Hi. Sorry for being a latecomer to this discussion. I just wanted to thank the original poster for this because I was just about to purchase the 2009 Deluxe edition thinking it would keep in sync with the online trees and allow me to take the tree to older relatives via laptop to discuss family questions, make updates to it and then sync it back to the online tree. This thread saved me from buying the software - so thanks very much.

That said, I like the idea of a single family tree online location, that's the only way to generate genuine collaboration between researchers and families. So while Ancestry.com and their fees and uses of data may not always be to our liking, the benefits derived outweigh the questionable practices. Personally, when I see information from another tree that relates to mine, I grab it and note it as tentative until verified. Often the only key we need to verified information is a name and birthdate or year. If you have that as a starting point, it's much easier to confirm than it is when starting from scratch.

Thanks again for fleshing out this issue for others to learn from.

David

I would like to report back, after having raised these issues, and now working with both FTM2009 and Ancestry.com for some time (my online and offline trees now have ~1000 people).

My resolution was to do all original work offline in FTM2009, then make the corresponding entries to Ancestry.com (online). While there is no sync'ing taking place to make things easier, this is not as difficult, or as daunting, as originally anticipated. However, one must be diligent in ALWAYS making the corresponding entries to the online version immediately after making any entries in FTM, lest they should be forgotten.

Also, I would like to add that FTM2009 is indeed a very robust, and much more useful tool than the functionality on Ancestry.com. To put it short, I wouldn't let the missing sync capability keep me from purchasing the software.

I have demo'd it with friends who have been using Ancestry.com until now, and they immediately recognized the benefits of FTM.

Also, and I don't want to start any rumors, as I cannot confirm this, but I believe that the FTM and Ancestry.com teams are working on a solution to make sync'ing between the two easier. I believe I heard them mention an additional method of exporting not just GEDCOM, but also media, sources, and stories, from Ancestry.com to FTM. This is a good step in the right direction. I'm sure that with some support and reminding they will keep working on this feature.

I know, while some may think that they should wait to purchase the software until it has all the bells and whistles they desire, my view is that purchasing the software now, and requesting added functionality will for one provide them the funding to continue work on it, as well as provide them the feedback they need to recognize that this is one of the sore points of FTM and Ancestry.com.

As stated in some above posts, please be sure to leave your feedback at the FTM site, and request that full sync'ing be brought to the upper section of the priority list: http://ftm.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/ftm.cfg/php/enduser/ask_feed...

I agree with you, too. Though I'm no fan of all the duplication of effort required, I find that there are things I just can't do on ancestry that I need to do. First and foremost is printing.

In the hour or so since my posting, I came to the same conclusion. I'll buy just the $25 essentials 2009 version in order to gain the printing capabilities as well as my desire to be able to backup all the work to my own drive just in case something happens to Ancestry.com . . . in this economy, you never know who will be the survivors. Can you imagine loading years of work online only to have it disappear?

Indeed, the basic version is really the only version (you only get additional perks on Ancestry.com with the other versions, it seems to be all the same software though).

I would be interested to hear how you tackle working around the missing synchronization.

-Mike

Synchronization . . . probably exactly as you described. I think that's the only way for the next few years until they get the program to do it automatically. I'm actually surprised they are working on that since so much of the future of software development is forecasted as ASP, web-based. Ideally, their online software would mirror their desktop version's capabilities and they could sync them and work off-line just like a Microsoft Outlook does. But they would need to surrender the unrealistic idea that you can't print your tree online without paying $40 for a snapshot of your tree - that's insane. I have access to a big plotter printer and figure I could print my entire tree on one sheet covering from the 800's AD to present time.

As a note to the online-integrated desktop, there are some of us who are unwilling to do it. There are significant privacy issues involved, and the integrated desktop is MASSIVELY slower than using an offline application.

Hi Daniel,

If you make your tree private and select the option to not even allow the search index to see it, what is the privacy issue? No one can use it or even see individuals in it unless you invite them. That's pretty private in my opinion.

Personally, my tree is private, but I allow the search index to find the names and birthdates of deceased members of the tree (those without dates of death are never displayed). By doing so, I've already encountered a dozen cousins from various branches of my tree, one going back 400 years that I now converse with several times a week via email. That's pretty cool in my book with no perceived risk to privacy for living members of the tree. Since Social Security already publishes full names and birth and death dates for deceased people anyway, as well as being published in the newspapers legally, what's the point of protecting their privacy?

As far as slowing things down, I understand, but again, the point is collaboration and sharing which connects the family across the world. You can't do that with a desktop application and to me, that's the entire purpose of genealogy. I want to get this material, which traces lines of my family back hundreds of years back even to the time of the Roman Empire, in a place where all of the kids and grandkids of all my generations can see it and build on it. To me, this may be one of the grand purposes/benefits of the internet.

"Two easy options for TNG are to provide a download method that includes media, or to provide true synchronization, either of which would not be that difficult for the source developers to create, and both of which have been done in other products already."

