The New Search Filters in

Looking for genealogical online records can be like looking for needle in a prairie full of haystacks. Which haystacks do you search? In which order? We've just released a new filtering feature that will help you separate the hay from the needles.

After you conduct a search, you can filter your results by:

  • Birth (and birth-like event) date and place
  • Marriage (and marriage-like event) date and place
  • Residence date and place
  • Death (and death-like event) date and place
  • Other event date and place (such as immigration, military service, etc.)
  • Gender
  • Category (record type)

The filters are located on the left side of the list of search results. Here’s how you use them:

  1. In any search form, enter information about the person you want to find, and click Search.
  2. Review your search results, and decide exactly what you want to find.
  3. Click the filter type that you want to apply. For example, click Birth Place.
  4. A pop-up box listing subfilters appears. The number that is next to each filter in the box indicates how many records will remain if you apply that filter. A filter is available only when it contains records that match your search.

  5. Click the subfilter that you want to apply, such as Canada, USA, and Mexico.
  6. To go down another level on that subfilter (such as the United States), click the triangle that is next to the subfilter, and select what you want.
  7. Keep applying filters and subfilters until you have reduced the number of search results down to just the records that you wish to see.

When you apply multiple filters, remember the following tips:

  • You can combine as many different filters as you need. For example, you can use filters for birthplace, birth date, gender, and category at the same time. You cannot, however, select more than one filter of the same type. For example, you cannot select more than one birthplace filter (such as Virginia and North Carolina). Allowing multiple filters of the same type is something that we will be working on for a future release.
  • If you wish to change information in the search form, such as a surname, click the New Search button at the top left to see the fields. When you click Search, you will conduct a new search, and your filters will be reset when your new search results appear. We are considering adding a feature that would let you choose whether you want to apply the same filters to your new search results.
  • As you apply filters, remember that the effect of the filters is cumulative. Each new filter is applied to the set of search results that are currently shown on the screen. For example, if you apply a birth date filter, the search results are constrained to the records that match that filter. Applying a birthplace filter takes that constrained set of results and reduces it to the records that match both the birthplace and birth date.
  • Adding too many filters may cause you to miss valid records in your search results. So that you can tell which filters are applied, they appear highlighted in white.
  • At any time, you can look at the top of the search results to see how many records remain in your filtered search results and to refresh your memory on your initial search parameters.
  • To remove a filter, simply click the x that appears next to it.
  • Click below to to post a comment to let us know how the filters have helped you and to suggest improvement we should consider for future releases. Your feedback helps us improve this feature and the rest of

    Comments (1151)

    Post a Comment »

    1. I couldnt agree more with all the comments below. The old IGI site was so much easier to use and now with the new site I cant even find people who were on the old site. What have you done It is a complete stuff up. Now, if I find a record on the old site and click the batch number to look at other records in that batch, it automatically goes to the new site and then tells me that the persosn I was looking at doesnt exist. Really PLEASE let us go back to ALL the records that were on the old site.

      M Steenvoorde 12 February 2012
      7:12 am
    2. can not find myslef

      john 11 February 2012
      2:55 pm
    3. As you can see this website is full of [url=http//] Militarism free[/url]

      Nevaeh_Alabama 11 February 2012
      10:57 am
    4. This NEW site is definitely a retrograde step. The old site might be considered simple and non sophisticated by the computer buffs who devise this site, but in my opinion they are just trying to be too clever. The average user of this site generally SIMPLY wants to be able to make SIMPLE searches in a SIMPLE way, because most of us think and act in a SIMPLE manner. Remeber to KISS = Keep It Simple, Stupid. In summary, -- -- DONT LIKE IT.

      Vic 10 February 2012
      1:20 pm
    5. I agree with the first few comments I have read. This is the first time I have looked for information at this site, but I think it would be easier to find my person if I looked in Google Why dont you just use a search bar instead of all these layers of filters? I was searching for Katrine Torgersons death record in Steele County North Dakotabetween 1900 and 1930. The first search returned over 2,000 Katrine Torgersons, but only one on the first page was from North Dakota. That is when I started trying the filters. Finally, the system showed only one person...Torgerson from Minnesota

      Marcia Nelson 10 February 2012
      4:59 am
    6. I also get very frustrated as I can generally find more info on the old site. Why doesnt it match up with verified records on old site showing up on new site? I have also put Batch no etc from old site into new one and find it doesnt work. I have just looked at new Derbyshire, England records. Filtered with place Duffield and told there arent any but scrolling through the non filtered results find lots of them All is not bad though as I have found new records eventually.

      Carol 10 February 2012
      12:26 am
    7. I know that your staff is trying to do its best to create the best site possible for all of us, and I commend you for your efforts. I have been involved in Family History for over 40 years, mainly searching through microfilms and books. I am grateful for modern technology and the rewards I have reaped from this wonderful site, but this new version is very challenging to say the least. I do like the idea of the filtering feature.But as I search for records from Sonora, Mexico I do end up with records from Austria to Colorado, to the Phillipines, even if I click the Exact button on the location. I do hope that you will be able to correct flaws soon. I wish you the best of luck and I know you will succeed. Thank you for your efforts.

      A. Romero 10 February 2012
      12:08 am
    8. Please please please go back to the old format. I cant find anything like I used to. Im so glad I made printouts back then. This site is useless to me now. Sorry, but its true. I cant even figure out how to get back to the home page.

      B Fisher 09 February 2012
      6:26 pm
    9. I found your so-called service totally useless.

      John Fitts 09 February 2012
      2:29 pm
    10. This new site is rubbish The old one was much more simple and user friendly and you have now taken away the link to the old site. Please put this back.

      Jayne Williams 09 February 2012
      10:08 am
    11. I would like to be able to search for military records...Im having trouble finding them with the search parameters.

      Dawn 08 February 2012
      10:53 pm
    12. I agree....the old system was better. Ancestry has bought you out and blocked many pages.

      M. Ross 08 February 2012
      5:45 pm
    13. I have read some of these comments and I agree with them, please bring back the IGI, this was a great tool for searching and you could then search for further baptisms under C reference, I cannot see whether this can be done on the new site, and when I ask for marriages, why does it also give me baptisms although I indicate I do not want them, please listen to all the fed up family historians, yes I know it is free, but only because our parish record keepers let you have them information Elaine

      Elaine 06 February 2012
      8:36 am
    14. What has happenned to the, until recently, prominently featured blue button on your homepage giving access to the previous family search site? Both sites are useful but searches on the older site were much quicker and provided far more comprehensive results. As a number of your other correspondents are pointing out, identical searches in the old and the new do not, unfortunately, give the same results and this is not only very frustrating but also extremely limiting as it suggests that many of the records you hold may not be accessible any longer if the original site cannot be accessed which is a great pity considering the labour that must have gone into indexing them in the first place. Please can we have this link re-instated.

      mailvr 06 February 2012
      3:50 am
    15. The Beta Testing version was a whole lot easier to manuveuer. In the olde system you could check several boxes that might be relevant to your research. In the new system you have to go back and forth too much to check each option. you could also use ranges for years. It was totally easier to find people under the old system.

      Karen 05 February 2012
      4:18 pm
    16. I read all these posts and almost without exception users are telling you LDS that this new system is harder to grasp, doesnt work properly, is more time-consuming and frustrating and is not fit for the purpose. If this were a DVD player Id take it back to the shop and demand a refund, but in the case of the new search system,. it looks like you are determined to ignore all the users and carry on regardless.

      Tricia 04 February 2012
      6:00 am
    17. Have used your site for a number of years now but the new search system is no help at all before it was quite straight forward now its very confusing and makes things 100% more difficult.

      Jay Vaux 03 February 2012
      3:56 pm
    18. OMG Family Search What have you done???? Have not visited this particular site for some time and WOW...what a change. Sadly, not for the better. People that I found EASILY here last year apparently dont exist anymore according to you....Filters or no filters, the people I am again trying to access are no longer listed ANYWHERE. What were you thinking? Was it that all of us WANT to spend 7 times longer trying to find things? If that was it then congratulations You have succeeded in that particular quest. Now could you please return the site to its prior easy to use format? Based on all the comments I have seen & read here Id have to say that the vast majority of us would like to return to the old know....when it actually WORKED and was easy to use??? On the plus side I do appreciate that this site is free to use and I do thank you for that - I had a LOT of great results from this site last year and put it all to good use. I was hoping to repeat that success today....but sadly, thanks to this new & improved system, it was not to be. Thanks anyway.

      Aggravated Jane 03 February 2012
      1:39 pm
    19. I wish I could say I enjoy the new search system, but I cant. It is way too cumbersome. Is there a way to access and use the former search?

      02 February 2012
      4:46 pm
    20. this new system gives more problems than answers sam

      sam 02 February 2012
      4:13 pm
    21. Thank you for all the work in providing free access to so many records. However, I must add my voice to those expressing frustration and disappointment with the new site. While I do find more information on the new site, at times, in trying to cross reference....between sites.... I actually find more information on the old site than on the new. For example, on the old site I found a name lited four times, but on the new........the name dosent exist at all. How is this possible??????????

      Carol 02 February 2012
      5:42 am
    22. I have used your site for many years and have done many trees and it was always great, I have also used all types of other search engines. For a while I have been searching the original archives and just returned to your site to check something. What have you done???? A great workable site now DOESNT. I dont know what the filters are filtering but it isnt what I put in. After about an hour I found a good hit which should have been easy to find, I printed it, put the details in the next day and after an hour and a half have still not found it again even using all the details from the printout. Then I found all these other complaints so I not going senile

      Frustrated Bob. 01 February 2012
      6:02 am
    23. Sorry, but I agree with alot of the unhappy persons that are using this site....I enjoyed using the old search program on the historical records. This new system takes up to much time..(page by page) you get no place....It is time consuming...I do prefer the old method....

      Kitty 31 January 2012
      8:43 pm
    24. I found the first person I was looking for Immediately. However, I dont find how to start a new search.

      Thomas Richard 31 January 2012
      1:59 pm
    25. This comment is in response to the comment made by Clive. We do read every comment submitted to each blog entry on the FamilySearch blog. Each comment is reviewed and considered. FamilySearch is ALWAYS working to improve the services we provide to our users. We know that sometimes, it is difficult to deal with change. This is especially true when people get used to using a feature or when the way something is done changes. Sometimes, changes are made so that users can test a new feature. Most of the time, a change is implemented to increase access to records. Please remember that in today’s world of technology, computerized programs, systems and products cannot stay the same. FamilySearch is no different. FamilySearch’s database gains more than 300 million new names every year. A database that grows that fast must continually change in order to allow users to get the easiest and quickest access to the records we provide. We regret any difficulties you and others may experience as feature continue to change. Our only intent is to provide the easiest possible access to the greatest number of records at no cost to our patrons.

      AndersonSF 31 January 2012
      1:15 pm
    26. Id like to order copies of records Ive seen on please let me know how/where I contact thanks

      kay 31 January 2012
      4:58 am
    27. I give up, search filters just wont work for me. Im sure theirs another way to get the information I need.

      Barbara 29 January 2012
      11:55 pm
    28. For instance, my grandfather was born in Oct. of 1867. On my computer, I have to go page by page in the birth records for those years, click through each new page... trying to finally get to the page with the info. If there are 525 birth records, and he was born in Oct, and the births begin alphabetically, I need to go page by page to get to Oct. So far I have not been able to get though so many pages before Safari quits on me and I need to start again. The little box that shows the page we are on...well, we should be able to put a page number in it so it automatically scrolls through the years, months, days. How do I get through a book of records? without having to go one by one.

      Diana keller 29 January 2012
      11:36 pm
    29. I have to agree with most of these postings. The old Pilot search method was superior to this one. I am finding this time consuming and essentially useless. I cannot even find documents that came up immediately on the old site. Even when I put in the exact search terms, dates, places (for instance, Cook County, Illinois Marriages), I end up with results I would expect with no information provided Census data for Wisconsin, North Dakota, etc. This is just an exercise in futility. The old adage still fits If it aint broke, dont fix it.

      Ruth 29 January 2012
      11:36 am
    30. By the look of things you are not listening and this will make no difference, but in case I am wrong, I will add my voice. from the comments received you have RUINED a large proportion of family history research for thousands of people (including all the ones who dont post comments) (and improved it for virtually no-one) - there can be no excuse for this continuing now you have been told - the only thing you can do now to make amends is change it back to EXACTLY what it was STRAIGHT AWAY. You should hang your heads in shame.

      Clive 27 January 2012
      4:45 pm
    31. Why are we not getting answers? I like your info. but dont understand it now. Thanks for all you do. Please tell us why are our questions being filtered through the WWW? I have clicked what I wanted to know & it came up with the document. I am so disappointing.

      Sandra 26 January 2012
      11:09 pm
    32. The new system is overcomplicated to the point where I struggle to use it. (This from an implementer of SAP systems and a genealogist of some 30 yrs.) So many people have contributed to your data base in good faith only to their good work ruined by a spectacularly inefficient retrieval system. The old box retrieval system , although boringly sparse in color was efficient. Maybe send your programmers a set of crayons, have them color this in and re-implement.

      George Moor 26 January 2012
      12:17 pm
    33. I have to agree with so many of the replies in that the old system was so much better than the new. There are only twenty items to view, but there may be over one thousand hits. That means so much more searching and frustration from the old search method. I find I use your site less and less, because it takes so much time to do one search, scrolling through pages and pages, and not finding anything. With the old method, I only had to scan one page and decide if there was anything that might be what I was looking for. The earlier search method on your site was much better.

      Paul D. Garrity 23 January 2012
      8:05 pm
    34. I enjoy the searching but the pilot search site that stopped running a while back was much better. If you found a family member right under that was the rest of the family. The site was much easier to surf. The oldest Family search is the best. The new site is so hard to find any information

      mnelson 21 January 2012
      11:45 pm
    35. My first time using your site. Not getting ANY positive results. Other sites gave me bits of info up to the point of pay please to see your FREE info. YOU are advertizing FREE as well, & FREE IS GOOD,I think, but so far that seems to indicate free of desired info. PLEASE FIX IT I would like to use your site.

      Linda Bridgewater 21 January 2012
      7:12 am
    36. The new search is, unfortunately, not user friendly cumbersome and seemingly inaccurate. I can no longer find information that was there so easily. I am sorry as I am sure you sincerely tried to improve things.

      karen 20 January 2012
      4:32 pm
    37. I think the new system is great. I was so frustrated that so much of the info has been bought by that I am thankful that what i can find on this site is so useful. Thank you for keeping this free.

      lisa r. 18 January 2012
      2:51 pm
    38. Love it I am finding a lot more records than before. Keep it up

      Michael 17 January 2012
      2:54 pm
    39. I am so saddened by your continued use of the new system. Have you read any of our emails at all? I have had some luck with my searches, and I Thank You, by not as many as before by a long shot. I have found myself falling asleep in front of my computer as I search thru page after page, attempting to find a family member in Georgia and having to go thru birth records of England and Wales ?, never finding the missing person, even though I have a picture of his headstone before me, so I know he did indeed exist, but not in England or Wales I have tried the tips you have offered, to no avail. How sad, as you have such a wealth of information that I have referred you to other persons as being a wonderful site now Ill have to retract that until you can show me that you have changed back to your previous venue.

      Kathie L. Webb Blair 17 January 2012
      12:33 am
    40. It would be really useful to have a NOT function on search, as in I dont want to see any Census data from anywhere. The old system used to divide results into categories which were easy to skip over.

      jonmalings 15 January 2012
      1:44 am
    41. I agree with all these users. This web page is worthless, I have been wasting my time searching. I can find nothing. Please listen to users, and go back to the old system.

      Maria S. 14 January 2012
      4:10 pm
    42. This is great. I was able to bet copies of actual birth certificates from early 1800s

      Judy 14 January 2012
      1:11 pm
    43. I also prefer the old system, where the country was applied. Entering it now means nothing looking for England I am confronted with pages of results from the USA. I have no ancestors there so, surely, it should be possible for we who do not live there to search other countries exclusively. The person I am searching for should be easy to find in the area I entered in the place part but obviously he has many, many namesakes in the USA whose names I do NOT wish to have to search through.

      Jan 13 January 2012
      9:13 pm
    44. This new family tree thing is awesome, and i didnt even know half the people that popped up, thank you sooooooo much . I just have one question, how do you see if someone was bapfized or not?

      Juju 11 January 2012
      7:42 am
    45. Has anyone from Family Search yet resonded to all the criticism of the new site? If they have, where can we access this response? I would be very interested to see how they answer this mass of criticism.

      Suse 10 January 2012
      10:11 am
    46. The old adage of if it aint broke dont fix it applies perfectly to your new search filters. Why did you change what was a very good and simple, easy to use system for this load of junk??

      malcolm j. 09 January 2012
      4:34 pm
    47. Please change back to the old system, the new one is a waste of time, before I could find records, but now I waste my time trying to find records that I know are there, Is anyone listening please.

      Betty 09 January 2012
      4:09 pm
    48. Is this site being possibly being deliberately sabotaged with viruses to be plagued with so many odd and inaccurate results? Or cannot find anything at all even when you know given information is correct and search information should be available?

      Allan Convey 08 January 2012
      11:43 pm
    49. any place that records names of people who died in the great San Francisco, CA earthquake in 1906?

      Dr. Donna K Buechler 07 January 2012
      10:26 pm
    50. I cant see the point of having to enter a search place when, instead of Devon or -- even -- the UK, I get US census information. Im gettiing increasingly frustrated. Not one of my ancestors lived in the US, so why do I have to wade through pages of US information to find the tiny scrap which is of interest to me? The old system used to list the findings by county, which was great. Its far more miss than hit nowadays. Sigh.

      MaryAnne 06 January 2012
      6:25 pm
    51. I also used the old site but the new site has far more PR entries. Have just found the family members who I searched for. Use the batch numbers found on the entry and then refine search.

      Diana 05 January 2012
      10:08 am
    52. Having tried out these boxes for the first time, some info generally correct - every response is no record found. Now I see that all comments without fail, reflect same problem What a waste of time and effort

      pauline 04 January 2012
      4:09 pm
    53. Please go back to OLD NEW not worth the powder to blow it to

      Gum 03 January 2012
      7:04 pm
    54. WOW What a change Ive read through the Whats New and the Getting Started and still cant seem to successfully navigate through this new search function. It occurs to me that perhaps the developers are not dedicated genealogists and therefore dont fully understand how we research. While the old system needed some updating, it worked quite well and information was presented in an easily understandable way. I was trying to find information using the last name Baird, lived in United States, Kentucky between 1900-1949. The very first answer retrieved was for Beard, not in Kentucky and prior to 1900. However, as I looked further down the list, I found the name Baird in Kentucky during the timeframe I needed. I double-checked my entry to make sure I had not made any typos, which could provide a possible explaination to the order of the information, but I had made none. I tried another search, but the results were similar. I continued research for about 2 more hours, becoming increasingly confused with the results. Im not sure what the intention was for the new searching features, but please review the changes and try not to throw the baby out with the bath water. The first attempt to provide genealogists with an internet tool was well received and very useful I look forward to having that back again.

      Becky 03 January 2012
      4:23 pm
    55. The old system was much better finding family members plus it gave us their jobs and address details which assisted with the research. This gave us a belonging and under standing what our families were like. Plus the info also helped us to rule a person/family out and helped find the correct person/family. Here it now gives very little why have you altered to a poorer data base? Please amend the replacement data system to incorporate the old information once provided or revert back to the old system which worked very well.

      P 03 January 2012
      1:30 pm
    56. Oh dear I thought it was just me, but I now see that you have a lot of dissatisfied users. Please, please, please can we have the old system back. It was so much easier to find family links. Now I dont seem to be able to find anything.

      Rosemarie 03 January 2012
      7:39 am
    57. trying to hang of new system. looiking for inf on mary ward born 6th nov 1867 in moneymore derry parent micheal ward and iSABELLA Holland dont if she s died got marries any help

      mary 02 January 2012
      3:59 pm
    58. What a waste of time I feed in a name in Nottinghamshire England UK or United Kingdom or Europe any combination one can think of and get back any where in the world but what I want. I have spent hours scrolling through large numbers of files got nowhere the old system worked, this new one I give up

      Geo.e.Clark 02 January 2012
      9:19 am
    59. I am new to this,but when I post info that I know to be true and exact, it tells me there is no such person or place or married ,etc. You have really screwed-up a good thing.

      Yvone Hoines 01 January 2012
      8:33 pm
    60. I am having a hard time using your site,it,s hard finding things ,like my mothers marriage record. you sit and click away,and still don,t come up with anything. I don,t know what the old site was like,i am new at this.

      dee 31 December 2011
      4:24 pm
    61. I dont know what the old search was like, but to me all mine are pretty much in order. Could someone tell me, the difference.

      trish 31 December 2011
      6:32 am
    62. Dec. 30, 2011 Its been a long time since I use your new search program, and I dont like it. It doesnt help me get to the information I was able to get to before. Why are you making this so difficult? I was very used to the old way, and I know we all have change, but this is why I dont get on this web site hardly anymore. I go to But I liked seeing the baptismal from Mexico, on your web site, it made me hungry for more, and it was so much fun finding my families back ground. I sure miss it.

      Barbara Cortez 30 December 2011
      8:02 pm
    63. You need to get some web developers who know what they are doing This site is now woeful and a dogs breakfast. The search facility is useless and it really is like trying to find a needle in a haystack now. I cant find a thing so Im off elsewhere till you resurrect the old one with all the up to date data in it. SHAME ON YOU. Listen to your users.

      Elaine from Oz 28 December 2011
      11:32 pm
    64. I agree with the rest. It was so easy to use before. Please change it back.

      Shirley 28 December 2011
      11:11 pm
    65. What ?? You take a reasonably well designed reference site and turn it into a site you cannot navigate all this has happened in 1 night. I was close to finding the links i needed to proceed but now i am back to the start. WELL DONE YOU HAVE PROCEEDED TO PROGRESS BACKWARDS

      THOMAS 28 December 2011
      4:23 pm
    66. I sure dont like this new method. I just want to type in the info in a form and be done with it. Youre always going up and down clicking, searching, redoing. Yikes, who thought this up?

      Janet 27 December 2011
      2:20 pm
    67. Hello, I found an image of the death certificate for my grandfather, Robert McKenzie, born, 1869, died, 29 Apr 1941. Father, Alexander McKenzie, Mother, Agnes Connors, Spouse, Dorothy McKenzie. Place Cleveland, Cuyahoga, Ohio. The problem is that the listing showed image number 1534, it is actually image number 1536.

      Keith McKenzie 27 December 2011
      1:16 pm
    68. you have really screwed up a beautiful RESEARCH SITE, with all your changes----GO BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS........

      EYELEEN 26 December 2011
      7:08 am
    69. I prefer the old system. The search engines were much faster and inclusive. This process is not user friendly.

      Deb 26 December 2011
      5:55 am
    70. I think this site is fantastic. Yes the search algorithm can certainly be improved upon and I usually have to clear all the search parameters just to change the sort criteria, but the amount of data available is extraordinary.

      jerry 25 December 2011
      5:44 am
    71. I am completely devasted that you changed the old searching apparatus. I used to have such incredible luck finding things, but now I can find nothing, absolutely nothing. The exact search yields totally inappropriate results. Oh la la, why did you change things? Collections that once were posted seem to have disappeared. I used to be enthusiastic about indexing records because of the joy I felt at finding things--I wanted others to feel that happiness too. But now ... just too sad. I dont imagine you will ever bring back the old search but I certainly wish you would. Why did you do this?

      m 24 December 2011
      6:26 am
    72. Sorry, I cant get the hang of the new search. I am trying to do William Lybass who received a 57 acre land grant from Gilford County, N. C. 1783, This was during American Revolution time. In Grace Gilliam Davidsons book it states Minutes of Inferior Court--1811-1817. Aug.7, 1816--B William Lybass B decd Charles Lybass appointed administrator Samuel Rice and Elbert Smith. Now, Samel Rice and Elbert Smith are his sons-in-laws. Where in Wilkes Co Ga. was this???? Help me please.

      Sandra Holder Blankenship 23 December 2011
      7:36 pm
    73. I dont understand why I was able to retrieve my great grandmothers baptism record, but now it isnt there. I was lucky enough to print it off and I can put in the same names that is shown, but I cannot get the record to come up.

      Marilyn 23 December 2011
      9:37 am
    74. Im very new at researching my ancestors and Ive had a very good success rate. Is there a way we can add immigration information. I cant tell when my family arrived from Scotland.

      Annamaria 22 December 2011
      8:38 pm
    75. PLEASE go back to the previous search method. Why are you making us go through so many hoops?

      Maria 21 December 2011
      9:44 pm
    76. The old search facility was far easier to use. I cant understand why anyone would prefer the new system.

      Barry Newton 21 December 2011
      10:16 am
    77. Im not liking this at all ( sorry...

      Danelle Poole Evans 20 December 2011
      1:16 pm
    78. I am new and therefore unfamiliar with the old way of searching... But I am enjoying this sight very much. Thank you for all the hard work you have put into it. I would be willing to help transcribe records if it meant I did not need ot go anywhere. Is that possible? Can I do it from the internet for you? Let me know.

      Sandra 20 December 2011
      11:52 am
    79. Could you please post a reply? It seems pointless to just keep adding to the complaints. Is anyone listening? FYI, I get different views on different computers, probably because I am using different versions of Mac OS X. FWIW, the page on 10.7 is marginally better than the others. Could you provide easy links back to FHL catalog? To Labs? To Community Trees? To the Wiki? To the old site?

      Ken Ozanne 19 December 2011
      5:24 pm
    80. Hello, I too agree with many of the users. The new search is impossible to work with. It has taken me an hour to find out how to search by batch number and with one click I lost it and now cannot find it again. Also why are we getting hundreds of these guessed birth dates taken from census. Such a waste of time. Cant we have headings, search by birth, search by marriage, search by burial, search by batch number or something similar, anything other than what is now being offered. Sadly, I can see no benefit whatever to the new format. I am astounded that members of the LDS agreed to this waste of space. Sorry to be so negative. Please revert to what was a wonderful site. Regards, Pam

      Pam Abikhair 18 December 2011
      7:32 am
    81. This search feature used to be so easy to use, and effective. Now its complicated and time-consuming, and seemingly ineffective. Id like simple and effective once again, please

      John Trapp 16 December 2011
      3:02 pm
    82. Hi I always use the old system never the new one, the filters on the new one are almost non existent, I find it hard to use so simply dont I cannot believe that LDS have invested in something so complicated that makes searching so much harder, I get the idea of pulling in other sources, a great advantage - if you reverted back to the old search system. There was nothing wrong with it but everything wrong with the new one - sorry

      Sarah 16 December 2011
      1:41 am
    83. I found my grandmother. When I clicked on her I was told I needed to register. I jumped through all those hoops and have come back several times and put in everything I know about her into the filters and now she is nowhere to be found? Not impressed so far...

      Scott Glover 15 December 2011
      2:56 pm
    84. Are you folks even listening? This new format is terrible. I have even put in names and dates that YOU CONFIRMED on the old system and it is coming up NO RECORD. How is this possible????? Please, give us back the old format

      Denise Bischoff 14 December 2011
      7:39 pm
    85. I would much rather have the old search-I can not get the filters to find anything-please change back. Thanks, Debra

      Debra Goocher Morgan 14 December 2011
      4:32 pm
    86. Hello L S D. Without you,we would probably know nothing.But I must say,the latest format is to complicated.Seven years ago it was quite simple.Also on new format I cannot find data that I gt on the old format..

      Howard 14 December 2011
      7:38 am
    87. Would much rather have the old system. The new one makes it difficult for me to find anything

      Caro Shalders (NZ) 14 December 2011
      2:59 am
    88. How can a get a contact details of the person I was looking for? I am assuming I have found this person and I would like to contact her by e-mail or phone or by any other way

      Serge Inser 13 December 2011
      4:50 pm
    89. Wow, this site is like a data mine, you need to be an IT manager to understand it. How do you turn filters off, I click for Death records and I get everything, very frustrating? Its got to be better than this...after reading the other postings, I guess not. thanks for doing what you do, but, you need to get this simplified to be productive and useful. Be happy to help if I can.

      Andy O. 12 December 2011
      4:18 pm
    90. I feel really frustrated with the Family Search site. The older Beta form was promising but the old search site, whilst it still works to some extent, I find now you cant search using batch numbers. If I go to the new site and enter batch nos. all I get is a page with two spinning gears and nothing further happens. I have asked the LDS for help but all I get is referral to their help page which takes me back to square one. Is anyone else having this same trouble? Ive been using the IGI for a few years now and found it very helpful but the latest system or whatever its called is abysmal. The only thing that Im happy to use is the English Counties that have digital images which I can view but try searching for a baptism when it says they have 67million odd records and I get the infamous blank page with two spinning gears. My searchings have now been made more difficult for a poorly installed system. Why not revert back to the old one till the new is usable?

      Alan (in Aust) 11 December 2011
      10:17 pm
    91. I am a newbie to the site and found the old way to be more beneficial. I am finding myself working extra to locate the information than when I was previously searching. Could you please explain why it was replaced with New and Improved and causing additional work. I would like to have Simple and Successful back, please.

      E. McCray 11 December 2011
      3:54 pm
    92. A few weeks ago I found hundreds of matches for the person I was searching. Today with your new search system, entering the same personal data, I was told there are NO good matches. Somethings wrong here.

      Pat 11 December 2011
      11:33 am
    93. I too am struggling with the new site, at least previously you could switch between the old and new. Not being able to search on batch numbers is a real step backwards, it was such a useful search tool. If possible please reinstate it.

      Sue 07 December 2011
      6:56 am
    94. I found an error. My grandmothers birthdate is incorrect. How can this be corrected?

      Gail M. Clak 06 December 2011
      9:50 pm
    95. As Genealogists we enjoy a site that can give us multiple search areas such as they lived in KY, AND TN AND IL...these narrowed down our search and gave us RESULTS You have been my go to site when I needed information that was unavailable other places. I especially liked the marriage documents and death records that listed parents and spouses in order to PROVE relationship connections. When I am searching common names like DAVIS....I need to narrow down a search and then not get THOUSANDS of hits. All in all comments are...Is was so great before...please give us back what was working

      Sharon Atkins in Roscoe, IL 06 December 2011
      1:09 pm
    96. Please return to the old search method. One example....Arkansas Marriage Records....I know that there were marriages in Greene County, yet when I request marriages for that specific county, it returns nothing. What? It used to work fine, what has happened? Im wasting lots of time going through every county in Arkansas to find something. Very upsetting.

      Dianne 06 December 2011
      11:53 am
    97. The new search features are substantially inferior to the previous ones. The huge scope of the results are frustrating. The previous site allowed a very specific place search. Extremely disappointed.

      Stephen Foley 05 December 2011
      11:22 am
    98. The search features in the beta site were so much better. You could search just using parents names...even just last names of parents. I found so many children I didnt know existed and also found maiden names. That search feature greatly expanded my search capability. I hope you consider putting this search feature back in. This site is very hard to use. Very disappointed.

      R. Emery 04 December 2011
      11:32 am
    99. Why bother including all that useless documentation information, like source film number and batch number, if we cannot USE them ? Until recently, we could find a specific record (e.g., a christening) and use the batch number to see if there were other christenings with the same parents (which seems a logical thing for a genealogist to do). But now theres apparently no way to filter by batch, much less film number. Please bring it back, even as an alternative search method.

      Scott S 03 December 2011
      10:56 pm
    100. I get totally lost with this system, I used to use the search pilot and I was able to find most of my ancestros back to 1700.

      Rogelio 03 December 2011
      5:10 pm
    101. please bring back the old system i cant find anyone i look for it takes forever

      mgt o brien 03 December 2011
      2:53 pm
    102. I agree with 99.9% of all of these. As I have asked several times--Why cant we have what we understand and want? I even ask if a donation was needed? Your answer NO, ok that is fine. The old Pilot System was great and easy to understand. SO ONCE AGAIN I BEG PLEASE GIVE ME BACK THE OLD SYSTEM, SO I CAN FINISH MY SEARCHING BEFORE GABRIEL BLOWS HIS TRUMPET ALSO, we can no longer print many of the death, birth and etc. certificates. Why send the State or Federal Records Dept. a check for some $20.00 to search for 1 given certificate, when there is a good possibility the check will be taken and the answer sent SORRY NO RECORD COULD BE FOUND. Of course, it cant be found if it isnt looked for. Do they think we oldsters just fell off the turnip truck????? I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY I LOG ON AND FIND THE PILOT SYSTEM UP AND GOING AND ALOT OF THE CONFUSING DELETED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR EAR, I HOPE YOU HEARD AND WILL HEED.

      BNP 03 December 2011
      2:42 pm
    103. Hello I am so mixed up and feeling I am losing my mind. i DONt LIKE YOUR Search site. I have facts on my search and nothing I Put in your page you dont have the any kind of facts. What are you trying to do with all the mess you are feeding the search site. I am very unhappy with all the new changing. It is a mess. So Sorry to gave you a Bad---- REPORT Lillian PO---Very unhappy

      Lillian 03 December 2011
      11:18 am
    104. The new site is very difficult to navigate - cant find anything, tells me there are no records - however I used to be able to get into the information - cannot do it now Very bad Bring back the old site

      kini 02 December 2011
      6:13 pm
    105. I wish we could once again enter the County when searching Irish records in the new updated site. At first, on it was possible to use advanced search to enter a registration district or County. Now that facility seems to have disappeared

      Rosemary McCormack 01 December 2011
      4:40 am
    106. Well, I can see that I am in a minority. I like being able to look up records in specific documents. I do understand that some records have restrictive agreements so that you can not display the original. Your extractions are easy to click and paste. It is nice that you are no longer displaying all the undocumented IGI member submissions, Or those that used old publications as sources when the publication could be wrong. One suggestion for change is That if I ask for Henry O. blank. Please restrict the response to Henry O, or Henry Odgen ---.ect I do not need Henry Frederick. That is an insignificant fault and I am sure that more improvements are to come.

      HAttie 30 November 2011
      9:40 pm
    107. Iv been through this loop twice.

      Paul Mack 30 November 2011
      8:15 pm
    108. I have an ID and have not been able to use it yet.

      Paul Mack 30 November 2011
      8:14 pm
    109. iagree with most of the comments about the new site not given yhe same information as the old one. As a silver surfer found the previous site easier to follow and with more information.

      may november302011 30 November 2011
      1:11 pm
    110. I have only been using this site for less than a week and the filter system has stopped me in my tracks cant input a real place or town only europe and ireland thats a lot of results to sort throughj

      larry b. 29 November 2011
      7:30 pm
    111. Is it me or what? I find this site very difficult to navigate. Please..make it more user friendly.

      Emily 29 November 2011
      6:45 pm
    112. Since my mom died I inherited her extensive genealogy records. Imagine my surprise when none of them are on family search--they use to be on the old site, but poof they are gone. What now?

      Deb 29 November 2011
      5:10 pm
    113. I must add my name to the growing list of unhappy users of the new system. Please return to the old system.

      Edwards 29 November 2011
      11:57 am
    114. God bless you for all that you do with the records. The were wonderful when we were able to use them. When I began to attempt use the site, I was excited with the new information that I had never seen before that was listed on the new site. I soon found that I could not print the information, or even pull it up to use it, leading to frustration and disappointment I left the program running for several hours, and it never did finish loading, and timed out in about 4 hours. All the precious to me information, I was never able to retrieve. I confess that I am not very educated in the use of the computer, so I know it is partly my fault. I just don`t understand the cues that you give to navigate the system. It is too complicated.

      29 November 2011
      6:41 am
    115. I just Love Family Search. It has more than I am unable to get around in it from lack of knowledge on my part. I found the states and I clicked on to N. C. and it wanted me to click on a county. I chose Wilkes. I found a document of Aberham Kilby from Wilkes Co.,N. C. There were wills, land settlements, land appraisals. It was wonderful. I tried to copy something and I couldnt get , guardians over children.

      Sandra Blankenship 27 November 2011
      4:42 pm
    116. Since you changed the format,which has been at least a year now, I dont believe you read our comments. The site is not friendly user,its confusing, takes twice the time as before. Do us a favor go back to the old site, listen to what we want and not what your techies want to do, their un-improvements suck. Difficult to use......

      Karen Baleno Bogdan 26 November 2011
      2:01 pm
    117. What on earth have you done this week? Its totally non user friendly. What was wrong with entering town name, county and county, a surname and some dates AND BEING ABLE TO FIND THE INFORMATION you were looking for. This new set up is definitely no improvement.. please scrap it

      Sue Freitag 26 November 2011
      11:07 am
    118. it is difficult to find what you want before you could type a name and a year example mason chase and 1860 1860 and it would find it quickly and now how do you work this one

      chautauquaco user name 23 November 2011
      5:58 pm
    119. it is more difficult, before this it was easier to find quickly what you were looking for . for example you could type person name and the year you wanted to search of 1860 1860 for the year and what you were looking for was quickly found. now how do you do that in this format????

      23 November 2011
      5:54 pm
    120. It would be really useful if a sort could be made within a particular place and time period by using the father and mothers names. IGI could sort this so you got all the childrens names. This is important if the surname is a common one. Also if both the surname and first name are common within many families within one place. I am a volunteer at an affiliate library in New Zealand

      Dianne Fraser 23 November 2011
      2:59 pm
    121. I dont like how other states pop up when Im looking for someones birth and death in a particular state. I would prefer the filter only show results from the state, county or city I request, then if I want to go further I can request that. That way I dont have a lot of unnecessary results from my search.

      dee 23 November 2011
      11:41 am
    122. I use both new and old sites. They both have advantages. Im not sure why users say bring back the old site when you can easily toggle back and forth between the old and new. Maybe the OLD / NEW switching option could be made more obvious. Thanks for all your work and for putting vast amounts of data online. After all, this is a free site, an amazing service to all genealogists, and is WAY better than the old days, when we had to physically travel to each location and look up physical records, or mail inquiries to government clerks and wait MONTHS for a reply.

