As of late October 2018, Ancestry have released another new display feature on the Match List page: a row below each match displays the number of shared centimorgans and segments.
This should be a real time saver when reviewing matches by scanning the page. In combination with the other new feature I posted about, the “no tree” display, these are just great user-friendly features that minimizes clicking and waiting for for each individual match page to load.
I would expect it will also reduce load on the Ancestry web servers, as users are less likely to click into their latest 6.0 CM matches. That would be good news for the customers, as it should mean we see less of the “name unavailable” type of errors.
Ancestry added a very useful new feature to the main list of matches at some time in September/October 2018. I’m being vague on the timeline because not all Ancestry users get the same new features at the same time.
We now see a new tree description toward the right hand side of the page: “Unlinked Tree”.
Prior to this change we’ve only seen categories “No Tree”, “Private Tree” and a number in the case of a linked tree. The tiresome consequence was that in order to see whether a match had an unlinked tree, we had to click on the “No Tree” to check if they did in fact have no tree or if they actually had three enormous unlinked trees full of buried treasure.
This really is a welcome feature when scanning pages of matches to quickly determine which match to investigate.
Ancestry doesn’t display the “number of people” beside the unlinked tree. That is understandable, because if the match has seveal unlinked trees – which one should be picked? It would be possible to calculate the highest number within several trees but that’s an extra layer of processing that could be a drag on performance (how quickly the page displays).
One cautionary note that applies to new software features: don’t bet the house on it just yet. One user reports in early October 2018 on the Ancestry boards that they clicked on a match displaying “No Trees” and the match in fact had five unlinked trees. Screenshots were added to prove the case. A big thank you to that user, because its important that Ancestry gets feedback of false negatives.