I'm very interested in this issue. What are the other products that you refer to?

Peace,
"Guided by the Ancestors"

This is what I came to the forums looking for.

I have a large online family tree with lots of photos and census info attatched to, but my original tree was started with a GEDCOM file that has many many duplicates and I really dont want to comb through 8000+ entries to find them.

I would really like some kind of 'prune' feature on the online system, where I can remove all the members of that duplicate branch.

George,

I apologize for not being more specific. The type of synchronization to which I refer is that used by software developers to maintain version control and distributed cooperative software development by multiple developers who may be spatially separated. These software suites permit simultaneous access and modification to branches in a tree of files and track changes to files over time. A new version is assigned to each modification of each file, which permits backward modifications (i.e., undoing the introduction of mistakes). Examples are RCS, CVS, SVN, various enterprise Microsoft products, and Google Docs.

Hi Daniel,

I agree with your statement:

"As a note to the online-integrated desktop, there are some of us who are unwilling to do it. There are significant privacy issues involved, and the integrated desktop is MASSIVELY slower than using an offline application."

That is not the type of synchonization that most of us want, I believe. And no matter the type of synchronization, it always has to be at-will, meaning it should be off by default, and explicitly activated by the user.

I believe manual synchronization, i.e. downloand and upload with full media content (stories, audio, imagery, etc.) is all that is required.

Or, alternative to that, a synchronization feature that lets you merge with an online tree directly (i.e. import from online source).

The file versioning systems used by developers (I am a developer, and am using them on a daily basis) aren't very usefull for non-techie users, as their concepts are often abstract, and non-intuitive. Also, you would only be able to version the tree as a whole, and perhaps the media files. If a versioning system were to be introduced into genealogy, it would have to be at the level of the individual record in the tree to be useful, enabling the capturing of individual changes to be recorded.

I could see this being extremely useful for collaboration projects if it is built with an easy-to-use interface; unfortunately but I think we're still a long ways off from that.

Cheers,
Mike

Join the club.
My mother and I have been doing genealogy for 30 years and we wanted to start collaborating. I bought us both Acestory meberships and copies of FTM2009 so we could do the work instead of sending PAF files back and forth via email. You cannot imaging how disappointed I was that the tech stupport person from Acestory had told me wrong on being able to synchronize our trees without having to upload/dowload GED files all the time. I am and IT manager and this is a MINOR fix to their software.

Schievelbein,

I am interested in seeing where you might have read, that this synchronizing of files was talked about. I have certainly seen folks, like yourself, being disappointed that it can't be done (at this point). But, I would like to see where that assumption started.

In the mean time, I would suggest that you use this link:

http://ftm.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/ftm.cfg/php/enduser/ask_feed...

And provide some detailed feedback to Family Tree Maker 2009.

You will probably not receive feedback from them, but the developers do read the feedback.

Good luck,

Russ

To quote many websites, including FTM and Ancestory:
- "Better Ancestry Member Tree Integration"

As a software manager for over 30 years, if all my software did was:
1-Export and inport in the standard format and
2-Act as a fancy web browser
I would NOT consider is Better Integration. These are standard features that MANY products already have on the market and are not Advanced over them. Advanced Intgration with any other type of product would be the ability to interact with the application/website on a web-services level with full CRUD (Create/Read/Update/Delete) capabilities at a very minimum. While I do not think that having a web based full merge is realistic right away, with normal integration, the desktop application should be able to perform this task and update the main (Ancestory.com) database upon next connection. All of these functionalities are normal database application functionalities that are justly expected by any two applications that are owned by the same company and advertised and Integrated. I have seen these capabilities added to existing applications in as little as a week, what is taking Ancestory so long?

Schievelbein,

I appreciate what you are saying, and Ancestry.com and the PC Based Family Tree Maker are almost where YOU are expecting them to me. Update on the Web or on the PC and be able to update the other.

1 - Do date, from what I have seen and tried out, I can Update my Family Tree Maker Version 2009 family file and post the update to the Ancestry.com website, including images.

2 - I can update the Ancestry.com tree and download it to Family Tree Maker.


The detail that is missing in #1, is that it creates a new Tree at Ancestry.com.

The detail that is missing in #2, is that the GEDCOM is the only way download from Ancestry.com to the PC. My guess is that feature was created that way, because until recently, Family Tree Maker was NOT the only way to update an Ancestry.com tree. What needs to be added from Ancestry.com is the ability to download in the Family Tree Maker format, as an option.

So, your 'Better Ancestry Member Tree Integration" statement is true, it's just that WE, the users what MORE and NOW.

I do think the both Ancestry.com and Family Tree Maker will get us there.

One Family Tree Maker user's opinion.

I do suspect that IF you started out with Ancestry.com Family Tree product, you might have a different opinion. For those of us who started out with the PC based program, we have been able to maintain Family Tree Maker Users Home pages and we did NOT have a way to download load from the website. So, with Ancestry.com and Version 2009, this is a step up. Just waiting for the option to update a tree, not create a new one, online.