      Felicia Nagamatsu 22 November 2011
      9:28 pm
    123. I am deeply disappointed and concerned with this new site, since the information collected by you over the years is really valuable for many people. I, for one, can not find my ancestors, and the few I find I spend thrice the time that I had with the old Family Search version. I am deeply shocked with the way you are handling these databases. Your mission is useless if we, the people who is intended for, can not find their ancestors. What a pity.

      Miguel Angel Omana Rojas 22 November 2011
      4:41 pm
    124. I certainly agree with all of the comments. I DO NOT LIKE THE NEW ? FORMULA I made many INQUIRYS , ASSURRED ME the next year would be like the old format , Tried and purchased No. 7, No.10, No.16 still hoping.. bought No. 2011 and STILL GOT THE NEW VERSION. FIND SOME WAY TO LET US OLDER PEOPLE (77) USE THE OLD SYSTEM. with any new information.

      Eileen 22 November 2011
      11:52 am
    125. Thanks so much. I think your updates and the new filters are great. Thanks again.

      Viola Ballance 21 November 2011
      2:57 pm
    126. This site is not easy to use. Why have information when it is in the type format that cannot be used by the general public? It is very much like telling a child they can have an ice cream cone if their remain silent, which the child does and then at the end of the day, no ice cream cone. No a reputable behavior for a church.

      21 November 2011
      10:52 am
    127. Not very user-friendly at all. Like others have said, some records seem to have disappeared, glad I have print-outs from the old style site, but I feel sorry for others who wont be able to find their ancestors.

      Maz 20 November 2011
      2:14 pm
    128. Im lost and cant figure out how to use this site...?

      David 19 November 2011
      6:46 pm
    129. Agree with sparse information, difficult to use, not very helpful. Old one was very good. Seems you are pushing us to Ancestry.

      Janet Davis 18 November 2011
      10:16 pm
    130. I, too, find the new familysearch more difficult to use than the old version.

      Terry 17 November 2011
      7:12 pm
    131. Very disappointed at the new site. At least with the old one you could download it automatically to my laptop. I now have to retype everything I find. When I find names from the old site, the new search doesnt allow you to pull it up. Please go back to the old version.

      Rose 17 November 2011
      5:30 pm
    132. I remember the old site with fond memories, and I am quite shocked by this new one Bring back the old site It simply was easier to find your ancestors there I found so much more there, Im glad I printed out those that I found then, because I cannot find them on this new site. Help

      Ernestine Foster Taylor 17 November 2011
      5:24 pm
    133. I have not used the Familysearch for some time and imagine my shock when I was confronted with the new search system. The old version was much better since if you located the parents, the childen were also listed on the family page. The current system is making my searching much more difficult and is greatly frustrating. Some of the records I have previously found are now missing? How is this? PLEASE bring back the old search pages as they were a lot more user friendly and less frustrating.

      William Turner 15 November 2011
      3:29 pm
    134. Cant rely on the new search at all. Nowhere near as reliable as the old one. New-style filters look glossy and attractive but if all the facts arent there there is no point in them. Found births & marriages in the old search which were just not in the new search

      Alan 15 November 2011
      2:37 am
    135. I love the web site but have run into a problem. For years I have been searching for a Catherine Callaghan marriage in the Ireland, Civil Registration Indexes, 1845-1958. It should exist in Millford about 1882 but does not. I have noticed that all christian names beginning with C (14 out of 170) are in Jan-Mar quarter, and there is a similar bias for names beginning with A, B & D but not the others. Is it possible that records have been systematically omitted in Millford for 1882 - particularly those where the christian name begins with C?

      Francis McGinley 14 November 2011
      5:21 pm
    136. What a shock - its some time since I used the ever-helpful and reliable site and I cant believe what has happened to it - PLEASE bring back the old site as it was.

      Jean Hudson 14 November 2011
      3:46 pm
    137. I have read the coments below, and I can only agree with then all.

      robert coats 13 November 2011
      9:21 pm
    138. I whole heartily agree BRING THE OLD SITE BACK---PLEASE. It really was much easier to use. AND, you could instantly tell if a document was attached and available to view.

      Vervaen 13 November 2011
      4:20 pm
    139. I like the old system better, easier to use.

      Phil 11 November 2011
      5:13 pm
    140. The pilot version was much more efficient. With the last version, you cant search by city in spain, but only by province. Please put again the pilot version online.

      Joan 11 November 2011
      3:17 pm
    141. Why cant we use the batch, page or other information as filters. I would love if results are sorted either alphabetically or by time. Im searching for Irish records and if data for 1 year is requested then the quarters are mixed up and very hard to search through. Does anyone know a good way of narrowing down the data to find the spouse of the target in marraige records.

      Phil 11 November 2011
      11:40 am
    142. The programmers and analysts must be working without a requirements document created by genealogists and archivists. This on-the-fly programming is done by people who havent put in their years in doing family history nor have they any experience in library science. The value of vast amounts of information lies only in the ability to retrieve it in a predictable way.

      06 November 2011
      10:39 pm
    143. The Pilot site filtering and field layout was GREAT. This new site is getting better as you fine tune the filters, but is still a bit awkward. Please add a filter for first letter of first/ last name. Sometimes names are spelled so many different ways, the first letter is all that is consistent. Thanks.

      Vicki 04 November 2011
      1:32 pm
    144. i have just read ALL THE COMMENTS and the majority of the people like myself would like the old version back because it was MUCH more simpler to use------please switch back

      kenny stowers 04 November 2011
      10:42 am
    145. The new site format is excellent Really like the advanced search options. Would like the +/- number of years to be extended to 50, not that it is not workable now with the +/- 20 option. Its just more convenient to have a greater number if the year is not known and you are guessing. Thank you very much for the wealth of genealogical information that you provide.

      Ashley Orton 02 November 2011
      3:18 pm
    146. I have just come across this page and realise now I am not the only one who has stopped using this site. The information is presented in a confusing way. I connot tell which fact has come from Parish or member, I cannot see at a glance from the page the parishes probably involved, I cannot do a parent search. On the odd occasion when I do log on I use the old search - button at bottom of page.

      Christine 02 November 2011
      2:21 am
    147. I LOVE the new site. I like that the census records are there to be viewed. AWESOME I think for those who are having a hard time with the new site just need to get familiar with how to use it as with any new program. They can still use the old site if they wish (I use both). Both sites are very helpful. Make improvements as they become necessary, but please, never get rid of this site. Thank you for providing a way to research ancestry.

      KM 02 November 2011
      1:48 am
    148. Dont care for the new site - things are much harder to find. Also, I am trying to search the Slave Schedules, followed a link for them and .... LINK IS INCORRECT. Is this free version supposed to make us run and join the overpriced You own,, and (used to be footnotes). Now records that used to be included in subscription now have to be purchased AGAIN with fold3. YOU OWN ALL THREE OF THESE SITES WHAT KIND OF RACKET ARE YOU RUNNING?

      Sandra 01 November 2011
      5:16 pm
    149. I entered in the images of San Antonio Del Zuia, Norte de Santander Colombia, I saw the images for deaths and I took many names, it was helping me a lot but now it desapeared, I can see names taken out from the indexing, Deaths 1730-1950 but I havent been able to see the images Please help me with this, I am a member of the church. I was watching the images of Death 1938-1955 from the place I already mentioned. Thanks

      Judith Carrera Silva de Gutierrez 01 November 2011
      10:22 am
    150. I am tossing up between adjectives to describe this site. HIDEOUS comes to mind and LUDICROUS. You are blindly ignoring the mountain of criticism from your users. I too find the old version vastly superior to this disaster and and would be lost if I did not have the results from years of use of the old site. What are your intentions ???

      Hugh 31 October 2011
      2:14 pm
    151. I was triple dipped at a Family History Conf and applaud your efforts at trying to sort out the volume of information coming into the site. Does it make sense to close the faucets until the sink has drained and the info at hand can be sorted out? Maybe find the TWO genealogists on the planet who are also programmers and up the ante so theyll want to come work for you til the haystacks are gathered in. Hay in the rain rots. I also experience the frustration at having put 8 lines on within the past six months and am unable to retrieve even ONE. I want my family to add things to this site, but will not invite them until I can navigate it with more certainty on my own part.

      Naomi Rose 31 October 2011
      11:55 am
    152. While searching your records for Watson family, Durham, England abt 1835, the record for John Watson b 24 April 1837 came up. Your record shows his father to be James Watson, this should read JARED, from the Church records at Sunderland, although he may also have been known as Gerard (see records for Mary Watson, Kelloe, Durham, England Bapt 9 Sept 1838 Bishops transcriptions). I would be pleased if you would amend your records after checking the above to assist others.

      J A Watson 31 October 2011
      6:01 am
    153. I am having a great deal of difficulty in finding the research dates of the parish in the United kingdom, for example, i search for a person, say fred blogs and i find him in the Births/Chr in Woolbeding Sussex in 1850, thats great, so i search for other members of the same family in the same parish, and before i finish my research in that parish i would like to make a note of the time frame that i have researched, in other words, i have searched in Woolbeding between the date of 1538-1900, But i can-not find the dates that are covered for this parish that familysearch hold, So how do i find the coverage dates of an individual English parish in familysearch.

      Laurence 27 October 2011
      4:07 pm
    154. I have been using family search on and off since the beginning. I am still not very good at moving around efficiently, such as, when I finish searching a data base I have to keep pushing the back arrow to get back where I started the search. Is there an easier way to do this? I appreciate all the work and effort that goes into making this information free and online for everyone Please, be patient with those of us who are frustrated after many years of failure. It is hard to believe we will ever find that grandfather. Kudos

      Florence 27 October 2011
      11:24 am
    155. I enjoyed being able to sort by first initial of both the given name and surname in the Pilot Program. Given the variability of Polish names, sometimes it was the only way to find individuals. I would hope that feature would be incorporated into the new search engine.

      S Jaskiewicz 27 October 2011
      8:32 am
    156. the last couple of days I have not seen the filter on the board

      Dale 26 October 2011
      9:37 pm
    157. I would like to be able to exclude some databases from my searches. For instance, I have a lot of common names in my tree and every time I do a search, I get many, many census records that I dont want to see. How can I exclude them?

      Linda Brown 25 October 2011
      10:30 pm
    158. by using.... Use the updated site to search millions of records, I have found death certificates that I have been looking for, for years. Thanks, Loving It....

      Marquita Fletcher 25 October 2011
      10:13 pm

      FRANCES MATT 25 October 2011
      9:50 am
    160. I MISS the original Hugh Wallis site. It looks like it is now being forwarded to NFS. It now does not work. ( It would be so helpful to have a surname search along with a batch number.

      Cathleen 24 October 2011
      10:31 pm
    161. I am sorry to say I agree with most on the comment page....I am new to genealogy and my first taste of getting what I was looking for, was here - Family Search. Now, I get nothing, in fact I just tried to leave a comment and I got a Canadian facts page instead Hows that for messed up?

      Rosie 24 October 2011
      5:12 pm
    162. I do find that your range of available information is a bit spotty, However the cost is worth it all. I am assuming that new details are being added in an effort to avoid huge blanks. Thank you for your efforts so far.

      Dave J. 24 October 2011
      10:11 am
    163. I agree with the other comments, this new site is useless.If it is to please you are heading the wrong path. I have try and I am not able to use it, they have many wrong infomations and wrong indexing. I have proofs of what I am claiming, the actual church records is the only way. My name has been mixed with any family names starting with S.Please go back to the old way of seaching and forget

      Alain Savoie 23 October 2011
      5:26 pm
    164. I really dont like this new site. It was much easier before. I cant find any relatives now on some searches that worked well before. Please can you fix this or go back to the old site.

      Kate Day 23 October 2011
      2:05 pm
    165. I also would like to use the older version as it was better

      Paul 23 October 2011
      11:19 am
    166. Your new site is very confusing. The old site was better.

      vicky flow 23 October 2011
      11:10 am
    167. Hi Looks like you need to undo the new cokeand go back to the old one.

      23 October 2011
      10:25 am
    168. Has Familysearch answered any of your complaints? I need a death cert on my gr grandmother. Does anyone know how I work this new system so that I can print the death certificate? .

      Chris 23 October 2011
      1:24 am
    169. I tried, just for example, a known date of marriage for my great-grandparents ( and I have the certificate as proof ), and it came back with the records found I then proceeded to look for known ancestors, whose documents I have regarding birth, marriages etc, and record found What an absolute waste of time this site is

      22 October 2011
      12:31 pm
    170. I totally agreee with most of the other comments. I have used FAMILY SEARCH for over 15 years and have in that time found it most helpful, but it is now useless and extremly hard to find anything. I am so glad that I used the old system as I would have no hope of finding the people now.

      Laurel ( in Australia) 22 October 2011
      8:19 am
    171. Looks like the whole of your records for people in the three Ridings of the county of Yorkshire, England are incorrectly recorded as York instead of Yorkshire. Cant find a single one that is correct. Also more importantly your search process just does not work well at all. For example a search for Baron (surname only) 1761 to 1780 in Yorkshire finds 1800+ records. Found some of the ancestors I am seeking in this list recorded as in Nafferton, York (should be Yorkshire). Trying to narrow the search by adding in Nafferton finds none of the seven people found in the first search. This cant be right. Ive done lots of searches and find these same inconsistencies all the time. Another point is that one should be able to turn phonetic searching on and off. About 1600 of the 1800+ records in the example search above were irrelevant because they were not Baron. Phonetic searches are sometimes useful but in my experience not very often. This would also speed up searches as most of the time it wouldnt be needed. It is a bit disturbing to scan down the postings here and see the high proportion of people who are unhappy with your site but no sign of any response.

      Brian Gautier 21 October 2011
      8:23 am
    172. Ive posted a comment before, but I have to say it again....this site is the worst What were you people thinking? Bring back the pilot program.....please If so many people think this is as bad as it really is, you must have lost alot of researchers Had to Please, get your s...t together Im done with this web site for good

      brighteyes 20 October 2011
      7:51 pm
    173. October 20, all yesterday and now today your site is acting flaky. I get a box of garbage in the center of the screen everytime I do a search. Are you able to fix this?

      Barbara 20 October 2011
      12:33 pm
    174. Cant find marriage records from Brooklyn, New York, and Bronx, New York, even though I have the dates and certificate numbers...Your program does not provide a place for it.

      B.Blum 20 October 2011
      11:53 am
    175. I agree with most of the other comments that the old system was much better than this new one, I found quite a lot of information from the previous site but hardly anything from this new one, please bring back the previous system.

      carole 20 October 2011
      10:11 am
    176. Will you PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE revert back to your old setup What you are providing to us now is TERRIBLE - a complete DISASTER Thanks for the effort, but NO THANKS for the results, Im outa here

      J. Berridge 20 October 2011
      7:13 am
    177. I cant put a span of years for a marriage

      Kathy 19 October 2011
      5:11 pm
    178. Surely you must realize by now that the new and improved version is not giving results that users are looking for Ive no idea why the new system searches the way it does it makes no sense whatsoever that when I search for Mary E. Smith, 1850-1900, Lawrence County, Ohio I get any name that has the initial E that lives anywhere in Ohio, and it starts with the 1900 date not the 1850 date I REPEAT...MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER At least give us an option of using the old Pilot version Thank you

      Gene 19 October 2011
      2:56 pm
    179. This site is useless now. Has it changed to give less information and force people to pay Ancestry. com for searches, when half the information they have, has been collected/provided from those they force to pay.

      Karen Hayes 19 October 2011
      12:50 am
    180. I cant even find my name in your records. I have seen my certificate of birth in Danville,Vermilion County, Illinois But it does not show up in my search. I dont think your records are up to date My name is Robert Gene Mason Born 12/04/1931 Registered No. 737

      Robert Mason 18 October 2011
      6:19 pm
    181. it seems to me that by reading the previous posts that people are very unhappy with this site, will you respond to their concerns? will you ignore their concerns? is this a site that is interested in helping people find out about their genealogy? i hope you regard this input as valuable )

      brad dibble 17 October 2011
      2:37 pm
    182. Social Security numbers are only posted for those who are dead. They are posted by the U.S.government as well as several other commercial entities. If a SS number is posted for someone living, it is a mistake and you are correct, it should not be posted.

      AndersonSF 17 October 2011
      8:50 am
    183. I havent been on the site for a while and at first thought what is wrong??? Was I not entering info correctly? Now I know it is the new program. GO BACK TO THE PILOT MODEL. The more info I enter the less I find, the person who designed this must not have any idea what Genealogy is and how it works. I love Family Search and would pay to be a member but not with this program it is to much trouble to work with. I hate to think all the work we all did and are doing in cataloging death cert, census, marriage records and etc.... is lost in this confusing program.

      Joyce Rogers 16 October 2011
      2:38 pm
    184. Your posting Social Security numbers should be against the law. This is a private number.

      Disgusted 16 October 2011
      9:05 am
    185. At Sabrina - there are many records for McKeverne on Ancestry. Can you tell me what or who exactly you are looking for?

      Jeanne 15 October 2011
      10:52 pm
    186. Looks like considerably more testing is needed - I know searching the IGI by batch number always produces nil results in the new version, so I deliberately tried to use the old version to do this but it now automatically throws you back into the new version with same nil results Very frustrating for a retired software engineer I have used the old version happily for more than a dozen years - please please put it all back until the new one is fully tested (have you thought about about a beta test programme ?)

      Barry 15 October 2011
      9:44 pm
    187. Please, bring back the old system

      Odette 15 October 2011
      7:58 am
    188. I cant help but notice that a large number of people find this new site worse than useless. Suggest you get the software engineers together and specify very clearly(assuming you know) what you expect from the new system and that payment for work done on the new system will be suspended until a satisfactory system is in place. In the mean time go back to the old system where there is a possibility of finding at least enough information to locate one more person in the family tree. If the system doesnt improve I can see people voting with their feet or fingers and most have 1 computer and 10 contacts.

      david craig 12 October 2011
      4:42 pm
    189. Is there some way I can research England Uk only sites. Im left with pages of American families to look through. Quite time consuming. Im a relatively new user but I seem to recall that there was a better search facility. Sorry but it takes ages to find someone now.

      novabird41 12 October 2011
      4:00 pm
    190. I miss the older version, I was able to find 26 death cerf with the older version. I love that we have all of these at our fingertips. Thanks so much for your effort and time. We love family history

      sharon 12 October 2011
      2:06 pm
    191. This site is a disgrace. I have just wasted my time trying to get a batch number I have followed the instructions exactly and it still says zero results. GET YOUR SITE SORTED OUT PLEASE

      A. Clay 12 October 2011
      1:10 pm
    192. Surely you have got the message by now. You probably are the best site in the world but nobody, it seems, likes this version. Even if it hurts the site designers pride, please run the old pilot version, it was great.

      David Williams 12 October 2011
      8:52 am
    193. I have to agree with the search problems. I can no longer locate records from Ireland, based on parents names and location, that I could in the old site. Also- how can I search IGI in the new search?

      MMM 12 October 2011
      7:38 am
    194. It would be good if we could search on the source film number

      Desley 12 October 2011
      5:18 am
    195. The new search is junk...and doesnt give the images that could find before. Is it because the images are going to a site that charges?

      L. Sexsmith 11 October 2011
      9:05 pm
    196. i have a fairly unique name, Bren Jacobson and can find nothing in your database for that name

      bren jacobson 11 October 2011
      7:46 pm
    197. This new search program is not very user friendly. Unable to find relatives on this new search program that I found years ago on family search.

      Eva 11 October 2011
      6:40 pm
    198. I find the new site very frustrating. Why when I searched for the DEATH of Enrique Howell in CHILE in 1858-1862 was I given 38 possibles, after filtering of birth, deaths AND marriages in Barbados, Jamaica and England as a match could not be found of him anywhere. In fact he is listed on the site as father of his son Juan Santiago Howell b Chile 1853. I expressed my opinion about the new site when it first opened and Im afraid it has not changed.

      Marca 11 October 2011
      6:25 pm
    199. Frustrating and time wasting to say the least. Can`t even find myself let alone ordinances etc. Pilot version far superior to this mess. Why fix something that wasn`t broken???

      Doreen 11 October 2011
      5:02 pm
    200. This new site is terrible. I had so many wonderful discoveries with the old site. Please give us back the old site. The filters on this new version are too crude. If looking for Dublin, the only option is EUROPE LDS has gathered all those records & now those records are effectively inaccessible. What was the point?

      Hanna White 10 October 2011
      3:35 pm
    201. This new site is a backward step. Why can I no longer look for Batch Numbers in IGI under the old system? Im disappointed that anyone can think this is an improvement, something wrong somewhere.

      Alex. Gray 10 October 2011
      5:00 am
    202. I feel rather frustrated with this new program. I cannot find my family tree that I painstakingly put in with the old system, I cant find LDS ordinances, I cant even find myself. I think I am a fairly intelligent person, and I am so frustrated with this program. I feel like all my work has disappeared and my genealogy has ground to a halt. Please change this quickly.

      Amy Schmeichel 09 October 2011
      7:17 pm

      HUGO IGNACIO 09 October 2011
      5:53 pm
    204. I cant even find my own grandmother that I got off this site years ago. it wont let me define a search to city only to usa. let alone matching by spouse.

      S. Hertzog 09 October 2011
      5:39 pm
    205. why do I get results for all Ireland, when I ask for people born Dublin? I loathe this new versionEtain

      Etain 09 October 2011
      4:51 pm
    206. The filters were much more useful in the Pilot version

      Will 09 October 2011
      4:01 pm
    207. I was able to find my grandmother, her parents and grandparents on the old system. Im so glad I wrote everything down, because I am having a hare time finding that infro. on the new system. I typed in my greatgrandfather name that I found in the old system and was told no match found. Confused.....

      Oni 08 October 2011
      9:45 am
    208. The records I was using before seen to have disappeared with the new system. Please go back to the old system. I have walked away disappointed 3x over the past month.

      Shana Juarez 07 October 2011
      3:52 pm
    209. Hello have found this site really helpfull have traced my ancesters back to the 1700s Thank you

      Barbara Davis 06 October 2011
      4:26 pm
    210. I love the current version. I also liked the Pilot version. Im looking mainly for death records in Tennessee and I have found hundreds of my relatives. Ive been able to use the filters without any problem. I sure hope you keep some version of the new or Pilot version. I also like that Ive been able to search for children who have died that wernt listed in census records. To those of you who have input the data, keep up the good work.

      P, Chyphes 05 October 2011
      5:30 pm
    211. now there is the blue button go to previous site ,the old one ,on the home page ......

      gilson 05 October 2011
      9:27 am

      LUCY 04 October 2011
      6:47 pm
    213. Countless numbers of people have voiced how they do not like this new search. I feel like it is an accident if I DO find what Im looking for. I give up after a few minutes because it is frustrating. I didnt have the problems with the old search.

      NJJM 03 October 2011
      3:51 pm
    214. I feel very confused here. This isnt very helpful at all. I too was able to find more the old way.

      shirley 03 October 2011
      7:25 am
    215. hey i didnt know this website before so i didnt know how was the previous version,but if u go to the home page and go to the right corner below u will be able to see use the previous version of if u click u will be sent to the old version....maybe is that what most of u r looking for ????

      gilson 02 October 2011
      7:51 pm
    216. I found all sorts of information in your pilot program, But can not even find that information in new program which I thought was to contain old Pilot. This is more than frustrating

      Clare Brown 02 October 2011
      3:14 pm
    217. agree with most comments bring back the old search formatt please this new one is very confusing, and im finding more thru the old site thanks

      cathy 02 October 2011
      3:00 pm
    218. Thanks four your your helpful site, I have become an expert in family searching, I have discovered that my family came from Spain and spread over Argentina, Colombia, Peru, Panama , Brasil and Mexico. If they are the same in America, then for sure inside a country the family with the same last name is the same. I liked the old interface better than the new one, although I discovered the name of my great great great grand parents from my father`s branch. I already know 3 and 4 generations names back to me. I am going to design my FAMILY TREE, I am very proud to discover it, because this is part of my identity, thank you for your valuable contribution. GOD BLESS YOU

      LAURA 02 October 2011
      12:48 pm
    219. yes i agree with the old searches they where much better. the census showed all who where at that address now you only find the one person.

      dot 02 October 2011
      8:39 am
    220. i entered quite a few names & got nowhere . It makes me think you want an excuse to get to talk to those who are drawn to your site especially given the comments. there is a saying , if it is not broken do not fix it

      n flett 02 October 2011
      12:38 am
    221. I have to agree with most of the comments. I used FamilySearch for the last few years and was impressed. Although the new site has a more graphic look to it, I cannot retrieve the same records I was able to retrieve using the older interface. Have the databases changed or just the interface? It is impossible to filter records down to a managable few using the filters using this newer interface.

      Bruce B. 01 October 2011
      11:27 pm
    222. I agree, you need to go back to the old system. This new system is not user friendly, and I am unable to find what I am looking for. The old system was so much better, quicker, and easier use.

      Frustrated 01 October 2011
      11:17 pm
    223. just joined your web site and it seems its just useless in my research

      tony 01 October 2011
      12:48 pm
    224. this new site is absolutely useless....why not allow the public to decide and bring back and expand the old could keep the new site, but nobody would use it

      sam 01 October 2011
      11:24 am
    225. Both the search and results screens are appallingly designed - the presentation of results is so dreadful as to be unusable. It shows a complete lack of understanding of what users need. You havent corrected the indexing errors in the pre-existing data (e.g. Fordyce OPR) and you cannot even spell the county name. What hope is there if you think this is an improvement?

      Experienced Genealogist 01 October 2011
      3:01 am
    226. I would have to agree with most of the posts I have read. This new site is hard to navigate. The old beta was so much easier. I cant figure out how to start a brand new search. What am I missing? I will continue to see if I can figure it out, but please bring back the old site.

      EUrban 30 September 2011
      4:09 pm
    227. I give up, cant find a thing anymore

      Karen Speicher 30 September 2011
      3:51 pm
    228. Please bring back old system much easier to use and more thoro

      pat 30 September 2011
      10:52 am
    229. Im extremely disappointed with the new search windows. Between this site, and the absolute garbage that Ancestry has turned its once amazing search page into, I cant find anything I used to be able to. Really, really BAD decision. M

      Maer 29 September 2011
      6:45 pm
    230. Please go back to the old system, I was able to find so much and it was so easy you have ruined everything for me. It is so hard to work with and I have found nothing since you changed. I talk with people all the time and they tell me the same thing. I plan to look into Ancestory.Com even tho I cant afford to do it but I have a new computer and I might as well through it away since this is the reason I bought it. Be honest do you intend to listen to us or just dont care?

      Mary Koenig 29 September 2011
      3:32 pm
    231. i hate this thing it wont help me find anything about my family

      simbo 29 September 2011
      12:09 pm
    232. well I am looking for my ancestor Ann Long a really commom name in yorkshire england, no matches at all on this new site.....I cant get any results at all for people I have already found Please go back to the old system

      Ann Burke 29 September 2011
      5:43 am
    233. Very disappointed. I inputted similar information, information I know to be correct, to what I used months ago under the old search system. No results found. Previously, I had a long list of results that I could sort through. The new system is less functional, more abstruse, and certainly not user friendly. I simply cant use it. It is worth the money to use because I get results.

      Gilbert Drendel 29 September 2011
      12:31 am
    234. The new site filters do not allow me to enter a birth date (when I know that) or specify that I am looking for marriage or death date. Why do I need to sift through hundreds of records for people born decades after my beginning (birth) date? I applaud putting this genealogical information on-line, but the earlier version for this site was easier to use.

      Jean 28 September 2011
      9:06 pm
    235. Hmmm maybe I dont understand the last one, but I really like this new way to search....

      Georgia 28 September 2011
      6:11 am
    236. Please bring back the old site,,much fun and easy to find informations I needed..This new site, can not help us at all...PLEASE BRING BACK THE OLD SITE,,

      vessi,/cali 28 September 2011
      4:51 am
    237. I dont like the filtering system, come to the site much less, the original beta was so much better. I really appreciate all youll have done, but wish youd go back to the beta type search options.

      Syble 28 September 2011
      4:44 am
    238. ive never used the old site but cant find anything on this one.HELP

      SAMANTHA B. 28 September 2011
      12:18 am
    239. I like the new look and feel, But I find it a little cumbersome at time. I get that. When you combine all the Indexing work which is so great, you have toput that somewhere. It is getting better if people will be patiant. Use the filters as tfey were intended. It is frustrating when things lock up and I am glad there are techs out there who are working at making things better. There are always critics to something new and those that want to look back.Charge on

      Sandra Haller 27 September 2011
      7:47 pm
    240. aaashhuucks and I m just getting started....I hope you go back too. I m with the majority , I think ? I mean ...I dont know..DO YOU ?

      Sharrieff Furqan 27 September 2011
      4:33 am
    241. I am looking for the McKeverne family can some help please

      sabrina 26 September 2011
      8:52 pm

      MARÍA 26 September 2011
      1:47 pm
    243. Im stuck Through this site Ive managed to trace my great, great grandfather, his birth, marriages, death, now I want to fill in the details of his life, what he did etc. All details have Indexing Project & Source Film numbers, without Batch Nºs. Where do I go from here? Help

      Debbie 26 September 2011
      10:02 am
    244. I have tried to post the filters to no results on clicking Please tell me why I cant get into this part of information. thank you

      Alice Watts 26 September 2011
      6:40 am
    245. i dont understand how to use it i cant seem to find any family with this _(

      Deza RAe Meidinger 25 September 2011
      5:12 pm
    246. i am looking for death and burial place for samuel wolf my ggggrandfather, born 1810 in died 1850 in todd co ky. i guess i do not know how to use your info. can you help me. i have been looking for years for this. please help. thanks, ruth wolfe

      ruth wolfe wilson 25 September 2011
      3:18 pm
    247. Ive been on this site several times in the past few months and usually just quit because its too aggravating. There was nothing wrong with the old could actually find things quickly. If it aint broke, dont fix it Did someone have to justify their job by redesigning the old site?

      Janie Johnson 25 September 2011
      1:43 pm
    248. Please Bring Back The Old Way You Had This. I Could Find Everything Now Nothing .I Thought You Were Ther To Help But This Is No Help

      carol 25 September 2011
      9:17 am
    249. I have not used this site for several months and find it has changed, I dont think for the best. I cannot seem to find any family members with this one which I had previously found and logged It does not appeare to be just me that is having problems Hope that you can either go back to the old method or make this one better

      maureen 25 September 2011
      8:11 am
    250. This is absolutely ridiculous, I cant even find myself, not by birth, neither by baptism, nor marraige.

      Andrew Grundlingh 24 September 2011
      11:59 am
    251. Very disappointed with the new site. It seems like change for the sake of change. Please return to the old system, and quickly.

      Stewart 24 September 2011
      8:21 am
    252. I found it hard to understand why I was able to find details of a relative in a parish cemetery by using your search engine yet no marker nor headstone could be found by onsite visual search, then, was astonished to discover that I was unable to recover information by your search engine for two other relatives in the same parish cemetary that has in fact, headstomes in place fo all to see

      L Bateman 24 September 2011
      3:57 am
    253. Marriage licenses...we can no longer filter by the spouses name? You must be kidding. I know Joe Smith married someone named Mary. I am trying to find Marys MAIDEN name. Just show me the listing of every Joe Smith that married a Mary. Not Alice, Emma or Elizabeth. Why on earth did you take away that filtering?

      SueAnnRobson 23 September 2011
      5:19 am
    254. Personally, I find this site better. There is an infant buried in the family burial plot but we werent sure who the parents were, even though we had the infants name. I found the info under the same last name as hers, that she was 8 days old when she died, and that she was born and died in a different state than the family plot and the other 11 members of the family. I also found her death certificate. I couldnt find that info anywhere else. I like the filter system. I had one name come up with over 5000 results. By using the filters, I narrowed it down to 51, and found who I was looking for. (NOTE There is a place for the names of spouse and/or parents at the bottom of the search form. Several people said they couldnt find it). I have also found several names here that I couldnt find on your other search site. Maybe you could find a way to combine the two to make everybody happy. Everything is not easy, and it can be frustrating at times. Sometimes you have to put some extra effort into what you are looking for. Ive been using familysearch for over 5 years and have found over 600 family names. Thank you for this search site.

      Jimmie 22 September 2011
      11:06 pm
    255. I really like the new system. Yes, it takes a bit of getting used to but its worth it. The filtering system does limit results - generally I only have to look through 10-20 results once I set the filters. The old system returned information, but no supporting documentation. I like that many of the documents return marriage records, death records, census records to validate the information. As with any system, there are going to be strengths and weaknesses. This is just one tool in my bag of tricks, but it is an excellent one.

      Mark Law 22 September 2011
      6:26 am
    256. Hello? Youve gotten massive amounts of complaints about this new site since April and havent switched back? Remember the New Coke? Everyone hated it. Then, Coke Classic? Wheres the New Coke now? Gone. Take the hint and put back the Family Search Classic and let people get on with their research. How long do you have to deliberate over this?

      Chris 21 September 2011
      9:46 pm
    257. Please return the old program which contained more info. What happened to finding copies of death certificates with the new system?? Are they no longer available? The DCs contain invaluable information...

      Judy M. 21 September 2011
      4:26 pm
    258. what happened to the family trees of others. Is there a secret way to get to them?

      SKB 21 September 2011
      4:12 pm
    259. Please,please bring back the OLD site, this one is USELESS.

      law 21.09 2011 21 September 2011
      12:48 pm
    260. I agree. I dont like the new system. Before I could find my ancestors here, now I cant. When I enter in a name, I get results of over 2,000 individuals with no way to narrow that down. Who has time to look thru that many results? I sure dont. I hope you listen to all these comments and change it back so actual dates and places can be entered, not approx. dates.

      Martha 21 September 2011
      8:13 am
    261. tried your site - results so poor I will use other sites from now on

      mike hanmer 21 September 2011
      3:17 am
    262. Tested the site for work already done nothing found best sticking to last version more user friendly sorry to say.

      terry poaru 21 September 2011
      1:03 am
    263. I found a family member a few years ago which listed the parents and children. Now, one of the children searches shows different parents. And, the previous parents names and siblings names cannot be found. What gives?

      James Mason 20 September 2011
      12:01 pm
    264. Agree with all the previous NEGATIVE comments on this new Site finding anything is complicated and unintuative. The old site was easy to use so why change???

      Devonian 20 September 2011
      7:39 am
    265. I liked the old site better got loads of info. This one is rubbish. Cant get anything. please bring back the old one.

      Valerie Woods 20 September 2011
      5:28 am
    266. PLEASE,I have use Ancestry for many years,previously done the filches, and cemetry footwork etc.please,bring back the other site where we could quickly find what was needed,sometimes BMD are not always revealed by families or even where they took place, on the other site with IGI we could find families and neighbours who we heard talk of we could quickly check it out and move on- and now how can we always name a place unknown to us, this slows up, locks up, and we quickly lose interest with such a laborius scenario.people moved about much more looking for work in those days.please think of it as all age groups could use the other system with much more success. but not so this new one IN ANTICIPATION THANK YOU ALL, Loys Raine-Thrall

      LOYS RAINE-THRALL 20 September 2011
      4:56 am
    267. I have just read so many comments.............all the same. This new site is hopeless. What a shame someone had to get cute and change what used to be a very well set out site. It is very hard to follow - you do not ask enough questions to start with anymore and then one day I am able to find something.............the next day its no longer findable. Hopeless - go back to the old way PLEASE. PLEASE for the sake of sanity of us all.

      Annette Baxter 19 September 2011
      10:52 pm
    268. I have found some new information on this site, that had not popped up before. I am now very frustrated that I cant quickly find what was to easy to look up before. It is a difficult site, very hard to get information that I know is there.

      Pat 19 September 2011
      9:44 pm
    269. Well I guess Im not the only one Seems to be pretty unanimous that the recent changes do not work for those of us that need to use them

      Aileen 19 September 2011
      12:59 pm
    270. you took something nice and simple and clear-cut and cluttered it up with too many bells and whistles. Your previous site was NOT broke and there was no reason to fix it.

      19 September 2011
      12:59 pm
    271. I consider myself a reasonably competent researcher and have used the LDS sites for years. I am not certain where I go wrong, but I cannot find records that I once retrieved on your old site on this one. The entries all seem reasonable, but a record I found as recently as last week apparently does not show up now.

      James Smith 19 September 2011
      12:04 pm
    272. For goodness sake and that of Family History please , please turn the clock back and reinstate the old site . This is an utter waste of time and denegrates all that the Church has tried to do to further the cause. , GO ON DO IT NOW

      Lynn Delaney 19 September 2011
      11:44 am
    273. I am looking for the parents and siblings of Joseph Schrempp Born 1842, Baden Germany, spouce Barbara Wangler. 1860 was living in Looking Glass Clinton, Il. (Damiansville/New Memphis, Il.

      Arlene Sandheinrich 19 September 2011
      11:40 am
    274. I do NOT like this new system. Cant find anyone.

      Linda Gaethje 19 September 2011
      11:31 am
    275. Yes...I agree with everyone...terrible site now....sorry because it must have cost a lot and been very time consuming to set up but like everyone has said DONT FIX IT IF IT AINT BROKE You could have simply made changes for the better with the former site....why did you think you had to start from scratch??? Didnt you do ANY consumer research before hand?? TUT TUT I think anyone who is praising this site had not used your older version (o(((((

      Sue Rowe 19 September 2011
      10:36 am
    276. At first glance, it looked like a great program........I just am not happy with this new program. Please change back

      FLORENCE 19 September 2011
      9:07 am
    277. For exampe, the Pilot version allowed one to search all records with parents names John and Anna and then filter records by selecting last names starting with S. I miss that option. Overall I found the Pilot version to be easier to use. I also liked the auto fill feature when selecting a city, county and state.

      Donna 18 September 2011
      7:50 pm
    278. I am in total agreement with the other 99% who do not like what you have done with this site If so many dislike the changes why would you not go back to the previous format that was such a helpful tool for so many? I dont even begin to know where to start looking for information. Putting my ancestor in with her information did nothing for me. Please consider the thoughts and suggestions of the ones who use the site.

      Betty 18 September 2011
      6:47 pm
    279. this new system..its awful. I wish you could return to the old one which was very simple especially when look ing for children of the same parents by using the batch number.....go on turn it back please. dont take the fun away.

      Allan Sutherland 18 September 2011
      12:24 pm
    280. Yesterday, I found the info I was searching for, cut forgot to print one important aspect (parents of a spouse). Now, cannot seem to pull up the same info I had yesterday, so that I can print what I missed. The whole thing is very unwieldy. PLEASE go back to the search facilities as they were 2-5 years ago I used this site exclusively to find my family, but now cannot find half of what I need.

      Bobbi 18 September 2011
      11:36 am
    281. I am in agreement with the other comments. The site is so difficult to use. Know every new change needs time to adjust to but this does not seem to have any advantages only disadvantages.

      norvic33 18 September 2011
      9:32 am
    282. Please go back to the old Family Search. Ive told so many people how to trace their family tree way back. It was so easy to navigate around compared to Now I cant even find the info that I found before.

      Marilyn 18 September 2011
      5:14 am
    283. I was able to find my ancestors in the old system but now there is no record of them and their marriage in Australia. Is it because there were some inaccuracies or doesnt Australia count? If I type in Australia as their marriage place I dont expect to see records of the USA NOT GOOD ENOUGH

      Jan Russell 17 September 2011
      10:28 pm
    284. I withdraw the comment I left few minutes ago. Somehow, I was redirected to this page and couldnt seem to continue my search. Once I logged off and came back to the site, I was able to search as I had done previously. The only thing that seems to be missing is the ability to search other ountries. My grandparents were born in Holland, and I would dearly love to search there.

      Jennifer C. 17 September 2011
      7:40 pm
    285. I think this site is great Found things that I wasnt able to find on such as Death Certificates and Marriage Registers.

      Donna 17 September 2011
      4:48 pm
    286. The new improved site is absolutely dreadful to use. How can you say its an improvement I dont understand. The old version was easy to use, very simple to refine searches in so many different ways and records once chosen could be easily viewed. When will you be reverting back? VERY SOON I HOPE I have tried many times to get my head around the changes here, but have found it impossible Dont think Ill be back here very often, sorry.

      Sheena 17 September 2011
      8:04 am
    287. Like many others commenting, I was able to find my ancestor before this not at all. What changed?

      Donna 17 September 2011
      5:29 am
    288. Please revert to the old site it was so informative and easy to use especially for novice computer users.

      Hayden 17 September 2011
      3:42 am
    289. I am in agreement with so many - the new site is very disappointing. I cannot even find records I have found before. PLEASE PLEASE bring back the old site, it was so much easier to use and so much more effective, since this new version went online I have been unable to find anyone.

      sharon 17 September 2011
      2:14 am
    290. Most cumbersome site, I cannot find any of my family even though they are well documented on film. Why can we not get a list of people ( eg married or baptised) by entering the family name only?

      GJ Sanders 17 September 2011
      12:27 am
    291. I miss the former way of searching-the formate now is not as easy to read-input and Ive noticed in the 1850, where the spouse used to be listed, is no longer occurring. I liked the old way, because I did not have to go into each name to find the spouse - Id like the old way of search to be available, thank you

      linda renfro 16 September 2011
      5:20 pm
    292. Searching on Thomason brought up 139 matches for Thompson no Thomason.

      Bob Thirsk 16 September 2011
      4:42 pm
    293. Not impressed at all the only thing I liked was the Marriage certs I got before they stopped.

      Bob Thirsk 16 September 2011
      4:39 pm
    294. I really miss the option to look for a bride and groom name. I found several of my folks by using the first name of the bride and the last name of the groom or vice versa as the index is not always correct. Please put that option back on.

      16 September 2011
      1:18 pm
    295. The changes you people have made to this site are awful. Please change it back. This was a great site before, you but have ruined it. Thanks a lot.

      Jeff 16 September 2011
      8:54 am
    296. Have to agree with a lot of comments above. I looked for the birth of my Grandfather Archibald Charles Leslie Otton born in Ballancollig in Cork in 1886. I have his certificate and I also remember him. On the old site it found him when you used the like button but now unable to. Why because he is wrongly indexed Archibald Charles Leslie Olton One letter out in a total of twenty seven and yet you cannot bring him up unless you know he is mispelt and type in the Olton. I did report this CaseID1631243 in 2010 and was told that it would be changed due to a feature is being engineered that will accept corrections / additions to the searchable index. in May 2010??

      Malcolm Otton 16 September 2011
      2:03 am
    297. It would be nice to see the early marriage banns shown as a Source for research of marriages ,pre 18th century.

      Chris 15 September 2011
      4:44 pm
    298. Im looking for people related to the late Bernard Natter Kane,once of Connecticut.Bernard passed away in 1983.His family originally lived in England,Bovey-Tracey.

      Martin Kane 15 September 2011
      4:34 pm
    299. cest nul jy comprends rien et ça ne marche pas. Remettez comme avant.

      15 September 2011
      12:37 pm
    300. no pude encontrar ningun familiar me es muy confuso

      carlos 15 September 2011
      8:56 am
    301. A terrible site now. It doesnt seen to be working for anyone. Change it back.

      Phyllis 14 September 2011
      9:20 pm
    302. This is my second or third visit. I doubt that I will return. Far to time consumming and difficult to navigate. Loved the old system. Kathleen Staub

      Kathleen Staub 14 September 2011
      12:17 pm
    303. I find the search fields useless. Why cant I search for a person using birth year & county of birth together with where there now living in USA. Why cant I search using parents names. Why cant I search by street. Its useless.

      Martin Phelan 13 September 2011
      11:34 am
    304. Could someone at Familysearch let us know what is going on. No one seems to like the new edition. It is very hard to navigate.

      Ben Hart 13 September 2011
      9:04 am
    305. Guess I could spend he rest of my life learning to use the new system and maybe even find the things that were available before. Happily I am a hard copy person and have copies of the old stuff, somewhere. Had this system (designed by been in use when I started I wouldnt have been successful. Change is not always progress. Hope that you have not lost control of the original LDS system.

      George 12 September 2011
      2:55 pm
    306. I am in agreement with many about the NEW and improved site. NOT. The old site and ways of doing things was much more easier and able to get thru. I do not like the new and improved version. MUCH more prefer the old one, It was easier to manage and use especially for someone new . I have been doing research for over 40+ years. This used to be my most reliable site to find stuff. Not anymore. If the people have a vote. I say go BACK to the other version. I have gotten so frustrated that I have quit looking,

      B Maxwell 12 September 2011
      10:33 am
    307. I cannot find any of my family members on this site. none whatsoever. Not even myself. I really need to know my genealogy on both sides and history and this site does not help. is there any other free sites that are better?

      Kelle 12 September 2011
      7:21 am
    308. Ive been away for a while. So today I showed my cousin this site and was truely shocked at all the changes. This site used to be a joy to navigate through, and now I just want to scream. I will definately not recommend this site to anyone. Please put it back like it was before.

      Lizzyq 12 September 2011
      12:03 am
    309. Not impressed. Now unable to search with fathers name only, or all those with the same christian name to find strange spellings of surnames. Old way much better.

      Pam 11 September 2011
      11:45 pm
    310. Im a Systems Analyst by trade. (very tech savy)... Im not against change,,, as long as it improves the product... However this version is a huge step backwards... Its much harder and more time consuming to do research... This is a classic case of desigining a new front end without understanding your customers requirements.,.. Please revisit the screens / filters of the old system and improve the new system.... You have a million dollar data base,,,, and a 10 cent front end for report generation....

      Jim 11 September 2011
      10:22 pm
    311. Bring back the first was so much better. What happened to the searching by parent names? or search by spouse names? What happened to searching by a specific database? Youve taken all the good things out and left a pile of junky searches behind. I knew it was going to be bad when you were first posting this new version and I kept going back to the first one because it was so much easier to search and find information. Truly disappointed.

      Patricia D. 11 September 2011
      9:26 pm
    312. One thing I think would improve the searches. Allow for a change to the forename and/or surname while retaining all the set filters. It is very laborious having to start from scratch each time.

      Gerd Hamilton 11 September 2011
      5:50 pm
    313. Im afraid I agree with Melisa... this is terribly hard to transfer to this new system and believe me ive tried

      M.Jeffery 11 September 2011
      4:27 pm
    314. I would like to thank you for your informative, free site it as been a great tool for my search. Carry on the good work you are doing an excellent job. Thank you again.

      Janis Kadir 11 September 2011
      7:33 am
    315. Like many other researchers, I found it so easy to trace the children of particular parents with a batch number - now the search changes over to the new system and one has to hunt through so many more Please go back to the old system

      Maurice Wilkins 11 September 2011
      5:51 am
    316. what have you done to this site? has been a while since ive been on here and now find it impossible to find anything bring back the old site, please

      karen 11 September 2011
      4:54 am
    317. My parents were married in Arkansas and a lot of Rhodes were but they are not there. They were before. What happened? The old system was better

      Nita 10 September 2011
      6:39 pm
    318. bring back the old system,the new system is neither use nor ornament

      chris 10 September 2011
      12:37 pm
    319. IF I HAD ALL the information you ask for why would I be searching? I have limited information in Finland and names are spelled so differently when folks came to the USA.

      ANITA DESENA 10 September 2011
      10:53 am
    320. Oh my, this system is so hard to use. I put in Krienke and get back over 100 Cronk Please bring back the old system. Also, there is not enough information to be sure I have found the person that I want. Information is mixed up too.

      Alyn Olson 10 September 2011
      10:14 am
    321. Please Please Can we have the old system back The difference is that the old system was as fast as the latest rocket. The new is Pre Stone Age You have all been outstanding to us in the past. We our exasperation into account. Thank You

      Marvyn 09 September 2011
      7:21 pm
    322. queridos hermanos de FS, se que los cambios nos cuestan a todos... pero esto es realmente complicado... no es preciso que vuelva el viejo sistema, pero creo que si hay que hacer algo para que esto sea un poco mas sencillo... muchas gracias por su ayuda...

      Nadia 09 September 2011
      3:22 pm
    323. You had a brilliant product and you have ruined it From the number of people who are complaining, including your own staff in the Centres, is it not possible for you to bite the bullet, admit it has been a disaster and return (at least for a while) to the Pilot version. You have provided a brilliant free service for so long and no one can criticise too severely someone who does that BUT please, please, do something about the current site.

      Sue 09 September 2011
      11:07 am
    324. Hate the new system. Its too difficult to use and Ive never found anyone since youve changed. Why fix something that wasnt broke?

      Norma Jenkins 09 September 2011
      7:13 am
    325. I cant find a marriage record like I used to - needing to find the wifes maiden name and names of her parents. They were married about 1895 in Illinois. Im doing this for a friend - I have the names of one set of great-grandparents, but I cant where this wife (my friends grandmother) is related to the set of great-grandparents. I used to pull up all kinds of pedigree charts at FamilySearch - cant find them now. And, my friend is in the 1930 census.

      Lydia Joy McCracken Chichester 09 September 2011
      1:29 am
    326. Have to agree, its a disaster. The filter system is not as good as previously.

      Fred heatley 08 September 2011
      3:59 pm
    327. Missing pilot I could limit my searches to just marriage records, or specific decades, and more.

      sarah 07 September 2011
      10:11 pm
    328. My comment like so many others will probably not be seen, however, I loved the old site and used it as long as I was able. The new site doesnt work well at all, and is very hard to find what I had no trouble finding with the other. I am with the others on this site. Please bring back the old site

      Phyllis 07 September 2011
      7:53 pm
    329. It would be nice if we could put an exact date in

      Chris 07 September 2011
      12:24 pm
    330. I do not like this site at all. Please bring back the pilot site where you could search with parents surnames for deaths. Please rethink this site. You have made it so hard and you have so much information to share. Dianne, CA

      Dianne 07 September 2011
      11:02 am
    331. I found one record here which is wrong in all the date.. my eldest uncle was born 1920 and their youngest sister (Emilia Bayona) listed birthday is 1831. all name are Okay as per my actual records. Grooms Name Hugo Belmonte Grooms Birth Date 1824 Grooms Birthplace Grooms Age 34 Brides Name Emilia Bayona Brides Birth Date 1831 Brides Birthplace Brides Age 27 Marriage Date 09 Aug 1858 Marriage Place Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo, Philippines Grooms Fathers Name Jose Belmonte Grooms Mothers Name Natividad Boblo Brides Fathers Name Lorenzo Bayona Brides Mothers Name Paz Sabedra Grooms Race Grooms Marital Status Grooms Previous Wifes Name Brides Race Brides Marital Status Brides Previous Husbands Name Indexing Project (Batch) Number I05764-1 System Origin Philippines-EASy Source Film Number 1624634 Reference Number RN 132

      Mel bayona 07 September 2011
      6:29 am
    332. Kindly see below data i found here which is wrong in all the listed date. all name is exactly Okay except all date the date, my eldest uncle was born in 1924, how come their yougest sister "Emilia Bayona" birthday is 1831. even their marriage date is wrong.. Groom's Name: Hugo Belmonte Groom's Birth Date: 1824 Groom's Birthplace: Groom's Age: 34 Bride's Name: Emilia Bayona Bride's Birth Date: 1831 Bride's Birthplace: Bride's Age: 27 Marriage Date: 09 Aug 1858 Marriage Place: Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo, Philippines Groom's Father's Name: Jose Belmonte Groom's Mother's Name: Natividad Boblo Bride's Father's Name: Lorenzo Bayona Bride's Mother's Name: Paz Sabedra Groom's Race: Groom's Marital Status: Groom's Previous Wife's Name: Bride's Race: Bride's Marital Status: Bride's Previous Husband's Name: Indexing Project (Batch) Number: I05764-1 System Origin: Philippines-EASy Source Film Number: 1624634 Reference Number: RN 132

      Mel bayona 07 September 2011
      6:26 am
    333. I find the changes to the site make it unfriendly to users. You previously had a very easy site to navigate, now it is cumbersome and unhelpful.

      Marilyn Poole 06 September 2011
      7:57 pm
    334. I am in complete agreement with the majority. The old site would give you the information you were searching for, now I cannot find what I found before using the same data. I have searched for one of my ancestors that another person told me his death certificate was on LDS. I could not find it. Please bring back the older version. It was so much easier.

      CAL3165 06 September 2011
      7:26 pm
    335. well many people said to me that this site is easy but me cant even do nothing here, is not that easy as is look. sorry but this way is not work for me.

      Jose 06 September 2011
      5:51 pm
    336. Estimados señores esta nueva forma de búsqueda de personas, no me parece la mejor, era mucho mejor la anterior, con base en qué criterio quitaron la eliminaron. Esta fórmula de buscar es mucho más dificil y complicada que la anterior. Les agradecería su contestación.

      Carlos Luis Méndez Quirós 06 September 2011
      4:15 pm
    337. A big thumbs down Im afraid - please bring back Family Search Pilot - life was much easier then. You have ruined family research big style sadly.

      Sue Cassidy 06 September 2011
      3:35 pm
    338. Please bring back the old system, this new one is no use at all. I will try again in six months and if its no better I will not use this site again.

      Pam 06 September 2011
      1:40 pm
    339. Hi, The old pilot site was excellent. This new site is very difficult to fined a small number of hits - especially in ireland where it is no longer possible to specify the town or county that the person lived in so instead of one or two hits for the county dublin I now get 300 hits for the whole country. I hope you rectify the problem and in the interim it would be great if you could reinstate the pilot family search

      S Byrn 06 September 2011
      11:37 am

      MARIA HERNANDEZ 06 September 2011
      11:10 am
    341. If I may make a constructive comment, you need to order search results by relevance to the original search parameters. If I specify a fathers forename, those results that show that forename should not be scattered through the resulting search results but should be grouped together on the first page of results. I have used familysearch for years and am grateful for what it has done for me in the past but will only be using it in the future once its former usefulness has been reinstated.

      Jon 06 September 2011
      10:36 am
    342. I would have to agree. I have been doing family history with this website for nearly 10 years and this has got to be the worst format for finding family members. What was wrong with the old format? I understand there is a need for change but surely only if its for the better.

      Linda 06 September 2011
      4:35 am
    343. Why can I find a persons birth on the old system, and get no response on this one? And the use of custom search is very poor compared to the old one which apparently no longer works.

      James Smith 05 September 2011
      6:50 pm
    344. I cant find anything in this new site. I liked the old one much better because I was able to find records much easier. Please bring back the old.

      Debora Cook 05 September 2011
      5:43 pm
    345. I could not agree more with the spirit of all these comments. You had a very useful tool for those of us who want to search through an entire database of names from our chosen town. Now that is not possible. We must scroll through at subsonar speed the whole list of entries. Bring back the old system. Whoever is doing these enhancements needs to learn from the ancients in your user group. Dont mess with something that is working just fine already. I hope to see a return to what we had in the near future.

      Eric Schaal 05 September 2011
      2:38 pm
    346. I couldnt agree more with the last commentor. Your changes have eliminated the usefulness of the IGI site for those of us who knew how to use it. Please change it back. Im afraid the technology types in your employ have never learned the wisdom of the older set. Leave well enough alone. PLEASE. Eric Schaal, Burr Ridge, Illinois

      05 September 2011
      2:26 pm
    347. Please, bring back the old system...I am so dissappointed with the new is harder to find information and it takes alot there are no parents names on marriages, bride and groom and their parents names helped to identify the individuals, now its like searching in the dark...Constance Hartmann

      Constance F. Hartmann 05 September 2011
      1:53 pm
    348. Id like to see the filter order tweaked a bit by moving the Gender to the topmost position. I believe it would speed things up in most searches. Thanks, Perk ()

      Perk 05 September 2011
      12:26 pm
    349. this is driving me mad go back to old search please

      beth 05 September 2011
      12:09 pm
    350. I found information on my mother, Agnes Rotteveel, but the date of birth is incorrect. She was born in 1914, not 1915. Please correct the record

      BonnieMcNair 05 September 2011
      12:07 pm
    351. I found a lot of my ancestors siblings by using the mothers maiden name but i cant seem to able to do that here

      Michael Brennan 05 September 2011
      9:13 am
    352. I havent used this site for a few years, but decided to give it a go and wish I hadnt. It didnt not find ONE member of my tree even though I put in their exact details, which can be found on other Geneology sites. It used to be one of the better sites, a lot simpler and a lot more accurate.....please sort it out

      Simon Bullough 05 September 2011
      9:10 am
    353. i am new to this site and so far i have gotten no matches on any of my ancestors and i know death certificates and records ane there. this site is a joke. i can go to google and get results easier. where is any results?

      margaret ann kelley 05 September 2011
      9:01 am
    354. I am finding this site very confusing, your old site was so helpful, especially when using the batch numbers to find siblings. Please make the old site available again. I see from other comments I am not alone.

      Janis Nottingham 05 September 2011
      7:36 am
    355. Im so disappointed with the changes to this site. I know it probably looked a bit old fashioned & plain compared to many other sites, but at least you could find the information easily. Now I cant seem to find anything at all. -(

      Hilary 04 September 2011
      8:22 am
    356. What are you thinking of? The changes are very unhelpful. I assume the provision of this previously very useful, and free service, was to encourage its use. What you have achieved, where I am concerned and I assume many others, is for to stop using it. Very sad. In line with all of the posted comments by other disgruntled reserchers I say please be brave enough to admit the new system is a disaster and revert to the previous model - PLEASE

      Keith Salmon 04 September 2011
      7:26 am
    357. Please go back to the pilot. I cannot find anything on the new site. Like Ann Landers always said If it aint broke, dont fix it.

      Dee Garrison 03 September 2011
      7:25 pm
    358. When this was Family Search LAB it was an amazing search engine because of all the ways you could tweak the search parameters. I thought the spelling variation searches "exact, approximate & partial" were one of the best options....among others that have disappeared. Did Ancestry take over Family Search like it did Cyndi's List ? The loss of function is very similar. There was honestly nothing wrong with the F S Labs search engine. I know you could have added all the additional new material to the existing site. It would have been grand, better yet it would have been even BETTER than the F S Lab's version. Instead, you've made another version of Ancestry's shotgun approach--"Why return 90 possibilities when 236,375 possibilities, with no winnowing process, can bury any attempt at research.

      Joan Strauss 03 September 2011
      6:19 pm
    359. Prior to August 23, this site was a very valuable tool in my genealogy research. You have removed the best feature of the older tool..quick and easy to use. We are searching for a reason..we do not have most of the information to fill into the search criteria of your new tool to find exact matches. One of the best features of the beta tool was the ability to look for parents names on death records. It was a great way to find children of a couple that you did not know existed or to find married daughters. Coming back to the new tool is getting less attractive each time I experience it.

      Patsy Wright 03 September 2011
      5:36 am
    360. Not happy -( . bring back the previous version of pilot

      Stephen 03 September 2011
      5:24 am
    361. Is anyone in authority reading these comments?Everyone hates the new format.Time for a change or take it off the web .

      Frank Hanson 03 September 2011
      4:10 am
    362. i just enrolled today for 30 days. so glad i did not enroll for one year. genealogy bank transferrs me to ancestry .com. i already subscribe to ancestry so why do i need you? it seems you only have social security info. any time you design a new system it must be usable by a person of average ability.this system is maddining.iwill stay for the remaining 29 days but then cancel my subscription.

      barbara huls 02 September 2011
      5:44 pm

      ROY 02 September 2011
      2:47 pm
    364. I think this is a great improvement. I have found many more people and I am learning more and more how to use the filters. They are super. It is a shame that some people are so resistant to change. Thank you for all your hard work.

      Gill 02 September 2011
      3:59 am
    365. I am sure my info is correct.It terrible you can not find it in any record. You make it very frustrating.

      Marge 02 September 2011
      12:48 am
    366. It used to be an easy system to use. I dont know what you did but it is awful trying to find records now.

      Virginia ivins 01 September 2011
      7:03 pm
    367. Please Please, keep old site running Found a marridge on old site, but New site can not find it If its not broken, do not fix it. Thanks Janet L. Ogden Mrs

      Janet L. Ogden Mrs 01 September 2011
      1:50 pm
    368. I can/t ever find information that used to be available.This change is terrible--I do not care for it. Ancestry has done the same, It is impossible to locate info that used to be so easy-

      Marie Edgar 01 September 2011
      8:06 am
    369. you have got to be kidding with this set up. I have copies of records from Ireland off of your old site and now I cant find anyone of them. What did you people do?

      Pam 31 August 2011
      2:24 pm
    370. I had been using this site to trace back my family tree along as many of its branches as I could connect to. I took a break for a number of weeks this Summer and although I did look up a couple of things a few times and noted that there had been an upgrade so that one could see all the persons siblings, I never expected that all my work would come to a screeching halt due to the fact that now none of the links from the ancestors I had not yet followed work and there seems to be no way to retrieve the data. I had actually been in touch once before regarding an error I had discovered and received a response saying that at the time there was no mechanism for corrections but it was being considered as a future upgrade and I got an invitation to enter data which I was considering doing once I managed to finish my family tree... Guess thats not going to happen any time soon unless you can tell me how to get the data I need to complete what I had set out to do. As an example, as of a few weeks ago, if I had clicked on the parents of the person below, I would have been able to continue working back in time through the existing data. Now the only link is to a page that allows only to enter a new search and gives NO results for any of the people below even though that data had come from you. name Petronille De GRENTMESNIL gender Female birth 1134 Abt Of, , Leicestershire, England death 1212 Apr 1 Leicester, Leicestershire, England burial Abbey, Leicester, Leicestershire, England AFN 12CL-NDP Parents father Hugh De (GRENTEMESNIL) GRENTMESNIL (AFN ) mother Alice BEAUMONT (AFN ) Marriages (1) spouse Robert Blanchmains HARCOURT [EARL OF LEICESTER] (AFN ) marriage 1155 Abt Any pointers?

      Louisa Anderson 31 August 2011
      2:17 pm
    371. Please go back to the great old screen search.You made it much more difficult for me and many others.

      Joan 31 August 2011
      2:04 pm
    372. This system change has devastated me. I feel like I have lost a tremendous resource. I used to use it with great and immediate success--found so many family records. Now I have to filter through too many names that have no relation to my family. Very frustrating, time consuming and more often than not--FRUITLESS Please, Please, Please change back to the old system Im begging you.

      Colleen Danstrom 31 August 2011
      10:33 am
    373. What's happened to the Batch Number searches? All I get now is web page cannot be found

      Pidgeoni 31 August 2011
      9:11 am
    374. Terrible I would like to use stronger word, but it would be unprintable. By all means improve the search possibilities, but if you cannot do better than this with the results - leave well alone The search results should ideally be presented in a single table, so that all results can be read at a glance wothout further navigation.

      Pidgeoni 31 August 2011
      9:06 am
    375. Is there no possibility to separate the dates much better? It could be so easy e.g. country, town, place, confession, name of church, event, year, month, day, last name, first names = Germany, Dortmund, City, evangelisch, St. Petri, birth, 1800, 10, 25, Schulte, Johann Henrich Wilhelm **** And Sorry to say that But the old system has had a better spelling of the names.

      Anna Sybilla 31 August 2011
      8:00 am
    376. Family Search - are you reading all these comments and are you going to do something about it???

      judy morrier 30 August 2011
      10:01 pm
    377. find researching very cumbersome. when you put in exact information you get too much non related info.

      sonia 30 August 2011
      8:42 pm
    378. I already have the majority of certificates I need from Scotlandspeople but have looked at this site for Scotland twice now to find some people who are missing. I am at a loss as to what you are trying to achieve with it as it is a total shambles. It does not even show people for whom I have certificates (by this I mean OPRs and Statutory Registration of which I have a mix). For some time now I have searched the parish records for Norfolk, England on this site that shows the actual image of the parish record. It is time consuming but very worthwhile and far more productive than the site for Scotland. Norfolk is set out simply and is user friendly. I do not know whether you are unable to show actual registers from Scotland and expect this is the case but please can you make the site user friendly. By this I mean can we not have simple categories 1Births/Baptisms/Christenings 2 Marriages 3 Deaths/Burials then by 4 Counties then by 5 Parishes then by 6 Year Users are then able to put in as much information as they already know to achieve the best possible match. It is a waste of time on the current site putting in specific details of an event, person, county & parish and then a year range as you get a list that bears no relevance to the search criteria you have stipulated. Why when I am searching for a specific country are there filters for other countries that do not relate to the country being searched, they are just not relevant.

      PamO 30 August 2011
      6:40 pm
    379. I am having an awful time getting anywhere - the links just are never there. I had more luck with the past program.

      Rose Pelky 30 August 2011
      1:22 pm
    380. Likewise Im sorry to say. Trying to get back into this after a long illness I cant even find what I had in the first place. Can you offer an option like Windows does, like Classic or Updated?

      Carol Marks 30 August 2011
      10:00 am
    381. I loved the old system too - I was able to find records pretty easily. But on the new site, those records are no longer there. I just dont understand it Perhaps those of us who dont want to use the new site can still use the Pilot?? If so, how do I do that? PLEASE, PLEASE, GIVE US BACK THE OLD SITE

      Colette 29 August 2011
      8:09 pm
    382. Please go back to the old system, this is terrible.

      maryann krupa 29 August 2011
      7:58 pm
    383. I really missing being able to select Limit to - Cook County Birth Records [Cook County is a county in Illinois] etc. I know that good intentions were being the changes but I feel like I have *lost* search power rather than gained search power. Please consider the feedback that you are receiving. With all that said, I really appreciate everything that Family Search does for the public. Continued blessing to you

      Dana L 29 August 2011
      6:06 pm
    384. Ive stopped using this now, the old system was the easiest and probably oldest method of tracing ancestors. Reliable, easy to use, simple to search and retrieve information and any one of any skill level could use it. This new search system is useless, the searchs are confusing to even the most advanced internet user, the results hard to decipher, The search options are so extended that you cannot easily find any. This is now awful and simply the worst search engine going, as such, it is now longer useful to us geneaolgists, amateur and alike, and it is pointless even considering using it. Reading the comments on here I cannot find one positive response to the change and therefore If you cant put it back to the old way, I would suggest that there is no point in you having it on the net at all?

      J P Langshaw 29 August 2011
      3:37 pm
    385. Hate this format, please go back to the old one. Total tunoff. Ive tried for months to get use to it and it is time comsuming and not friendly at all. why fix something that didnt need fixing.

      Karen Baleno 29 August 2011
      1:04 pm
    386. Worst of all the search systems youve had. The last beta search was much easier to filter and got less hits. So far have been unable to find how to search by parents so as to find children. There are so many hits that it makes this virtually unusable.

      Texasnmyheart 29 August 2011
      12:10 pm
    387. Could not agree more with all previous critics of the new system. I give courses to a local elderly group, and i know they will not manage this new facility. Please please do some thing . Fred

      Fred heatley 29 August 2011
      10:39 am
    388. This site is so frustrating. The pilot search allowed me to see my relatives plus the parents, I am not getting enough information on the new site, eg i can find my grandmother, but is does not give the names of her parents,on the pilot search it did, its making it very difficult to be sure the person you find is the one you want without this added information.Also i am searching in Ireland only it only allows me to search Europe which is time consuming,can we have an Ireland only site please Phil Crowley

      phil crowley dublin ireland 29 August 2011
      10:04 am
    389. awkward,lacking cohesion difficult and time consuming -pity i used to get such a kick when i would discover new information about my familys ancestors.

      mary keenan 29 August 2011
      9:29 am
    390. i cant find half my relations like i used to by adding mothers maiden name i really do not lie the new site it is too hard to narrow down your relations. Irish genealogy is hard enough but the old site it was easier to search on

      mary wade 29 August 2011
      8:46 am
    391. Bring back the old system I used to be able to find what I was looking for--and more- so easily. Even whole families This site is NOT an improvement. Its not the least bit intuitive, very confusing with all the filters and subfilters, and worst of all I dont get the results that I used to with the old system. Ive wasted countless hours here. It seems to me that your architects and programmers are out of touch with your users. A huge setback in my estimation

      Jen 28 August 2011
      11:44 pm
    392. the website is terrible hard to track people, records are incorrect. ex. the have my grandmother name listed 3 ways birdie robins-scipio, utah-correct. her name was not verta or bertie as listed in the census records. her daughter nana e. mcarthur is also listed as nona mcarthur-wrong. census records are incorrect all over thee us. ex. my grandfahter in sayre, ok. was johnathan lee byd--wife and children are all correct. but other census records she him as johathan t. and johnathan e.--wrong-- but again the children and wife are correct. DO NOT TRUST US CENSUS RECORDS BUT THEN, WHAT ELSE CAN YOU EXPECT FROM U.S. GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS people participated in the u.s. censuses, but name imformation i terrible. charlotte winters

      CHARLOTTE WINTERS 28 August 2011
      9:10 pm
    393. This new system is terrible. It takes me forever to find anything. I get too many hits that have nothing to do with my intended search. On the pilot system, I could find a marriage by putting in the last names of the groom and of the bride, as well as the state. Now, to find a marriage record I enter the name of the groom and get pages and pages of census records that I don't need. There is no place to enter the name of the bride. Please let us have the pilot system back in addition to the new one.

      Pat 28 August 2011
      1:20 pm
    394. This new system is terrible. It takes me forever to find anything. I get too many hits that have nothing to do with my intended search. On the pilot system, I could find a marriage by putting in the last names of the groom and of the bride, as well as the state. Now, to find a marriage record I enter the name of the groom and get pages and pages of census records that I dont need. There is no place to enter the name of the bride. Please let us have the pilot system back in addition to the new one.

      Pat 28 August 2011
      1:17 pm
    395. I find this new site most confusing and very time consuming - please bring back the old version so easy to navigate - I am not using as much as I used to because of the confusion.

      Sheri Robins 28 August 2011
      10:58 am
    396. Please bring back the Pilot search,it was so easy to use and very effective.Cannot get any results on new sit.And thanks for all the past help.

      MáireBeirne 28 August 2011
      10:00 am
    397. Awful, awful, awful! I'm astounded at the LDS. This new site is a nightmare to use. It simply isn't worth wasting time on. I used to search Pilot Search for the Irish Civil Registration indexes (1845-1958) but there is now no point! I will return to the hardcopy indexes in the GRO in Dublin...they maybe old fashioned and time consuming to search but using them is now - unfortunately - much quicker than wasting valuable time on the new FamilySearch site! Astounded!

      Steven Smyrl, professional genealogist 28 August 2011
      9:48 am
    398. Where do I start? The LDS was always at the cutting edge of new technology... but this replacement for the Pilot Search is just terrible Words fail me What used to be a relatively easy system for searching is now so wide that it is impossible to undetake any worthwhile searching As a professional genealogist with over 25 years experience I am underwhelmed by the new FamilySearch site. If it doesnt take account of the huge amount of criticism I have read (below) then I dont think that it will ever be of any real use to resrachers. Its really as simple as that

      Steven Smyrl, professional genealogist 28 August 2011
      9:43 am
    399. I do not like this new site, the old pilot project was much more user freindly. Maybe i just dont know how to use this, very frustrating.

      Glenys 28 August 2011
      8:43 am
    400. Im terribly sorry for all the work you have done on this site, but I must agree with most comments that it is almost impossible to find relatives. The old system was indeed much better.

      Owen Harrower 28 August 2011
      5:27 am
    401. The search for other children of a couple can be done by changing the relationship box to Parents. You can then enter the father and mother, and optionally a batch no. The problem I think in part at least is the the paucity of help and instructions of how to get the best out of the search

      Karen 28 August 2011
      5:08 am
    402. Of the four people I have located using the new system, three birth dates were off by a digit or two from other published dates, and a death date was different from one on a certified copy of a death record in my possession. LDS burial information was also incorrect (there were no supporting images). I had hoped for something a bit more reliable. A disappointment.

      K. Davis 27 August 2011
      9:47 pm
    403. This site is beyond confusing. You need to make this a LOT more user friendly.

      Debbie 27 August 2011
      7:53 pm
    404. One of the ways you can make life simpler for searches is to separate out Canada, USA and Mexico. It would be a way to make the searches smaller. I can see leaving it all 3 but than allowing us to see a drop-down box where we can further limit the search to the USA, but Ive never found that I could do that. PS Even though Ive sent 4 comment today (3 of them re this paragraph), my e-mail address AND MY NAME are still stuck showing. Even though I went to a different web page to read something, my name and e-mail address are still there showing at the bottom of the web page even though Im on a totally different web page. Its stuck and I dont like that at all.

      RMK 27 August 2011
      11:47 am
    405. Bring back the Discovery your Ancesters from the Pilot site.

      David 27 August 2011
      11:37 am
    406. Suddenly, I cant view census records which had been available for viewing prior to something kicking in in the last day or so. Ive registered and all and when I view the printed data , the census record viewing part says that its now not available. Was thinking of depositing my information with LDS. Not sure if this is the best place. Been doing this for 40 years and have much material . All one needs is to have a glitch pop up like this, a new change, and it suddenly doesnt make sense to deposit the info here.

      jonathan arnow 27 August 2011
      4:21 am
    407. Do not Like the Filters, old system provided quick results this one is too much-please return to the older system or at least run both --thank you

      Estelle Shipp 26 August 2011
      4:36 pm
    408. I really like the drill-down capability of this new search. Bravo

      Colleen 25 August 2011
      2:32 pm
    409. El sistema anterior era mucho mejor, para buscar hijos de alguien no se puede usar, antes entrábamos el nombre de la madre y aparecían los hijos bautizados con madre de ese apellido o apellido y nombre, este sistema no sirve para orientar las búsquedas

      Silvana Rodríguez 25 August 2011
      6:29 am
    410. The pilot site was better, this one is useless. Even if you put in the place name, it comes up with everything else. Very difficult to find anyone.

      Pat 25 August 2011
      5:52 am
    411. The system is very difficult to navigate, unlike the old system. Unable to access marriage records for England, keep getting Births and Christenings

      S Smith 25 August 2011
      5:41 am
    412. Hi, not part of your church so no right to whinge, but having used your old records, with the microfich, and then later updating everything with the great new computer system was fantastic, i had a great deal ot trouble trying to find my Russ family in essex uk up till then, probably because they were staunch roman catholic, but the new system was helping me piece it all together. However your new system gives me a huge range of totally usesless unrelated people to go through, before i can find the old records let alone any new ones, filtering seems very limited, maybe if you could have exact names etc it may help, but the old system was far more user friendly, and helpfull. Anyway, thanks for the wonderful research all your people do, and all the very best.

      Dave Hunneybell 25 August 2011
      4:49 am
    413. I used to use this site a lot but now it is rubbish. You cant find anything, even things you have looked at here before You used to be able to find siblings really easily and now you cant. Bring back the old version, PLEASE

      madmummy 25 August 2011
      3:02 am
    414. There is a field for a batch. Is the batch a number or a name? Where do you find the batch to enter???

      Sis 24 August 2011
      11:39 pm
    415. How can I enter the name of a couple? I can do it in Family Search Pilot, in advance search. Now is very confusing

      Emanuel 24 August 2011
      7:35 pm
    416. He tratado insistentemente, sin embargo toda posibilidad ha sido negativa, en resumidas cuenta un fracaso, tratar de encontrar información sobre mis descendientes españoles, pareciera que ustedes no tienen nada de información al respecto, he perdido el tiempo y siempre encuentro la misma respuesta o no hay información disponible o no podemos atender su petición en este momento, sírvase acceder más tarde, todo es un cuento...

      Víctor Polini 24 August 2011
      5:19 pm
    417. I have used the old site for years and have had enormous success with researching many generations of my family - for which I am very grateful to family search. I am at a loss to understand why you woud want to replace the old system with this frustrating unfriendly confusing long-winded system. I am very very disappointed. Please admit that this is a mistake and reinstate the old one. Please.

      sue 24 August 2011
      11:46 am
    418. old system very very much better found ancestors records of births etc easy .On new system there not even there now,your new system looks like it was set up for the usa. please please revert to the old system.i had told friends about the old system now they think i was having a laugh.

      tony monaghan 24 August 2011
      5:28 am
    419. I have been using this site for 13 or 14 years. It is wonderful and allow me to find data that I cannot even access on my expensive paid site. The new system does take a bit of getting used to, but once you learn to navigate it, it is great. For those users who are unhappy, there is a link on the main page that allows you to use the old search browser and shows you the results in the old format. But as an experienced genealogist, I suggest that you be patient and learn how to use the new system because you have access to so much more

      Vicky Topping 23 August 2011
      5:30 pm
    420. I was excited to see that the Washington states had been indexed, In my search - now - I can see the person I want in the various census(es) but I cant find her death information. Please let us go *back* to searching data by batches. (or .. linking to the images from new familysearch would be nice.. as we were told it would be when nFS was initially told to FHC directors)

      Alan W 23 August 2011
      2:33 pm
    421. Why change ?? You had a perfectly good system- so why ruin it with this mess?? New stuff isnt always better that the old- Let us have the old system back---please---

      Karibeth 23 August 2011
      12:01 pm
    422. Please bring back the pilot search. This new search is terrible. Before you could search one surname and limit the search to an individual township or county if you wanted. Now there are hundreds of results and the results cannot be limited to a specific location. I used the pilot search so much but this new returns so many results that it is a waste of time.

      Patti Harnden 23 August 2011
      9:41 am
    423. sorry do not understand, how to get round this site

      andrea 23 August 2011
      4:46 am
    424. I dont like the NEW at all, it is much too confusing. Whatever happened to KEEP IT SIMPLE FOR STUPID? Maybe a great genealogist researcher and a great librarian should meld their thoughts and work out the kinks and wrinkles. Until then, I will be using more books than online sources.

      Arlene 22 August 2011
      4:47 pm
    425. Estou a procura de dados dôs meus antepassados Friedrich Mähl ou Mehl, a esposa Christine Gallenberg ou Galauloch, os filhos Heinrich, Eduard e..... ea nora Carolina Teinel ou Theinl. Estou fazendo a árvore genealógica da nossa família e não tenho dados destes antepassados. Acredito que tenham vivido entre 1800 a 1900. Todos naturais da Alemanha é o que me consta.

      Vera Lucia mehl Ribas 22 August 2011
      4:28 pm
    426. I agree with most of the criticisms of this new site. Cannot filter by mothers maiden name etc. Cannot have multiple filters for the same type. The pilot was much better - this new site is poor in comparison. I would have expected a better search experience from an organisation with such a vast number of records.

      Peter 22 August 2011
      4:10 pm
    427. me gustaria ubicar la fecha de matrimonio y defuncion de mi tatarabuelo Simone Toso y ,Susanna Fabiano , en Voltri, Genova ,Italia . su hijo Luigi Toso Fabiano lo bautizaron en Parrocchia Di Nicolo DI Erasmo 1839

      Ana Maria Toso 22 August 2011
      3:48 pm
    428. I got great help of the old system, now I just cant find anything, not even those names, that I found earlier - where are they? - I dont like the new system

      Birgit Stricker, Denmark 22 August 2011
      1:38 pm
    429. I really, really, really dislike this new improved system I had an IGI citation, found under the old system, for a marriage and a death for a person. In the new system, it says there are no records for my ancestor When I switch back to the old system and search the IGI, the 1800 records files for my ancestor are no longer there, either. There appears to be no way to access only IGI records from the new interface - cumbersome, confusing, tedious. You know ... if it aint broke, dont fix it ... has some validity here

      linda 22 August 2011
      9:20 am
    430. how have this sit in french?? please

      amelin 22 August 2011
      8:23 am
    431. Because Ive been having difficulty getting any results I decided to conduct a test. I put in all the info from my grandparents marriage certificate from 1911, a copy of which I have in front of me, which I obtained from LDS microfilm. My search came back saying no records found. Im very good with computers so I dont understand why this happened on this site.

      Mariann 21 August 2011
      6:47 pm
    432. I used the old system to find everything and I must admit it was so simple,but now its a headache.I tried it with the info I got off the old system and it all came bad sorry not found .

      Peter 21 August 2011
      1:18 pm
    433. The search mechanism in the pilot site was a lot easier to use and allowed one to look at a specific collection of records. I have tried looking for records I know I found using the pilot site that I can no longer find now.

      Brenda Costello 21 August 2011
      10:18 am

      WILLIAM QUEREY 20 August 2011
      12:16 pm
    435. How come I can not find some of my relatives on here when i know they are from a certain area. I am searching my family history and thought this would be a good place.

      Francine 20 August 2011
      6:29 am
    436. Sorry, but trying to find any information on your website now is akin to being totally lost in a giant maze. Please reconstruct your searching in such a way that we who have used FamilySearchOrg for so, so long can find ourselves on familiar ground.

      19 August 2011
      6:09 pm
    437. The old system was much better. I used to depend on your site now it seems there is less information available and the names that do pop up have little info attached to them. Go back to batch numbers Please

      Dorothy OConnor 19 August 2011
      3:05 pm
    438. I dont like this new filter.I liked the old way.I agree with Melisa,it is very difficult.I liked when I could click the Census records,and or birth

      Bess Carter 19 August 2011
      2:20 pm
    439. I dont care for the way this new site is set up. It isnt as easily accessible as the old site. I get so irritated that I dont use this unless it is a last ditch attempt. I wish youd go back to the old format.

      A.L. Hazell 19 August 2011
      7:10 am
    440. PLEASE bring back the pilot. It was sooo easy to use and see the records. The auto fill in for places was great too. This one does NOT stay in the area you want at all.

      C Boldt 18 August 2011
      10:45 pm
    441. I give up Changes need to be made or I wont be using this site. Too difficult to go back to the first page without everything I typed in only to be deleted. System could not even find me.

      Judy 18 August 2011
      3:08 pm
    442. Ive tried a few times with this new site and I just cant find anything. It is so much more difficult than the old site I think I will just have to give up, which such a shame as there is such a wealth of information on here, once you can access it -(

      Melissa 18 August 2011
      2:39 pm
    443. Its almost impossible to find just one group of records - such as Alabama Death Records.... Im not a big fan of how you have this site set up - I agree that it is very hard to navigate. I mean, you group a filter such as the US, Canada and Mexico together??? Really?

      Jo 18 August 2011
      10:23 am
    444. While I apprreciate availability of such a store of information, I do not like this new setup - the previous one was easier to use - the old screen was MUCH MUCH BETTER, please bring it back - there is little point in just dividing areas into Europe, USA etc., where is the individual county that I could click on previously. Going through all the information which comes up 99% of which is irrelevent to your search now makes reasearch a chore rather than a pleasure. If it aint broken dont fix it. But THANK YOU for the availability of this site.

      P 18 August 2011
      7:17 am
    445. Good grief what have you done to this site. Havent you heard the old adage If it aint broke dont fix it?

      Ian Robinson 18 August 2011
      7:14 am
    446. There is no update of Baptisms before 1840 ish, there must a lot more Records to updat.

      18 August 2011
      4:54 am
    447. Youre on the right track. Im grateful for the use of your site. A corrections tab is highly needed. Search engine info needs EDIT key (so you dont have to input stats again, and a NEW SEARCH key. And there should be a place at the top of the IMAGE page that shows the census date. So when we are saving a file we can double check the date. Thats all for now. Im sure Ill post again.

      Janet 17 August 2011
      11:41 pm
    448. I loved the Pilot and found it so much more informational in searches. What happened to searching with parents or spouses? The filters arent relevant to how I use advanced criteria to drill down into more specific data. I am not impressed.

      Deborah 17 August 2011
      8:29 pm
    449. I dont like this new Search. The old one was better.... this is very confusing. I agree with other comments ...that this is terrible.

      theresa nolfi 17 August 2011
      2:06 pm
    450. dreadful, much preferred the old system. i want English records but get America ones

      Pam 17 August 2011
      6:09 am
    451. Batch number is there as a search parameter

      Bob Douglas 17 August 2011
      4:21 am
    452. Every time I try a search I get the following error message We are unable to display search results due to technical difficulties Any one can help to solve this problem?

      Fernando Mujica 16 August 2011
      3:45 pm
    453. I have just come back to this site recently and found this new version. I remember I used to be able to find all sorts of useful information but now everything I search comes back with a zero result. I also seem to have to re-input the information over and over again - there is no modify search option. Sorry folks, what is the point of publishing all these records that no-one can manage to search to find anything.

      Jo Pease 16 August 2011
      3:42 pm
    454. Have to agree with so many others This new system is confusing and does not find records that I have already found--which I did as a check on what it could do. The older system was FAR better.

      David 16 August 2011
      6:44 am
    455. i really need help please, necesito ayuda por fabor. I entered my grandfathers name, that s the only information i have, and that he lived in El Salvador, but nothing, yo he puesto los datos de mi abuelo, solo se su nombre y que vivio en El Salvador y no sale nada, what i have to do?? que puedo hacer?? por fabor necesito ayuda, llevo años buscando, im looking for years.

      Sandra Mijangos 16 August 2011
      6:08 am

      PAOLA 15 August 2011
      10:24 pm

      paola.c.o 15 August 2011
      10:02 pm
    458. Has anyone at Family Search read any of the previous 634 posts? I didnt take time to count but I bet more than 630 didnt like the way it is set up.

      hbrn 15 August 2011
      3:33 pm
    459. I found my parents names but my moms name was incorrect. How can that be corrected? This my first time useing this sight.

      edith 15 August 2011
      12:21 am
    460. Like all the others, this site is making me CRAZY. I wish they could make it so we could filter more. I have dates of births and marraiges, but its NO good on this site.

      S,. Dietrich 14 August 2011
      5:02 pm
    461. still trying to get use to the new system. Sure wish you had done this first,now I have to go back and find all the mistakes

      marie stephens 14 August 2011
      4:43 pm
    462. This is soooo confusing. How do I find all the data and family work I have already submitted?

      CD 14 August 2011
      2:11 pm
    463. I agree with most of the other comments - this is the most difficult site to navigate. Where in the world is the social security index????

      T.Smith 14 August 2011
      1:13 pm
    464. On the OLD site, I could look at family pedigree sheets with ease.. can not even FIND them on this site.. where did you ever put them???

      Virginia Yocum 13 August 2011
      10:50 am
    465. I found my Grandfathers birth and death dates in Finland in a 2009 search by just typing in his full name. Now when I try searching I receive a response that his name is not found. Previously I was also able to click further from the record to found his parents and brothers. I do not find this sight user friendly. Luckily I printed out the pages so I can search the Finnish websites for more information.

      Janice 13 August 2011
      6:59 am
    466. This site does not work for me. I have tried to obtain any information on family members that I know for a fact matter what I records exist. Needless to say, I am so sad and very disappointed.

      Gail Hood 12 August 2011
      11:32 am
    467. Im sure this new interface is well intentioned, and the filtering concept is good, but it is not well executed. Like Microsoft Office Suite, it has tried too hard to simplify and by doing that it has removed control from the user. The user is unable to control the results returned, getting far too many responses and many seemingly random responses. Then the user has to page through a dozen or more pages to scan the weird range of data returned. The old system worked better. It had its faults, but it did amazing work. Most importantly, if you asked right, it did what you asked, and no more. Users were in control. I have given this new one my best shot, but its frustrating, annoying and just horrible. Sorry about the plain language, but I must call a broken spade a broken spade. I am a web database developer so I can see how you should and could do be doing it which makes if even more frustrating. There is so much amazing information you could be presenting here, that is just hidden behind this very poor interface. The best comment in this list, a month or two back, is about the LDS Family centers being given copies of Ancestry because the LDS system is unworkable. That is a real admission of defeat.

      Craig Allan 12 August 2011
      4:01 am
    468. I hope youre reading this feedback and taking it seriously. I just entered identical searches in both the Pilot site and here. On the Pilot the results were fast, specific and direct. Zero filters needed and I got 6 records perfect match. Using this, I might have to spent a lot of time filtering through the myriad results (none of which appear to be even close) in order to reach the same results as the Pilot. This is not an improvement.

      Annette 12 August 2011
      1:01 am
    469. bad site takes to long to filter even when you put in more information.

      11 August 2011
      10:09 pm
    470. Why dont you listen to your customers? Or at least try and communicate with us to justify why you changed the system. I have to agree with them... but maybe there is something I dont know?

      Kazmer 11 August 2011
      4:47 pm
    471. What was wrong with the old system? Names are not found that were there before and in order to find them you need to search for other family membbers. Is this progress?

      Eleanor 11 August 2011
      11:38 am
    472. you can contact me at

      pat 10 August 2011
      11:19 pm
    473. unable to find my grandfather Richard Morgan Jr and his wife and children. Temperance , va had 7 children, 2 girls and 7 boys. He was born around 1904 Jan 14 and died 1977 and his wife Isabell ora Penn Morgan born around 1909 died 1963.

      pat 10 August 2011
      11:18 pm
    474. Your website has changed so much, it is no longer easy to find any information that I have previously researched before in the last 2 years

      Gloria Fishback 10 August 2011
      9:54 pm
    475. This search system is a failure. Take a look at what users are telling you. Allow them to put what information they have in any field, not just the ones you narrowly think will yield results, that is very often not the way genealogists have to work.

      Mike Jones 10 August 2011
      7:14 pm
    476. Bring back the old system I used to be able to find marriage and birth records so easily. Now I only get census data...Please go back to the old system. It was so much better

      Monica Haines 10 August 2011
      4:49 pm
    477. your summaries arent corrected, you are listening adults as children and children as adults. When viewing the photo of the actual (CENSUS) record it is listed correctly.

      Monique Boyer 10 August 2011
      1:21 pm
    478. The decision to change the old format to the new screen search is the absolute worst I have seen.

      David M. Sullivan 10 August 2011
      10:36 am
    479. How can I access microfilm raw online, from selcted areas where the microfild exists, but not online. I read and speak Portuguese, do well with old language and script, but cant access my ancestors in microfil. I may be the onlyone in my family and probably from those parishes who is well acquainted with the records. Yet I have not access to microfilm online to do the work. I tryed to contact FamilySearch at no avail. If anyone has a hint please let me know one word the lion scribe at gmail dot com.

      Decio F. F. Leonardo 10 August 2011
      5:44 am
    480. I will probably not use this site anymore and it sure was one of my favourites for years . Why would someone think that this was better than the old one ... obviously it wasnt someone who did research

      Gayle Gurney 08 August 2011
      8:08 pm
    481. This site is indeed now very complicated. It use to be so easy.

      S Smith 08 August 2011
      2:21 pm
    482. New format is not user friendly. Cannot find a thing

      BJF 07 August 2011
      9:06 pm
    483. I cant find hardly anything. Very Disappointing.

      Kay Fritsch 07 August 2011
      4:38 pm
    484. Bonjourje cherche un oncle (Trébaticky anton)fils de Andre Trébaticky et de Catherine Bolesik. dorigine Slovaque.MERCI.

      Trébaticky anna 07 August 2011
      4:36 pm
    485. Much to difficult to find anything. Can you even jump to a letter of the alphabet?

      KC 07 August 2011
      12:41 pm
    486. how is it that when i enter the name from a birth record that you have sent me that i get no matches found

      marlene stoneman 07 August 2011
      12:01 pm
    487. cumbersome and confusing. i have been using your help centre in london ontario for over 30years and found lots of information but when i put in the names from birth records that you sent to me i get "no matches gound" how can this be?

      marlene stoneman 07 August 2011
      11:59 am
    488. I like the search features. I think it is logical and easy to follow, and Im not a geek. The problem Im finding is I have hit a wall, in that I have come to a dead end. I dont beleive it is this web sites fzault but a lack of available information. I also am member for other geneology sites, and the same appears. I am surprised that I cant find any death notices for any of my family in the 1800s.

      ed boyer 07 August 2011
      10:24 am
    489. Is it anyone taking this problems seriously? its frustrating not to be able to look for information that I provided myself, Please fixe it SOON

      LUCIA 06 August 2011
      12:33 pm
    490. Awful Please revert to old system

      Bob Hartley 06 August 2011
      8:16 am
    491. I agree with Graham. All of the records on the Australian Vital Records Index 1788-1905 are not registered on the new version of Family Search. It was actually easier with the old online version to find relationships as it was the old microfiche version of IGI. I just hate this version.

      JennyL 06 August 2011
      1:54 am
    492. Just found this site. Ive never attempted a geneological search before. Yet it is obvious that this site makesw it no easy task. Im searching for my sister Christine, born is the US. Our parents are deceased, but also born in the US. Mother of polish/prussian descent, father Mixed with Irish sirname. Everyone born in Chicago. Most records focus on Irish sources instead of US. Why? Paternal grandparents also born in Chicago. knowing their names and places of birth, names of offspring, I wonder what sources will come up. My sister-inlaw performed very successful search years ago. Why so difficult?

      Michael Fegan 05 August 2011
      7:53 pm
    493. I dont like this search, it is awful, not easy to get info like it used to be, wasted my time with this

      Debbie 05 August 2011
      7:05 pm
    494. I agree with the negative comments. Go back to the old way, please. I cannot even find my husband AND I know when he was born & where & when he died

      Carolyn H Pappas 05 August 2011
      11:10 am
    495. Why have you interrupted my search.This is not an easy site.

      Carolyn 05 August 2011
      7:05 am

      WILBONBON@AOL.COM 05 August 2011
      6:43 am
    497. The new system seems to be an impenetrable maze designed to resist successful tracing of ancestors. Please bring back the IGI sytem

      Tony Cusens 05 August 2011
      2:45 am
    498. what happened to this site? I cannot find anything any more This site used to be so user friendly -- now it is extremely difficult to use.

      04 August 2011
      3:21 pm
    499. Why is it, when I type the information I want you give me an over abundance of names with info that has nothing to do with what I requested? (ie listed place & date, but you give me people from other states and not what I requested)

      C J St.Michael 04 August 2011
      11:54 am
    500. I cant make head or tail of this new familysearch

      I.S 04 August 2011
      3:17 am
    501. This new format is too hard to use and understand. I will only use this site as a last resort, when before it was always my first point of call. Maybe they should have something so you can use the old format as well. Julie

      Julie Peruch 04 August 2011
      2:59 am
    502. I dont know if this will help people who are having trouble with the site, but I did create a web page that tries to explain how to search the records collection. http//

      Bobbie Snow 03 August 2011
      4:50 pm
    503. Cómo localizo el arbol genealógico de Pedro Santiago Charis de juchitán Oaxaca ( nació a fines de 1800)

      santiago 02 August 2011
      11:20 pm
    504. How is it that I find something one day, and a few days later when I want to find it again, using exactly the same filters as before it just doesnt appear at all, or only after wading through page after page for an hour.

      Rosi Bowyer 02 August 2011
      7:06 pm
    505. I have worked in many archives but I cannot find anything on this site. Hopefully it will be simplified soon. Theresa S

      Theresa S 02 August 2011
      6:27 pm
    506. Riesige Danke, wie ich Sie danken kann?

      Cypeancella 02 August 2011
      6:15 pm
    507. I find the new search platform to be shear stupidity. You cannot enter what you want. the choices are very limited. A waste of time. Genealogy searching is trying at best. Adding this impossible way of setting up a search just complicates thing more

      Don 02 August 2011
      4:28 pm
    508. The new search method is a complete piece of grabage. Please bring back the old system.

      Adrian 02 August 2011
      3:45 pm
    509. I stongly agree with all the other comments about the new improved site. It may be new but improved it certainly is not Please bring back the old system as soon as possible. Yours faithfully. A very frustrated and confused Welsh researcher

      Stephen James Biddiscombe 02 August 2011
      2:51 pm
    510. It used to be so easy to find the siblings of a known ancestor by entering the batch number Dont understand why you cant go to an advanced search, and put the parents names in, with either a batch number or a location. (A batch number is fine unless your family lived both sides of a batch start / end.) Pretty much exactly what I did under the old scheme.

      Adrian B 02 August 2011
      2:07 pm
    511. First time user. Found my grandfather, but no other relatives, including myself. o) The filters are easy to use but dont produce much. Whats with that?

      G. Allison 02 August 2011
      1:11 pm
    512. I cant find anything but deaths on here?

      02 August 2011
      12:01 pm
    513. Thisis the most terrible thing that I have ever seen. I cant even go in and look up the 1880 census records like I used to. I cant even find anything - I probably will never come to this site again. I am totally frustrated and upset

      ona fern warren 02 August 2011
      11:45 am
    514. What a disaster The batch number searches dont seem to work on the new search - all I get is the whole batch, 5000+ entries at 20 per page. Itll take me a week to get through to Smith. Why not at least add a filter for the first name of the surname. Or the first two names of the surname. You must be very embarrassed by all the negative feedback. And my worst fears are being realised. Youre phasing out the old search, which was brilliant. Give me the old search with all the member submitted dross any day of the week, rather than this new system where my search time has increased twentyfold. In case my message hasnt got through, I HATE IT

      David Cooper 02 August 2011
      11:05 am
    515. Far too complicated.I haven`t got time to answer your mail sent to me previously.So sorry.It was very good up until now.I`m so happy there are many people who agree.

      Barbara W. 02 August 2011
      9:41 am
    516. How do you search for a a particular surname in a batch under the new system, please? Sorry I cant work it out.

      Martin 02 August 2011
      6:27 am
    517. Whats happened? Trying to find Nicholsons in Norham but I get ALL the people in Norham all 12,000 plus of them Grrrrr. Bring back the old system, if it aint broke, dont fix it

      Genlistlass 01 August 2011
      11:17 pm
    518. This is awful Just awful What happened to all the birth/christening hits that made this site so great? I cant find a blasted thing on here now. I probably wont be back.

      Jayne 01 August 2011
      6:08 pm
    519. I agree the new system is terrible. It has become so hard to find the information needed. In the old system it was very easy and once youve found one person you could search that batch for more. Nowadays I hardly use this website, it is useless.

      Anne Schley 01 August 2011
      3:50 pm
    520. Thank you very much. After 14 years of searching, everywhere, your new screens helped me find my elusive Great-Great Grandfathers family coming from Prince Edward Island in the 1880s to Portland, Maine. I just love it

      Dana E. Pollard 01 August 2011
      2:39 pm
    521. This is terrible, It used to be so easy to find the siblings of a known ancestor by entering the batch number. Bring back the old system please

      Graham Langley 01 August 2011
      7:34 am
    522. Your Staveley Westmoreland records want checking Births are male when they should be female and some have two mothers or a child as a mother. Totally mixed up

      june gardiner 01 August 2011
      3:50 am
    523. Sorry but this site is driving me mad - not an easy site to navigate. It reminds me of so many sites organised by computer geeks, instead of input by people who know

      Maggie 01 August 2011
      3:14 am
    524. now I get 6000 hits and have to fillter it like mad, and its like vista the kind of xmas present for the mother in law.

      Billy2Sheds 31 July 2011
      2:50 pm
    525. Me gustaria saber los antepasados de mi nonno Antonino Laquidara que vivio en San Martino Spadafora prov de Messina, Sicilia Italia entre 1850 noviembre 1934

      Caterina Costa 30 July 2011
      9:51 pm
    526. I want to use the old IGI search function with the old IGI Batch Numbers.

      janice 30 July 2011
      8:51 pm
    527. Im afraid I agree -this new search system seems to be very confusing and there is not enough information given on the indexes to see if you are even in the correct place. I went into the old igi and went into the batch number and it threw me over into the new website which was such a mixed-up mess there was certainly no list of names from the town I was searching for Ive been doing this for 50 years and even though I was a beta tester for nfs with all of those headaches, this seems worse

      Valerie Mary Call 30 July 2011
      5:49 pm
    528. I see the older version is changing already. I did my usual search for children of a couple - putting in the fathers first and surname, and the mothers first name, with County and year range of baptisms... It now flips to the new version and starts at A having nothing to do with the surname I put in. I really erally dislkie this new site, and will hope that the old version reverts back to the old version.

      Kricket 29 July 2011
      5:20 pm
    529. I have entered my fathers details,but it says no record. PLEASE HELP ME

      Judy-Ann Ford 28 July 2011
      5:45 pm
    530. I have entered one of my cousins Names,and I get the list that tells me his parents and siblings. My question is how do I find out his children??

      Leslie Paugh Sr. 28 July 2011
      10:35 am
    531. I am very grateful to the LDS for making so much genealogical data available. However, this new search facility has to be the most confusing and time consuming tool I have ever seen on any website. For example, one of the searches I have used a lot on the old IGI search, was using the batch number, surname and parents names, so I could find all the children baptised in one location for one set of parents. I dont see anyway to do this in this new search. I certainly hope that this is not the final version of your search tool.

      Heather 28 July 2011
      9:01 am
    532. It does take some getting used to this site. Am I right that batch numbers are all for the same families?? Am I right by seeing the same batch number in different ppl ate the same family somewhere down the line?? All a bit confusing but ploughing through it.

      Diane 27 July 2011
      4:11 pm
    533. Records are on the old search, but I cant find them on the new search - why? Even when I submit lots of simple variations in the new search it still doesnt find the old records. I think Ill have to stick with the old version.

      RobertS 27 July 2011
      5:32 am
    534. For the people who are asking for the old site to be brought can still get to it if you go to the homepage for this site, go to the lower right hand corner....there is a link to click on that will take you to the previous site....I still use it, too, as it has some of my familys pedigrees on it....I have found info on both sites....

      jdr 1234 27 July 2011
      12:08 am
    535. The facility to keep filters would be tremendously useful, & would save a great deal of time, & wear & tear on my index finger & mouse.

      Paul Irving 26 July 2011
      11:55 am
    536. Dont like this new way of searching . The old one was marvellous and much clearer. PLEASE bring back the former screen search - and with parent search etc.

      Marion 26 July 2011
      7:32 am
    537. I absolutely HATE this new site, cannot find anything. I used the old pilot site a lot for death records--please bring it back.

      Earlene Porter 25 July 2011
      7:46 pm
    538. Am I the only one that likes this new site?. I have used the original site, the pilot, and now this. The filtering system is very intuitive and comprehensive, maybe a bit too much so for the less experienced researcher. However I have found many, many new results I did or could not find on earlier implementations. Keep up the good work.

      Paddy 25 July 2011
      3:24 pm
    539. is it me but finding this site very confusing puting in info that i know to be true and coming back with nothing

      margy weston 25 July 2011
      8:54 am
    540. This weekend it stopped working with CHROME. All I see now is coding. I rather like this site and its much easier to seach than the old IGI--that is when it was working Please fix ASAP

      jon ackroyd 24 July 2011
      10:13 am
    541. who is my family dolores schüttkow ,sister ,brother melvin,börny.

      schütkow 24 July 2011
      9:24 am
    542. The site has become very, very disappointing to use. I do Not like it anymore.

      Betsy 23 July 2011
      5:10 pm
    543. Not helpful site.

      Diane Sanders 23 July 2011
      4:48 pm
    544. Is there a way to fix factual errors? Your system has the name of my great grandfathers spouse wrong. He didnt marry R.W. Oswald. He was R.W. Oswald And the dates of death or birth dont match the death certificate I have in my hand.

      Michael Carlson 23 July 2011
      3:56 pm
    545. Hi, sent a note on June 25th expressing my frustration with revised system. I did have a brilliant idea and return to the Family Research Center at the Mormon Church close to where I live. I told the lady what Id been trying to search and when we sat down to begin she went on Ancestry.Com. Surprised, I asked why she wasent looking on Family Search and she said they were given Ancestry to use and it is easier to cross check names, dates, etc. I stayed 2 hrs. and found a few more things. Today being Saturday, thought Id try for a miracle on a search with Family Search. Guess what it hasent happened. Please fix your product

      Sue 23 July 2011
      3:32 pm
    546. In the beginning when I first started, it seemed as though I was finding census records quite easy. But, as I gain more experience on your website looking for more detailed information. I was so excited looking to you, folks as WORLD LEADERS in documenting all of our families over hundreds of yrs. You are doing this every single day around the world documenting, documenting, documenting. This site is boggus to the those of us who depend on you who have a FAULT of information of our ancestors stored in the MOUNTAIN for safe keeping. TAKE A HARD LOOK-PLEASE, AT ALL THE COMMENTS OVER THE LAST YEAR. ARE YOU REALLY READING THEM. ARE YOU REALLY CARING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT THE WORK YOU DO HERE? I AM NOT TRYING TO BE HURTFUL. BUT OUR GENEAOLOGY IS JUST AS IMPORTANT TO EACH OF US AS IT IS TO YOU FOLKS... Obivously, you dont because nothing changes. Ill only use your site when all else fails and then its only when other census are not avialable to me. There really isnt much else I want to try and use since nothing else is of any value, because the system isnt working.

      WIDDLERIE 23 July 2011
      7:10 am
    547. Im new to this. I was an abandoned child with very little info of my father. Good or bad this sight has saved me alot of gas Free and informative. How can anyone complain?

      mary campbell 22 July 2011
      7:59 pm
    548. How do you search for the children of specific parents? Easily done on the old site - but apparently no longer possible .Not only that, but I am VERY disturbed by the way the Mormon Church has cobbled parents and children together erroneously, flying in the face of information from primary sources. The old site had mistakes, but did not link data together in such a way as to build on and compound them. This used to be a useful tool for genealogical researchers - but now its only value is for people attempting to construct genealogical castles in the air as religious dogma. A sad day for truth, scholarship and intellectual rigor . . .

      PJH 22 July 2011
      4:31 pm
    549. I agree with everyone else. This used to be so good - please restore it as now neither I or anyone can find anything - what a good job I had done a lot before There is an old saying if it aint broke dont fix it

      Jackie Hockenhull 22 July 2011
      4:26 pm
    550. Keep the old site runnuing The new site is completely confusing and useless.

      P Sharpe 22 July 2011
      3:24 pm
    551. Maybe Im just dense--is it possible to browse the census records? If so, how?

      Lynn Crews 22 July 2011
      6:28 am
    552. This is so confusing You make it sound so easy. Think I want a refund on my money

      Mandy- 21 July 2011
      8:57 pm
    553. I agree with comment # 141. Cant state it better than she did. I too, liked scrolling through a neighborhood - found more that way than in many others. Pilot was pretty good, and I commented favorably then but lately searches are not fruitful.

      granny knot 21 July 2011
      6:33 pm
    554. I dont like this very much it doesnt help at all i just wanted to find my family and yet this thing is so freaking confusing and it doesnt even work right i put in a all the information just as it said and it came up with nothing so what the heck i know ill tell none of my friends to use this until you people get a new upload on it and try just a little bit harder goodbye and good luck.

      Tinkerbell 21 July 2011
      2:35 pm
    555. Loved the old system - cant seem to find anything on this one, even when I know its there

      Lyn 21 July 2011
      2:07 pm
    556. I am brandy-new to the site an am already intimidated after reading the recent posts. Nowhere did I see any response from the creators and or system managers. Hopefully, there is a newsletter somewhere. Gracious thanks to all responsible for this wonderful service (minus the glitches).

      Ann 21 July 2011
      2:01 pm
    557. I dislike with a passion this new family search it is ridiculous and I can not find anything I am looking for I had several generations worked out on the old family search please please bring the old one back I miss it so much....

      Julia Cole Ivy 20 July 2011
      10:38 pm
    558. The Pilot Site is WONDERFUL. The enhanced site is too much. Please keep the Pilot as an option. And yes, we are very grateful to the LDS Church for all the information they provide - especially the free info.

      Jim Craig 20 July 2011
      2:27 pm
    559. bonjour je recherche la famille moschetto oscar est ne en 1906 a romanel en suisse mort en france son pere s apelle placide sa mere nibbio maria merci de

      moschetto 20 July 2011
      6:49 am
    560. Gostaria de saber o Nome do Theodor Behringer este veio da Alemanha no ano apriximadamente 1852 para o Brasil Rio de Janeiro e foi para Santa Catarina no ano de 1860 não se tem a data precisa. Casou-se com Eleonore Bergmann também veio da Alemanha. Tiveram vários filhos entre eles 1. August Behringer. 2. Wilhelm Behringer 3. Carls Eduard Behringer 4. Christine Emille Behringer 5. Henriette Behringer. • August Behringer filho de Theodor Behringer, nasceu no dia 17 de janeiro de 1866 em Blumenau, casou-se com Guilhermine Carls Filha de Frederico Kahls e Luiza. August e Guilhermine casaram-se no Cartório de Blumenau, ele morreu no dia 18 de fevereiro de 1956 aos 90 anos de idade, August e Guilhermine ou Mina. Tiveram vários filhos algum dos nomes deles sei ] Aparece VariosTheodor Behringer ou Beringer mas não sei que são os pais do mesmo ou seja os avos de August Behringer que é meu bisavo quem puder me ajudar fico agradecida mil beijos

      Helmtraut Behringer 19 July 2011
      8:26 pm
    561. ( This new system is sort of shocking to say the least. Im glad I took copies of some info that no longer shows up. I guess it was too good to be true.

      nancy 19 July 2011
      9:06 am
    562. como se hace para entrar

      valeria 19 July 2011
      7:52 am
    563. I started using the Pilot program the first of the year and Im still using you web site. Its been great. Ive fond family members I never could find. I love this site

      Kevin T Gross 18 July 2011
      5:35 pm
    564. This site is no good to me anymore for all the reasons stated by people before me. This site used to turn up a lot of great finds for me. Since the change I cant find anything, not even the ancestors I found under the old system. I think the problem goes deeper in the coding behind the filters rather than the filters themselves as I am savvy enough to know how to use them. The reason I say that is for example I hypothetically put in George Scruffnstuff, birthdate 1887 +/- 0, location Texas. I set up the filters to reflect the same thing minus the birth date since I know exactly when he was born. My search results turn up Ann Marie 1772, England and dozens of other people not even remotely related to my search. That shouldnt work that way. Please bring back the older, proven tools you had before.

      Kateri 18 July 2011
      1:31 pm
    565. I am going to try one more time, but so far the whole new system has been very annoying.

      18 July 2011
      10:37 am
    566. Dont like the new format at all.

      Lenora Lyons 17 July 2011
      8:15 pm
    567. I love this new site. Been away for awhile (mission) and now am enjoying FamilySearch again.

      Larry 17 July 2011
      2:28 pm
    568. Im fairly new to the site and was excited to find something that links Benjamin Taber Jr with Benjamin Sr and his parents Joseph and Abigail and so on, but where do I find records? Maybe a link to the records FamilySearch has as a source. Im researching family disc #77 and # 46 and by the way Edward S Taber 1836 not 1834 had son Edward Luther Taber who married Isabella Hay, had son Edward S Taber who married Johanna Donahue, who had Howard S Taber b. 21 Aug 1889 USMC married Clarissa Fogg both buried at Arlington National Cemetery, which brings me to my question, are you able to update disc?

      Theresa 17 July 2011
      11:22 am
    569. I want the pilot back, I hate the new beta search. I tried three times this morning to get into pilot, with no success, please leave it for those of us who loved it.

      June H 17 July 2011
      7:06 am
    570. This new system has lost my family records, or is it in here somewhere. I agree with many of you all, this new system is so hard to use and confusing

      Paddy 17 July 2011
      2:44 am
    571. It has been nearly a month now since i have been on this family history site due to my previous frustration. I thought things have changed and after spending the time collating more family history information, i am now back, but no better than last time. Please, help

      Patrice 16 July 2011
      11:27 pm
    572. I would like the search to have the function of being able to put the parents/spouse in which will help to narrow the search down. I liked the old search better.

      16 July 2011
      1:44 pm
    573. so many cries for the old system--pse.head to themthe broad mass of researchers are NOT TECH BRAINS ALTOUGH I AM NEW TO FAMILY RESEARCH I JUST CAN NOT GET TROUGH WHO HELPS???

      RUDOLF 16 July 2011
      12:23 pm
    574. I use all three sites, original, pilot and beta, because they all have their advantages. I love the quick and easy way I can find a family using batch numbers and parent search on the original site, however its great that I can search for a marriage just using surnames on the beta site, and find parents on a marriage transcription without sending for a certificate I also love being able to search through images of the original parish registers for details that are so important but never transcribed. A fathers occupation for example can help to narrow down baptisms and find your ancestors parents. When I first started using pilot and beta, like everyone else, I felt VERY frustrated, but with practice, Ive gradually found my way round both new sites. Having said that, I hope all three will remain available to use THANK YOU for giving us so much more information, but please make it easy to search.

      Jayne 16 July 2011
      3:37 am
    575. I really do not see that this new version is going to give me what I need for my research. Should have stayed with the older version. If it aint broke, dont fix it. Tweeking the old one would have been better. Keep trying.

      D.Robinette 15 July 2011
      2:55 pm
    576. Cmon, folks, try reading the directions and clicking on the relationship button on the search form before complaining. And at least try to be nice and summon a little gratitude that LDS offers this search service to you for FREE.

      Jane 15 July 2011
      2:01 pm
    577. Searching by spouse or parent is critical. The older version confirmed information by groups of people that could be traced over time. That feature is no longer availabe and reduces accuracy. Not everyone can afford the costs of or findmypast. provides an important service making information available to the masses, for initial and long term research. Although the more costly vendors can make visual images available online for a fee, most of us can only take a limited advantage as the cost is prohibitive.

      Norma G. P. 14 July 2011
      9:50 pm
    578. If it ain't broke, then don't fix it. My wife and I are long time users. We are tech savvy and the new setup is a bust. We surrender. You can declare victory if your intent was to drive people away. We're done, I am sad to say.

      Paul Jones 14 July 2011
      7:55 pm
    579. More NEGATIVE than postive comments left here regarding the new search, from what I can see. Please reconsider and keep the old pilot search. It was always a thrill to use the old system and see what goodies would pop up. Now most of us just give up after scrolling through pages of non-related results. What records you have to offer us is phenominal, but if we cant access anything successfully its just an exercise in frustration. Thank you for listening and please consider staying with what WORKS for the majority.

      Sara 14 July 2011
      6:49 pm
    580. I am still trying to understand how to use this familysearch site.

      Jan 14 July 2011
      6:44 am
    581. Change for change sake is senseless, this system is not user friendly nor intuitive. FS used to be my first choice in a new search , I use it less and less now and definitely not first. The eyeopener for me was my 11 year old grandsons reaction. He is of course a keyboard and internet power user and just getting started in research. In five minutes with the new system he was yawning and asking is there another way we can look for people? He did better right away with Pilot and since youngsters are the researchers of the future new systems that do not appeal to them and are also disliked by present day researchers are doubly useless

      Gwen Mccullagh 14 July 2011
      5:50 am
    582. I can clearly see the tons of negative feedback on the new filtering system, but I do not have the same opinion. To me, the filtering system was not *new*. I first started using this site in the past few months, and I have had absolutely no problem with the filtering system. It was an effective tool. I have successfully located multiple death and marriage records that I was not finding in other $$$ systems that I also use. I look forward to some of the other capabilities that you noted as possible future additions multiple choice filters on a single data attribute, and carrying an existing filter over to a new search are two that I would love to have right now. Thanks

      Todd Dixon 13 July 2011
      4:40 pm
    583. I am frustrated when I use the new site. I much prefer the format for the old site.

      Norma 13 July 2011
      2:36 pm
    584. I know we should move with the times but this new site is so difficult for those of us that used the old system (but it does have more information- if only you can find it)

      Val 13 July 2011
      4:52 am
    585. Dont like the new pilot , was able to find a whole family using the batch number . The new system is cumbersome and less straight forward .

      kath b 13 July 2011
      3:02 am
    586. Looking for Vincent or Vinson Brann born about 1843. Has a brother Milton and Father may be Thomas. Need census or something to list parents, children In Tennessee. It would have been North Carolina before it was the state of Tennessee.

      Mary 12 July 2011
      4:38 pm
    587. Even the old DOS program was much better than this new program with its thousands of names. Do you think I have time to sit and search through that thousand and thousands of names. NO Your filters are not very good either. Sorry. Even if I did find a name I still have to go to the film to very. Useless unless the film is linked to the site. Which I am happy to say that some are liked to the film. But here again TOO many names to search through. And by the way I still use the old DOS system and find the people I want and need in a realitively short time. It is the best program that has been developed. If one knows how to use the other links to each name. I have found many of member of the family by using Parent searach in DOS. DOS is even better link in this respect than the Polit Search. Which is next best. And I can see from the many comments made that a lot of people agree with me. Thanks but no thanks for your new Family Search

      Ronda 12 July 2011
      3:53 pm
    588. I give the pilot search a very high rating - nearly 10 out of 10. Please please keep it Unfortunately I find the new searcher practically useless. Filtering very poor. What use is Birthplace Europe for narrowing searches? 2 out of 10.

      Art Cremin 12 July 2011
      2:45 pm
    589. Things you can do only with PILOT version 1) You can input a wider variety of search parameters such as spouse AND parents or offspring 2) Easier to select filter parameters and option for multiple filters 3) Display is MUCH easier to read and sort thru to locate good matches 4) Provides for a 2-click COPY RECORD option not (and why not???) offered on the alleged upgrade 5) much more user-friendly and, 6) a whole lot less time-consuming to use. Oh, and it also returns better results despite the highly-touted new version supposedly having double the number of records. Have always loved & adored PILOT over other genealogy search sites it will be a sad day in Mudville when you take it away...

      Barbara Haines 12 July 2011
      3:19 am
    590. Dont like it, sorry So much more cumbersome and cannot find some entries which I KNOW are there from before. Please bring back the old system which we all knew how to use - it was so much simpler

      Angela 12 July 2011
      12:31 am
    591. i'm just a 8 years old kid that just wants to learn my family history

      paloma 11 July 2011
      8:45 pm
    592. Where did the field for Spouse or Parent go? I need to search for a female by her maiden name and need to narrow search by putting in her husbands name. I dont see that as an option. I agree I am having trouble with this new improvement.

      D G 11 July 2011
      4:37 pm
    593. After several months of not using this search progam and allowing time for kinks to be worked out, I came back to see if anything has changed. I am disappointed to say it is still as difficult and time consuming. Please, please bring back the Pilot Program and toss this one. It will probably be many more months before I visit your site again. This is so frustrating.

      Liz 11 July 2011
      2:35 pm
    594. Yes, this new version is difficult. It doesn't give the useful info the previous search did. Get rid of it. I've been researching for 40 years.

      alan clark 11 July 2011
      1:16 pm
    595. Havent used this for some time but I checked up 4 different births/deaths(Ireland) which I know were there and are not - is this the new system??????

      Hazel 11 July 2011
      12:53 pm
    596. Very cumbersome and time consuming. Results are poor. Ask for deaths in Iowa, and get marriages and deaths from everywhere. It takes 8-10 steps to do what one step did on the pilotsite. This new search system is similar to the new search and just as time consuming and ineffective. I cant get the same results twice using the same search criteria. This is definately NOT an improvement. I can no longer locate records on this site that I found on the pilot site a week ago. VERY POOR when searching for a specific record.

      Karen Dirk 11 July 2011
      9:34 am
    597. I like the pilot program better. I was able to put in the parents name to get better search results. Also, I was able to find many relatives by entering the place then filtering by last name. I wish we could filter with last name here. Bring back features from the pilot program, please.

      11 July 2011
      8:50 am
    598. Is someone out their lisening Thank you for your attempt to improve the pilot program which was a great tool and friendly to the use, This new version is unfriendly and restrictive. 1.This lacks the ease of use of the pilot program. 2.The ability to narrow a search to a region, instead of the city 3.The ability to narrow a search to by date by century, instead of every ten years 4.The ability to copy record data uniformly into the family tree builder note section is terrible.

      jm07187 11 July 2011
      6:07 am
    599. Old way much easier

      Glenn 11 July 2011
      12:06 am
    600. I had thought that this new way of searching for people was pretty good. However, I have changed my mind I put in the batch number and it comes up no children for these people and when I do a separate search for a child,I find them. It is very frustrating, especially when you do not know how many children, or what their names were. How can it be improved?

      Isobel Chiswell 10 July 2011
      2:09 pm
    601. Your new system is not user-friendly, except in superficial searches. I used to be able to follow through stuff and come to my own conclusions without being limited by the programs premature decision to eliminate (if that makes sense). It takes more faffing about and for a disabled person with limited mousing time, it is really frustrating.

      Lauraine 10 July 2011
      6:03 am
    602. I do not like the new family search. I find it to be very time consuming and hard to filter. I had loved the old way. Whose idea was it to change it? Please bring the old way back.

      Linda Adams 09 July 2011
      4:15 pm
    603. Im sorry to say that this system is by no means plausible. For instance I inserted the name Margareth Richter, Bavaria, Hammerbuehl, Birth 1852. How come that I would have to go through hundreds of results far off from the input. If the system should be a little effective, it would at save me the trouble to run through names born in other states of Germany. And why should I read through numbers of different Christian names. Sorry, but I just dont get the idea of it. Nevertheless, thanks for your service.

      Heinz Hofmann 09 July 2011
      2:10 pm
    604. Please bring back the old way. I found everything I was looking for. I cant find anything now.

      Joy 09 July 2011
      11:54 am
    605. please bring back the old way i could not find what i was looking for,

      grace from wales 09 July 2011
      7:08 am
    606. could you get it more wrong. a marriage was wrong. it should read Colin Stokes Williams married Alice Martha Davies at Hadnall Shropshire on the 10==August==1899. [NOT 20 SOMETHING 1899] rather have old system.

      pam jones 09 July 2011
      5:29 am
    607. you got a marriage wrong. it was 10==8 ==1899 not 20 something 1899. i have got the marriage certificate for this marriage [ Colin Stokes Williams married Alice Martha Davies at Hadnall Shropshire]. so could you get things right. I did prefer the old system. this one is ok to a point.

      pam jones 09 July 2011
      5:25 am
    608. Perhaps its already there and I have missed it, but it would be helpful if a soundex option was included on the surname.

      Darryl Gardner 09 July 2011
      4:40 am
    609. I agree with Elaine Langlois, the earlier pilot version was much more useful. Many of the filters available now are uselessly broad and unspecific. As she noted, often one has a location or a small area to search and even then names of the parents. Previously this led to good hits on the documents relating to the family in question and rapid identification of additional family members [for example children who died young and thus did not show in census returns].

      Michael Hobart 08 July 2011
      9:35 pm
    610. Bring back the original lab pilot project On this format,I cant put in the parents or spouses names Very time consuming..I wont be back unless the search process can be made user fast and friendly like the old system was.I loved the lab pilot project because it gave me access to many images and I found many relatives very easily.I would put in a surname,place rough dates and get sometimes 100 pages of images and found many relatives around the world. Elaine

      Elaine Langlois 07 July 2011
      8:39 pm
    611. Helemaal niks, geef mij het oude systeem maar weer terug, duidelijk en overzichtelijk dit is tijdverspilling Ans ewald

      Ans ewald 07 July 2011
      5:22 pm
    612. Dit is helemaal niets het helpt je totaal niet verder, geef mij het oude systeem maar, dat was makkelijker en overzichtelijk Jammer ik vind dit niets het werkt op mijn zenuwen. Ans Ewald

      Ans ewald 07 July 2011
      5:20 pm
    613. Yes, it is complicated, but I just found an index leading me to a record Ive been searching for since 1989. Could use clearer instructions about getting to the record in order to obtain a copy. I did it, but only because Ive been working at this for so long and have gained knowledge through past experiences. New background is certainly more attractive and less clinical in appearance, which is nice.

      Linda G Kelly 07 July 2011
      4:33 pm
    614. Youve made it more complicated than it has to be.

      deniselane 07 July 2011
      12:42 pm
    615. I find the new system much more difficult to navigate than the old one. I agree with most of the comments-bring back the previous system.

      Tom 07 July 2011
      1:36 am
    616. I agree the old way was much easier

      gwenda shofstall 06 July 2011
      3:53 pm
    617. I actually like the new system. It is basically the same underlying data. My question is why not do both. Please dont get rid of this new method. I love applying filters gradually instead of going back to the front page for each new iteration. Do both

      Bryan Chapman 06 July 2011
      2:39 pm
    618. Give me the old system so I can find it all by a click. This is great maybe for the tech. brain who decided on it-- but the old way was much easier and just what was needed. WHY change?

      mary 06 July 2011
      12:42 pm
    619. The old site was much better, I got loads of information about my ancestors but I cant find anything on this new site.

      Liz 06 July 2011
      10:33 am
    620. The new system isnt working for me. I dont think its just because it has changed and Im not used to it. Im having trouble where I didnt before. It is now over-complicated and frustrating.

      Angela Douglass 05 July 2011
      10:15 pm
    621. I must agree with the majority. I had so much success finding things on the old system. Now, I cant find what I had before let alone progressing to more things.

      Diane 05 July 2011
      8:30 pm
    622. Easier to use? Where are all the ancestral files and pedigree charts? Please bring back the 2007 version. Thats the year I got started doing genealogy and it was easy then and I discovered so much. With the new search I havent even been able to rediscover what I had learned before.

      Libby Meador 04 July 2011
      5:58 pm
    623. I was just checking in to research a name on my grandmothers pedigree chart. It was so easy and user friendly last time I checked in- I loved it and could find information easily and quickly. Now... I feel a bit like screaming I tried using the trees tab, have read the tutorials, and still cant find what I am looking for. I used to could locate family trees or pedigree charts in a matter of seconds now all I can find is my ancestors on the latest census record or no match responses...PLEASE restore this site to its former greatness and user friendly (not frustrated) version.....SOON??? Many Thanks for your kind consideration of this matter.

      Joyce 04 July 2011
      5:00 pm
    624. I agree with everyone else who thought the old site was much better. This new version takes so long to search anything. I got more information way faster with the old version. Please bring it back

      Kim 04 July 2011
      3:09 pm
    625. I still can't see the death record images even when I'm logged in.What is going on??

      04 July 2011
      2:45 pm
    626. I havent had any trouble finding the info I was looking for but since things were changed, I cant access the death images anymore.I can get census images and marriage images still,but I would really like to see the death images for my ancestors.I log in like I always have but still cant get them.

      sue 04 July 2011
      1:47 pm
    627. this is just useless no good somebody is really brainless to do such mean thing to us shame on you

      04 July 2011
      11:09 am
    628. time to get rid of this system awful

      jill 04 July 2011
      4:04 am
    629. I have to agree with all the others who dont like this new system. I loved the old search where you could find someone born in a certain parish and then trace the birth of all their brothers and sisters in the same parish record. Please go back to the old reliable way or at least have it available to us as well.

      SeniorLiz 03 July 2011
      10:24 pm
    630. I have scrolled though all of the comments & see after the past few months there are more people not being able to use your new site, which I agree with. I havent been that committed as it was but felt somewhat comfortable & was able to find imformation that was helpful. Now I feel like I have to go to someone else who might be able to teach me the new system.

      Lynda J. 03 July 2011
      7:40 pm
    631. If you have a wheel don´t try to investigate in a new one we say in The Netherlands. This new site is not user friendly. Look to this site in The Netherlands You can try the name Jansen and see what happes. Change your options if nessesary to make a smaller dicission. In the top left you can select the English version.

      Andre 03 July 2011
      11:00 am
    632. Has anyone else had trouble viewing death record images?When I asked about it they said I need to be logged in.I am logged in,but when I click on to see the image my log in name disappears and it says image not available online.I also tryed the automatic utility support thing with no results either.I used to be able to get them with no problem.Thank goodness I printed out a lot of them before this happened but now I cant get the others that I needed to put in my family tree book.I just wondered if this was a common problem or not?

      03 July 2011
      9:58 am
    633. much preferred the old system

      Avril 03 July 2011
      1:26 am
    634. I, too, loved the pilot site you had and am baffled by how different this new one is.Who made that decision? This current site is not an improvement over the pilot site at all, in fact it is a set-back. I found so many records on the pilot site that I cant even bring up with this site now.

      Laura K 02 July 2011
      10:32 pm
    635. Please, Please, Please give us the option of searching the old way. I cant even retrieve data that I got using theold system. This old brain cannot learn new methods. If I was 25 maybe but not at 61

      Karen 02 July 2011
      7:59 pm
    636. Please, please, please put it back the way it was I cant find war records anymore or other information. The other way was much easier and seemed to have much more information.

      T Warner 02 July 2011
      10:51 am
    637. Sorry - I left a date out! Yesterday - July 1st - I could enter a range of dates - ie, 1750 - 1840. Today - July 2nd - I can only enter one date, +/- up to 20 years. Can you please put the "range" option back - or else tell me where I can find it again? (I am quite new to FamilySearch).

      Mike Bickers 02 July 2011
      9:05 am
    638. Yesterday - July 1st - I could enter a range of dates (ie 1750 - 1840) Today I can only enter a single year, +/- up to 20 years. Can you put the range option back, please?

      Mike Bickers 02 July 2011
      8:59 am
    639. I agree with everyone else. this site is not a patch on the old one or even the pilot site. Why call it a pilot site and then introduce a site which searches in a completely different way. I now find it impossible to put filters of parents. There does not even seem to be a dropdown menu of places so even putting in a county does not guarantee a match as what format should the place be put in?

      another Ann 01 July 2011
      1:41 pm
    640. I hate this new system it is so slow and then it doesnt give me what I want. Please put it back like it was. I used to really like this site, but not any more. I have limited time to do my research and this is the worse time waster. Thanks

      Ann 30 June 2011
      10:48 pm
    641. I agree with all of the other users, the pilot search engine that you put out was awesome and I thought the new system would be the same... but this is so frustrating... nothing comes up the way it used to.... you get information in the search that doesnt even pertain to what you are wanting....

      Mary Howell 30 June 2011
      4:42 pm
    642. Oh...I want to pull my hair out PLEASE put things back the way they were I cannot find anything....this new way gives me everything EXCEPT for what I am searching for. Please...please....please....put things back to the way they were... where it was easy to search...and FUN to research. My researching days will be over if I have to depend on this new system.

      SaSan Mullins 29 June 2011
      4:16 pm
    643. Ok, I give up. I find this new system impossible. Im still trying to click on Penn. and nothing happens. Seem to be stuck in Va., not what I want. Give me the old system back..........please

      Barb 29 June 2011
      4:01 pm
    644. I really like being able to drill down. Once one understands how the filters work, its great

      Antonia Chiarico 29 June 2011
      12:01 am
    645. dont like this at all could not find what i was looking for. there is an old say, if it aint broke, dont fix it. you tried, but this sucks

      janis 28 June 2011
      10:48 am
    646. Whoever designed this system has taken the fun and ease of finding information away from searches. This site used to be exciting and helpful, now it is frustrating, disappointing and time consuming. When entering my information in search, I receive information that has nothing to do with the country in which Im searching, nor the time, nor the county or state. I find nothing in this new search engine..yet I was able to go to the old and find exactly or very close to that of which I searched. I tend to think that the producers of this new search program is not a genealogist.

      Cleo Holden 28 June 2011
      9:17 am
    647. I had never seen this way of doing things before therefore, I did not understand and could not make it work for me.

      Donna Chestnut 27 June 2011
      9:35 pm
    648. I agree with other users of the old system. The new search takes longer and is not as good as the old. I also wish search would allow me to sort results by column.

      Melissa 27 June 2011
      9:17 pm
    649. busco información de mis antepasados, y hasta el día de hoy me ha sido imposible encontar datos, que puedo hacer.

      Víctor Polini 26 June 2011
      4:13 pm
    650. No he podido encontrar datos de mis ancestros, por más que he tratado, que debo hacer ???

      Víctor Polini 26 June 2011
      3:49 pm
    651. This site is most disapointing, no match found is about the only thing that I get. Sometimes it is better to stick with something that works. I agree with most of the above, not worth looking at. Chuck

      Chuck 26 June 2011
      6:41 am
    652. Can I search by parents? Entering the both parents names, location and range of years could bring a whole family instead of doing multiple searches. This was available on the old site.

      Paul 26 June 2011
      3:07 am
    653. I had tried Ancestry.Com and then returned to and I can only get very basis informatiion from the grandmothers family in the 1880s or 1900s. Its very disappointing, I dont know where else to try.

      Sue 25 June 2011
      9:58 pm
    654. First time on site - just found it after years of this stuff. Works great, so far cant find any fault with the process. From the coments, the old system must have been reeally great. OK for me, thanks.

      c.bryan 25 June 2011
      9:15 pm
    655. I think this site is great So user friendly and its so much easier than all the other sites Ive been on. Maybe its because I am new at this and too stupid to know any better. Please keep this version, I am finding things now that I never could before, and without getting frustrated. Many thanks again for making this easier for all the newbies.

      Louanne 25 June 2011
      4:57 pm
    656. Your databases have helped me quite a lot in the past and convinced me to submit my own family data years ago - but now i cant even find my direct ancestors anymore. The new structures and search engine dont work for me at all. What a disappointment.

      Stefan Barth 25 June 2011
      7:13 am
    657. I think your knew filtering system is very cumbersome. I should be able to filter more deeply. I liked the old system much better. New and improved isn't always improved.

      Jane 24 June 2011
      6:53 pm
    658. The new site and its system of filters is way too cumbersome. Im searching for death records and cant filter out Social Security, etc. The filtering system falls way short of the old way. I wonder if you try to stream line for those at the FHCs who are not as knowledgeable...

      Jane 24 June 2011
      6:39 pm
    659. I am totally confusedThis new site fails to recognise my username and password that the other site had no problem.I am not sure if that is the reason I cannot look at the California marriage licenses of 1907 OR that you dont have them on this site.I was able to look at a marriage license in another state in 1926 and was able to give in info when I requested a copy, be mailed to me. SOOOOOOOOOO what gives.I really like this site and have found some good research which I appreciate very much

      Margaret Ledford 24 June 2011
      6:32 pm
    660. As a computer illiterate, i spent hours and hours searching for ancestral information that i found before on the old system, but now, could not locate it at all and being told that theres no match. I know the exact names, dates, places etc. Soooooooo frustrating Sorry

      Patrice 24 June 2011
      5:32 pm
    661. How do i access a pedigree on the site? I sent a family genealogy document to you several years ago My submission reference # is 46612856-0214109011742. I lost some of my data, and would like to access the pedigrees of some of the family trees. Thank you

      Dorothy Blake 24 June 2011
      2:57 pm
    662. Sorry but I find this site not as good at all as the previous version - please bring back the old site, it was so much better...

      Shirley 24 June 2011
      7:43 am
    663. Im new to this site . I submitted names & dates that Im sure of & was told there were no matches . I am confused .

      Bernie 23 June 2011
      10:54 pm
    664. Sorry dont like it I do love It is your best site - Searching is easy. I have to agree that the old format was 100 times better and easier to use. I appreciate that the service is free, but if I cannot make head nor tail of it whats the point of having it anyway. New system okay, old system much better.

      Kim 23 June 2011
      8:56 pm
    665. This has not helped at all. You cant find anybody like this.

      Shirley 23 June 2011
      8:23 pm
    666. I have not been able to find any IGI file since the new design. It is pretty much all take and no give here.

      Brenda 23 June 2011
      5:23 pm
    667. Your new system is a total disappointment. I feel so discouraged now.

      Thelma 23 June 2011
      12:57 pm
    668. I’m finding it most frustrating to look for names. Couldn’t one just leave well enough alone? Or least receive impute from those who truly w/the program.

      Ann 22 June 2011
      10:49 pm
    669. I have been researching as a genealogist, histoirian, librarian, archvist and lecturer in those fields for over 40 years and I am very sorry to state that this is indeed one of the worst search engines I have ever used. There was nothing wrong with the old site ... it worked well and was efficient. The concept of adding indexed / linked images could have been done as a new tab on the old home page menu. The IGI (formerly known as the CFI - Computer File Index) was a standard genealogical item cited in millions of research reports over the years and everyone knew what it was and what to expect. This new search engine is very challenging even for those of us who know what we are doing. Even the grahic watermark is tiresome and not up to that standard of the LDS Church that we have come to expect. True it represents the values of what the Church represents but it does detract from the information. In other words the old format was wonderful .. if it was not broke why did you try to (unsuccesfully) fix it????

      Brian 22 June 2011
      5:04 pm
    670. I want to download a Gedcom of IGI data to my family tree program has this fuctionality been removed too?

      Grace 22 June 2011
      3:25 pm
    671. On other sites and on this site, prior to the re-design, I could somewhat easily locate more specific information on my ancestors by entering the county and the town in which they were born rather than the state and country. I dont find such filters here now meaning that I have to search through many, many more pages and records than before. I think that the new changes have actually rendered the site more difficult to use. If thats what you were shooting for, you got it

      Kat V. 22 June 2011
      3:10 pm
    672. I dont have any problem printing death certificates, so it can be done - at least Tennessee ones, havent tried others.

      Margie 22 June 2011
      10:58 am
    673. Must agree with the other posts - dreadful to find anyone. I was looking for someone on the 1881 Census, but it is now not given as a choice. I know they are there, but cant find them using the new site. Perhaps I am making a mistake, but never had this trouble with the old site. Unfortunately, my set of 1881 England Census discs will not work with my new Microsoft version.

      Kevin Bennett, England 22 June 2011
      8:54 am
    674. The old search had fields to put parents names so that within, for example, birth records all children born to a set of parents could be pulled up. That is something that would be very beneficial.

      Minipats 21 June 2011
      10:21 pm
    675. I really, really, really miss the old site. My daughter needed family names for her girls camp where they were going to the Manti Pageant and doing baptisms for the dead in the Manti Temple. Each girl was to bring her own family names. No big deal I thought, till I got on the new site and discovered I couldnt find the family tree search. How disappointing it was to not be able to simply locate the family tree where I now there are ancestors needing their work done and no way for me to access that information. Please let us use the old site. With this new site, I wont be able to continue with my searches, help please......................

      Becky Meyers 21 June 2011
      6:54 pm
    676. This site is worthless to me-I Cant even find the information I found on the old system// I wonder what made this so difficult.?

      Ken Dringle 21 June 2011
      3:18 pm
    677. are you kidding? what were you thinking, making it so difficult for us beginners to find anyone. i put in exact information for all blanks and it came back no listing???? hello can we have access to old system, it was much more comphrensive and easier to use. get with it

      Homer 21 June 2011
      3:01 pm
    678. Do not like this site.

      Nancy 21 June 2011
      1:32 pm
    679. Its amazing how the new system can never seem to find a single record Im looking for, even searches that worked on the old system. Why in the world cant this new system find information I know is there? Please change back. I find myself using this site far less often now.

      Jen 21 June 2011
      11:40 am
    680. Now I cant find my families at all. I know they are in the Church database and I have depended on being able to use them to extend each of the lines and see who needs ordinance work. I have been able to see them through Ancestral Quest.

      Jerry Hurd-Smith 21 June 2011
      10:02 am
    681. All the comments about the old system being better is very very true. Old system was able to print birth certs, death certs, etc. Now for some reason they are not there, where did they go? The filters for the new system have lots of limitations. Please, please, please bring back the old system. It takes more time to search on this so called new system and that is not good.

      Barb Adamik 20 June 2011
      10:55 am

      JON ROGERS 20 June 2011
      7:48 am
    683. Dont like this at all. Not being able to filter by parents names especially on death records is a huge hindrance. The old search was much more user friendly.

      Barb 19 June 2011
      8:34 pm
    684. I agree that the new way eliminates so many possibilities. When the old way was usable I found so many birth, death, and marriage records often with more than one family on the same sheet. Now it seems impossible to find a birth record. PLEASE go back to the old way of searching.

      Yvonne Slonaker 19 June 2011
      8:07 pm
    685. I must add my regrets at the loss of the original Family site, an have to agree with all the past comments please please bring back what was a great research tool, I as I am sure are many others now too old for all these changes

      Sandra 19 June 2011
      1:32 am
    686. Thank you so much for this site. It has allowed me to trace my family tree as far back as 1853. Which has been truely a blessing...Thank you, Patricia

      Patricia 18 June 2011
      8:53 pm
    687. Why can it not be highlighted just the things you need and be printed to show the class WITHOUT all 100 plus comments, that wastes a lot of paper, I dont need.

      Sis Koning 18 June 2011
      5:34 pm
    688. I agree with most everyone,it makes searching so difficult. Lets go back to the old method.

      Eileen 18 June 2011
      10:11 am
    689. If it worked (the old system) why change it this system does not work , where have all the records gone this new system is a nonsense. Somebody who has too much time on their hands just thought that it would be a good idea to change it, its not and judging by above comments I am not on my own in saying so.. hope you havnt got rid of the old system?

      dee henderson.. 18 June 2011
      8:55 am
    690. Je suis vraiment désolé, mais je comprends pas un mot dAnglais, ce qui va rendre impossible mes recherches.

      Patrick François 18 June 2011
      1:22 am
    691. I do not use the site nearly as often now. Why cant we still get access to the old site - PLEASE?

      Ann Wells 18 June 2011
      12:06 am
    692. New system good, old system better.

      Nan 17 June 2011
      8:19 pm
    693. i agree with everyone. This way you can only search 1 criteria at a time. The old way you could click on the parents of the subject and keep doing that till you got way back. I did it before and just tried to do it with this new system to write some stuff down and I can'T. Pleeeeeaaaase put it back to the old system. Much more user fiendly, much more info, and yeah, some data appears not to be available any more

      Therese Sherman 17 June 2011
      2:49 am
    694. I like some things and prefer the old site for others. OLD: I like to use the "next household" option on the old site to "walk " up and down the streets in the census. You would be amazed to find that relatives often live in the neighborhood and you can find "missing children" living with their aunts and uncles down the block. NEW: Gee, why is their no filter for spouse's name? When you know the spouse name, it is a sure fire filter. When you are looking for a birth date, marriage date, having the spouse's name is a HUGE time saver. OLD: I also used the BATCH data to look for the same surname in the batch. Wow, you can piece together the names of all the kids and often the parents of a couple, just because they lived in the same area for a stretch of time. Can you do that with the NEW system? I haven't found it yet. The new system looks nice, is easier on the eyes, but frustrating that I can't do my old tricks. My vote is to keep both of them, and improve the new system with better filters and figure out how we can see the neighbors...and search batches. All in all, I really appreciate what you have done!

      Ada H 17 June 2011
      2:19 am

      SUE 16 June 2011
      8:44 pm
    696. I am trying to trace my Great,Great Grandmother trying to find her parents I know she was born on May 3, 1807 in Canonbie,Dumfries,Scotland,U.K. She married Francis BARCLAY on May 20,1825 in Canonbie,Dumfries,Scotland,U.K. but cannot find a record of her birth . She died in Innisfil,Simcoe,On,Canada on March 25,1886. Can you help me ? Thankyou, Gail

      Gail 16 June 2011
      8:27 pm
    697. agreed... I dont like this at all

      Joan 16 June 2011
      7:15 pm
    698. I think this is great. Thanks for all the work by so many

      V. Fox 16 June 2011
      4:48 pm
    699. I must agree with previous posts. The old site was friendly, easy to use, and very beneficial. I am unable to access information that I previously had access to. Very frustrating

      gdonkin 16 June 2011
      3:39 pm
    700. Im sorry to whine but I agree with other posts - I dont like this new software. I cant find anyone including myself

      Mike Carrington 16 June 2011
      12:04 pm
    701. he was in quito ecuador 1040 as soldier

      16 June 2011
      11:05 am
    702. Please Please return to old system - this is far too inflexible

      Kit Penn 16 June 2011
      7:50 am
    703. Is it me or have some records been removed? Ive been on hiatus for a year, and recently started to investigate some leads Id found on the now old site. I entered the batch numbers I had used previously, and the database says they do not exist. So, I decided to take another route and enter names ... the search with this new site again turned up nothing, yet I obtained all this information from the old database. Where has all the information on Polish records gone? The areas I am researching are not even listed ... crazy since I found my original information from the old site. All my search criteria now return information only from U.S. records. Im stumped, Ive tried all sorts of search permutations and I get zilch.

      Lost in Cyberspace 15 June 2011
      9:51 pm
    704. i have never felt so frustrated, this site is so confusing PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE bring back the old family search.

      Barbara UK 15 June 2011
      7:38 am
    705. I don't like this new system. It's too hard to use. Please go back to the older version.

      Sharon Jones 14 June 2011
      3:35 am
    706. Well I too have returned after some time and am completely unable to use this system. I have put in well documented lists of ancestors and the new system is telling me they dont exist....Hello there I obtained the information with relative ease from the previous system so which bright spark in the IT world thought this one up Not user friendly at all regardless of the few supporters it may have....... I have reluctantly decided I have to choose elsewhere and I was soooo looking forward to renewing aquaintences with Family Search. Some changes perhaps but I need to join a support group to use this site.

      Marion 13 June 2011
      9:40 pm
    707. First of all I would like to thank you all that hard work invested in typing so many stranger hungarian names. I found this page (this possibility) only two days ago. I am the oldest in our family - that means I can not ask for forgeted informations only in this way, OR ask in church registers, searching thousands of pages, and - of course - write all with pencil, or make photocopies. I prefer the first way. I do not like such comments like these (only for example) 27 April 2011 358 pm 27 April 2011 347 pm 27 April 2011 452 pm 28 April 2011 751 am I think, people like above, must to try the second way once and then return to this one. Last, but not least I would like to help you - if you need - to correct hungarian records. Contact on my email address. Sincerely Istvan Kiss - Hungary

      Istvan Kiss 13 June 2011
      4:06 pm
    708. I prefer the old search system, it is easier and I could find what I was looking for. Now I could not find the data I used to see so easily

      Margarita de los Reyes 13 June 2011
      12:32 am
    709. I have to agree, I love the old system's searching capabilities. It at least let you enter the parents names to narrow your search. The new site does not have a place to enter this and doesn't allow you to narrow to a specific county or city. Not finding records I once was able to find in the old system. Be great if the old and new searching capabilities could be combined and the user chose which fields to search for.

      Laura D 12 June 2011
      12:35 pm
    710. I need to know who all the children were and who the ancesters were, now I cant find any information at all I dont know who or why it was changed, but irs no good the way it is now.

      Raymond Woodbury 11 June 2011
      5:09 pm
    711. I do not like it that the 'new search' box is hidden, leave it unhidden for quick editing at all times. I do not like having to continuously reopen the 'new search' infomation area with that down arrow feature.

      BLPitchford 11 June 2011
      8:43 am
    712. Don't care for the new search . Your site was GREAT , now I really have a problem finding some info. Even if I know the times - places - and dates - - - - -can't fine some of them . BUT - - -

      Ron Sopher 11 June 2011
      7:35 am
    713. I thought it would be a good idea to start my search with known facts, they are that on the 15th august 1878 my great great grandfather Thomas Callaghan married Mary Callaghan at Eadestown rc church,Naas, co kildare, Ireland. They both hailed from Cromwellstown Co Kildare. To my great disappointment your records have no account of them,or their father Michael who in 1852 farmed 33 acres in Cromwellstown, the land being leased from a Mrs Haughton. Sincerly Christopher OCallaghan.

      Christopher OCallaghan 09 June 2011
      12:33 pm
    714. Michael Callaghan farmed 33acres leased from Mrs haughton in Cromwellstown, co Kildare. in 1852, information from Griffiths Valuation

      Christopher OCallaghan 09 June 2011
      11:35 am
    715. Ive been doing online research for a long time and this is the most confusing and useless search system I have encountered. The old system was simpler and user-friendly. I also prefer to see a long list of hits on a single page than to have to leaf through dozens of pages looking for a hit. The only way I see that this new search engine would be useful is if you already knew exactly what you were going to find.

      S Rankin 09 June 2011
      7:43 am
    716. For all those who like the old system better, why not just use it and quit complaining about the changes. The way to use the old system has been posted a number of times.

      Margie 08 June 2011
      4:03 pm

      LINDA 08 June 2011
      3:13 pm
    718. Filters are good but overall I dislike the new format very much. The old format was much more user-friendly and gave many more results.

      Susan 08 June 2011
      1:36 pm
    719. Those who are not happy with the new site and want the old one back should realize that they are asking to have MILLIONS of new records removed -- and to not add the hundreds of thousands of new records that are now being added almost every day. WHY ON EARTH would you you want to go back??? But if you really want to ignore the new records because it is too difficult for you to learn a new way to search... then use the GO TO PREVIOUS SITE button, right column.

      Bobbie Snow 08 June 2011
      7:35 am
    720. I think this site is an amazing resource and I am incredibly thankful to have found it. Thank you all so much

      Samantha 07 June 2011
      10:31 pm
    721. It is hard to believe the complaints and demands made by some. Instead of complaining so much, should be grateful that the site is here and they do not have to pay to use it.

      Margie 07 June 2011
      8:26 am
    722. I cant believe the negative comments here From where Im sitting I can search both the new site AND the old So I get the best of both worlds I applaud you for all your efforts and hope you will continue... forever I for one am extremely grateful for all those who trancribe, index and publish - without them my research would be severely handicapped. It is my intention to offer my help in your transcribing programme in the near future - perhaps some of the whingers on here might like to consider doing the same collectively we can accomplish a whole far greater in size than the sum of the parts.

      Chris Thomas 07 June 2011
      4:33 am
    723. I think that I see, at least in part, where you are going with this site, and am pleased by the improvements. Keep up the great work

      Shelbeck 06 June 2011
      10:09 pm
    724. We are giving instruction on this site at a FH Open House. It is wonderful Anyone can use it IF they use the Help provided. Without the help, it can be confusing. Thanks for all the effort and we look forward to the increasing number of records as the indexing pours in.

      J. Malone 06 June 2011
      8:18 pm
    725. I was new to your site and thrilled to find so much information concerning a branch of my family from Ireland. I foolishly saved this information to my favorites until I could complete the research, evaluate, and print it. Now, a short time later, the information is all lost. Ive tried everything but the only response is that there are no records for these recently discovered ancestors.

      Mary 06 June 2011
      10:56 am
    726. I preferred the old search system on this site. I had been using it for several years with no problem. It was much easier to find the records you wanted to search and the results were easier to search. One click and you could see the household members on the census and the BDM were better. I dont think Ill be using your site in the future if its this hard to find anything.

      Shills 06 June 2011
      9:39 am
    727. Interesting you say no Civil War record. I have all his papers and even pension. However proof of parents, state of birth - year of birth cannot document. Even though the Risley Family Assn. has existed for over 200 years. So since enlistement papers in Springfield Greene Co. Missouri says born Missouri and that he was 18 years old. but heighth 52. makes me doubt age. In 1905 papers from Ft Leavenwoth Old Soldiers home has him as 58. that State census in 1905 says born in Indiana. So you ask for this information etc. That if I had would not be searching. I did get his death certificate and had his Civil War grave marked Hot Springs AR 1924 death. There seems to be no others in this family either alive or interested in this man. He was father to my maternal grandmother and husband of great-grandmother. They died one month apart in Denver Col 1919 flu epidemic. This was when my mother lost track of him and her uncles. Was told National Archives next of kin was not documented when they enlisted. Very Odd.

      Charlotte Muckey 06 June 2011
      9:23 am
    728. I just wanted to say that I liked the older system better than the newer one. When I had problems drawing a line from one ancestor to another, I was able to find sources from the genealoical indexes that would carry me back from person to person. Now.....they just simply arent there. If I want census reports, Ill go to Please help me. If Im wrong and I just cant find what Im looking for, OK, Im sorry. Its just not helpful anymore.

      Frank 06 June 2011
      7:58 am
    729. What happened to the IGI? I found it very useful. Can elements of the new & old websites be combined? The new site leaves something to be desired.

      Mark Waggoner 06 June 2011
      6:34 am
    730. I too find the new site much more difficult - when checking people already found, they seem to have disappeared. Please go back to the old site which was great.

      Susan W. 06 June 2011
      1:07 am
    731. STILL a waste of time. Previous records found are now impossible to find, again Does any one in your organizatiion read so many negative & frustrating comments & yet refuses to correct this MESS?? Fire the person responsible for this waste of energy How many times do you have to be told If it works, dont fix it

      Louis Di Girolamo 05 June 2011
      7:47 pm
    732. No one likes the new system the old system was much easier to work with. I know dates of my ancestors and there is no way I could find them in the new program. GO BACK to where we could find something this one is no good

      richard peacock 05 June 2011
      11:23 am
    733. I am shocked at the changes in this site. I cannot find my way around anymore and it has become so unhelpful. After trying everywhere and finding nothing, I used to come on here to search for ancestors who had evaded me for so long. I was in the habit of telling everyone who cared to listen to me what a wonderful site this was but the changes have not been good changes. I must be considered a most unreliable person now. As a stroke survivor I do not need any NEW lessons in searching, life has been tough enough thank you.

      DEANNA 05 June 2011
      10:14 am
    734. Your site is no longer useful. I have given you information that I already knew from your previous site and not even gotten that much back. Are your members no longer doing genealogy? Your site is hopeless to use and not the least bit of help. Please improve it or close it to the public. Wait maybe in your own way you have already done that with your changes.

      Sandra E. Bradshaw 05 June 2011
      9:55 am
    735. I have to agree with the negative feedback you have received from other family researchers. I was able to find out quite a lot of information from the old system but now really struggle. It definitely is not an improvement.

      gloria ellis 05 June 2011
      9:50 am
    736. Sorry to complain but I do not like the new search. The old one was way better. I liked the filter on that one. I have found very little on this one. I used to like family search better than all the others but now no so much. Please change it back. Thanks.

      Vicki 05 June 2011
      7:20 am
    737. please go back to previous system. if it isnt broke dont fix it

      jill 05 June 2011
      4:17 am
    738. Philadelphias PA Return of a Death will not allow me to view the image of the orginal. Thank goodness, I printed out so many before the new system. The new system has kinks with viewing the orginial documents.

      joyce 04 June 2011
      6:50 pm
    739. The new site filters do not let you narrow the search very much. I liked the pilot site where you could filter by specific collection not just census or vital records.

      Barbara Baker 04 June 2011
      2:14 pm
    740. I am very computer saavy and I find your system has lost its user-friendly appeal.. what a disappointment..

      04 June 2011
      12:05 pm

      BETTYJO KIRK 04 June 2011
      11:49 am
    742. This site is fabulous Take the time to go through the explanations on how to search. It is fast and everything is at our fingertips. Five *****s all the way. Thank you

      Elaine 04 June 2011
      11:49 am
    743. PLEASE BRING BACK YOUR OLD FORMAT PLEASE, PLEASE Im researching my family for a few years now and loved your old system. Please consider bringing it back, as such alot of users are asking. I appreciate your hard work and costs to bring us this service and I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. But as the system is now I cant get any relevant info.

      Carol 04 June 2011
      7:16 am
    744. I agree with what the otheers are saying. Please change back to the old version . When I asked for a name it gives me the one that I dont need. I found it is very hard to use the searches.

      Sandra 03 June 2011
      1:32 pm
    745. I like this new site... beats hands down... and guess what - its free... persevere please its a great improvement....

      03 June 2011
      9:53 am
    746. I dont want to be ALL negative when something is new. If that was right, wed still all be writing on stone tablets because nothing new is worth trying Im taking the time to become familiar with your site, at the same time realizing some parts are still under construction the card catalog must be. Aside from all the analytical nit-picking everyones doing I want to commend you for this awesome offering. There is SO MUCH MORE here ... and will be so much more. Logically speaking, its always seems hard to change because we go from what we know to the unknown. If we fully understood new things from the get-go we would all be rocket scientists, have done our family history twenty years ago and people wouldnt live in the ghetto. Get my drift? Dont look a gift horse in the mouth? Stop griping or whining...HAVE SOME FAITH. These very smart people have just given you a gift you you didnt pay a dime for nor spent one hour in creating and the first few pokes at it and youve got your complaint mastered.

      EC 03 June 2011
      12:18 am
    747. It is unfortunately one of the sad facts of life that we are never content to leave well enough alone. We tinker around with what is a functional product until bang goes the cork and out comes a monster instead of the proverbial genie. OR. Could this be another case of industrial sabotage which makes a once user friendly product so unwieldy that it forces its users to use one of the many for profit ancestry products in the commercial market place? Seek out the person who has thrown the spanner in the works.

      George Peter Lewis 02 June 2011
      7:10 pm
    748. Incredibly difficult use. I never used your old system, so I have nothing to compare it to. Ive tried numerous times to find ancestors with many different variations and have had no luck. Please revise this site

      02 June 2011
      6:25 pm
    749. I DO NOT LIKE THE NEW SITE. Info I found so easily on the old site I cannot even find on the new site. Please go back to the old site.

      Debbie 02 June 2011
      4:55 pm
    750. I have hundreds of records printed from the old LDS site most of them no longer seem to be here. I have just returned to the site after a few years and I am shocked to find it is no longer useful. What happened please?

      Susie 02 June 2011
      3:53 pm
    751. Just started researching my family history and your site was recommended by a friend but I havent been able to find anything or anyone. Whats so good about it? Even I dont exist according to your records

      Eileen 02 June 2011
      2:59 pm
    752. What happened to the death record images?I am disappointed that they are gone since I found clues to other family members alot of times.Will they be back?

      02 June 2011
      1:09 pm
    753. Overall I like the site. Yes, somethings could be improved, but some of the problems that some people have, I have not experienced. Also some of the problems that I had earlier seen to have been fixed. I look forward to more updates. Marjorie

      Margie 02 June 2011
      11:07 am
    754. Please, Plllleeeeeeeaaase bring back old system. I dont come to site often any more because it doesnt seem to give as much info, aor allow choices.

      Barbara 02 June 2011
      2:54 am
    755. I dont understand how you think the changes that you have made could possibly have made the use of the site better. It is much harder to get the info entered. I also took longer for the site to be open.

      Patricia Greenwood,TX 01 June 2011
      11:46 pm
    756. I agree with everyone who made negative comments about this site. Please go back to the old system. This one is tired and bothersome. Cant even locate Social Security death information. Please, please, please return to the old system

      Audrey Mitchell 01 June 2011
      9:44 pm
    757. I really like the new search and new look. People just need to learn how to use it. I tell our patrons to click on everything to see how it works and then they love it.

      Linda Dibble 01 June 2011
      8:50 pm
    758. I am very confused on how to use this. I type in my ancestors names and it shows that theres not any information on them its very fustrating They should make it more simple to use and easy to fund information. right now its really a waste of time trying to use it.

      Florencia 01 June 2011
      7:40 pm
    759. sorry but I dont like this at all, was so much easier on the old system. I cant find anything and TBH I dont know where to start looking. This was a great site but now its virtually useless to me at least.

      Neil Munro 01 June 2011
      6:41 pm
    760. For a couple days now Ive been trying to search and was having no luck, as I couldnt go to the places I wanted and get the information I knew was there, I had seen it before. After reading the comments of others, I have decided that Im not really stupid, as others are having the same problem as me. That made me feel a bit better, but it doesnt help me find the information I need. We need to be able to put the counties, no just the whole state when hunting.

      LaRita 01 June 2011
      6:25 pm
    761. this is the most frustrating,confusing mess I have ever tried to navigate. PLEASE go back to the old way until you find something that ACTUALLY WORKS. Used to find what I wanted in a matter of minutes, now I waste time just trying to get around this mess of a site.

      Pam A 01 June 2011
      5:38 pm
    762. Terrible system cant find a thing please go back to the old one do you know the saying if its not broke dont fix it

      Alice 01 June 2011
      11:57 am
    763. I am not finding this new search engine at all helpfull. It was much easier, quicker and clearer before. It might work well in theory, but in practice it doesnt. From reading the comments, I see that the majority of people feel the same as I do. I just find it tedious and frustrating to do any searching. Please reconsider going back to the previous search method.

      Diana Ellul-Grech 01 June 2011
      9:57 am
    764. Found details of my gggggrandads 1814 wedding previously, but now the search comes up with no details found Very frustrating.

      Andy Pollitt 01 June 2011
      9:47 am

      01 June 2011
      9:16 am
    766. I find this new system difficult to use. It's not that I am computer challenged. It just seems that I cannot access the info I need. i could get it on the old system.

      Christine 31 May 2011
      11:18 pm
    767. I like searches that home so I dont have to re-enter data. However, contrariwise, Id like to be able to wipe the search clean and start over. I dont know how to do that without backing out of all of my choices... THANKYOU THANKYOU. I have spent all day on this family in NE, years prior I would never have made progress because the WAIT time to receive and answer by mail, I would not be able to keep my train of thought to get who falls into my sights. Almost like calculating logarithims by hand, ugh I have targeted and seized all day. I feel them knowing I am finding them The harvest has been great for me all day. THANKYOU for what ever you contribute that makes this good.

      EC 31 May 2011
      9:57 pm
    768. do not like the new search , filters or any of the new setup. It is very hard to find any thing . Please go back to the other old way. Know alot of people that have used this site but have gone to .

      dorothy 31 May 2011
      9:35 pm
    769. This site is a mess. Loved family search when I first started using it in 2004. Now when you put an ancestor name in, you get much more than you need or want. Go back to the old version please.

      Nita 31 May 2011
      7:47 pm
    770. I absolutely agree with all negative comments. In the past, I really enjoyed using this site, but now find it extremely frustrating. Please, please bring back the original.

      Maureen 31 May 2011
      7:21 pm
    771. Love the changes--much faster/easier to narrow search results with filters. Big improvement

      Jenna 31 May 2011
      11:54 am
    772. Very disappointing search experience 10 years plus experience of using and configuring seach engines. Cant filter on the things I need to be able to filter on (eg parents names). This really does make genealogy like looking for a needle in a haystack whereas the old one worked even if it didnt look so pretty.

      Bernard 31 May 2011
      8:08 am
    773. what is this? I know the information is here because I found it with the old system but now I cant find it me or the new search system?

      Chris 31 May 2011
      5:11 am
    774. This site is VERY user unfriendly - I can't find myself, grandparents, mother but found my dad.... his name was misspelled & I was told it couldn't be corrected. If I had to pay to use this, I'd be demanding my money back!!

      Val 30 May 2011
      6:37 pm
    775. I am very disappointed with the search change. I found out so much information on the old search, now I can not find anything. It is just frustrating to try and retrieve any person I have found in the past, if I can even find them. Please, put the old search back in place. I even bragged this site up to friends, who are now completely confused.

      DebeeM 30 May 2011
      1:43 pm
    776. The old site has been my main tool for tracing generations of my family very successfully. I am not happy with the new site but as long a I can go to the old one as well (as at present) I will regard it as an extra tool. If you remove the old records there will be a big problem.

      sue 30 May 2011
      5:11 am
    777. I found a great deal of information using the pilot program. I was throughly enjoying researching the new information that has been added. Now Im just frustrated. Is there some way the pilot format could be provided as an option (where users could click and revert to that program)?

      Michelle 29 May 2011
      9:01 pm
    778. Please bring back the format that was used in the pilot program. It was so user friendly. This program is frustrating.

      29 May 2011
      8:52 pm
    779. Cannot use this new format. Was happy with old one in that you could look for birth or marriage separately, now it just seems too clever for its own good. Put it back into simpler form, please- the resources are too valuable to lose for both mormons and the non-mormon community.

      sylvia williams, england 29 May 2011
      9:55 am
    780. This is terrible. I look for a fairly common Irish surname, where I have found lots of helpful data even years ago, and all I get is one or two irrelevant names from Philadelphia, way out of the 18th-century date parameters I had entered. The filters dont work at all. In fact, nothing seems to work Whats up?

      Charles Nicholas 29 May 2011
      6:40 am
    781. I completely agree with the comments. I DO NOT LIKE this new search. Please revert back to the old one. This may look very fancy with all the options, but the other way actually got you more people to look into, and was easier and quicker to follow. Considering how many people dont like this, I cant understand why you havent changed it. I now pay for search on I know they also have problems, but much easier and quicker to follow and get results. I live in Australia, and I have to do all my research on line. This needs improving for me to return.

      Trina. 28 May 2011
      8:46 pm
    782. I used to get information that wasn't on other sites. It's frustrating to put in the info you have for your relative and getting information for some other name. I have an unusual last name, Scheidt, I get just about every Sch name that exists. I give the state they lived in ALL their lives, Cook County Illinois, I get every Sch name from EVERY state. There is no reason for me to search for them in California, I know they were in Illinois. When I look for their children and childern's kid I may need those other states. Having been using you site, I have found them on the US Census, now the records may be there, but they're burried in thousand of records. If I try to narrow the search down I get a confusing list to go through, check something and then end up back where I was with the same amount of choices as before. Evitently I didn't do it right, but by then I'm not interested in searching anymore. I don't do this as a living, I may only have an hour or two to devote to my search at a time, I don't want to spend it getting frustrated and angry. I guess I'll have to bite the bullit and go back to Ancestry. They're not nearly as good as you were and they're not cheap, but at least you can spend your time getting some information and not feeling you just wasted your time

      Karen H. 28 May 2011
      10:35 am
    783. As all of the earlier posts have said, the old way was better. Ive only been researcing my family about 2 years. I tried all the other websites, paying thier prices, but after I found Family Search I found myself returning here everytime. Ive even used the Family History sites at your Churches. I found the Beta search to have even more records available. Now you type in a name and everything but the kitchen sink comes up. I put in Chicago, Bloom Count, Illinois and I get every state that has a simular name Im looking for. My Great Grandparents never lived anywhere but Cook County, I dont need Californias records. I try to narrow it down and I might get rid of 1 or 2 thousand. Since this is not my full time job I need to be able to manuver thru the records in a timely fashion. Yours was always the easiest and most usefull site to use. Maybe you sould go back to the Beta site, it was an improvement over your original site and a lot better than this one.

      Karen H. 28 May 2011
      10:04 am
    784. Es mas practico buscar en las hojas anteriores donde se veia todo la página del censo ya que mayormente indica el grupo familiar. Asi no se sabe quien pertenece a qué familia, ya que no indica nombre de los padres.

      Hedwig Bandurski 27 May 2011
      5:18 pm
    785. Change is always good when it’s for the better when it’s not, it’s time to revise the change. Thanks for all the hard work you did, special thanks for having a free site, but now as Moonbeam would say “bring’em back to the why it use to be”

      Janice 26 May 2011
      5:59 pm
    786. I can not find any information about my family I dont know what else to try

      Christa Jones (Nietner) 26 May 2011
      3:49 am

      Dale 25 May 2011
      8:41 pm
    788. You should have left well enough alone. I loved the old site and even with my advanced computer research skills, this new site is EXTREMELY difficult to navigate and I cant find any of the information I had located earlier this year. Im particularly disappointed that I no longer have the ability to search for unknown children by inputting just the parents names and location. Please change it back

      Meghan 25 May 2011
      10:42 am
    789. I left my comment, and you lost my comment - bottom line. "it just doesn't work like it used to" - please find a soution.

      Sylvia 24 May 2011
      10:27 pm
    790. Like many others, I previously was able to find important genealogical information never before seen. Since the improvement to the site I can find nothing. Before I found death certificates for two little sisters of my mother in Philadelphia 1896 and 1900. Through death certificates dating back to 1870s I learned names of siblings of my grandfather to fill in the gaps previously called Child #1 - Child #8 from Civil War Pension Affadavits. No names were included, but I found all eight on the LDS Pilot Site before. The Death Certificates were invaluable because they contained information I never knew, such as cause of death, date of birth, residence of parents. It was such a blessing when I found them. Now and for past several months I still check back, hoping things are fixed - but again tonight I find a plethora of information - but NOTHING HELPFUL. It was better before, and I certainly do wish something could be done to resolve the problem.

      Sylvia 24 May 2011
      10:24 pm
    791. Is this site down today May 24th - I keep getting a message 1-nan and just numbers of people I am searching for but no drop down of the actual people - I love this site hope it is ok

      Kay 24 May 2011
      12:00 pm
    792. Hi I love this site - however today it keeps showing 1 nan whenever I put a person into the box and shows the numbers of people but doesnt display them - it there something wrong with the site today.?

      Kay 24 May 2011
      11:57 am
    793. VERY VERY dissappointed why change something was was black and white and to the POINT. Please please go back or fix the problem. I enjoyed this site and it was very help

      Gloria 24 May 2011
      11:35 am
    794. Beginning more than 20 years ago I could do REAL research on this program. Successive DUMBING DOWN of the program has rendered it useless. Seems a lot like the parking lot in our local mall. No matter how some new designer tries to get CUTE with the spaces, they just dont understand the public wants good function, not CHANGE for CHANGE SAKE.

      Zona 24 May 2011
      11:28 am
    795. David C. Cornelison fought in the confederate war for the South. Born in Tennessee, on may,1843. . Married Nancy Louisa Burlison on Nov 1861. Parents Garrett Cornelison, mother Elizabeth Watkins.

      Rosalind K Barrow 24 May 2011
      10:49 am
    796. Not even my very technologically talented teen-aged grand-son could make heads or tails of this system. Please go back......

      cdmh 24 May 2011
      1:46 am
    797. A place to put in a spouse name in the search filter would be sooooo helpful

      Cindy 23 May 2011
      4:09 pm
    798. Found no one I was looking for

      Orval Riker 23 May 2011
      11:52 am
    799. I loved the beta version and found amazing things. Now I cannot find anything. The filters arent fine-tuned enough and I get a lot of useless results. What happened? Please put it back the way it was, oh please, please, please.

      M. M. 23 May 2011
      6:38 am
    800. I have to agree with the majority. This site is definitely NOT an improvement . Lemmens was a fairly common name in the southern part of the Netherlands (still is) but its almost as though they never existed

      Terri 23 May 2011
      3:07 am
    801. Under the old search engine/filters I was able to find so much more and it was fun I find the new search engine very limiting and somewhat frustrating. Thank you for letting me give my opinion.

      michael allen 22 May 2011
      11:00 pm
    802. Have to agree with the users who are saying the old search was better, waaaaaaaaaay better. New one is much slower, on the same computer as before with the same browser. The new filters when used on a search I did on Civil War docs listed 91 results and every filter, including place, was useless - the place filter had US and nothing more detailed. You used to be able to use the filters in place, and the number of results was reduced in a meaningful manner. No longer. Additionally the old search allowed you to create a left to right pane that had the details from the indexing, and then the image in another pane to the right, if there were an image. The current method requires clicking to another page and going back and forth, which loses your track of where you were in the hit list. UGH, ugh, ugh.

      nc in Calif 22 May 2011
      6:05 pm
    803. Please go back to your simpler system. I could put in my fathers info and go to pedigree and go back to 1036. Now I dont know how to find anything. Too complcated

      Rebecca Bagley 22 May 2011
      12:25 pm
    804. Am I the only one who can NEVER find anyone on this site? Even with the original certificate in hand I still get zero hits Whats up with that? Very frustrating to use Ill find information elsewhere from now on

      Aileen 22 May 2011
      11:31 am
    805. I am a volunteer Indexer. Today, when I finished indexing, it was like the program crashed, with an error message to download new software which I could not locate. Now my computer has started rejecting any attempt to begin again. What is going on?

      Jerry Dennis 22 May 2011
      8:57 am
    806. The new search refinements are not effective. It does no good to find 2000 names, then narrow it down to US and get 1990 names, and then, narrow it to the 1800s and still have 1400 names. Even if you ask for John D. Smith, it still gives you John A, John B, and John C. The previous search tool was clumsier but at least it refined down to a reasonable number of possibilities. It seems that not much thought was put into the design.

      Bill 22 May 2011
      8:06 am
    807. Do you read these comments or just us users? With so many negative results of this new format, why havent you fixed the problem? At least post a little note up top saying construction zone so you can give hope to us that you are working ob

      22 May 2011
      5:05 am
    808. I first started researching at this site. At the time I did find some information and enough clues to keep looking. Now, two months into stalking my people- and my experience is up 100%- I cant find a darn thing here. Not even people who were here two months ago. I go back to the old site as soon as I realize Im here. I appreciate that the site is free. And I got exactly what I paid for.

      toni 21 May 2011
      8:55 pm
    809. This search method can't even re-find people I found there before!

      Sharon 21 May 2011
      3:25 pm
    810. I will wait hopefully for a search engine that can be more specific. When I ask for a marriage in Illinois in 1902, that is what I want. I do not want a marriage in England in 1874. I get thousands of results for other locations and other years. The quality of these searches seem to be going down hill. It is a shame because the information here is massive. But you have made it hard to access. Could we have a choice of the old searches?

      Larry 21 May 2011
      12:05 pm
    811. I am so disappointed with your new methods. I dont think beginners will be able to use it and as a very experienced researcher, (45 years), I cannot find a death certificate at all. I have searched and searched and wound up with absolutely nothing. I followed your directions completely and when I find a person whose death certificate I want, it says image not available. What ever happened to USER FRIENDLY? I dont mean to scream, but I am at my wits end. I dont have too many years left of being able to research and now I dont have time to relearn a much more difficult program. Please have pity on your seniors and beginners. I cannot imagine what possessed the builder of this software that not even the experts can use. Thanks for the years that I have been able to use your website, but I can just continue to cry and just walk away. I feel like the woman in the commercial who cannot open a jar of jelly.

      Mary, the Texas Treeclimber 20 May 2011
      7:23 pm
    812. Thanks, Ann. I really missed being able to search for unknown children and youve just made my day Happy Weekend to you

      jane 20 May 2011
      12:38 pm
    813. I agree, with all the above, this ia not near as good as before you changed it. Put it back the way it was.

      Evelyn 20 May 2011
      9:29 am
    814. This is the worst Wish you would go back to the way it was. This is very hard to use. I have no luck at all.

      Elva 19 May 2011
      4:12 pm
    815. I prefer your old style template by far. Is it available as an option?

      Robert T. Russell 19 May 2011
      3:07 pm
    816. necesito sea en spanissi no no entiendo nada gracias

      lucia angelica chua 19 May 2011
      12:34 pm
    817. I agree with all the posts that stated all the positive points about the it was really productive for me the new is very cumbersome and basically unusalbe compared to the pilot please make the pilot available again and include all the indexing we are doing. Thank you

      Lenard Stull 18 May 2011
      10:47 pm
    818. How do I find out about the person who has all the wrong info posted on my gggrandfather They are bound and determined to say he is mine even with all the wrong children I want to correct them

      Dot 18 May 2011
      3:30 pm
    819. Every change bugs me, then I get used to the latest version and Im happy. Then a new version appears and the pattern repeats itself. Can we have an option of using the last 1 or 2 versions? That should make most people happy. I miss the last 2 pull down boxes in your previous version. Not being able to provide volume and page has increased the cost by 50% on older searches.

      Antoin 18 May 2011
      12:22 pm
    820. To all those who say it is impossible to search for unknown children by entering only the names of parents - it is a bit more difficult to find that on pilot, but the option is still available. 1 - click on advanced search 2 - click on the arrow on the select box under Relationship 3 - choose parents Two rows will appear with space to enter first and last names for each parent. You can make it exact or leave the fuzzy default search. Have fun

      Ann 17 May 2011
      1:13 pm
    821. i cant figure out how to refine my search, rather than start with a new search. It may be buried in the options, but should be easier to find

      17 May 2011
      11:57 am
    822. Well, the good thing is that I obviously am not alone in this frustrating change. Just hope to be able to use the older and well performing system. PLEASE REPAIR AND IMPROVE THIS MESS.

      Marike 17 May 2011
      7:59 am
    823. I loved the old pilot program search. There were many ways to sort, i.e., place, date, collection, first name, record type, role and event type. There is only a place to put one persons name on this new site. On the old site I use advanced search and there was a way to enter the last names of two people who were married. With the two last names, I found tons of marriage, birth and death records as both parents names are the birth and death records too. With this search engine, I cannot find anything. I just put in a last name (which is the only choice I had) and I got 97,000 records I tried to limit the search no way to put in the spouse, etc. Please, can you combine the GREAT sorting techniques from the Pilot program into this program? The information is already in your program and it is not that hard to add all the sorting options to this program. That would make so many people very happy. I am still using the pilot program but I am not sure if they are even adding records to it any more. I have been doing genealogy since 1977, and I started using this site when I found it many many years ago. I have always found this site to be great, and the pilot program only made it better. Now I find it very frustrating to be on. Thank you.

      jneyr 16 May 2011
      4:11 pm
    824. Been using software for several decades now and your changes certainly make research more difficult

      Vera Swei 16 May 2011
      3:41 pm
    825. I liked the "old" search on this new website better, too. Found lots of things, now it is way harder to narrow down to specific areas if needed.

      Ellen 16 May 2011
      1:46 pm
    826. No wonder, I am having a hard time now. When I started using this website I was able to get more data. Now in going back in I cant find the data that I saw originally. This is too bad I was just getting started and now find that I may have to pay for a sight. Sorry you ruined this.

      Vicki 16 May 2011
      11:41 am
    827. I found a lot of things the old way. This way is totally useless. Why dont you just put it back the way it was? Somebody with too much time on their hands messing with something that was far better the way it was. I hope somebody with some sense will read these comments.

      Jackie 15 May 2011
      6:37 pm
    828. What a disappointment. I once was able to find people. Now, nothing.

      Barb Kruger 15 May 2011
      1:48 pm
    829. Please go back to the wonderful (in its day but depleted resources now) Record Search Pilot Why would you revert to non java programs just because some users have outdated machines This is 10 steps backwards

      Rob Lochner 15 May 2011
      12:52 pm
    830. I had no problem at all finding information on FamilySearch with the prior search setup, as I usually had at least some idea where the people I am researching lived. Now, when I look for someone who was born, died, and lived their entire life in, say, Kentucky, the only hits I get are Philadelphia marriage indexes or something equally irrelevant.

      James Raney 15 May 2011
      12:39 pm
    831. @Catherine Langford Be glad you CANT find your birth on genealogy sites It would be a terrible risk of personal information. By default, most reputable genealogy sites do not have open access to information on living people. (Here if you entered it, you could see it, but no one else.) Depending on your age, you might find yourself in the 1930 census, but actual vital records kept by the government arent released for a certain number of years for privacy reasons.

      Jennifer J 15 May 2011
      10:52 am
    832. This is my favorite site. I have found hundreds of records that would have cost thousands of dollars to obtain, if I even knew where to look for them. For me it is just a matter of learning to negotiate the new format which will become old hat in time. Thanks for this FREE site.

      Mark Cottrell 15 May 2011
      7:08 am
    833. Do not like this new version at all. The old version was user friendly. With this new version the majority of the time you wait and wait then all you get is unable to display results. Not much fun spending all that time waiting then getting nothing.

      Lynda 15 May 2011
      12:47 am
    834. You cannot do a parent search for unknown children as with the old familysearch, thats my biggest issue with this. Clicking on a tree does not duplicate the ease of the old search facility. Still really appreciate the work involved here. Just wish you would re-add that item.

      suze 14 May 2011
      9:44 pm
    835. Man and I thought this web site would be easer than the one I was paying for.I think I will just leave genealogy to the rest of you.

      ryane 14 May 2011
      9:20 pm
    836. Just adding my note of displeasure to this list

      Ken 14 May 2011
      3:53 pm
    837. I appreciate the fact that the site is free and have found a lot of what I have been looking for. Some elements are a little slow but not so slow as to cause aggravation. Besides, even if it was, the fact that it is free should and does make up for that.

      Barb S 14 May 2011
      3:37 pm
    838. I have to agree that the old format was 100 times better and easier to use I appreciate that the service is free, but if I cannot make head nor tail of it whats the point of having it anyway

      Carol Tye 14 May 2011
      9:20 am
    839. Im not going to jump on the bandwagon of this site is terrible. Im finding exactly what Im looking for. People are complaining that there is no feature to search for parents and spouse, click on TREES and you will find it. Cant find BOOKS, click the tab and voila, there is your search engine. Not every record on is available on this website. That is the purpose of FS Indexing - to help make more available for free. Someone asked about what all of the numbers mean (enumeratin district, sheet numbers, film numbers...) - it pertains to where information is located on a film or on the page. The film is available at the SLC library or by requesting the film roll at your local library. Not EVERYTHING is going to be viewable online. IGI? That hasnt been updated in ages (many years...). If you want current IGI information, you need to log in to the Something to remember, this is called FamilySEARCH not FamilyFIND. You may or may not FIND what you are looking for in your SEARCH.

      Pam 14 May 2011
      8:58 am
    840. I was very excited about the Zimbabwe death notices on the new site. However, even after finding a reference for a particular death, I hit a brick wall and spent hours wading through volumes that bear no similarity to the actuall reference. This is hopeless. I even tried a step by step tutorial published by a member of Rootsweb and still could not find a way to find a notice even with the reference. Surely, there must be a way of tying up a reference with the volume it is applicable to???????

      Jeanette Randall 14 May 2011
      8:34 am
    841. I have had more important finds on FamilySearch than on any other online site. When I ran into a brick wall on Ancestry I would go to F/S and invariably find what I had been looking for. The sight in its current format is of no use to me.

      Tom Kenah 13 May 2011
      3:10 pm
    842. I all...I really appreciate that this service is free and has much better information then the ones Im paying for. At did. The new filters are terrible. Way to broad. Its way to difficult and time consuming. I have a lot of specific information that I could use to filter it down, but there is no place to put it. Spouse, Parents and Children filters would really help as would exact locations of births etc. When you get a filter like Canada, USA, Mexico...its kind of crazy when youre looking for John Thomas. Thanks for the effort but the old way was much much better.

      Kim Thomas 13 May 2011
      2:12 pm
    843. I apologize for complaining but the new format is WAY short of the friendly older one. Please fine-tune this one. Thanks.

      Dwight 13 May 2011
      2:08 pm
    844. I have been reading some of the comments, and I would like to most...the new site is much less user friendly than before Why is that?? I cant get the search engine to find something that should be there I think you have too many cooks spoiling the broth as the saying goes MAKE IT SIMPLE

      Alice A. 13 May 2011
      1:53 pm
    845. I used the site yesterday May 12, 2011 and it worked fine, today it doesnt work at all. What gives?

      Patsy Snider 13 May 2011
      11:43 am
    846. I absolutely cannot make this site work for me. Your directions do not work. After reading a lot of the comments it seem that most people think your site stinks. I found it thru Kim Komando and I will certainly tell her to stop recommending it. What a waste of my time.

      Phyllis 13 May 2011
      8:03 am
    847. I dont know whats happened, but I preferred the old way... this one doesnt come up to scratch. I cant find marriage records. Please change back as it was much easier to use. Thanks.

      Rose 13 May 2011
      5:24 am
    848. I absolutely loved the Pilot search for Quebec.... now I cant seem to find the books

      Sue Duhaime 12 May 2011
      9:39 pm
    849. I emailed them my concerns months ago. It is terrible to work with. I have bookmarked the old site. Here it is for anyone that wants to use that. Once in awhile it will automatically go to the new site. If that happens, just refresh your page. Hopefully, they wont shut that site down now. Ive found hundreds of documents on the old site and maybe 3 on the new. Its impossible to search for anything. Link to old site below http//

      Nancy 12 May 2011
      8:48 pm
    850. Cumbersome as it was, I much preferred the old system Why make changes when its not for the better???

      Marilyn 12 May 2011
      4:09 pm
    851. No, this is definitely a real step back from the Pilot Search The only way to see in what parish a baptism etc took place is to click on each individual record. By using so much of the screen for the filters, you have reduced the amount of info available on the list for each record. Please think again, this is a bad piece of screen design, and in the meanwhiles please give back the option of using the pilot search

      Clive B 12 May 2011
      3:30 pm
    852. Please may we have spouse and parent filters back ? Currently more difficult than Beta to use

      Angela 12 May 2011
      12:46 pm
    853. I cannot find my birth, my marriages(2). I do not exist. I was born in 1930 and my birth was not recorded at that time. I got a birth certificate in 1987, which required a lot of paperwork, but it seems I ought to exist somewhere.

      Catherine Lanford 12 May 2011
      9:03 am
    854. I loved the old beta program, but I have been working with the new one for months. Each improvement doesnt seem to help. The filters are way to broad and alot of the information I found on the pilot program are just gone. The new search keeps displaying disabled and I have to log out and start over. I am an indexer and work very hard to help with this project, but it seems my efforts are only adding more information that cant be found by others.

      Diana 12 May 2011
      8:23 am
    855. The old IGI Individual Records gave details of where the information had come from in the Message area - ie usually either Extracted from local sources or Record submitted by a member - I always had much more confidence in the Extracted records as they were seemingly the result of an activity to capture complete Parish Records - whereas the Submitted records sometimes seemed to be the result of assumptions made by the submitter. On the new system it looks like the Indexing project batch number is the only way to identify Extracted (as opposed to Submitted) records - can anyone confirm that this is the case? Would it be possible to include the IGI Message data in the new system?

      tom parker 12 May 2011
      7:40 am
    856. If this was my site, Id be rushing to improve the new search and work with my Patrons.I presume from the anonymous postings here that the code makers on this site ARE reading these comments. So far all they have achieved is to make the filters WORSE. Everytime you change something it must re-search automatically and display a lot of useless results. What a waste of time and traffic back and forth. Its laborious, slow, complicated and frustrating. You want to make it better? Scrap this mess and go back to what did work and analyse why. Please.

      Stella Ellis 12 May 2011
      3:37 am
    857. I have been having extreme difficulty with the new update. The old version allowed me to search the census with such ease. I cant find my families that were previously available. I also find that the system freezes and I am unable to proceed as I had before. Is it possible to return the version which was before this one. I try to work in the program searching ancestors each day and qualifying them for temple ordinances. Now I can spend hours and not come up with any information, very discouraging.

      Jan 12 May 2011
      12:45 am
    858. If the system is unchanged, despite all the comments above, why should I bother.......

      ian. 11 May 2011
      11:13 pm
    859. I agree that this site is now much more difficult to navigate and find the information you want. It freezes frequently and I have to stop even though Ive got a promising lead.

      Barb 11 May 2011
      8:46 pm
    860. You have almost destroyed the usefulness of your site. Your categories are meaningless as they show the same results whatever the category is supposed to be. Just give us a good old list to sort through on our own. You are not the ones to determine what is pertinent and what is not!

      Barbara Mills 11 May 2011
      7:44 pm
    861. Keep it improving.It helps us a lot in finding our ancestors.

      Emmanuel A. Neo 11 May 2011
      6:15 pm
    862. I like the new system very much. It helps us where to find our ancestors, especially those from foreign lands.New knowledge and wisdom came to our minds as we search our ancestors in the new system.Keep it improving.

      Emmanuel A. Neo 11 May 2011
      6:11 pm
    863. I find this new method more time consuming. With all the new changes made, it also made it more difficult to zero in on a particular subject without falling asleep or going temporary blind. Dont get me wrong because I too am grateful for the opportunity to search for my genealogical past But this method is aging me before my time. Perhaps a little more of the KISS method of logic in your brain storming would be put to better use in making it a little easier for us users as a whole i.e., when looking for a Baker in the USA, one does not need 200 pre additional pages from the UK, Scotland, etc., etc.

      Pat 11 May 2011
      5:40 pm
    864. I miss being able to insert relevant information like parents etc but what has been bugging me since loosing the IGI results is the slowness of getting results. Then when I strike lucky with some results after putting in a name, place (if I know it) and year and if there is a whole host of records, I can get no further than the first page. The surround appears to cover the next buttons. My next gripe is the pages keep freezing. Or it takes an age to find any records. Personally the old system was superb and fast and being from the UK the only thing I would of changed was an option of giving more information, like the county/town to narrow down the results, if needed. Also I used to find it useful to be able to copy and paste the information on a page. Now when you try to copy and paste there is so many unnecessary lines from the bottom of the page from the word ‘Learn’ onwards, comes up after the information required when you paste it. Well that is what happens on my computer and I am using Windows XP. In fact for me to be able to send this message I have had to go and use a laptop which is working on Windows 7. Has the send button is not working and has not for over a week. I do not wish to sound ungrateful for all the hard work you must put into running this site and allowing us to retrieve the information that is so valuable to us family researchers but it would be nice to have an easier method. Just a suggestion:- I would dearly like to see the actual original record. An option which does not appear available for UK records. Has human beings we can all make mistakes but I know from experience that sometimes your information is not correct. By actually seeing the document would enable us to decide if it is a transcribing error be it just a genuine mistake or the document is difficult to read alternatively if the document hold an error from other evidence and for it to be reported and corrected if it is in fact a transcribing error. Thank you for giving us a chance to voice our opinions.

      JeanB 11 May 2011
      3:00 am
    865. THis new site is awful - even when it is working Having to enter new data in DETAIL each time one wants to do a search is such a slow process. It frequently goes on strike and wont work - displays the following Unable to display togerther with a small revolving disc. I eventually have to log off, try again, log off, try again, etc. The previous lab system was terrific

      Ruth Cooper 10 May 2011
      10:41 pm
    866. Estoy aprendiendo y me ugsta este sistema

      Damiana Aguilera 10 May 2011
      9:37 pm
    867. I dislike this new format of search filters. I liked the searching on labs the best. Then I learned sorta how to use the new beta site and this new filters are just terrible. Should have left a good thing alone. Terrible, terrible, Terrible

      Kathy 10 May 2011
      12:02 pm
    868. I agree with everyone who has negative comments about the new search. Its terrible ( Old search was so much easier to use. Now, when I want to find an ancestor, its impossible as I get records for foreign countries and... records for the United States it used to show me are no where to be found. This new system is just too complicated. Where did all the United States Federal Census records go?? I cant even find a listing for our own Countrys Census records by year. I used to be able to find some of my ancestors at Family Search that I couldnt find in search of the Federal Census Records. THIS IS NOT A USER FRIENDLY SITE ANYMORE. As they say, when its not broken, dont fix it. PLEASE.... BRING BACK THE OLD SEARCH THE WAY IT WAS. Dont think Ill be using this site much anymore. Even Ancestry.coms search is easier than this mess and Ive been a World Deluxe subscriber to Ancestry since 2000. THIS NEW SYSTEM MAKES IT EASIER FOR WHOM, CERTAINLY NOT A PERSON TRYING TO SEARCH. IF PEOPLE WHO MADE COMMENT AS TO NEW SEARCH IS WONDERFUL, OBVIOUSLY YOUVE NEVER SEEN OR USED THE OLD SEARCH. Put site back the way it was, had no trouble searching, now this site stinks

      Annmarie Christian 10 May 2011
      11:28 am
    869. I have found my great grandmother and great grand father thanks so much for this incredible service to find our relatives and family.

      Lidice A. Candelario Matos 10 May 2011
      10:26 am
    870. I miss being able to insert relevant information like parents etc but what has been bugging me since loosing the IGI results is the slowness of getting results. Then when I strike lucky with some results after putting in a name, place (if I know it) and year and if there is a whole host of records, I can get no further than the first page. The surround appears to cover the next buttons. My next gripe is the pages keep freezing. Or it takes an age to find any records. Personally the old system was superb and fast and being from the UK the only thing I would of changed was an option of giving more information, like the county/town to narrow down the results, if needed. Also I used to find it useful to be able to copy and paste the information on a page. Now when you try to copy and paste there is so many unnecessary lines from the bottom of the page from the word ‘Learn’ onwards, comes up after the information required when you paste it. Well that is what happens on my computer and I am using Windows XP. In fact for me to be able to send this message I have had to go and use a laptop which is working on Windows 7. Has the send button is not working and has not for over a week. I do not wish to sound ungrateful for all the hard work you must put into running this site and allowing us to retrieve the information that is so valuable to us family researchers but it would be nice to have an easier method. Just a suggestion- I would dearly like to see the actual original record. An option which does not appear available for UK records. Has human beings we can all make mistakes but I know from experience that sometimes your information is not correct. By actually seeing the document would enable us to decide if it is a transcribing error be it just a genuine mistake or the document is difficult to read alternatively if the document hold an error from other evidence and for it to be reported and corrected if it is in fact a transcribing error. Thank you for giving us a chance to voice our opinions.

      JeanB 10 May 2011
      7:43 am
    871. GIve us back the way it was, please.

      Jane 09 May 2011
      9:07 pm
    872. I find the new search system impossible to use. I thought the new site would be even better than the previous one, but for me its useless. It just says Unable to display results. Can someone from LDS please tell me why?? Youve ruined a perfectly good system. I didnt think one had to have a PhD in IT to be able to find ones ancestors. PLEASE MAKE IT EASY TO USE

      Annie 09 May 2011
      8:45 pm
    873. While I am pleased with the additional information on the Beta site, I always find myself going back to the traditional site as I seem to have better luck there. The data needs to be better integrated, with easier to use search filters. In particular, make it easier for me to limit my search to the IGI or the Pedegree Resource File when I go into the Beta.

      Emile 09 May 2011
      6:35 pm
    874. Does anyone know how one accesses the digital image once one has the image number? What is the emureration District? What is the Family number? from a US census? NARA Publication? What am I able to see with these data points and how do I find it? Many thanks

      elizabeth 09 May 2011
      12:22 pm
    875. do not know what all the complains are about. I have found more informaton on family members using the Beta search in one morning of search than I did for months using the old version . PLEASE KEEP AS IS.

      Eva 09 May 2011
      11:48 am
    876. Dislike the new format. Can no longer search by exact birth date and who wants to spend hours looking at page after page trying to find the correct date of birth. I can only search the 1800's or 1900's. That does not narrow it down much. This used to be a great site but not any longer. What a shame.

      Pat 09 May 2011
      9:21 am
    877. It seems that the Tost family from Georgetown/Hamilton Ontario simply does not exsist, YET I know we ARE. Anyone with any info on my family please forward to me. Am becoming frustrated with the no records popping up. Thanks so Much Carol Tost

      carol sue tost 09 May 2011
      5:29 am
    878. I have never been so disappointed with a site I used the Beta site when you were making the change and found it very good indeed but now I have to agree with the 98% of people who dislike this new search engine Like everyone else I cannot find previously found ancestors even though I have persevered for 10 days getting to know the site and its idiosyncrasies. What do we have to do to get you to revert to the Beta site - if you keep this search facility no-one will be using it in a couple of months time? But then as it is free it will be no loss to you just us amateurs

      Famagusta 09 May 2011
      3:20 am
    879. Why cant the filter also still be for spouse and parent names along with the person you are looking for ?? Found alot of people that way

      Robin Amerson 08 May 2011
      5:21 pm
    880. i dont understand this newscreen search i cant find any of the people that were there before. joanl

      08 May 2011
      4:53 pm
    881. Why cannot we have Parish Batch searching like on the original IGI site which still works thank goodness

      Stanley Archer 08 May 2011
      3:56 pm
    882. Why would anyone pay for a premium upgrade when informed there is no available results?

      Thomas Hackett 08 May 2011
      3:15 pm
    883. The people with the negative comments must be thick (as well as ungratefull given that this is a free service). The new filters are a huge improvement and if used correctly can condiderably reduce the time spent sifting through records. Stick with the program LDS!

      Nigel 08 May 2011
      2:50 pm
    884. All these negative people must be thick (and ungrateful given that it is a free service). The new site is much more efficient at homing in on a specific individual. The filters save a huge amount of time. Stick with it LDS

      Nigel 08 May 2011
      8:57 am
    885. Thank goodness I found massive amounts of info before you switched to this new format. Now I cant even find information that I found three years ago. This new format is cumbersome and unwieldy to say the least. Even the pilot format is better.

      fbragg 08 May 2011
      8:04 am
    886. Im new to this site and Im finding the same problems that are mentioned by the others who are posting comments about difficulty researching. I should be able to find the relatives that Im seeking but this system is unable to find information on any of them.

      Marian 08 May 2011
      6:36 am
    887. You can access the previous version. On the bottom right of your start page, just click on the link Use previous version. It works for me. And I do agree, the previous version was much better.

      Roxane 08 May 2011
      5:32 am
    888. Does anybody know what site is most like the old one? When I find it I will be spending my time over there because this site is about useless now. From one of the best sites to one of the worst sites. So sad. I would hate to be the project lead on this fiasco.

      Bill Ewing 08 May 2011
      12:00 am
    889. Can not believe how this update went in such the wrong direction. Is anybody finding this better? Am I missing something or is it not possible to modify a search such as a letter in a name or change the state? Do the developers use this program? What am I missing? If they dont want people to use this site then just shut it down and not waste everybodys time. Does any body know which site is most like the old one here because I will be spending my time on there from now on. What a loss.

      Bill Ewing 07 May 2011
      11:55 pm
    890. Must agree with the majority. Each time you upgrade it gets harder to use. Tighter controls of what we can find until it becomes unbearable to use. Am sure some improvements were needed but we dont need more roadblocks.

      JIM 07 May 2011
      10:59 pm
    891. ick

      07 May 2011
      6:37 pm
    892. not happy at all with this at all

      Maureen 07 May 2011
      6:22 pm
    893. I think you have messed up a perfectly good search program. I used to be able to find most of what I needed, now it takes HOURS I just get disgused and turn off the search window. Why fix something that isnt broken? LaVeren Jean Wildt-Fort Worth,Texas

      LaVerne Jean Wildt 07 May 2011
      4:10 pm
    894. This new program is a disaster The former program was so simple and effective-- so why did you ruin a good thing?

      D Rietz 07 May 2011
      4:09 pm
    895. I have to agree with what seems like 98% of users you have ruined what was a perfectly good easy to use informative site.I am now unable to find anyone not even the ones previously found, I was doing so well and now I can get nowhere.PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE bring back the former site. Why oh why don't Family Search listen to their users, do they want us all to go elsewhere? or is it just a case of 'this is what we have done TOUGH!!' I am fed up with seeing 'unable to display results'. Come on Family Search, change it back, if its not broke don't mend it, before your users vote with their feet

      Jenny Worcesrershire 07 May 2011
      2:27 pm
    896. I dont understand why everyone I enter comes out as can not display results. I had heard this was a great sight but I must be doing something wrong.

      Gloria 07 May 2011
      2:15 pm

      TERRY 07 May 2011
      1:37 pm
    898. If unable to display was an ancestor of mine, this would be a great program.

      Ron 07 May 2011
      1:28 pm
    899. I am having lots of trouble as Im looking for a death record and dont know the married name. I like when I can leave a surname off and add each parents name and be able to find someone. I also miss the old IGI.

      Diane 07 May 2011
      1:24 pm
    900. I am so pleased to see I am not the only one finding this site impossible to use Having been given new info from relatives & thus able to add more detail to searches I assumed it would be easy to find what I wanted, but.......all the families previously located have now disappeared No results is the norm. So sad, as this was my favourite site. I have also enumerated thousands of records for FS & wish they had been put to better use Please either revert to the old system or let us choose between both

      Carol 07 May 2011
      12:02 pm
    901. I have to agree with what seems to be like 98% of bloggers what used to be a very informative easy to follow site has been TOTALLY RUINED! I used to be able to find lots of family members now I am unable to find anyone not even the ones I had found before. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE BRING BACK THE OLD SITE. Is it too much to ask that Family Search actually listen to their users or is it just another case of 'this is how it is, tough!' do they not want us all to use their site? I was getting on so well now I dont know what I am going to do

      Jenny Worcesrershire 07 May 2011
      10:32 am
    902. I hate this new system. keeps saying unable to retrive results, what good is this site if you cant get results?

      Carol Fredette 07 May 2011
      9:41 am
    903. As a longtime genealogist, I would love to have the old IGI made available again - maybe as a separate entity. This new format is fabulous for some searches, but a nightmare for some others. Seems like just making the IGI also available wouldnt be such a hard thing.

      Kathy Beals 07 May 2011
      9:23 am
    904. Am unable to find anything. To be sure it wasnt me doing something wrong, I typed in a name I had used a couple weeks ago and found great information. Nothing this time. Everytime a computer program is improved is is ruined. The new system is totally useless. Every search after waiting quite a few seconds comes back Unable to display results. What a disappointment.

      Carol Rosser 06 May 2011
      8:15 pm
    905. This is a terrible disappointment. I am used to getting quick results, now all I get is...unable to display results. Isnt that just wonderful???? Pitiful, pitiful mess you have made of a wonderful site.

      Mary 06 May 2011
      8:07 pm
    906. I need to Hoock up to my to the enturnet website

      nichole 06 May 2011
      7:15 pm
    907. I have to agree with EVERYONE else. the new search version is lousy. I used to be able to find all kinds of records. Now I cant find anything. Please bring the old way of searching back.

      Simone 06 May 2011
      4:30 pm
    908. I can't find anything on the new site. Your first version of the new site was much easier to navigate and the old old site, which is still available to me is easy as well. Also, I can't even sign in anymore. Very frustrating.

      MBranton 06 May 2011
      2:20 pm
    909. I'm glad I'm not the only one having trouble getting displays! How can this be solved? I've been using FS for years now, but now it is not working very well! Please work out the bugs or return to the previous program until they're gone :(

      Sandy Virtue 06 May 2011
      2:11 pm
    910. I used your "old" system for many years. I had no complaints at all and was very happy with the search system and the lists brought up for my examination. I loved the IGI that brought up families. That is how I know if I have the right Adults.. by the children, by the household group! That was so helpful because it gave me more people to 'work' on. I'm so disappointed at the system now. Life was still good when you had the choice.. old or new.. and I took them both sometimes but always started with old because it was more likely to find what I was looking for. I hope this isn't the end of your improvements because right now an improvement would be to go back to 'choice' of old and new and believe me old would win if there was a vote.

      Mary 06 May 2011
      2:02 pm
    911. I am sitting here with SIX Unable to display results in front of me. I have used this site for countless hours and NEVER did that appear. This is just horrible. I am so upset, I could just scream. Why did you do this???? PLEASE PUT THINGS BACK THE WAY THEY WERE....remember THE ENEMY of GOOD is BETTER. THis site truly illustrates this saying. What a mess

      Mary Conley Riedy 06 May 2011
      1:12 pm
    912. Yo, it's me again. I took a break for several days after posting my last message expressing utter dissatisfaction. Came back today and tried one more time to see if Family Search has trashed their new improved filtering system and gone back to the system that was working. What a sad disappointment for me. I was consumed with Hope that Family Search would listen to it's users' pleas for Mercy but looks like that is Wishful Thinking. However, I did notice about 2% of the bloggers here profess that this is a tremendous improvement (still scratching my head over that). I guess some people have lower expectations than I. Sorry, but I got spoiled by the older system that worked so well every single time I came here. In the past two weeks I have not been able to retrieve a single document from this site. What a pitiful loss. Good luck to You All. And when you get tired of wasting your time here trying to figure out the Family Search mess .... come on over to Footnote or Ancestry. Sure, it costs money but most stuff you see offered to you for FREE is likely the lowest quality available and couldn't be sold if they tried. The choice is yours .. stay here and bawl at the blog where your voice falls on deaf ears or go to a website that enjoys your service and actually listens to you. Those of you who like change .... please, please, please stay here at Family Search. That loud noise you just heard was a slamming door and me getting back to some serious research at Ancestry. God Bless You All. You'll need it.

      nate parrish 05 May 2011
      5:52 pm
    913. After using the old site for printing out all my family records, I find the new site does not have the same, simple printouts. Now I get to run off all new individual and family pages so they are uniform. Wish you would bring back the old site. It was so much earier to use Why did you try to fix something that wasnt broken?

      Carol T 05 May 2011
      5:33 pm
    914. please go back to the other way-so much simpler-I like going into census records and pulling up the date of census I want, please go back, or give us the choice of the new and the old

      linda renfro 05 May 2011
      5:30 pm
    915. I like the old way-when I could choose census records, or the marriage death, with the census I could go directly to the census date I wanted

      linda renfro 05 May 2011
      5:28 pm
    916. This new system is a mess I cant even get signed in, no matter how many times I try..It doesnt even let me enter my user name & password. This so called new & improved system makes everything extremely difficult

      Karen 05 May 2011
      3:11 pm
    917. I dont like this format at all...I cannot find anything that I need since it will not give you the options to choose and get the amount of information as before .

      Elizabeth Bedford-shea 05 May 2011
      2:55 pm
    918. I am trying to find information on my older twin sister Muriel olive who died 10 days after birth, her twin was Margaret rose miller born 23rd november 1947 survived, I was born marilyn jean miller on 8th july 1949 all were born at 46 nicolson street Edinburgh.

      lynletham 05 May 2011
      1:33 pm
    919. For shame introducing untested searching & filtering on the main site. I did three simple searches that Ive done many times before -- that worked quickly even on the beta & pilot sites -- but for three times, I got the message unable to display results, after a loo-o-n-n-n-g wait. Put the old search back on the main page until the bugs are fixed. PLEASE

      Gord Hines 05 May 2011
      12:20 pm
    920. On Friday April 27th FamilySearch released a new version of the website and search tools. This release provides one of the top patron requests, the power to filter search results by collection, event date and places, and gender. In analyzing patron feedback over the last few days we have identified two specific issues that appear to be the cause of many patron complaints. An issue in the data prevented many of the records and collections from being searched (results that were returned Wednesday were just not returned on Thursday). We also identified issues that generated "Unable To Display Results" errors. Both of these were unrelated to the new filtering feature and have been fixed in an updated release we made yesterday. Based on patron feedback, we also moved the previously available collection filter tool to the top of all the other filters and renamed it to make it clear that you can filter your results by "Collection."

      Anonymous 05 May 2011
      9:50 am
    921. System needs tweeking... I cant get images either

      Robin 05 May 2011
      9:46 am
    922. This site has been a great help

      Brenda Beasley 05 May 2011
      8:52 am
    923. www, Discover Your Family History was better before the online meetings were held to include Filter You Results. Prior to this the first name I entered brought up the 1990 census. Once Filtered was installed, the census record vanished replaced by an incorrect record. One problem with the system is bringing up a possible record and having to pay Footnote or another pay site for access to family records

      Mel 05 May 2011
      8:06 am
    924. NO, NO and NO to the new system. My great Grandmother is Jimmie Cassie Tillman. She has completely disappeared from your files under the new search system. (Putting it does not work.) Even when I go back to the supposed old search version up top now, I still can not find her and she was easily found before. You really need reset the system back to the old one....and I dont mean to just use the old version you have up top now...because you have obviously changed the search algorythm, and it is missing many vital records now when searches are don. Very, Very Frustrating

      K Holmes 05 May 2011
      6:55 am
    925. What I thought was a brilliant site, user friendly, informative etc., is now just simply AWFUL. Why is it that what I COULD find and access before the great and wonderful change is now GONE or so deeply HIDDEN in the archives it might as well be gone. Theyve lost me

      Jacqui 05 May 2011
      6:13 am
    926. I am new to this family tree thing and I love discovering relatives I never knew I had. However, I agree with a lot of the comments. I prefer the old system and constantly refer to it for ease of use. The simpler the better. However old and new alike, it does frustrate me that when I specifically key in a name and a country - in this case - Scotland, I have to scroll through everything until I find what I want. Why cant the system be more country specific in its searching. Please do something about it as your site is one of the best - dont get too technical.

      Lorna 05 May 2011
      4:27 am
    927. Please bring the old version back,this new one makes searching for a specific event harder.

      Ruth 05 May 2011
      3:16 am
    928. It is bewildering that you have replaced an efficient, quick and reliable data source with a barely moving, non productive system. I wasted far too much time for absolutely nil return. I cannot understand what you have done and why you have done it.

      Ann 04 May 2011
      11:03 pm
    929. You had a fantastic screen search. Why change a good thing. Follow the old saying if it works, dont fix it. Too much wasted time & at times confusing. What mental minion came up with this idea??? It should be fun to research. Please go back to the previous programs

      Lou Di 04 May 2011
      7:34 pm
    930. why do I have to read all the names of England, France and so on when I am interested In Germany Dont like

      Manfred Heymann 04 May 2011
      7:07 pm
    931. Names i have found last year, dont even show up anymore. New system no good

      Manfred Heymann 04 May 2011
      7:03 pm
    932. With this new design youre forcing people to wade through all births from a decade, in my case 402, instead of being able to look at a few pertinant records. Im not saying to scrap the new system, but you really should consider allowing those of us who know EXACTLY what we want to ask for it instead of drilling down. It simply takes too long when one has a common surname to research.

      Theresa Griffin 04 May 2011
      6:27 pm
    933. I miss being able to insert relevant information like parents etc but what has been bugging me since loosing the IGI results is the slowness of getting results. Then when I strike lucky with some results after putting in a name, place (if I know it) and year and there is a whole host of records, usually I can get no further than the first page. The surround appears to cover the next buttons. My next gripe is it the pages keep freezing. Or it takes an age to find any records. Personally the old system was superb and fast and being from the UK the only thing I would of changed was an option of giving more information, if you had it, like the county/town to narrow down the results if needed. Also I used to find it useful to be able to copy and paste the information on a page now. Now when you try to copy and paste there is so many unnecessary lines come up after the information required when you paste it. Well that is what happens on my computer. I do not wish to sound ungrateful for all the hard work you must put into running this site and allowing us to retrieve the information that is so valuable to us family researchers but it would be nice to have an easier method. Just a suggestion. I would dearly like to see the actual original record. Has human beings we can all make mistakes but I know from experience that sometimes your information is not correct. By actually seeing the document would enable us to decide if it is correct or there has been a transcribing error be it just a genuine mistake or the document is difficult to read or if the document hold an error and for it to be reported and corrected if it is in fact a transcribing error. Thank you for giving us a chance to voice our opinions.

      Jean 04 May 2011
      5:53 pm
    934. Theformer format you had a few weeks ago to look things up was much better than the way you have it set currently. We had more choices for census dates and such where now it is so very limited. The choices are not very good. So disappointed. Looking for other sites since this one is not friendly anymore.

      Cathy 04 May 2011
      4:14 pm
    935. Sorry, really liked the old design much better. I miss being able to just type in relevant data like spouse names, etc.

      Heather 04 May 2011
      11:21 am
    936. Can find ABSOLUTELY NOTHING I am looking for on my dad. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

      Kathleen 04 May 2011
      9:45 am
    937. There is no record ANYWHERE of my fathers birth, where he lived growing up or his mother or when she became a widow, what happened to records with her old married name when she RE-MARRIED when my dad was still a baby? WHERE do I find such records? I cant seem to get any information on my dad OR his half brothers

      K. Kenepp 04 May 2011
      9:43 am
    938. I do not like the new system way too confusing

      LouAnn 04 May 2011
      6:18 am

      PAULINE 04 May 2011
      5:33 am
    940. Oh dear me, documents I was able to access under the old system, and copy - the new system say do not exist - I find this odd - distrubing and annoying. You had a wonderful Free system going for which I shall be eternally grateful - but now I am totally stuck - even my grandfather 1850 - not there anymore.

      Elizabeth 04 May 2011
      5:17 am
    941. Absolutely nuts - someone had to be to make those changes. It's as if a virus or worm was inserted into the program to thwart our every move. I used to write code and I can make most anything work, but not this gem.

      David 03 May 2011
      10:37 pm
    942. What did you guys do? This is worse than the new Coke fiasco Absolutely insane. Please reverse whatever was done.

      David 03 May 2011
      10:32 pm
    943. I am really struggling to get this to work for me. I am ready to give up. I am not able to pull up other records I have found before. I do not feel this is conducive to doing the work. It makes me want to quit because of the frustration levels. It also stops working all together and doesnt even display the most basic of information. It just stops. Sometimes it resets itself to the previous search not using the new search information I have typed in. Its strange.

      Cindy 03 May 2011
      8:10 pm
    944. Why did you change a good search system? The old one was way better. Please change it back.

      Art 03 May 2011
      6:44 pm
    945. I agree with Barb and Cheryl Malone. There was a document I found before that I cant find now. And, it slows the system down, you can tell with the scrolling, its slow to scroll. Id like to be able to use the old search again

      Gizru 03 May 2011
      6:30 pm
    946. I am totally lost, i cant find anything i used to before. what have you done to family search

      Lew Bunnell 03 May 2011
      6:09 pm
    947. Poor design. I don't like the new look. It's cumbersome and confusing. Too much scrolling up & down for no good reason.

      Marie Sandvig 03 May 2011
      5:46 pm

      LAVARRE DALEY 03 May 2011
      4:22 pm
    949. Im with everyone else on this one. Where did all the old records go? Just change it back. The old adage applies. If its not broke, dont fix it.

      Robyn Barnes 03 May 2011
      4:17 pm
    950. It would be very helpful if you could add a search criteria for Spouse Name and Parent Names, like the old system. When the party we are researching has a common name, that would help. Sometimes we know family names that would help locate records. Thanks

      sue fister levine 03 May 2011
      4:12 pm
    951. I dont like this new version. Cant find anything that I found before, and cant find anything new. Its horrible to use. Please bring back the old way. Thank You

      Joan Schramm 03 May 2011
      2:09 pm
    952. the new familysearch systen is very confussing, the old system was the best and was easy to use, in the new system I cant seem to find the census records, how do I find the census records ?

      David McElfresh 03 May 2011
      1:57 pm
    953. DO NOT like this version at all. Please return to old version. This is so much more difficult to use.

      Jeff 03 May 2011
      12:18 pm
    954. Need to be able to zero in on certain records, such as 1920 US Census

      Dorothy 03 May 2011
      11:36 am
    955. Was much easier when one could go straight to the census filters

      jane 03 May 2011
      9:06 am
    956. [please return to old format

      jan 03 May 2011
      4:37 am
    957. This is to complicated for me. I found a death for 1829 under the old IGI search and now trying to find it again for more information and it has vanished Can we please have at least the option to go back to the old version?

      Rosemary 03 May 2011
      1:37 am
    958. Please change it back. It was VERY easy to use before. It isn't easy any more!

      Barb 02 May 2011
      10:16 pm
    959. I do not like the new format. Things I used to be able to find seem to be gone. I didnt have any trouble narrowing down my search myself. Go back to the old way.

      Barb 02 May 2011
      10:08 pm
    960. I dont like this new search. Its too confusing and time-consuming. There wasnt anything wrong with the way the old search. Why change a good thing? Hope you change it back

      elaine 02 May 2011
      9:22 pm
    961. I dislike, dislike your new website design. You have it hard to search for family members. Please go back. After being on this site for a couple of minutes you want to get off.

      Charlene 02 May 2011
      9:06 pm
    962. This new search has been an absolute headache. I have tried it for a couple months. I must go into my computer on internet options each time I use this site and delete all history and cookies pretaining to this site, and I mean everything. I then must go to the search page I want but only in a certain order will it work. I can bring up a list to look at the images but I must sign in only at that moment, if I goto a name to look and forget to sign in before entering that page, then I must start all over and go back into my computer and erase all history & cookies. Then if I leave my computer for any lenght of time, I must go through this routine again, this happens several times a day. Seems all I get done is trying to sign in. Also it seems to be messing up a lot lately , just saying something about unable to obtain images, won't search correctly, just shows last search I did, or just a blank page. I really like this site, just hope you guys can get it up and going right. Why must you sign in every few minutes?? This is not even working have been trying to post to the comment board for over 20 minutes, but it won't take it.

      Gin 02 May 2011
      8:03 pm
    963. The site freezes up after a couple of searches and doesnt work even after closing the page and starting over again. Liked the old format better. Thank you for all your information though - really appreciate it.

      Betty Rhodes 02 May 2011
      7:12 pm
    964. Under this new format, I am not able to find records previously found (easily) in the past. I am totally confused.

      Nancy 02 May 2011
      6:21 pm
    965. I have tried in good faith to use the updated search, but find that it is more time-consuming and less effective than the previous system. PLEASE rethink this. It was wonderful to be able to search a given census or type of records by itself. My ancestors seem to be the ones who fall through the cracks and the new system does not allow a very thorough search.

      Susan N. 02 May 2011
      5:37 pm
    966. Please create a video on how to use the new filters. You have the information page but a video would be so helpful.

      Margaret Jones 02 May 2011
      4:36 pm
    967. I clicked on the return to old site option only to find myself here and can find no way of going from here to my destination except to go back wards and click on the go to old site option once more. Sometimes this works and I get to where I want to go. Other times it takes me several goes to finally get there. This is most frustrating Please understand - when I click on the go to old site button thats where I want to go I find familysearch so useful but this recent change is really annoying

      Angela Smith 02 May 2011
      3:11 pm
    968. This has been outsourced no doubt or is there the making a big buck plot coming up shortly? If it works why fix it?

      Oldtimer 02 May 2011
      2:18 pm
    969. This new system is much less intuitive for me to use. I cant figure out how to search under specific documents as I used to, and the suggestions for name matches often arent even close to what I was looking for. Sorry, bu you struck out with this change.

      Linda S. 02 May 2011
      1:23 pm
    970. I like the fact that, in some Census records, when I find and click on the name of the person im looking for, the other members of that household are also shown. This feature saves an enormous amount of time. Are there plans to have this available on all Census searches in the future? Thanks

      Rob 02 May 2011
      12:47 pm
    971. Please return it to the old format. I could choose specific areas/states etc. This is not user friendly.

      Jennifer Karony 02 May 2011
      12:16 pm
    972. Please change back to the old format. This one is so confusing and time assuming. It takes forever to try and find information.

      Shirley Price 02 May 2011
      9:29 am
    973. Why cant the search info entered remain on the screen after results, above the filters, like it did before? It is a waste of time, and annoying, to have to click on the arrow to be able to see what was entered and to make any changes to what was entered. I cant think of any valid reason to hide that information.

      A Watkins 02 May 2011
      7:55 am
    974. I like the changes. Once I figured out how to use them (finally read the instructions), it was quicker to find what I wanted to search for.

      Dianna Babcock 02 May 2011
      6:22 am
    975. I really dislike( HATE) the new search filter and find it very limiting. If a person was born in one state and then resided in another I was able to click on records of those states searching for birth, marriage, death etc. It also brought up more variations in names in case the transcriber used an A instead of an O. I found so many records. Now the only option I have is USA ,Canada. Please bring back a separate button for the old search filter. If not I probably will not use the site very often.

      Jeff H 02 May 2011
      5:40 am
    976. although i like the new system i feel the database filters need tweaked ,eg, if i do a search for BMD in scotland it pulls up american, englishand other data despite applying filters. not a critisismor complaint just an observation also cannot seem to get death records for Scotland ?but hey finding the births gives me a start point for my research and can be verified at Register house all in all i prefer this format just hope the filtering issues can be resolved for a free site superb what right do people have to complain if they do not like do not use it, simple

      david turner 02 May 2011
      2:47 am
    977. Your filtering process down the left side is cumbersome and irritating. Scrolling up and down is for the birds. Think about placing all fields within a search box in the top left corner. Having your search box located in one area and 100% on the screen, your patrons then can focus on all the filters and fields without having to scroll. Further, what happened to a multiple land description for christenings, e.g. Weeley, Essex, England or Templecarn, Donegal, Ireland? Proof is in the pudding, and your readers dislike this new filtering system. The older format was user-friendly. The use of parental names in finding possible children was a delight. Think about revamping your search box Lastly, keep the “old search” website up until you have cleaned up this beta system.

      Linda 01 May 2011
      6:03 pm
    978. I am VERY appreciative of the vast amounts of information that I find here. In fact, I find things here that other subscription sites do not even have! But, with all of that said, I am not a fan of this format. It was MUCH easier to just scroll down to the state needed. This format, it seems to me, you would really need to know more SPECIFIC information in order to find what you are looking for. :( UGH. :( :( :(

      Carrie 01 May 2011
      5:08 pm
    979. Please, please, please go back to old format!!

      George 01 May 2011
      4:44 pm
    980. I do not like this new version of searching it only brings up limited information as before I found tons of info on family members. I absolutely do not like this new version and hoping and pleading that you will return it to the old more friendly version.

      Tammy 01 May 2011
      2:35 pm
    981. I dont like it - it is too busy. Why dont you focus on It is a much better search friendly site.

      genealogy105 01 May 2011
      2:17 pm
    982. the new site seems to be okay. Just takes time to click all the places I need ... but am finding it somewhat easier to navigate than I did a few days ago ... sometimes 'filtering' out un-asked for areas is good. I find that if you click on the 'new search' ... you can go back and changes names real easy ... which is what I and others do alot ! Good luck to us all ....................

      Rootsgirl50 01 May 2011
      12:37 pm
    983. Im sorry, but I prefer the old way this is very difficut for me and I dont want to stop my research. Please please

      Liliana 01 May 2011
      11:20 am
    984. please return to the old system made more sense and allways found what i wanted this makes it harder for a silver searcher please return to the old system.

      brian 1 may 2011 410pm 01 May 2011
      9:14 am
    985. Its too confusing. I was having great success with the old style. Now I cant find anything. -(

      jenzroots 01 May 2011
      8:57 am
    986. I don't like this new screen search. This is way to difficult. Bring back the old search.

      Sharon 01 May 2011
      8:19 am
    987. Where did the pictures of the documents go?

      Dianne 01 May 2011
      2:10 am
    988. I too have found the next page button freezes the page however if you hit the page number this does not happen. I have found good and bad with the new format. I have found the Norwegian results brilliant as it gives both birth and baptism dates which makes it easier to find the originals.

      Joan 01 May 2011
      12:14 am
    989. Whoever dreamt up and designed this new search system goofed big time. It was not well thought out. They obviously didnt have the interests of reseachers in mind. The idea is to make things easier, not more difficult and complicated. How about devouting efforts, in future, to adding more records onto the site, instead of wasting time designing new search systems, which are not really needed.

      Milton 30 April 2011
      11:58 pm
    990. please bring back pilot search. very good and easy to use it is difficult enough to find family in u.k. [no accessibility to parish records] i spend hours and get no where .

      jill 30 April 2011
      11:06 pm
    991. Don't like the new filter system - gives too many hits/options and takes forever to go thru them all. This results in spending more time on line - far longer than with the old system. Also do not like the new FHLC printouts - now takes two pages to print what was contained on one page in the original version. Printout includes all 'hidden' information as well. Crazy as a FHC charges 25c a page!

      JO 30 April 2011
      10:23 pm
    992. Dont like the new filter system - gives too many hits/options and takes forever to go thru them all. This results in spending more time on line - far longer than with the old system. Also do not like the new FHLC printouts - now takes two pages to print what was contained on one page in the original version. Printout includes all hidden information as well. Crazy as a FHC charges 25c a page

      JO 30 April 2011
      10:22 pm
    993. The old cliche If it aint broke dont screw with it You did just that I much prefer the old way. As some have said, it was more user friendly. I have a specific way in how I do my searches but trying different combinations of info. The new layout does not allow me do do that in that same way. I have been doing research for almost 40 years so I know what I am doing by now. I have a suggestion Why not provide an option button for both methods. That way you please everybody. One other item, I wish you could provide more copies of the original documents rather than sending us to paid sights. In many instances I would be paying for documents that are useless to me unless I can view all the details. I dont like buying a pig in the pock.

      Con Mobley 30 April 2011
      9:50 pm
    994. I do NOT like the new update for family search. Why did you think by updating the site it was more efficient, but it is not. Most of the time I am timed out or the site is down. Please go back to the old site, it was easier.

      Kay 30 April 2011
      9:42 pm
    995. I liked it much better choosing a census type to look at. I actually found more information that way because most of the spellings and information on my ancestors got recorded incorrectly.

      Tom 30 April 2011
      9:37 pm
    996. I do NOT like the new search. Why did you make the site more difficult??????????? Why cant you leave the site the way it was

      Kay 30 April 2011
      9:35 pm
    997. very annoying. Too time consuming to re-enter search criteria. The old way was much better and easier. The new way takes too much time. Hourglass waits are too long between filter levels. New York results in every search for Alabama records. Much to cumbersome.

      30 April 2011
      8:31 pm
    998. I want to thank you for a great service I trust the people who are behind the scenes on this site, theyve been doing this a long time. For those who do not like the change, there are other avenues out there. Km

      Kathleen M. 30 April 2011
      6:24 pm
    999. This was a REALLY bad idea. I can't figure out how to pick just the collections I want from the results as I prefer. PLEASE revert to the previous version!!

      Michael 30 April 2011
      5:40 pm
    1000. Reading the comments above; right on about the site locking up. If I find a name and try to go to page two to continue my search and the next pages.. No dice.. Locked and says cannot display. Back to the old. I could't find things then and when not finding I figured the info from the area I needed was not on yet. I can't find anything now. Getting very frustrated. And even if I think something is found when I try to go back to it, it's not there..... Sorry was having better luck with the old...

      Marcella 30 April 2011
      3:37 pm
    1001. - R.I.P.

      nate parrish 30 April 2011
      3:29 pm
    1002. I just started to use your program. I find it hard to believe when searching for something like my own name I can not find it. Can something be done to help find who we are looking for.

      Margo 30 April 2011
      3:14 pm
    1003. I do not like new search.

      30 April 2011
      3:01 pm
    1004. Dont like it... telling me there are are results when I am sure of the info (my parents marriage) As many others said, the previous edition was better.

      Gloria 30 April 2011
      2:56 pm
    1005. These are great. I had to read the explanation to see all the functionality - and while it is not quite as easy as the Pilot site, its light years of improvement over the beta site. No problems and these will be a big help to the search for that needle in the haystack. Thanks for the ongoing efforts.

      Patricia Kruger 30 April 2011
      2:42 pm
    1006. I dont care for the new system. I seems like it takes longer to narrow down your results. I wish there was an option where you could chose the new or the old search methods.

      Gsw 30 April 2011
      2:32 pm
    1007. I hate it - it is too busy. Chuck this site & focus on is a much better & friendlier search site.

      genealogy105 30 April 2011
      2:23 pm
    1008. This new system is not user friendly a all. The old one was complicated but at least somewhat useable.

      Jay 30 April 2011
      2:02 pm
    1009. Im all for change, but only when it is needed. In my opinion, there was nothing wrong with the previous search filters. I cant go back and change anything. I feel it is just too limited which limits my search. Perhaps Ill get accustomed to the new look, but I really liked the previous format. I agree with the 4/27/11 post from Melisa.

      Norma 30 April 2011
      1:57 pm
    1010. Please please please let us filter by database. In the pilot, you could select one or many of the different databases that came up in the results. I cannot find that option here anymore.

      Jane 30 April 2011
      1:16 pm
    1011. I agree with all of the above complaints. Please return to the old method................

      Ed April 30, 2011 30 April 2011
      1:06 pm
    1012. I appreciate all the effort made to improve the search capabilities, however but I am disappointed with the new filter boxes. They are in the way and not very helpful. Please return to the previous filters listed below or make the filters more like's.

      Michele 30 April 2011
      12:49 pm
    1013. Is anyone reading the user feedback and comments? Seems the overwhelming majority, myself included, favor the mush easier, much more convenient, better result providing older format. How much more time are you willing to waste on tweaking a program that is not as user friendly or doesnt return the information that is being asked for? LEAVE THE OLD SITE ALONE so those of us who have used it, understand it and LOVE IT will still be able to use it and not the New and IMPROVED(?) system, that by my standards, and the feedback from other users OBVIOSLY DOES NOT WORK

      Brian 30 April 2011
      12:19 pm
    1014. Sorry don't like it! It's too busy. I do love It is your best site - Searching is easy. Dump your other sites & put all the records here

      genealogy105 30 April 2011
      11:12 am
    1015. Do not like the new system. It is not user friendly. Have to use too many filters to get the information looking for. Used to be able to bring up parents and retrieve all the children born to them. I also find the site freezes up and I do have high speed internet. Please go back to the old beta site.

      Barbara 30 April 2011
      10:56 am
    1016. Well, seeing all the negatives, I guess Ill weigh in with a positive. I like it and Im not troubled by having to learn something new. I suspect that many people have a tendency to sound off when they dislike something new, and I often do too, but in this case, I also think this is something I can get used to. And since I often get shown bazillions of hits even when I try to specify some limitations, I like being able to winnow the list in this fashion.

      Tom Seeley 30 April 2011
      8:02 am
    1017. Just doing a search type in Oklahoma and get only Massachusetts returns. Am I doing something wrong? Where is Mass. spelled anything like Ok. ????? Did prefer the old system better guess Ill have to keep tring or try someplace else.

      Doug 30 April 2011
      7:54 am
    1018. I agree with some of the comments. I need to be able to search using parents names (especially when I am looking for stray children) or spouse name. Also I ahve just noticed tah id I select a birth year I cannot then give a death year - I need this to be able to search on both events simultaeneously

      30 April 2011
      7:38 am
    1019. You know the old saying if it aint broke, dont mend it well that certainly applies here. I used to be able to get straight to the info I wanted, now Ive just given up...... again and again....and again. Put it back to how it was - P l e a s e.

      eileen robinson 30 April 2011
      7:33 am
    1020. I very much dislike the new filtered searches and found the older search format much more user-friendly. Every single search I have attempted over the past few days has allowed me to view only a page or two of results before the system locks up and further results page links become unclickable. Several records successfully found before the new system was implemented can no longer be located no matter how I attempt to filter my searches. I appreciate all the work being done to improve the site, but this just simply is not working. Please return to the old search format

      Marilynn 30 April 2011
      6:41 am
    1021. do these people not know how lucky they are to have such a great site it has loads of information at their finger tips and its all FREE i have paid out lots of money to join sites then paid for the certificates .had i discovered your great site before i would have saved a lot of money as i could have got a lot of info and printouts for free . you have a great site i only wish i could just find the last two births to finish my family tree but the luck of the irish i think has run out many thanks geraldine

      geraldine koller 30 April 2011
      3:18 am
    1022. I didnt like the last change because it made it harder for me to search. I like this one even less. I cant find anything now. Please allow us to use the older search. What happened to all of the images of actual documents that we used to be able to see? I would appreciate having them back. Thank you.

      BevA. 30 April 2011
      2:10 am
    1023. Not liking the new filters, they are more difficult to use that the way it was last week.

      Dave 30 April 2011
      12:12 am
    1024. Ha Thank goodness I read the post on how to search by spouse or parent name (by using the Advanced Search)...because I was a little upset when I thought that feature was gone. Now that I know how to do it, the new options make the site even better. Great updates

      LVCP 29 April 2011
      10:51 pm
    1025. Not a huge fan of this system of searching, please return it back to the old way.

      Kurt S 29 April 2011
      10:31 pm
    1026. I like the previous version best. I cant do the search I need in this version

      RMA 29 April 2011
      9:53 pm
    1027. So youre now outsourcing your programing to overseas where they dont understand English? New program is not user friendly, but I think you already know this....please return the old program.

      Cathy 29 April 2011
      8:45 pm
    1028. Definately do not like the upgrade Not user friendly at all...

      Beth 29 April 2011
      8:34 pm
    1029. Hate it

      Carey 29 April 2011
      7:50 pm
    1030. Have just tried to do a search this morning and am very frustrated as I had the old system down pat and I find this new one not so user friendly. I have always promoted your site to other people as being so good - do not think I can do this anymore now - please return to the old system

      Marvin 29 April 2011
      7:36 pm
    1031. Please go back to the previous version. This one is not very user friendly and does not allow for spouse or parents which helped find people I was looking for because of variety of names spellings.

      Barbara 29 April 2011
      7:20 pm
    1032. This new system is not nearly as comprehensive nor as easy to use as the old pilot system. I used to search by parents names and would come up with all the children born to them I also could search for marriages, but cannot with this system. This is completely unworkable and difficult to read, too much data spread over the page, not compact enough to scan the results. When asking for a certain location we get a global result and have to keep drilling down and down again by keystrokes to get to the location asked for in the first place. The old pilot system went directly to the area requested and did not show irrelevant data. I dont understand why our suggestions, requests and comments on what works and what does not are being ignored, seemingly. Thanks for what you are trying to do, but please do not throw away something that worked well for something that does not.

      Karen Dixon 29 April 2011
      7:03 pm
    1033. I absolutly love the fact that the data now prnts on one page. Please keep it this way. The old way printed data on three page which was a waste of ink and paper. I do like the new system though it is still new to me.

      Iris 29 April 2011
      7:00 pm
    1034. This is terrible. Searching is now much more difficult and much more limited. I want to be able to look through the search results and pick the results to review.

      Barbara Mills 29 April 2011
      6:56 pm
    1035. Once again, another step meant to be forward turns out to be the reverse. The original beta site was simple, complete and easily used. The last site, before this change was more difficult but usable. The new, present system is disgusting, difficult and inefficient. Ever heard the saying If it aint broke, dont fix it Believe it

      Mary Ann 29 April 2011
      5:59 pm
    1036. It was much, much easier to find information in your old format. This new system is so frustrating and gets me nowhere.. I agree with the negative comments of all of the above. Bring back ( or at least offer) the old system for those of us who were able to retrieve the information we were searching for.

      mary 29 April 2011
      5:56 pm
    1037. WONDERFUL Everything that was there before is there now and much more. Youve done a wonderful job of updating. This is the best site for finding information--- and FREE. I hope in the future more images will be available.

      Judy Phillips 29 April 2011
      5:20 pm
    1038. Please return to the old system. This new one doesnt work for me.

      Edie Sly 29 April 2011
      3:46 pm
    1039. You have removed the ability to put the name of the spouse in so you can search for marriage licenses. That is what I use you site for. If you are determined to keep this search configuration, please add back the ability to put in spouses name. Otherwise, please go back to the previous configuration. Just last week I taught a class where I showed my students how to use your site. Now my training was for naught and they will have no idea how to do what I taught them. Please fix it.

      Jan 29 April 2011
      3:41 pm
    1040. Something that would be handy would be a little box next to each name that would delete that entry from the list of what was displayed. That way we could narrow down the list of possibles ourselves. Give that some thought please. And thank you for making the effort to try to improve the site.

      Jerry 29 April 2011
      3:17 pm
    1041. this is the first time I have a used the new search system, and i have found it very frustrating and unusable. the advanced search option has taken away the ability to put in names of spouses and exact places, so I have been left with more than 2,000 results to look through. obviously I have given up

      Joanne Davies 29 April 2011
      2:39 pm
    1042. You took something that was very user-friendly and turned it all around where now it is hard as can be to use I like the older form. Please leave the older search form somewhere on the website so us veteran users can find it

      PatL 29 April 2011
      2:23 pm
    1043. Dear Family Search, A friend turned me on to this site about 2mos ago. I just signed up for an account today. Just to test this new format, I have rentered some of the same information , I got from this site 3 days ago. Guess what? The old info wont come up. I was on a roll, I had been finding family I never knew about. Let me give you an Example, I have a great-grand parent named William Joseph, he was married to Lue. I have found them as BIll and Lue, WJ and Loraser. Some really crazy stuff, I had no idea. I know its them, by some other identifing factors. Actually my Great Grandmothers name is Louise. Many of my family members I presume were illitrate.

      iset 29 April 2011
      1:30 pm
    1044. I do not like the new search filters. I prefer the old way.

      Anna 29 April 2011
      1:14 pm
    1045. PLEASE restore the previous search paradigm. This is annoying and practically unusable for me. I want to search, then cherry-pick record sources of interest and a cant figure out how. If you are invested in this because some want it, PLEASE restore the by source filter somewhere.

      Michael 29 April 2011
      1:07 pm
    1046. I think these filters are very useful.

      Judith Lynne Pollock 29 April 2011
      12:35 pm
    1047. I am not a long time user, but have found the new filters most helpful in searching and changing the search. The information about the new system was clear and provided additional information to help me in my search. Thanks

      Paul Bennewitz 29 April 2011
      12:23 pm
    1048. I don't like the new search at all, I much prefer the old search where the search terms are always present and changeable. Sometimes I did need to scroll a lot but when doing general searches it was much easier to select births, deaths, marriages, census records or the like and know where they were from. The new search with filters is very painful to select first the geographic area, then the country, then maybe the state and never the county. At least three separate selections when the old search would just say "New York births" or "New York marriages." At least give us an option to use the old search.

      David 29 April 2011
      12:15 pm
    1049. I definitely liked the old search much better even though I sometimes had to scroll down quite a ways. At least I knew what I was looking at without filtering over and over again to discover the filter doesnt go detailed enough. I like the search parameters always being visible and changeable. In my opinion this is a step backwards.

      David 29 April 2011
      12:02 pm
    1050. It is great you are trying to imporve. But the old web page was not broken. The new format makes researching for unknown child or spouse more difficult. Previously, I could just type in childs surname and possible a state. Then type in what I knew such as fathers name and possible mothers first name. This was a broad search. The list would drop down and suggest birth records, marriages or death records. By making a broad search, I could find more children, marriage and deaths pertaining to the parents. Then there would be a process of elimination. The new method starts at the bottom and goes up. This is difficult to do since ancestors moved around from county to county leaving it a real hunt to locate them. It was helpful for me to start with a broad search and go down. For this reason, I preferred the old web page.

      Marlene 29 April 2011
      9:56 am
    1051. I dont understand what so many people are complaining about. This is a HUGE step in the right direction. It comes close to duplicating the search, followed by narrowing of scope by means of filtering, found in the beta. This is precisely what users on the message boards have been begging for, I think the majority of those who are complaining havent figured out that searching based on parents and/or spouses names is available in advanced search, and that the filtering options are nested (ie. choose USA/Canada/Mexico first, and then individual states appear from which to choose, etc... Like any new application, it will take some users longer than others to come to terms with the changes, but I think overall you guys have done a great job.

      Rick 29 April 2011
      1:40 am
    1052. I dont like this new searching sytem, The old one was easier

      Esther Eustaquio 29 April 2011
      1:21 am
    1053. Okay, where the heck is the search button??????

      29 April 2011
      1:15 am
    1054. You need to get real and get back to the old system-- this one has locked up on me several times and I am fed up with trying to figure out what you think is so wonderful -- I will be searching for anew site. This is a real shame because your site has always been so very reliable , as after nearly seven years of searching and your site being so reliable . I am nearly finished with all of my searching.I like others know that there is records there but when you keep getting things like records are not available , It is very frustrating. and I dont have time for this kind of nonsense.

      carol 29 April 2011
      12:43 am
    1055. I agree with the complaints. I have been bragging about your site to librarians and using it for 90% of my research, and now I cant even go back one page to refine my search. My fields get cleared when I try. Also experiencing lots of unable to display results. I just got used to the december changes and was able to find so much in german records, and actual census pages.

      Barb Castelli 29 April 2011
      12:00 am
    1056. Where is the exact match so you don't get 300 pages of Robert when you are looking for Robina....what happened to the Irish records? It also takes forever to looad pages if it doesn't lock up.....Please put it back to the old way!!!

      Mary 28 April 2011
      10:35 pm
    1057. Thank-you to all the patrons who indicated they were not seeing some results today that they could see yesterday. Based on that feedback we identified an issue with the recent release and were able to promptly fix it. You should be seeing the expected results now. FamilySearch Search Team

      Robert Kehrer 28 April 2011
      10:30 pm
    1058. It was easier to enter places before. We could list Neuburg ( the village, Odessa (the area), Russia (the country). Simple until the engineers get a hold of it. Your new system gave me a filter of Europe. wrong for Russia and so would Asia be wrong. Your system does not seem to search what I put in. If I put in a German name and birthplace Russia, I get people in Germany. I never did enter Germany as a place for my person. The program assumes that. You need a better search engine not a complex set of filters.

      Christina 28 April 2011
      10:10 pm
    1059. I don't like that my search terms are hidden. I make changes to these terms very often, and now I have to take an extra step to see them.

      Rick 28 April 2011
      9:53 pm
    1060. I DONT LIKE IT! i don't like it! I don't Like it! i Don't like It! IDON'TLIKEIT! idon'tlikeit! eyedon'tlikeit! eyedon't likeit1 !itlikedon'tI !ITLIKEDON'TI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDO000000N'TLIIIIIIIIIIIIIKEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT!!!!!!

      Raymond Torres 28 April 2011
      9:48 pm
    1061. I dont like that my search terms are hidden. I make changes to these terms very often, and now I have to take an extra step to see them.

      Rick 28 April 2011
      9:44 pm
    1062. Im trying to learn this new system, so when I put in the names of people I already found in the old one, the new system told me no results ????? Its probably just me. Have you tried the new search yourself? Ill keep trying.

      Cheryl Nonnenmacher 28 April 2011
      8:40 pm
    1063. WHOAAAA ... WHAT HAPPENED? Did somebody hack the site? Is this a joke? I guess all good things must come to an end. What a shame, the site was such a good research tool and now it's been trashed the way Sam's kids did Wal-Mart. Good luck.

      John Thompson 28 April 2011
      8:38 pm
    1064. This new format is horrible. It takes more than double the time to continuously reselect the category every time you change a name search and the pages take forever to show if they even manage to show before they time out. What was wrong with the other format? It was working so well and was timely efficient. Is this what you call an improvement? Please pay attention to all of the complaints that have been posted prior to mine. Thanks but no thanks

      nate parrish 28 April 2011
      8:33 pm
    1065. I was trying to get aquainted with the new system, I found I couldnt achieve the same results with this new search as I could the old. Plugging in the same names and other info as before would not return the same results. I looked for people I had already found on the old search system with no luck on the new. Have you tried it out yourself? Its probably just me, not understanding how its supposed to work. We both need a little tweeking I suspect.

      Cheryl Nonnenmacher 28 April 2011
      8:28 pm
    1066. The newest changes are almost like micromanaging a search with half the search info missing. I like to put in as much info as I can and then narrow down the search results. The new system wants you to be specific and sometimes that wont work if you have little info. I also now cannot get records that I was able to access last week. This was very frustrating when I was trying to help new FHL patrons use the system. This is sooo not user friendly. I also have spoken with the engineers about another problem about the print function on the printed version of an original document. Instead of printing 1-2 sheets, it spits out 5 with unwanted excess info. I can manage to use print screen or manipulate things to get what I need but it is frustrating for those who have little computer knowledge.

      Daryl 28 April 2011
      8:16 pm
    1067. I prefer the old search method. I understand you are trying to make it user-friendly BUT IT WAS FINE BEFORE

      annoyed with new system 28 April 2011
      8:02 pm
    1068. I can find cemetery and naturalisation records for people I am tracking in New Zealand but when I log into this site it can not find any trace of them. Why is this?

      George Mihaljevich 28 April 2011
      7:54 pm
    1069. I will keep trying but I am getting discouraged! It seemed so easy before and now I am finding nothing.

      raymond torres 28 April 2011
      7:48 pm
    1070. I have read the instructions 3 times and still can't quite grasp it. I liked the old site and had great results with it. I will keep trying but I am getting discouraged.

      raymond torres 28 April 2011
      7:40 pm
    1071. I am not fond of the new format. I know change can be difficult but Ive tried the new for a while and I find it combersome and difficult to manipulate. Too sophisticated for users. Please go back to the last edition.

      Mike Armstrong 28 April 2011
      7:34 pm
    1072. Sure wish there was a filter for counties.

      Sister Kitty Burgess Research Support Missionary 28 April 2011
      6:51 pm
    1073. I would really like to peak at the new filters, but... I cannot get to search at all. When I enter a name on the first search page, I get either the oops screen or unable to load message. Then there is also the new screen that pops up and downloads all the index information in one long line of script. I have a dial up service and expect things to be slow, but I do expect it to load eventually.

      marlene 28 April 2011
      5:52 pm
    1074. I was going to try to explain the search I performed, but it was too confusing to write the details. Two words come to mind: DRAWING BOARD.

      Kathleen 28 April 2011
      5:25 pm
    1075. I have all the census data I need and liked being able to click to choose the type of data I wanted (which is what other sites allow you to do.) I'm looking at the new system and just blinking in stunned amazement. I help beginner genealogists and it just seems that the new system is not as user friendly as the previous version. How can I help others when I can barely work it myself?

      Sally M 28 April 2011
      5:23 pm
    1076. This new search engine is AWFUL. I can't find a thing. Yes, I know how to USE it, I can filter out the results using the menus etc, even though I feel that is an unnecessary complication. I like the method applied to the library catalog best. For example, if I'm looking for records for Columbia County, New York, in the library catalog, when I type in "Columbia" the system provides a list of places with "Columbia" in the name. I think just have to scroll down and select "Columbia, New York." MUCH easier than having to constantly drill down to the result I am looking for using this absurd filtering system. AND, if that isn't inconvenient enough, WHERE have all the records disappeared to with this "new and improved" search system? I searched for "Goldsmith" nothing more, no place, no first name, no dates, etc. I received the following response: Historical Records Search all collections 1-20 of 25 results for >Name: goldsmith Some of the results included: Guldsmed Goldschmidboing Goldschnied Or Goldschmid But NONE were the Goldsmiths I should have found in record collections on this site where I have found them prior to the release of this MESS of a "search" engine. PLEASE PLEASE restore the prior search engine...the one that actually WORKED!!

      dlgizzi 28 April 2011
      5:18 pm
    1077. I love it. Faster and more intuitive. But, like all new updates, I am sure there will be glitches here and there until its all done. People, keep in mind what a big change this is and remember that programmers can't think of every single thing. Even my browser updates never go flawlessly. Consider this a beta version and be patient. Thanks so much for the change. It's working great for me!!

      Audrie Livingston Bethke 28 April 2011
      5:01 pm
    1078. I JUST LOVE IT And I am sure that those who are finding it a bit different will be singing its praises too in a few days. Just like a new software update, it takes a tiny slow down for a day or so but then...yikes. It is so much faster. Thank you times 50 I wish tht you would pass on your technology to I always come here to search and then enter my data there. It would be nice to have the two integrated.

      Audrie Livingston Bethke 28 April 2011
      4:54 pm
    1079. The old method has worked extremely well for for a very long time. I have never yet had a serious problem locating the person and the records I wanted to find. The Search Filters features merely makes the search process longer and much more difficult. I don't like it, and I urge you to make the Search Filters feature optional. You have gone to great lengths to fix something that wasn't broke.

      Ted Pasco 28 April 2011
      4:37 pm
    1080. Please restore the original interface as an alternative to the new one. The old one allowed specifying the type of record to look for, like allows, and this is very useful

      Mark London 28 April 2011
      4:23 pm
    1081. I love it Thank you. It is much easier to narrow your searches down now, and I dont find that it is missing anything. If there is trouble doing this, the databases can always be searched as before. Keep up the good work.

      Matthew Mapes 28 April 2011
      4:21 pm
    1082. I got on this today after not using it yesterday. I had been using the old search everyday. I really had much better success with the old one which I was using everyday. This totally discourages me. I was able to find names so quickly before this change happened. The old way I found hundreds of names and matched families. Now its almost a total zero. I been using this for three hours today and its totally frustrating. Please bring back the old one. Please

      Roxanna Cook 28 April 2011
      3:37 pm
    1083. 1). it is a total disaster. I agree with practically every one of the negative comments. 2. My system is frozen on no records found for x, y and z when I know very well that the information is there (because I was able to print them out just last week). How, please do I get even ancester search back? 3. When you are researching a site you work over and over on the same area i.e. a state or a county. With the filtering system you would have to work from the general to the specific over and over and over. there should be a way to easily dive directly on the site for someone and then look for specifics. 4. Please do not start a new system until the bugs are out - at least. 5. I prefer the old system. Please return it to us. Thank you.

      cynthia urfer 28 April 2011
      3:35 pm
    1084. This new system is not working for me!~ Every time I enter a name ... It says record. Which I know is not true! Can you please give us the option of the new or the old system? The Old System was wonderful!

      Mary 28 April 2011
      3:26 pm
    1085. This was a wonderful site Now, you have ruined it Can we not have a choice in the old version or the new?

      Mary Gregory 28 April 2011
      2:51 pm
    1086. Not very helpful, What happened to the spouse & parents search option?

      Rob 28 April 2011
      2:37 pm
    1087. Very disappointed no longer to be able to specify what type of record I wanted to search. has this feature. This is very valuable. Please restore this feature, or let people use the old interface, if they want it. Thanks very much.

      Mark 28 April 2011
      2:20 pm
    1088. I am very frustrated with your site. Its good when it works, what is happening? I have tried using windows, firfox, and now google and it works for a couple of minutes then it says unable to display results, then I have to sign out then sign back in to see if it works or not, you have good information that I cant find anywhere else but its frustrating trying to use your site

      Marian 28 April 2011
      2:12 pm
    1089. I liked the old version a lot better. It was easier to use. I liked being able to click on the Census category to decide which Census I wanted to browse in. I hope that the old version is made available. I found so much information previous to this change. Thank you for all you do.

      Ruth 28 April 2011
      2:09 pm
    1090. I also dont like the new filters. I like the ability to select what type of records I want to search through, which is what allows. You need to add this to the filter list. Please fix this, or at least give us the ability to use the old interface.

      Mark 28 April 2011
      2:05 pm
    1091. Please bring back the old one. I am an old timer and while some new methods are good, this one definitely is not.

      Clara Hill 28 April 2011
      1:54 pm
    1092. Ditto to all of you that are frustrated. I loved the pilot site and then had to deal with the beta site. Just when I thought that the beta site was sort of providing results, now this MESS Seriously? Were you getting complaints about the pilot site? I doubt it. The searches and filters on that site were SO EASY to apply and use. The entry screen was perfect. What is so difficult about just leaving a site alone. Ive read hundreds of comments that people want the pilot site back. Why oh why can we not go back to that exact site? I just dont get it. These new dropdowns are much to cumbersome and the system doesnt seem to be responding. Couldnt get page two to even come up. Are you all just determined to continue to frustrate your users. This site provides SO MANY wonderful records (when it works) and I appreciate what you have to offer us. Believe me, your site (the pilot site) broke down some of my brick walls. Please listen to us.

      Diane 28 April 2011
      1:22 pm
    1093. how can i search for a spouse in a marriage record search? how can we do parents searches etc?

      Sara 28 April 2011
      1:04 pm
    1094. All the finds I had several days ago are unfindable today. Your new search system sure hasnt helped me. it would be nice to have the option to use the old way.

      Paul 28 April 2011
      12:58 pm
    1095. I like the filtering, but I think that the discussed option of keeping the filters in place for new searches should be a must. I would also like to say that it would be really nice for those of us that use your website from secure, home computers (i.e not at a library or a family history center) would *really* like the option to be kept signed in. Its exasperating to find, say, a death certificate, only to be told to sign in yet again in order to see it. Make this an opt-in feature, so that those of us who want it can specifically activate it, and those who dont care, or use from public computers wont find their accounts or search history comprimised.

      Andy Bakerq 28 April 2011
      12:38 pm
    1096. The search form itself will take some getting used to I have no problem with that. The huge problem is that I cannot access even half the records I could yesterday. Why has this changed? I searched for David Black,specifically in Ohio and with a birth year, and was told that no results were found. That absolutely cannot be true. Dont fix something that was working just fine.

      Jessi 28 April 2011
      12:29 pm
    1097. The new search tools require that you know what you are looking for. Unfortunately, in many instances, you know where to search, but not what. Yesterday I was searching through a group of Philadelphia Marriage records. Now I cant even find them. The filters ask for place of birth, and many other data items that are not even in these records. Yesterday I was looking at 25 records. Today I cant get the list below 2,500 Once again, a giant step -- in the wrong direction. You had almost progressed back to the abilities of the original Pilot site, and now you have regressed at least 6 months. I am very disappointed.

      Maury 28 April 2011
      12:26 pm
    1098. Im sorry to say that I am not a fan of your new search filters. Like many of the others who have posted comments, Im unable to find information that I had previously found. I like the ability of throwing a broad net at my research. Ive had real success with that strategy. Narrowing my searches will only make research more difficult. Ive spent several hours this morning trying to find a marriage record that I found in minutes yesterday before the new filters started up. Very frustrating.

      Tim 28 April 2011
      12:23 pm
    1099. The previous version was MUCH better.

      GPGilmore 28 April 2011
      12:23 pm
    1100. I think you had a better system before. This new idea is not working. Not enough imput allowed into the search box.

      Frances 28 April 2011
      12:22 pm
    1101. I find nothing with this new system, It was better before and and even the IGI is better than what is offered at present. Please revert back to something which gives results. This is the pits. However, thank you for trying.

      Frances 28 April 2011
      12:17 pm
    1102. I agree with all of the negative comments that have been made so far. What ever you did I wish you would undo it I am looking for the 1860 census for George Smith, born in 1821 in Philadelphia, PA. I end up with a listing of over 1300. Thats a huge waste of time to have to go through all of those when Im only interested in the census for Philadelphia, PA and not every other state. And what has happened to the birth and death certificates? I had found a few death certificates for family members prior to you changing everything. I didnt think your site was very user friendly before but this is a million times worse. Im no longer looking for a needle in a haystack - Im looking for a needle in a needle stack. Also when I reach the bottom of a page and click for the next page instead of it taking me to the top of the next page Im at the bottom of the next page and I have to scroll up to get to the top.

      Janet 28 April 2011
      12:03 pm
    1103. You have meddled with a fairly decent program. Before you changed, I could sign in and get Death Certificates. Now, you do not even support them (at least thats what you say). The problem gets worse - I cant get a record on any name I enter. The popup standard reply is - no records found for (this name. I absolutely know Ive had results on names that now have no records found. Bad Bad Bad Checking what you want is absolutely ridiculous. I want to see what is available online for an individual in a certain place. I have found fantastic info on my family - now nothing This crazy filter system needs to be flushed This sight is no longer USER FRIENDLY BTW, I am not a novice computer user.

      ellen 28 April 2011
      11:47 am
    1104. This new system is very frustrating. I mainly use the site to find families in U.S. and Canadian censuses, and that is next to impossible.

      Susan 28 April 2011
      11:37 am
    1105. I hate this new search system Its terrible for researchers who want to narrow the results down to specific U.S. or Canadian censuses. This raised my blood pressure.....

      Susan 28 April 2011
      11:30 am
    1106. Do not like the new version at all. The old one was much faster and easier to use and now I dont see how to do a parent search. Please go back to the previous version.

      marylin 28 April 2011
      11:23 am
    1107. Terrible. Was finding a treasure trove of information in the past week, now I can't find any of it again.

      Lynne 28 April 2011
      11:18 am
    1108. The old way was much better -- this one too difficult to use

      Linda 28 April 2011
      11:17 am
    1109. Do not like new system. Was finding a treasure trove of information in the past week. Now I cant find any of it. This is terrible.

      Lynne 28 April 2011
      11:14 am
    1110. The system should allow me to search a category first and then a name if that is what I want to do. Right now I have to enter a name first, and then a category. Not all of the categories are coming up. It is not as user friendly as it was before. Please give the option to go back to the old search engine.

      Chris 28 April 2011
      11:09 am
    1111. Sorry, not a big fan of the newest version. Can we have a choice to opt for the older version?

      Joyce 28 April 2011
      11:07 am
    1112. How do we now view the record itself, i.e., census records?? I think the old version was much easier to navigate through. You could use the titles at the left to filter out what you want and everything was there. Im not sure how to use this but think the old version was better.

      BJ 28 April 2011
      11:07 am
    1113. PARENT & SPOUSE SEARCHING? On the advanced search form, click the Relationship drop down, choose Spouse or Parents and enter the names.

      28 April 2011
      10:36 am
    1114. I was surprised to see the recent changes. Ive had good luck with finding info on this site and it seems the new filters will be a great asset. Thanks for all the help.

      jjeljo 28 April 2011
      9:54 am
    1115. Disappointed to see the changes - not able to find what I was able to find easily before. Do not understand filters. Interesting to read other comments pleading for the old version and notice only computer literate persons are saying thanks - what a pity a great site now a confused site.

      Elizabeth 28 April 2011
      9:51 am
    1116. There is something badly wrong with this version. If I enter just the surname Taylor (nothing else) I get over 6 million responses, which is to be expected. If I enter the surname Black, I only get 133 responses, which is absurd. I was trying to search on the surname Blackwell, and only got 44l there as well, which is also not even close. The idea of the filters is sound, but the execution is woeful. Can we have the previous version reinstated until the kinks are ironed out of this one? Please? ... Pretty Please???

      Will Taylor 28 April 2011
      9:41 am
    1117. I am still trying to figure out how the filters are supposed to help. The birth place filter is too broad. I wish I could choose a state in there. Because clicking on Canada, USA, and Mexico gets rid of maybe 3 or 4 results-not a lot. I would like to narrow it down much more. And I can no longer find death and birth records. I love being able to find them, because they always give you more information on parents. It would be great if we could have an option of getting on a site with filters or not. I am still willling to learn about the filtering system, because it sounds as if some really love it. It just isnt helping me yet. I also wish it wouldnt pop up the filters everytime I go back to the search results. Thanks

      Rebecca Merrill 28 April 2011
      9:25 am
    1118. Looks like you need the same information for all but available for searching in two different UIs

      Gary Barton 28 April 2011
      9:16 am
    1119. Sorry - I dont like this new search tool - would prefer to also be able to search by type of record (ie, Chicago, Cook, Birth Certificates).

      Pat 28 April 2011
      8:37 am
    1120. The older version is much, much better

      Mary 28 April 2011
      8:32 am
    1121. Im getting messageno results found when I know there are lots of results based on the info from basic search page. Several months ago I was getting lots of results for searchs now I rarely get anything Whats happening?

      Marion 28 April 2011
      8:31 am
    1122. I like the old system better. I find this harder to use. Please go back to the old way.

      Carol 28 April 2011
      8:31 am
    1123. your site now is very hard to search. Can't do a parent search. Where's the census info.... can't you leave well enought alone ?! this is or was my main search site ... now I'm not sure ... maybe I'll find another place to go .... Fix the items those of us have told you are wrong & maybe it will be okay then

      rootsgirl50 28 April 2011
      8:29 am
    1124. using these filters is crazy put the search back the way it was I dont like this new feature at all. Its stupid the way it is. go back to the way it was and leave well enought alone.

      rootsgirl50 28 April 2011
      7:51 am
    1125. The nesting menus for location are really stupid, the worst part of the old FamilySearch searches, a vast waste of everyones time. Yes there will be people looking for ancestors in Oceania, but virtually all of the records I want are in New England. You should at least put in some cookies that know this. The preliminary search menu had its limitations, but was more usable than these horrible dropdown menus. Rootswebs advanced search menu is a better model - open boxes where known info is entered and visible.

      David Kew 28 April 2011
      6:09 am
    1126. apologies - have just found the old "start point" box. it was very startling to suddenly see all those new things - please forgive me !

      hilary 28 April 2011
      3:59 am
    1127. is there somewhere to enter spouse or parents names ? i cant find it. i was one of the people who said they preferred the pilot version. the thing i liked was its simplicity. i have just worked hard to get intuitive with beta and begun to get good results now you have changed it totally and its really hard work all over again. please - a box to enter name, place, date range, and names of parents or spouse before all the extra filtering starts.

      hilary 28 April 2011
      3:56 am
    1128. A long waited for and welcome return for filters. Thank you very very much

      Steve 28 April 2011
      2:40 am
    1129. Your new site looks quite good, except I can not find records that I had before in the IGI index. Has that index finished for good, if it has I will be sad as it has seved me well for many searches. Having said that your site has more than assisted me in the past, perhaps I will get to understand the new one I hope so.

      william smart 28 April 2011
      1:26 am
    1130. This filtering filtering does not help me and suggest improvement would be to put it back the way it was yesterday. Youve really screwed up. This is no improvement to

      28 April 2011
      12:13 am
    1131. I know change is suppose to be good but I do not like the new filter system -- The old search screen was easier to use -- If you could not find what you needed with that I doubt the new system will help that person

      Scott 27 April 2011
      11:06 pm
    1132. I am more comfortable with the old way of searching. I seemed to get better results. It seems to have just changed in the past week. Is there a way I can still use that search method until I get used to these changes?

      Janice Bukey 27 April 2011
      9:55 pm
    1133. Sorry but I like the old version alot better. With this new version everytime I key in the info, the box shrinks, then it takes forever to come up with Unable to display results. Maybe its just that I cant get how to work it. I dont know.

      Elisa 27 April 2011
      8:49 pm
    1134. This is terrible to try to find anything. I used to be able to go in and check to see if anything had changed or if anyone had messed something up on my line, and now I cant find anything. This new system is certainly not user friendly.

      Newel Rogers 27 April 2011
      8:43 pm
    1135. Love the new site, easy to move around and to find records. Many thanks for providing us with your records. Regards Andrew Donaghey

      Andrew Donaghey 27 April 2011
      8:36 pm
    1136. Your site is not responding as the tutorial on filters designates. Very frustrating It was so simple and I was raking in information on my New Orleans and Massachusetts relatives. Please tell me it is going to work soon.

      Margaret dAquin 27 April 2011
      8:28 pm
    1137. Love it

      27 April 2011
      8:21 pm
    1138. Okay, I think your site is great, but I had figured this out on my own (above info). I keep entering the name Im looking for now, with dates,& place and all I am getting is referred to this page over & over what do I do?

      Susan Mentzer 27 April 2011
      8:19 pm
    1139. All I am getting out of it tonight is unable to retrieve results.

      Inez 27 April 2011
      8:15 pm
    1140. I liked the site prior to all of the filters being added. It is not the easy friendly site that I found it to be before. I have found so much information prior to the changes and I will try to work through the changes, but so far its not a positive experience. Sorry.

      Kate Johnson 27 April 2011
      8:05 pm
    1141. I dont care for your new search system. how do you select cencus year. You cannot select as well as you could before.

      Richard Longpre 27 April 2011
      8:00 pm
    1142. Helpful Hints

      H Russell 27 April 2011
      7:53 pm
    1143. thank you very much for your contribution in making searches easier and successful. phyllis weldon

      27 April 2011
      7:14 pm
    1144. Sorry not fond of the new search...its great except cannot search with spouse name or parents names which is very important when thats all the info I have (spouse or parents) and dont know where born, when born (within 25 yrs), etc. Please give us this search function. Thank you so much.

      27 April 2011
      7:01 pm
    1145. It appears that your upgrades are obiviously just slowing the process down or locking it up -[the pages move so slow or NOT at all], well at least for me being on AOL dialup. The site was faster before, and It worked great before and the pages changes alot fastest -- before you installed these new features I was able to feel I was getting somewhere finding my family related to Solomon Rupp, etc. I am sorry to say that though I do like new upgrades, when all works faster, but when -- well... I must say...that something is wrong with the program your using or the site itself.... as the site NOW freezes especially today, as or, especially when one is on page 1 and clicks NEXT///at the bottom of the screen, once I want to go to the next screen now --[vs] the older way -- it says it is unable to display -- when it clear that there are many items [ like on 20 of 345 ], ... regardless, my arms are killing me now -- from holding the mouse and my arm up,clicking so much too... as I have tired several times today to get somewhere in my continuance of find the death dates of my ancestors... etc. I also am very [bummed], distressed with the new featues in this way because I am disabled, and holding the mouse bothers my arms, hands, etc... and if I have to keep clicking to move the page up once I go to another screen.. ro see the results, when before it went directly to the top of the screen showing me it was looking for what I searched for... now it shows the bottom of the screen and well instead appears to freeze trying to load the search onto the screen [if all that makes sense to you], The site just seems like it has a corrupt file or has a virus or something is erratic - is all I can tell you... Regardless, I do not like [due to my disabilty] having to keep reopening up the search infomation area with that new down NEW arrow feature and then, having to reopen the top bar on the right where I put my search infomation... after I decide I want to change my information.. I like seeing it [what I put] on the left hand of the screen -- directly the input I put in for my search.... anyway I realize that that info is now on the top right side... and in bold... and that is a neat feature, however, if the site is not going to go to the next screen... then that tells me something is acting up on the site or with the program... Anyway..I just wanted you to know that I think something in your upgrade features is slowing the whole process down... again, in my use today vs last week... the site locks up, most pages do not move to the next number and etc etc. I hope you will get the twinks out of this new system soon to make it easier for my to continue my research on my family history... sorry for complaining -- but again, I loved the old way better as it moved faster for me... and I used the mouse less, too. Sorry so long in explaining my concerns with the site too, but I am frustrated today with this site... forgive me ...but I was hoping to Find Velma France Baker-- who married my Great-Uncle Emery Rupp and get her death date, as the records I have her are incorrec--- and the goofed on her birth date too... but I do know the date they were married... it was Jan 7th 1926.... and Emery Rupp was born 3/05/1903 [1st Son of Solomon Rupp - my great-grandfather], etc is Uncle to my Dad Kenneth E. Rupp. Earlier I tried to find our original grandparents... Johannes & Magadlena too - but nothing is giving me born in Orschweiser, Germany.... but you only list other places in Germany -- and I am not sure -- If I do not see that Orschweiser, before the Country Germany....anyway... I hope my comment helps to improve the site features... as I am just hoping to get this/these at least done in part of my research for my family tree. thanks so much God Blessing to you all Cheryl

      Cheryl Malone 27 April 2011
      6:57 pm
    1146. Thank you SO very much for making ALL of the Irish records disappear. The IGI records have been gone for ages, now everything is gone, including the records I accessed this morning.

      Judith 27 April 2011
      6:41 pm
    1147. This new filtering system is a huge improvement over the previous search where you might have had the data you were searching for, but could not find it in the long list of results. This enhancement was exactly what I wanted.. UI is intuitive and simple. I have designed many UIs in the past, and know that simplicity is not easy to achieve. Nicely done. I will be presenting this new interface at a family history conference in 3 days. Good timing. One day later and I wouldnt have time to change my preso.

      Ben Franklin 27 April 2011
      5:17 pm
    1148. This new system is not desirable for me. What on earth were you thinking?

      Beth Tordella 27 April 2011
      4:52 pm
    1149. This is incredible Thank you sooooo much I have been waiting for such a filtering ability Good things happen for those who wait

      Ann Montgomery 27 April 2011
      4:33 pm
    1150. I dont like the new filters. I prefer the way it was set up before. I am a family history consultant and have been researching for almost 20 years now and this makes it more difficult to use.

      27 April 2011
      3:58 pm
    1151. I dont like this new screen search. I want the little boxes that let me change the name, residence and dates. You just made my research very difficult.

      Melisa 27 April 2011
      3:47 pm

    Leave a Comment