My Response to Today's AncestryDNA Survey

     Today I received an email from Ancestry.com, asking me to take a survey about AncestryDNA. I thought I'd share my responses on my blog.

     My responses were influenced by the fact that I had tested with other DNA companies (ftDNA and 23andMe) prior to Ancestry.com.   Based on what the AncestryDNA test currently offers in the way of results, my responses were low.   I think that those without experience with other companies would probably give more positive answers.

• Overall satisfaction? 4 out of 10.  I had higher expectations for such a leader in the genealogy industry. This test is missing many features available from other companies.
• Value for the money? 6 out of 10. It is much less expensive that the tests at other companies. But, you don't have the features.
• Would you recommend it? 3 out of 10. Although it's cheaper, the other companies provide a better product. If you only have $100 and don't think you can save $300, go for this one. If you are more concerned about quality, save up.
• Increased my satisfaction with Ancestry? 2 out of 10. Again, I expected better. This product actually lowered my opinion of Ancestry.com as a company.
• Website is easy to use. 5 out of 10. It is easy to use (almost too simple) but it is slooooooow.
• AncestryDNA website clearly represents my results. 1 out of 10.  This one needs a bit of an explanation. Yes, the website is pretty simple. But, as I said above, it is almost too easy. I understand the info they give me, but I don't learn anything. Based on their website, I have no idea how they came to these conclusions. I just have to hope that Ancestry.com got it right. Sorry, but I want to know the science behind it all.

On the other hand, I did give them a few high marks:

• Test was easy to do. 9 out of 10. Spit. Done.
• Test was easy to ship and register. 9 out of 10.  It was pretty simple.
• Test result turn around. 10 out of 10. It took less than a month. Hard to beat.
• My results are kept private. 10 out of 10. Private? I don't even know all of the info behind my results.

     I would love to see more detailed results from AncestryDNA. Raw data, chromosome data, ability to triangulate matches and, simplest of all, a search function.  Let's add those features and I'll give a higher score.

What is "Large"?

I saw a link this morning on Twitter to an article by Tamura Jones about GEDCOM file sizes and what a "large" file is. It's a great article, comparing different genealogy websites and vendors and their definition of a large GEDCOM file. In the end, the author defines a file of 5,000 individuals as small and 25,000 as medium.

I can understand this number in terms of file size and what technology should be able to accomplish. The article really puts into perspective the different capabilities of each site/vendor and the way each one creates their own "large" definition. And the article chastises those who only support smaller file sizes and call them large. Makes a lot of sense.

But, this article got me thinking. I'm curious: how large is the average GEDCOM of a hobbyist researcher? Does the average researcher ever reach "medium" size in their own GEDCOM? It seems so large to me!

Personally, my GEDCOM has 2,430 individuals and is 980KB (using Reunion). I suppose it would be defined as x-small. :)

I have three lines that go back 10 generations, my shortest is only 5, and the average is 8 generations. Lately I've been more concerned with adding supporting research than expanding my tree. I do research collateral lines, though I often stop after two or three generations away from my direct line.

So, to anyone reading this: How big is your GEDCOM and what is your research strategy?