Russ

I am new to geneology and all my information is on ancestry.com. I was thinking of getting FTM2009 so I could put it on my laptop and go to Grandma's or Mom's where they don't have internet access to work on it with them then sync it all back together at home. I'm glad I read this and found that it won't be that easy. I am not computer literate at all and yet I'm surprised this isn't a feature. My Zune player syncs with multiple computers and I have worked on college group projects online. It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to sync.

Laurel,

Actually, you CAN do what you want.

You can download what you have on Ancestry.com and open that GEDCOM file with Version 2009.

You can then update the file on your Laptop.

When you get back home, or have access to the internet again, you can upload the changes you have made.

Please understand that a GEDCOM file (Download from Ancestry) will not contain any images that you may have on Ancestry. However, if you have images on your PC, in Version 2009, you CAN upload them as part of your file.

If you go this route, then I would suggest that you then move the maintenance of your file from Ancestry to your PC.

Russ

Russ,

That is not correct, as I currently understand the functionality of Ancestry.com. While it is true that you can download your family tree OFF of Ancestry.com, you currently CANNOT merge any changes you make offline into the original tree; you will be forced to create a new tree.

That is the crucial functionality that is needed, and that is what is driving people away. It just isn't reasonable to expect people to keep re-inviting their entire family and collaborators to every new tree that is posted.

-Mike

Mike,

What you said it true. BUT, you can, In Fact, upload and updated tree.

Yes, there are issues with that.

I also am not disagreeing with you about the need.

As I have said a number of times, on this issue, it depends on where you started. The mode here, between Version 2009 and Ancestry.com and Previous Versions of Family Tree Maker are not too different when using a Family Tree Maker User Home Page. That is where I am coming from.

Certainly, if you started on Ancestry.com and now are using Version 2009, then it is an issue. That is why I suggest using the 2009 Feed Back form to let the developers know.

Russ

If the trees could be merged imagine how much less incorrect information there would be floating around on Ancestry.com. I am constantly finding and fixing errors, and when I upload a new tree (usually every 3 months) that bad information is still out there and gets propagated until it looks like the truth. Being able to synchronize the information would limit the amount of bad info out there.

Daniel - you say that a media download method (for ancestry.com?) and true synchronization have already been done in other genealogy products. Which ones? I looked and couldn't see where it explicitly says for Rootsmagic 4, Legacy 7, or any of the rest that they do this. Please let me know.

I apologize for not being more specific. I did say that such synchronization has been accomplished in many other products, but no genealogy product of which I am aware. For some reason this continues to be an unsolved problem...

The only sychronized PC to on-line database I use is MyHeritage Family Builder@. The PC-resident program is free and readily posts data with photos/docs on a personally-controlled website. If you want to post more than 250 names and use the site-to-site matching/copying capabilities, you must pay a monthly fee. Others may import "your" data and photos into their PC from your on-line posting once you authorize them to "belong" to your MyHeritage.com site.
I have imported data and scanned photos/docs from several family researchers in three countries using MyHeritage.com. While I continue to use FTM v16 for several files, I limit scrapbook photos to a minimum due to their file size impact and the difficulty of sharing them while imbeded in the *.FTW database.

I agree wholeheartedly ! I have been using FTM at home for 10 years and thought I'd give Ancestry.com a shot to see if I would find any information. I did find information and started adding it to the tree I created on Ancesty.com site but found it very time consuming to have to manage my home computer info and the one on line as well...it seems ludicrous to me that they cannot combine the software they market for home use with their online version to share online information which we are PAYING to obtain.

As far as I am concerned Ancestry seems to be looking out for themselves and building their information base without any thought to their consumers. You cannot even print out all the information you attach through their hints to a printable report. Their new trees are cumbersome and only bring up some descendents, not all.

I frankly am surprised at the overall ineptitude of this web site especially considering the length of time they have been in business one would think it would be of a higher caliber than it is.

My plan is to just keep my home database and use the online site for a few months just to obtain info and not supply free research FOR Ancestry.com I hope they will start to be more consumer friendly especially since many of us have bought their home version of Family Tree Maker which has many nice features for reports and linking people together. It is amazing to me that you can't combine people from tree to tree either online OR that you can't import infor from your home tree into one you have online, you have to creat a whole separate tree- NUTS !!! Oh well I learned my lesson the hard way waasting a lot of time using their site to build ridiculous trees that don't help me in any way. KAthy

Why not something as simple as this: if the name of the tree being uploaded matches the name of a tree already at Ancestry.com, provide a dialog box that says "Replace, Add as new, or Cancel." The dialog would work as follows:

Replace: the uploaded tree would replace the existing tree of the same name. All permissions etc. associated with the replaced tree would be kept intact for the replacing version.

Add as new: a new tree would be created with a suffix of -1 (or -2 or -3 as required.)

Cancel: the upload operation is canceled with nothing changed or uploaded.