorts of enlarging, moving and printing. > > The Genealogy.com's printout was too small to read. If anyone has figured > out how to make it bigger, please let me know. What I did do, however, was > save it as a graphics file [.tif, a huge format, was the only choice but > tif's can easily be enlarged without loss of quality]. So, hopefully, I can > dump it into my PaintShopPro, enlarge, copy and crop it to go onto two > pages. The down side is that'll take maybe 10 minutes of fussing per image > whereas Ancestry has that function already built into it's service . > > The search engine for Genealogy.com didn't pick up several people who I knew > were in the Gloucester City, NJ 1900 census. There was no indication that > the NJ census was partially on line so subscribers could very easily assume > the people they were searching for were not in that census when in fact they > were. That very misleading and WARNINGS SHOULD BE ISSUED! > > On Ancestry.com, however, everyone who I knew was on the census and I had > the ED & page # for were there. I have no problem getting to specific pages > once I knew the secret of sticking the ED on the location line but I admit > to being a 'geek' and most people would have difficulty using that. > Ancestry's new 'go to' at the bottom of the page apparently alleviates that > problem. > > The REALLY BIG problem with Ancestry.com is the lack of an index. I gave > them my money over six months ago in the belief that everything would be > available come the new year. Three months into the new year there is still > no index and the 1920 is still not complete let alone all the other years > that were promised. > > I was willing to give Ancestry my money as an act of faith knowing that > research always seems to cost more than budgeted and didn't want $$ to stop > them. I don't know what's their problem. I was happy as a regular > subscriber. The online census subscription is a concern to me. Why haven't > they sent their subscribers a note apologizing for the delay and mollify us > with an extension? They're still offering subscriptions with unkept > promises. That disturbs me. It's time they dealt straight with their > clientele. > > I don't have any census CDs because of their cost. Can someone compare the > census CDs to the online services? > > judy > > > ==== MA-CENSUS-LOOKUP Mailing List ==== > To view completed census transcriptions online > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/inv/index.html > > ============================== > Ancestry.com Genealogical Databases > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist2.asp > Search over 2500 databases with one easy query! >

At 02:42 PM 3/31/01 -0700, you wrote: >I don't have any census CDs because of their cost. Can someone compare the >census CDs to the online services? > >judy I have a few of the heritagequest census CDs and think the ones at ancestry.com are easier to read at the bottom of the page where there is so much background -- although not being a computer/graphic geek, it's possible that could be cleaned up but I don't know how. The hertitagequest CDs are also not individually indexed. I also have the FTM 1850 MA census CD set which is indexed -- still have some really hard to read parts -- not much improved from the microfilm - but the index (heads) makes is valuable. Lin

I bought some CDs with families on them from Family Tree Maker (FTM) . Didn't find any of MY folks and felt cheated...until I found a very small paragraph that said you can return them within X number of days if they don't have what/who you are looking for on them. I'm not sure about other services, but if they are similiar to FTM then you can return them..unfortunately, I didn't see that notice until it was too late..But I know now. So read the CD catalog for Company policies on returns to be sure. I personally cannot afford them but if I had the money....I might think differently. Also be sure the CDs are compatible with your OS system(Win/Mac) and the geneaolgy program you have. BFaye Searching for "Russell" Plummer, "roustabout" for a Circus down South , in the early 1900s. >At 02:42 PM 3/31/01 -0700, you wrote: > >>I don't have any census CDs because of their cost. Can someone compare the >>census CDs to the online services? >> >>judy > >I have a few of the heritagequest census CDs and think the ones at >ancestry.com are easier to read at the bottom of the page where there is so >much background -- although not being a computer/graphic geek, it's >possible that could be cleaned up but I don't know how. The hertitagequest >CDs are also not individually indexed. I also have the FTM 1850 MA census >CD set which is indexed -- still have some really hard to read parts -- not >much improved from the microfilm - but the index (heads) makes is valuable. > >Lin > > >==== MA-CENSUS-LOOKUP Mailing List ==== >To view completed census transcriptions online >http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/inv/index.html > >============================== >Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp