Family Tree vs New Family Search

Discussions about using and improving the new FamilySearch online application.
zaneclark
Senior Member
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Contact:

Family Tree vs New Family Search

Postby zaneclark » Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:57 am

Can someone please explain to me in simple terms the relationship of NFS to Family Tree? I was just getting into using NFS when I was told that NFS would soon be obsolete and Family Tree would take it's place.... Somehow that doesn't seem right...

zane

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:00 am

zaneclark wrote:Can someone please explain to me in simple terms the relationship of NFS to Family Tree? I was just getting into using NFS when I was told that NFS would soon be obsolete and Family Tree would take it's place.... Somehow that doesn't seem right...

zane


Family Tree will ultimately take the place of NFS. At the present time a selected group in Utah has been given full access and is currently reviewing the software. The rest of us have been asked to review it as we can and pass along suggestions by using the feedback link. One caution: Any changes you make in your data by using Family Tree will be reflected in NFS.

I don't have any information regarding when the switch will take place, but I would guess that it will still be a while.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:32 am

Techgy wrote:Family Tree will ultimately take the place of NFS.

Is this really true? Or is it more that Family Tree will just be a more powerful, cleaner interface than NFS? Is it really true that you won't be able to access NFS directly anymore after some point? Or will NFS just remain the more basic interface to the same data?
Many questions are already answered on the LDSTech wiki. Check it out!

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:45 am

mkmurray wrote:Is this really true? Or is it more that Family Tree will just be a more powerful, cleaner interface than NFS? Is it really true that you won't be able to access NFS directly anymore after some point? Or will NFS just remain the more basic interface to the same data?


I don't know exactly how this will happen or what the time frame is, but as I understand it there will be a switch at sometime.

Source: I contacted Caroline Rober, who serves as the training coordinator for our local regional FH center. Last Sunday evening we had her do a presentation for all the FH consultants in the stake and she covered in brief the Family Tree software.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?

KathrynGZ
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 8:59 pm
Location: Draper, Utah, USA
Contact:

Family Tree vs. New Family Search

Postby KathrynGZ » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:06 am

mkmurray wrote:Is this really true? Or is it more that Family Tree will just be a more powerful, cleaner interface than NFS? Is it really true that you won't be able to access NFS directly anymore after some point? Or will NFS just remain the more basic interface to the same data?


Our own Russell Hltn expressed yet another opinion on this subject this morning on the FHCNET Yahoo list. I am no expert, but I wonder if it's too soon to tell. After beta testing FT, I hope it doesn't replace nFS--at least not in its present form. FT is very beautiful-looking. And the new list of ordinances is incredible. But it also seemed to take me several additional clicks to do basic tasks. And I felt like my vision was limited, if that makes sense... for instance, when I went inside a "folder" I couldn't still see the whole tree to provide context. Several times I found myself thinking, "It would be really nice if I could do x here ..." then I'd remember, "Oh, yeah, like nFS!"

It looks like FT might be geared toward users who are uncomfortable doing genealogy, to make it as simple as possible for them (and that's not a bad thing)... but maybe not so much toward users who are past the initial learning curve and who value efficiency in addition to beauty. I could be completely wrong, of course... :)

My 2 cents...

Kathryn

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:14 am

Kathryn wrote:It looks like FT might be geared toward users who are uncomfortable doing genealogy, to make it as simple as possible for them (and that's not a bad thing)...

I really do know absolutley nothing on this topic, but it just seems awkward that they would release NFS (which isn't even version 1.0 yet!) and then quickly replace it completely.

My thoughts were that perhaps they are two different types of interface to the same data, maybe even one a basic interface and the other a more advanced UI. It appears there is someone that agrees with me. :) Of course, it also appears I may have gotten the two mixed up, mistaking Family Tree as the more advanced interface, when it might be more likely NFS is designed this way.

Thanks for the input. And I agree with you, this whole theory is completely conjecture on our part...
Many questions are already answered on the LDSTech wiki. Check it out!

techgy
Community Moderators
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:48 pm
Location: California

Postby techgy » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:20 am

mkmurray wrote:I really do know absolutley nothing on this topic, but it just seems awkward that they would release NFS (which isn't even version 1.0 yet!) and then quickly replace it completely.

My thoughts were that perhaps they are two different types of interface to the same data, maybe even one a basic interface and the other a more advanced UI. It appears there is someone that agrees with me. :) Of course, it also appears I may have gotten the two mixed up, mistaking Family Tree as the more advanced interface, when it might be more likely NFS is designed this way.

Thanks for the input. And I agree with you, this whole theory is completely conjecture on our part...


I totally agree. In fact I've sent in my own feedback and suggested that NFS not to put on the scrap heap. As has been said, we're not authorative on this matter and all I can do is pass along what I've been told.

I'm currently trying to get a few more details on the subject. However, I'd suggest that those who feel strongly about the subject use the feedback to express their concerns and suggestions.
Have you read the Code of Conduct?

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20767
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:23 am

Kathryn wrote:Our own Russell Hltn expressed yet another opinion on this subject this morning on the FHCNET Yahoo list.


Yes, I get around. :rolleyes:

In the long-term, "new FamilySearch" itself is just temporary. At some point everything will be integrated into "familysearch" and there will be no more "new".

My understanding from following the developers from a distance is that "Family Tree" is referring to a function/application. At this point nFS *is* all Family Tree and not much else. (However the phrase "Family Tree" doesn't appear in there anywhere. So many members have taken to using "Family Tree" to refer to what's found in Labs.) Labs is showing a newer version of FT being taken for a spin.

I think an examination of this forum's layout will help illustrate the point.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

zaneclark
Senior Member
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Contact:

Postby zaneclark » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:53 am

mkmurray wrote:I really do know absolutley nothing on this topic, but it just seems awkward that they would release NFS (which isn't even version 1.0 yet!) and then quickly replace it completely.

My thoughts were that perhaps they are two different types of interface to the same data, maybe even one a basic interface and the other a more advanced UI. It appears there is someone that agrees with me. :) Of course, it also appears I may have gotten the two mixed up, mistaking Family Tree as the more advanced interface, when it might be more likely NFS is designed this way.

Thanks for the input. And I agree with you, this whole theory is completely conjecture on our part...


I would certainly hope that we are not wasting our time teaching members how to use NFS only to have it replaced. I would hope that Family Tree is going to be an adjunct to NFS and not a replacement.

dannykos
Member
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:26 am
Location: UK, East Grinstead

Postby dannykos » Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:15 pm

maybe the take-up of NFS has been that bad, that an easier to use, more simplified front-end is being released for the technically challenged?


Return to “FamilySearch Family Tree Application”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest