RootsChat.Com
General => Technical Help => Topic started by: Paul McEvoy on Saturday 27 April 19 00:58 BST (UK)
-
I have just started to use cloud storage for family history hoping that this would make it accessible to as many interested family members as possible. It also offers the possibility of other family members adding their own files to the collection. It seemed like a good idea at the time but I am beginning to have second thoughts.
I have sent out links to the cloud storage by email but the feedback I am getting is that the whole operation is too technically challenging for my target audience. Of course that audience is at the older end of the age spectrum and generally not so tech savvy. I suspect family members are intimidated by the technology but don't want to admit this. Rather than asking for help they don't persevere and I receive no feedback at all.
To start with, clicking on the email hyperlinks seems to work depending on the email server being used by the reader. The alternative to clicking is to copy and paste the link into a browser address bar but I suspect that is a challenge for older family members. Nothing happens when they click on the link so they then give up. If they use a mobile to read the email that produces its own set of problems.
If they get the link to work they are then faced with a main history file and a supporting folder. Within the file there are text, photos, links to URLs and links to supporting files. There is even a link which opens Google Earth to show an abandoned family farm and homestead ruin from 80 years ago along with supporting historic photos. The technology offers such exciting opportunities but it is of little value if it is seen as too hard to access.
I expected this matter to have been raised before but I was unable to find it addressed anywhere on the internet. I wonder if that is because most compilers of family history regard access as secondary to recording and maintaining records.
-
HI Paul,
Have to keep reminding myself that I am now in that "older age group" - though I consider myself to be fairly tech savvy (apart from mobile phones - I must be the only one in the world still happy with a "flip-top" oldie.)
Must say that I don't save to "The Cloud" - know little about it, but consider it to be too? accessible to the world in general. (Could the lack of "privacy" be another issue for the older generation?) It would seem to be the way to go for the younger generation, though I have failed totally to get my "younger" ones the slightest bit interested in family history. Let's face it technology is getting away from me - still have old videos around the house - dvd's are "passe", computers lack dvd drives - So how will our hard work end up? Filing cabinets and boxes full, Anc... private tree - - Have set up private website to be able to "tell the stories" - though I find I am "talking to myself"... Hmm all sounds a bit doom and gloom eh? comments from others re how to "save" our work from disappearing would be helpful!
-
Welcome to rootschat, Paul.
I think they are several issues to your question
e.g. ' hoping that this would make it accessible to as many interested family members as possible.'
Have they said and actually are interested, or are just being polite?
It is your hobby, not theirs.
Many people have no interest whatsoever in their family history.
'I have sent out links to the cloud storage by email but the feedback I am getting is that the whole operation is too technically challenging for my target audience'
Do they regularly use such links in their normal communications - if not, I have total sympathy with them.
It is a challenge if you have not done it before, and so need actual help, in person, to make it work.
'The alternative to clicking is to copy and paste the link into a browser address bar but I suspect that is a challenge for older family members. '
How old? Help in person required, and written instructions to remind how to do it.
' If they use a mobile to read the email that produces its own set of problems.' Exactly. Again, help in person is needed.
I know someone who works with computers, but still has little patience with non-working links, slight differences to how he usually accesses information etc, particularly if it is something that he is not interested in. Think that attitude applies to most of us.
I do not have the correct software installed on this computer to do some very simple operations on the rootschat site, I spent hours trying to solve the problem until this was pointed out.
'It also offers the possibility of other family members adding their own files to the collection.'
Have other people got their own files, or are you the only one? If they have files and have not added, are they just not wanting to do so, or cannot technically do so (seems unlikely if they have created them in the first place)
Some people do not want to share family trees even with very close family, including a very bitter person on here recently.
I use the cloud, but not a lot. I would not regard family history as requiring privacy if you just use it for dead people. Have you asked them if that is a problem?
-
Hi
2 items = 2 steps.
1= Storage of backup/full documentation.
You will never be correct if something happens to you and no-one takes the project up.
Keep the filing as up-to-date as you can.
If they are interested they will find a way of reading old technology.
Print it, put it in folder(s)
2= Publish it on something a little more modern, eg Zoompast.com.
Give anyone interested a copy+login&password
R
-
I’m older than I was but still youngish I like to think (62)
But more importantly I have two children in their 20s who both work in the IT industry as developers, luckily for me, they are both very interested in my genealogical findings. And they say I am more technologically adept than their friend’s parents.
Nevertheless when I asked them how they would like my work preserved/filed for them in the future I was very surprised they wanted books. The old fashioned sort,
So that’s what I do. When I come across Something particularly interesting I use them as the basis for a book. In the back I put full trees and notes plus blank pages for handwritten additions should they become necessary. I always get a couple printed off and advertise the availability around the family, am always surprised at the uptake.
Each of the four I have done so far has had a different format, according to the information I want to share. For example
One big one, was all about one man Cornelius Hatfield, American Loyaist, some of his story and an outline of his descendants but I did another whole book about the family and descendants of one of his grandchildren . The Family of James Anderson and Caroline Maria Furrain, 19th & 20th centuries
One online thing I did do, was a Cousin and I went around all the oldies and took photos of their old photographs and uploaded them to Evernote, and provided a link. Was popular, but still my children want me to put them in a book format with notes (I haven ‘t done it yet :()
I’ve another three on the go
And I did some very interesting work on a collateral branch, didn’t warrant the expense of printing, so I made a blog for that.
Anyone connected to Fred Goodwane/Goodmane/Goodmayne/Smart Professor of penmanship?
https://tangledweb.puzl.com/
But even that I’ve printed off and bunged into a ring binder.
-
I have a Legacy family tree which as well as being backed up to a separate hard drive. it is also backed up to Legacy Cloud. As far as I'm concerned that's enough. I've had my DNA done by Ancestry and 23andme and if I'm contacted by a distant relative I'm happy to share information with them, also my family although they're not particularly interested.
I only back up to Legacy Cloud because when I change my laptop, which I've done a few times, it's been a hassle to download Legacy and then find the info on the hard drive and send it to the new Legacy tree. With Legacy Cloud I'm hoping that the process will be much more straightforward in the future.
-
Thanks for all the responses.
Firstly I should say that I just joined the family history business in the past year, somewhat accidentally. So it is not really my hobby. Family history as a hobby - 'my hobby not theirs' - implies that it is an end in itself. That you should write the history irrespective of whether anyone else is interested. If you are writing books about your research material, like Mckha489, it is more than a hobby of course.
It is too complicated to explain in detail, but my involvement relates to a published article about my family, on the internet now, which I consider unbalanced. There is a schism in the family and the journalist was informed by the other side. My sister had been our branch's family historian - she was writing a book centred on my parents' life. But she passed away a decade ago before it was finished. I took possession of all her records and compiled some history perhaps more as a response to the journalist who wrote the article which has now become public history.
I have not thought of security as an issue with family history. I put greater value on making information generally available. The attraction of the cloud is that the history can be always accessible to all family members rather than in the personal possession of the historian. But that is only relevant if they feel comfortable accessing it.
Chempat asks have family members expressed an interest?
Some have. Could they cut and paste a link to a browser? I'm not so sure. It's simple enough to explain, but would they be sufficiently interested to ask for advice on how to go about it? That is probably a threshold question for which I am unsure and gets to the core of why I started this thread. I feel quite a few would have enough interest to at least glance through a hard-copy history album, but I suspect not prepared to do the same for digital records if the technology seemed daunting to them. If that is right then the cloud will not achieve what I had in mind.
How old are the family members I am talking about?
They are all over 70, I suspect with rudimentary computer skills. I have no illusions about young people being interested, although they too will become old and some may take an interest later in life.
Have other people got their own files, or are you the only one?
I know there is an interest in family history and others have kept records. It is possible they could collaborate in a joint effort but they would have to feel comfortable with the technology. My point was the cloud solution would make that a possibility, not a likelihood.
Maggbill mentions saving 'work from disappearing'. I would think having a copy on the cloud would help. There would at least be two copies then.
Ray talks of interested people reading printed history. But the new technology offers so many advantages, even if the documents end up on USB flash drives. For instance, hyperlinks to websites, of which I have many, can link the history to the current day or provide confirmation of evidence presented. But I accept that the old way of doing things has nostalgia and charm.
Ray also mentions zoomcast.com. That appears to be a family tree application. LizzieW writes of Legacy family tree. Much of my material comes from old letters and written accounts. I have not tried to present a strict chronological account but rather put together a series of articles on themes from within the history. I do include a mostly single paternal line family tree in an appendix.
-
The things I take away from your reply is:
1 You do not consider what you are doing as a "hobby" but as a means of setting right some previous wrong.
2 Other family members may have expressed a passing interest in family history or have some documents -- but none are actively researching
3 These family members are on the older side and less confident with computers / technology. They may also have eyesight problems which make reading a screen difficult
So you need to consider -- WHY are you doing this and WHO are you doing this for ?
If it is for your own peace of mind that the "wrong" is righted -- then write up the info, publish on a blog or similar webpage or in print and be done.
If it is to properly research your family history with full trees for your own knowledge -- then you need to keep the info organised in a family tree programme such as Legacy or one of the many others -- otherwise you will get lost in reams of paper and documents.
If it is to pass this knowledge onto other family members -- you cannot force this, only make it known the info is there if they want it. In my own family, my sister & I are avid researchers, one brother has an interest but no time/inclination to do any research, another brother has no interest.
By all means, put copies up on the Cloud for the younger / internet savvy -- but many people, especially older people with failing eyesight, will relate far more to hard copy -- so print out some trees and interesting documents to show them if they ask
-
Just a comment, I am 78 and quite au fait with computers, Cloud, etc. so don't think that all over 70s only have rudimentary knowledge of computers - although I agree some do. Many people, my husband included have worked with computers since the early 1960s and are perfectly capable of using them now.
-
Many people blank out when the cloud is mentioned. Maybe as a comprise you could build a tree on one the big sites and set up a blog to share the written information, articles, etc that you would like them to read.
-
WELCOME to Rootschat!
"Ray also mentions zoomcast.com. That appears to be a family tree application. LizzieW writes of Legacy family tree. Much of my material comes from old letters and written accounts. I have not tried to present a strict chronological account but rather put together a series of articles on themes from within the history. I do include a mostly single paternal line family tree in an appendix"
I have obviously failed . . . . .
ZOOMPAST.com ( as originally spelled )
"appears to be family tree" ( it is better than appears to be )
A more modern look of just the tree, trying to generate interest amongst a younger set.
The first point was to keep ( backup ) all info found, ready to be used by generations in the future, rather than make them duplicate research already carried out.Even re-writing your articles in the styles applicable to their generation.
Your list(s) of hyperlinks are out of date immediately you publish, wherever they point.
( try using Cyndi's List )
You have then lost ( the link to ) your info.
"Suppliers" shut down server farms ( economics )
"Researchers" do not renew their storage accounts ( they pass-on, various other reasons )
The idea of you creating your view of history in your articles is very good, you still need easy access to the original data for others to view/review/absorb/create their own view, in the future.
R
-
PaulMcEvoy
Addressing your comments regarding the age of researchers, their genealogical requirements, their capablilities of understanding modern IT, etc .
Certainly, there are "quite a few" Rootschatters, and elsewhere, who are capable of creating web pages containing links to documents on their own local kit / servers.
Rather than just clicking a URL within an email.
AND they may have real experience AND/OR qualifications in relevant / allied subjects/businesses, ( 50+years in some cases I can think of ).
What's the word I am looking for ? . . . . . . . . ;D
-
I take Ray's point about WebPages disappearing. An ideal implementation of my project would be to archive pages in the supporting folder in case they disappear. The link could then use the saved version if necessary.
But not all WebPages are so transient. My mother's father and her grandfather (born 1833) both have WebPages still standing. I believe historic Wikipedia entries, of which I have a number, will last indefinitely. The amount published on the internet about a famous WWI battle in which my father participated seems to have increased rather than decreased over the years.
Saying material is "out of date immediately you publish" seems to be choosing a field which is the strength of digital methods - its flexibility. The digital version can be easily updated at any time if new information surfaces. The original version need not be lost. It can be saved both in digital and hard-copy form.
I have two millennial late-nesters at home who deal with printed or written matter only when there is no alternative. It is by members of this and later generations that the history we are writing now will be read. And future records are also more likely to be digital.
" ... you still need easy access to the original data for others to view ... in the future."
I have original hand-written documents going back more than 100 years. Not all have been digitised and transcribed but that is my intention - as long as I am not too discouraged by disinterest. The originals are kept in protective plastic sleeves. I intend to backup the digital files on M-disks for which the makers claim a 1000 year longevity.
Now if I digitise everything and put it on the cloud it would be accessible to even relatives living on the other side of the world. How does your hard-copy stack up against that? I keep the original hand-written documents, like you do, but their value is mainly sentimental and of course an ultimate backup. The original scans are sufficient proof of authenticity to satisfy the most critical sceptic.
But those relatives on the other side of the world would be just as ignorant of my family history files if they found them too technically difficult to access. Craclyn's idea of a website with restricted access, rather than cloud files, is something I have considered. Ray also mentions Rootschatters using a website - but where are they? It was ideas like that which I had hoped I would find implemented when I started this thread. I was hoping to profit from others' experience.
A publicly accessible website is something the least computer-literate person is familiar with. But if access is restricted - in all probability requiring a link - it adds another level of complexity which could make it just as discouraging to the technology-challenged. I would only change my present approach if I learned of someone who had thoroughly investigated all the options and established the best solution.
I see LizzieW thinks that I am denigrating the technical capabilities of all older people when I am one myself! I'm sorry if that is what you thought. Of course if I don't know individual capabilities I have to assume averages. Surely you would agree that the older a person the less technically-savvy - on average!!! I also first used computers in the 1960s and bought my first micro-computer, an Apple II, in the late 1970s. But we are not typical.
Marmalady thinks I should right the wrong by "publishing on a blog or similar webpage or in print and be done". This advice seems to be based on a particular format which I should follow - "research your family history with full trees for your own knowledge". I accept that this is the way you and probably many others on this website approach family history. That is probably what people are expecting when they hear the term "family history" and probably why I am finding they avoid it like the plague.
In my family tree there are many individuals who lived mundane lives and there are a few who lived remarkable and exciting lives. Your approach seems to weight them equally. My history, like that of the journalist I spoke of, any journalist in fact, is only about the most interesting parts of those interesting lives. I'm sorry if you don't approve but that is the way I am doing it. I provide a minimal family tree just as a reference for names mentioned in the text. I know my approach is more reader friendly but I just don't know how to convince people of that.
From Marmalady again: "... older people with failing eyesight, will relate far more to hard copy." Tut. Tut. You'll have LizzieW scolding you about stereotyping older people as half blind when she can read fine print from twenty feet without glasses.
I have made my point about hard-copy above.
-
Of course if I don't know individual capabilities I have to assume averages. Surely you would agree that the older a person the less technically-savvy - on average!!!
No.
-
From Marmalady again: "... older people with failing eyesight, will relate far more to hard copy." Tut. Tut. You'll have LizzieW scolding you about stereotyping older people as half blind when she can read fine print from twenty feet without glasses.
It all depends where you make the cut-off for "older people"
I am late 60's and tho I don't consider myself as one of the "older generation" many others probably do. And, like LizzieW, my eyesight is still reasonable. So a Cloud or other web-based info file would be fine for me.
But my mother -- at 94 -- is computer savvy (started off with a Spectrum ZX81 in the early 80's) but has poor vision and failing memory. So while she could increase the zoom on a web page to read the info, she would be happier with the info in paper form that she can study at leisure with a magnifying glass. She could also pick it up and put it down as often as required to absorb facts more easily than on a web-page
It is just one reason why some of your family members are not interested in your Cloud-based idea.
As for some ancestors having lead mundane lives -- they are still part of your family history. Of course, it is your choice if you just want to concentrate on the more spectacular ones - but you do still need the basic knowledge of the others to know where they came from.
-
I take Ray's point about WebPages disappearing.
Following comment applies to all electronic versions. . .
Not just pages disappearing/ . . . . .suppliers, business focus of same, general trends, Wiki disappearing ( haven't you had the begging mail? ), your view of same, changes to specs of file formats/types rendering them unusable thru lack of updated/capable software .
eg .sam.ocx.doc.docx.pdf / jpg.jpeg.tif.gif.pic
Using another example, don't forget that when pdf first appeared the resultant pdf file was unmodifiable, by specification definition.
But not all WebPages are so transient. My mother's father and her grandfather (born 1833) both have WebPages still standing. I believe historic Wikipedia entries, of which I have a number, will last indefinitely.
Not if wiki goes broke pluswiki articles are updatable by others. Maybe possibly changing emphasis/detail eliminating your ancient people fromthe article.
The originals are kept in protective plastic sleeves.
Sleeves of the correct spec for storing paper, I would hope.
Not the cheap stuff in the normal shops
Ray also mentions Rootschatters using a website - but where are they?
Rootschatters AND (that type of ) Websites.
That's the reason I keep mentioning my present fave.
To get people thinking about it .
and established the best solution / hoping to profit from others
Your view seems to be the only, and best, solution?.
You joined here expecting us to have already developed it?
-
"Cloud" = someone else's computer ::)
Well, actually it is the currently fashionable term for someone else's bank of web servers. It is just a file storage system. It's usability depends on the way you present the data; a collection of files may or may not be understandable to anyone else. For maximum accessibility you need a good, easy to use, interface that anyone can understand.
If people aren't interested in your research they really won't mind how it is presented ;)
-
Ray asked was I "expecting us to have already developed" a cloud solution?
It is my experience that with the multitude using similar equipment for similar reasons if I have a problem then I am not the only one. I just need to learn from others' experience to find a solution. And yes, I did think that putting family records online made so much sense that there would be many people already doing it. I joined Rootschatters forum because the nearest thing I found on Google for what I was looking for was a post on this site. Aha, I thought, that must be where all the experts are.
I do find it very interesting that I can't find any advice on this. I don't for a moment believe that the hard-copy method of keeping family records is the right model for the future when young people today like everything online. I have listed the advantages of digital records which apply not just to family history. Ray finds technical objections, but I suspect similar resistance was directed at the first motor cars. Of course I can understand people clinging to traditional methods but I suspect that's not the whole reason.
A little philosophising. I'm sure someone will correct me if they think I'm wrong.
The "family history" of sites like this is "family tree history" which I guess must by now be a multi-billion dollar industry. As a hobby it is not unlike in some ways coin and stamp collection. Collectors look at reference books to see what items they don't have, but would like to, and set about acquiring them. You look at all those blanks in your family tree and work to fill in the gaps. It is almost an end in itself. You get satisfaction compiling your family tree and if someone takes an interest that is great, but your hobby doesn't depend on it. What you produce is a reference document full of facts, like a dictionary. No one takes a dictionary to bed to read. But if someone has a query about their ancestors they know that Uncle Bob, with his family tree history, is the one to consult. The subject of the history, the family, is a collective unit but your collection is personal and individual. I suspect that if a cousin asked to photo copy all your hard-copy records you would not be happy. Am I right?
With my records online and my willingness to collaborate with others, I am basically surrendering much of my individual ownership. Others could copy all my records. They become closer to "our records" than "my records" - "our" referring to the family. Isn't that the way it should be? I accept that's easier for me as I'm a Johnny-come-lately who obtained most of my material from my late sister's collection.
So is there unwillingness to surrender ownership and control of personal collections of family records which putting them online would entail?
My version of family history is closer to a story book than a reference. I am not trying to say that my model is better, just that it is different. I believe there is a role for both. Mine is certainly "family history" but not "family tree history". It has been put together to make interesting reading about the lives of interesting members of the family. But it needs readers to realise its goal. One cousin, who does want to read my family history, said he knew my father's life - from the beginning of last century through Africa, Europe and Australia - was like a boy's own adventure story (do they still have those?).
From Marmalady: ... just one reason why some of your family members are not interested in your Cloud-based idea.
The difficulty I have is that everyone assumes my family history is the same as yours. That I
am expecting them to read a reference document which they have no need of. That is what I have learned from this thread. I have made up my mind to really sell my history, to distinguish it from the family tree version. I have been shy in offering technical support (so as not to offend all the LizzieW's of my family) but now I've decided to provide a help file.
-
A little philosophising. I'm sure someone will correct me if they think I'm wrong.
The "family history" of sites like this is "family tree history" which I guess must by now be a multi-billion dollar industry. As a hobby it is not unlike in some ways coin and stamp collection. Collectors look at reference books to see what items they don't have, but would like to, and set about acquiring them. You look at all those blanks in your family tree and work to fill in the gaps. It is almost an end in itself. You get satisfaction compiling your family tree and if someone takes an interest that is great, but your hobby doesn't depend on it. What you produce is a reference document full of facts, like a dictionary.
You're making a lot of assumptions there. If you have a look through the threads on this site, you may revise your ideas. Everyone here has their own individual attitude to family history, with different motivations, interests and satisfactions.
-
So PaulMcEvoy,
You don't find people agreeing with you when you join a new ( for you ) assistance resource ( Rootschat )?
You turn up with a loose/half-formed specification?
So, we are all wrong?
Some of us actually do utilise a mixture of ancient and modern and talk to each other about what we can do/use from what is available.
"Some" of us are (current/ex-)professional genealogists with/without qualifications.
"Some" of us are (current/ex-)professional IT with/without qualifications.
"Some" of us are hobbyists.
You started off criticising, you continued with a promotion of your incomplete idea(s).
You have used terms such as "average"/"assume"/"philosophying"/"sure
"/"I just need to learn from others' experience to find a solution"
To learn you should stop and listen.
Drop the arrogance and use the term "to help find a solution" .
You attempt to belittle.
You would not have even started if someone (your sister?) hadn't filled in the gaps for you.
This site is mostly about assistance/help within the broad definition of "Genealogy".You have only to read the number of people who have visitted. Many have stayed to help.
. . . . . ( to be continued )?
Not by me.
-
From Marmalady: ... just one reason why some of your family members are not interested in your Cloud-based idea.
The difficulty I have is that everyone assumes my family history is the same as yours. That I
am expecting them to read a reference document which they have no need of. That is what I have learned from this thread. I have made up my mind to really sell my history, to distinguish it from the family tree version. I have been shy in offering technical support (so as not to offend all the LizzieW's of my family) but now I've decided to provide a help file.
You have totally missed my point. It doesn't matter whether you are presenting "family history" or "family tree history" (tho I dispute the difference you make between the two) -- if the people you are wanting to share it with have difficulty reading a computer screen (as my Mother now does) -- then internet based information is of no use to them whatsoever -- but a hard copy version might interest them.
And as for providing hard copy information to cousins etc -- yes I have done that. I am happy to share the information that I have found with anyone who asks, in any format I can provide that they can easily read.
There is no reason why you cannot mix and match -- provide hard copy for those who prefer that and Cloud based for those that can access it and for future generations
-
I am still struggling to see what you are hoping to achieve here PaulMcEvoy. You seem to be determined to attack everyone who offers you advice.
Why do you want to force everyone in your family to use one mode of communication? People have different skills, interests and needs. If you want to reach out to your family and get them interested or educate them in some way about the errors in published articles then the only way you are likely to succeed is to adapt your method of communication to meet the requirements of those you want to reach. There is no one size fits all and if there was it is highly unlikely that cloud storage would be the solution.
-
Could someone with a 10 year old daughter or son (notice the alphabetic order) have one of them explain what a cloud is. I thought it was one of those things the biplanes avoided when flying over the countryside.
-
I'm sorry if people think that I have attacked them or tried to force my ideas onto them.
I was looking for advice on using online family records when what I found was people defending the traditional hard-copy approach. The problems I am having with my digital project were never going to force me to abandon that approach because I know this is increasingly becoming a digital world.
I do accept though that I landed on a genealogy site with members doing things in a certain way and I can see they were always going to defend that way. Perhaps I should have recognised that much earlier.
Signing off
-
oops too old to comment
xin
-
Paul -- I'm sorry you don't think Rootschatters have been helpful to you -- but you did seem to arrive with a fixed idea of what you wanted to do and seem reluctant to change that idea on the advice from others.
The fact is, most Rootschatters are what you call "Family Tree Historians" and so keep their information in Family Tree programmes in a format that can be shared amongst the various commercially produced family tree programmes. Many of us also do what you call "Family History" files on selected ancestors -- sometimes just saved as "notes" in the programme we use and sometimes in separate documents.
There is no right or wrong way of doing Family History / Genealogy. We are telling you our experience of collecting / sharing data. If you come up with another way that works for you -- great! -- but it may not work for others.
As well as the constraints of the various programmes, documents, archives, file storing systems etc you do have to consider the needs of the people you wish to share them with. Even the easiest and most simple Cloud storage venue is of no use to someone who does not or cannot use a computer. For these people, you will have to consider hard copy if you / they want to share the info.
Good luck in completing your project to your satisfaction.
-
I have just started to use cloud storage for family history hoping that this would make it accessible to as many interested family members as possible. It also offers the possibility of other family members adding their own files to the collection. It seemed like a good idea at the time but I am beginning to have second thoughts.
I have sent out links to the cloud storage by email but the feedback I am getting is that the whole operation is too technically challenging for my target audience. Of course that audience is at the older end of the age spectrum and generally not so tech savvy. I suspect family members are intimidated by the technology but don't want to admit this. Rather than asking for help they don't persevere and I receive no feedback at all.
To start with, clicking on the email hyperlinks seems to work depending on the email server being used by the reader. The alternative to clicking is to copy and paste the link into a browser address bar but I suspect that is a challenge for older family members. Nothing happens when they click on the link so they then give up. If they use a mobile to read the email that produces its own set of problems.
If they get the link to work they are then faced with a main history file and a supporting folder. Within the file there are text, photos, links to URLs and links to supporting files. There is even a link which opens Google Earth to show an abandoned family farm and homestead ruin from 80 years ago along with supporting historic photos. The technology offers such exciting opportunities but it is of little value if it is seen as too hard to access.
I expected this matter to have been raised before but I was unable to find it addressed anywhere on the internet. I wonder if that is because most compilers of family history regard access as secondary to recording and maintaining records.
It is very difficult to make an informed comment on your website (cloud storage) as you did not supply a link but rather wrote about the problems people have accessing it.
Some of us have been using websites for many years (e.g. my first family history site was online in 1998) and we use the cloud as a useful addition that does not replace paper records or even digital records stored on our own back-ups.
Cloud storage has its own unique problems such as Rootsweb (a cloud supplier) removed all their websites for between 3 months and a year due to server problems. But that problem was overcome by many by having the data on our own computers and in our own back-up files.
It might sound surprising to you but many of the digital professionals I talk to prefer books for long term storage than digital and many print online records to read rather than read them online.
You mention about email links obviously I have not seen yours but often the problem with email links is they are too long and break when flowing into a second line on the viewers screen.
You may think the replies have been discouraging but perhaps if we could see what you are referring to there would be a more positive response.
Cheers
Guy
-
I am still struggling to see what you are hoping to achieve here PaulMcEvoy. You seem to be determined to attack everyone who offers you advice.
Why do you want to force everyone in your family to use one mode of communication? People have different skills, interests and needs. If you want to reach out to your family and get them interested or educate them in some way about the errors in published articles then the only way you are likely to succeed is to adapt your method of communication to meet the requirements of those you want to reach. There is no one size fits all and if there was it is highly unlikely that cloud storage would be the solution.
Yes, spot on.
I was born in 1947, I have been actively involved in family history since childhood, so I have seen many changes in the ways to research, the ways to record that research, the availability of material to research, and the formats to store that research. It is only in recent years that the concept of seeking out the living relatives to exhibit that research to them and to expect them to flock to hear, see and even promote the researcher has emerged. To me, the basic tenet was to seek out information about our deceased ancestors and if along the way we met someone else who was also researching same deceased person, to willingly share info and conundrums with them.
On the other hand, I do a newsletter every quarter to many of my known living relatives .... my scandal sheet .... gossip, snippets on 19th century families, photos, etc . This is a pdf, it goes as email attachment. The eldest person receiving email was born 1915. He has had email since 1992. He ditched his cheque book last century, and does his bookkeeping all online. He does not trust cloud. And .... well .... Metadata is not for him.
Family history booklets, essays, papers, and electronic storage devices etc can still be lodged with family history groups or with archives organisations here in New South Wales, Australia.
JM.
-
As an aside, I first heard the expression "the cloud" in 1990, working for the data network part of General Electric, where it referred to the entire part of their global network, an extension of old fashioned time sharing.
Martin
-
I had signed off from this thread. But I received a personal message from Martin which I attempted to reply to but was defeated by the personal messaging system despite numerous attempts.
Thankyou Guy for your very considered post.
You ask me to provide a link to my history. Others have talked about security of their material and I hope you can understand why I do not wish to open up my files to strangers, especially considering some of the posts made here.
But I have not had any technical problems at all. I have had feedback from people who have accessed the files successfully. The links are short enough for a single line. Viewers are presented with a file and a supporting folder on a standard cloud server - much as you get if you download a webpage. Clicking on the file will open it in a browser. It is not technically demanding. But I know from sending email links on unrelated matters that clicking on them does not always work for all the recipients. They work for some but not for others. I assume it is related to the email server they use.
The alternative to clicking on the link is of course to cut and paste the link to the address line of a browser. In my experience that always works. But I suspect that some people don't know that. They click. It doesn't work. They give up. They feel I have sent them a dud. Or they may worry that it is their fault and they don't want to admit ignorance.
So in future I am going to include a file "What to do if clicking on the link doesn't work".
But it goes beyond that. My files are more like magazine articles with genuine human interest even for non-family members. I am confident if people just start to browse they will be sucked in. But there is a general reluctance to try. I put this down to a stereotype of 'family history'. Because genealogy has become popular they assume that I am sending them a detailed family tree type of history. This is not to deride what genealogists do. I too am interested in my family tree and like to look up my ancestors from time to time.
People here have said I can't force others to read the history. No, but I intend to do my best to persuade them.
An alternative to using cloud storage is to use a restricted access website. But I understand the restriction occurs via an email link which means the problem will be the same. A website is also more work. But if others have tried both I would love to hear of their experience.
You mention cloud servers going down. But the original files which I hold (yes, with backups) will always be there. Everything can be reconstructed. Nothing is perfect. After all hard-copy records can be consumed in a fire.
You mention "many of the digital professionals I talk to prefer books for long term storage than digital and many print online records to read rather than read them online."
Do you remember the old joke "A pessimist is someone who lives with an optimist"? I am probably older that the average here but I believe I can objectively straddle both sides of the traditional / modern debate. I still read newspapers, magazines and have a library book out right now. Among my two millennial late-nesters I am constantly defending traditional ways versus digital and online. Here it is the opposite. I can acknowledge there are lots of good things about traditional ways. I use those arguments against my children all the time. But no one here acknowledges any of the advantages of the digital and online. They are not succeeding because of prejudice. It is because they offer genuine functional advantages.
I imagine some members have family history albums brimming with information which are works of art and a joy to view and hold. No digital version could compete with that. (If you want to view them though you'd better get along with the owner, 'cause he ain't gonna let you in otherwise). But each still sits in one bookcase / house / town / state / country. The online digital version can be viewed by anyone (approved), anywhere with an internet connected computer.