• Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

  • If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  • This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  • It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here

The new Find My Past is coming......

I found the new site very, very slow yesterday.
Also, if I was in a set of results and looked at a record, if I clicked the results button I went back to the beginning of the set of results.
If I just used the back button, then I went back to where I was in the results, which was what I wanted.
 
Alexander Bisset said:
Version 10 has been flagged as a critical update over v9 on windows 7 for last couple of months. Which suggests your machine may not be up to date with its windows updates?

However as Peter suggests chrome is probably a better bet anyway as it seems far smoother and quicker on most sites than IE ever was. You can get Chrome here .
Click to expand...

I think I'd prefer to stick with IE, at least for now, as I don't really have the time or inclination to get to grips with something new at the moment, but thanks for the suggestion. However, I have now updated to IE10.

I do keep my computer up to date with Windows updates as soon as they come out although I don't have it set to automatic - that is, I get notifications as soon as updates are available but I choose when to download them, and so can if I want to choose not to download something. However, I think updating to a new version of IE is just about the only thing I've ever chosen not to do straight away after the notification, and that's because previously there have sometimes been initial problems with new versions.
 
I was about to report the peculiarity between opening FMP in Firefox and in IE10. I have Windows 7 and traditionally use Firefox for FMP (and for my own reasons use IE for the Forum). So I opened FMP today (in Firefox) which immediately opened to the old style site and made no effort to divert me to the new site set up.

I knew of the new site because a few days ago received an email from FMP advising it was now open. I clicked on the link in the email which opened in IE (I have version 10; I did have 11 but disliked it so set it back to 10). I had a 'peek' at the new site (which performed without hitch) but decided I would investigate further another day.

So today was that day and I opened the FMP tab in Firefox as I always do. I was surprised it opened to the old FMP setup and, as I said, made no attempt to divert me to the new; I used the old site for quite some while. Then I opened the Forum (in IE ) and read this discussion topic so, out of curiosity, signed in using IE (no attempt to log out of Firefox). Yes, you've guessed it open with the new site and I was able to toggle between old and new using Firefox/IE10.

I agree the new style will take some getting used to and will leave comment on that for another time. I am sure it will be only a matter of time before Firefox diverts to the new site much as Family Search did a while ago. However for what it's worth I can report that IE10 appears to work well with the new site, as I am sure Firefox will also do, particularly if I elect to search for the new site.
 
My Firefox diverts me to the new site, but I cannot sign in to it. No error message, it takes me to the next page, but I am not signed in.
I had to use Chrome to sign in , that was fine.
 
Is anyone else having trouble using the new FMP for searching for specific streets in a census? I tested the new system using a known census result. I searched for all results for Austral Street in the 1911 census but got 0 results. I searched for William Alfred Reed born in 1883 (who I knew lived in Austral Street) in 1911 and found him - and the transcript gave his address as 6 Austral Street. I added Austral Street as a filter to my search for William Alfred Reed and got 0 results. Can anyone see where I am going wrong please?
 
LawrenceP said:
Is anyone else having trouble using the new FMP for searching for specific streets in a census? I tested the new system using a known census result. I searched for all results for Austral Street in the 1911 census but got 0 results. I searched for William Alfred Reed born in 1883 (who I knew lived in Austral Street) in 1911 and found him - and the transcript gave his address as 6 Austral Street. I added Austral Street as a filter to my search for William Alfred Reed and got 0 results. Can anyone see where I am going wrong please?
Click to expand...

It's not you....it's them:mad:
 
Oh what joy! So we have another "improvement" which turns out to include some backward steps. I did another test, and tried to find a marriage - but I can find nowhere on the search page, nor filters, that allows me to give the approximate year of the marriage.

I used to much prefer FMP over Ancestry for census and BMD searching - but this is starting to worry me!
 
And here is another search issue that I have come across.

I am sure that many of us have searched for offspring of marriages (post-1911) by inserting the surnames of the father and mother. But the births search page only allows for a search on the surname of the person in question (so also usually the father's surname). You then have to do a search on that and get a myriad of results - but there is no filter labelled mother's surname. I took a punt and entered the mother's surname under Keyword, and that did the trick. But that is hardly user-friendly.

Who designed these search pages and options? Have they ever done any FH searching?!!!!!
 
I did another test, and tried to find a marriage - but I can find nowhere on the search page, nor filters, that allows me to give the approximate year of the marriage.
Click to expand...

I have now found it - what appears at first sight to be the birth filter is actually a filter for birth, death or other event.
 
LawrenceP said:
Who designed these search pages and options? Have they ever done any FH searching?!!!!!
Click to expand...

Perhaps more worrying is that the beta testers ie: people like you and me didn't spot these things and suggest they be fixed before going live. Sadly often with beta testing people are so fixated on being first to see something new they lose sight of the fact that their role is to report errors and suggest improvements.

NB. for the curious I am in no way shape or form suggesting that my excellent beta testers for FT Analyzer fall into that category. I thought I better make that clear before any of them read this and take offence. :)
 
peter said:
This beta tester was not fixated! I reported all the problems weeks ago.
Click to expand...

Sadly that's worse it means they were told but didn't listen :( Reading the posts on their blog on feedback from users, users HATE the new interface and report lots of problems.
 
As with all "upgraded" search sites, it takes getting used to and one needs to work at it, forgetting how you used to do it and using the Help and other facilities. I quite like it in principle, but (as I have said above) there are problems which need fixing. We have all got used to the new Family Search, which I do now think is an improvement on the old. But I really do hope that FMP listen to all their users and act on their complaints; I don't want to have to start using Ancestry as my census search engine of choice as I still loathe it!
 
If I sign in from a FMP email, I am taken to the new format, but still search via the 'old' from my already logged- in start button.
 
Bob Spiers said:
... However for what it's worth I can report that IE10 appears to work well with the new site, as I am sure Firefox will also do, particularly if I elect to search for the new site.
Click to expand...

Yes, as I thought, using Firefox to search for Findmypast (instead of clicking on the long used tab in the Bookmark Toolbar) up came the new site, and more to the point my login was automatically recognised (via cookies associated with the old site). I bookmarked the new site and -and for the time being at any rate - I have the benefit of old and new, auto logged to both which is strange.

Using the new site I did a couple of 'known' 1911 Census searches, and my goodness it went all round the Wrekin. As my father would have said 'What a Palaver'! The old site produced the results far quicker.

For the moment it is likely the changed format, for instance instead of being able to select a Census year from a dropdown box (with person or address variation) you now are asked to enter a Census year with a +/- 2 years default. (Doh!):confused: I entered 1911, selected United Kingdom and in the blank space alongside (no drop down county box) I entered Birmingham. Wrong! I should have entered Warwickshire because the actual place was Aston; at the time regarded separately from Birmingham. Once I found the family I then had to cope with icon buttons to display images, and made a mess of that.

Of course it will become second nature in time and I am loath to condemn a new format on the strength of a 5 minute test (well it should have been 5 minutes but it took 15).

I have just noted Peter owns to having been a Beta tester so if his experience is anything to go by, I do not hold out much hope for much needed improvements. Come back Ancestry all is forgiven!
 
Bob Spiers said:
Using the new site I did a couple of 'known' 1911 Census searches, and my goodness it went all round the Wrekin. As my father would have said 'What a Palaver'! The old site produced the results far quicker.

For the moment it is likely the changed format, for instance instead of being able to select a Census year from a dropdown box (with person or address variation) you now are asked to enter a Census year with a +/- 2 years default. (Doh!):confused: I entered 1911, selected United Kingdom and in the blank space alongside (no drop down county box) I entered Birmingham. Wrong! I should have entered Warwickshire because the actual place was Aston; at the time regarded separately from Birmingham. Once I found the family I then had to cope with icon buttons to display images, and made a mess of that.
Click to expand...
Hi Bob,
To search a specific census I have found that you have to:
click the top bar 'Search Records'
select 'Census & Land Survey'
Key in your search field, I now see that you can search by address!
scroll down to 'Record Collection' and click on 'Browse Record Collection' and select 'Census' click 'apply filters', Census will appear below the record set box.
scroll down to 'Record Set' and click on 'browse record set' scroll down and click 'more' then click on '1911 census' and click 'apply filters'
Then after all that click on the search button at the bottom and it will only search the 1911 census.
I have lost count of how many more clicks and scrolls you have to do than on the old site!
Good luck!
 
Katie Bee said:
Hi Bob,
To search a specific census I have found that you have to:
click the top bar 'Search Records'
select 'Census & Land Survey'
Key in your search field, I now see that you can search by address!
scroll down to 'Record Collection' and click on 'Browse Record Collection' and select 'Census' click 'apply filters', Census will appear below the record set box.
scroll down to 'Record Set' and click on 'browse record set' scroll down and click 'more' then click on '1911 census' and click 'apply filters'
Then after all that click on the search button at the bottom and it will only search the 1911 census.
I have lost count of how many more clicks and scrolls you have to do than on the old site!
Good luck!
Click to expand...

Thanks Katie: I think it's time to use one of my mother's sayings (with a little irony on the side) - 'it's a piece of cake'. Why didn't I think of all that? And FMP reckon it improves the search experience? No way Pedro!
 
I tried a 'known' post 1913 Marriage search and although confronted with a 'round the houses' search protocol similar to the Census one reported by Katie -plus remembering to click on the page icon (as opposed to a camera) - I was impressed with the fuller information reported. I am just trying to get into the mind set of the new (seemingly) elongated and elaborate search techniques dreamed up by FMP. I reserve judgement for the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top