Family Tree Maker 2012 SYNC Disaster.

[Judesman]

Thank you for your input Confusion but what you are saying is way beyond my technical understanding. I am afraid when it comes to software it is a bit like a car,  when I buy one I expect it to work without having to know what goes on in the engine.

[[Ray]]

(Hi Confusion)

It is more likely to be inferior programming practice (coding, testing, signoff) than incompatible software components (blocks as you called them. Although the same could apply equally to them)

If we all applied proper process to using new software then we would all test the software ourselves before we actually committed to full use. But we do not.

Ray

By the way, we ALL carry out backups of various bits/pieces but how many actually try using RESTORE?

[Judesman]

The punctuation problem with Notes in FTM 2012 seems to have been rectified but when downloading from Ancestry or doing a Sync there is still a problem with unlinking children from an unknown spouse and recording them against another spouse in FTM. This becomes even more of a problem when Syncing again because FTM will then unlink the children from the unknown spouse in Ancestry and in my case recorded the children against two different fathers.

Sync is still a no go area for me.

[confusion]

Further to these threads regarding the TREE SYNC disasters, I urge you all to read and re-read if necessary the Companion Guide.pdf  to get a better understanding of how this facility works.
Each scenario will be different and I suggest you strongly consider the choices from the displayed dialog boxes before you agree to upload your tree.

GOTO: Help>>Companion Guide
Chapter 12 Working With Trees.

Uploading and Linking A Tree To Ancestry.com p261

This means that additions, deletions, or edits you make in your Family Tree Maker tree will be  duplicated in your Ancestry tree (and vice versa)

What does the 'vice versa' mean in this instance?

My understanding of a synchronization is to copy from source to destination, therefore Family Tree Maker is the source or master file and Ancestry.com is the destination or slave file.
I am not aware of any synchronization taking place two-ways. One way only, source to destination.


Differences Between Desktop and Online Trees p 266

However, because Ancestry.com and Family Tree Maker Trees are in different formats,
there are a few differences you should be aware of

Different formats eh ! !  That's what I said in previous thread.

That why the SQLIte Database in Family Tree Maker 2012 does not 'sync' the data with the online Ancestry.com database correctly.

Both database schemas are completely different and not compatible.

Looks like the developers novadevelopment.com and Ancestry.com have shot themselves in the foot with this one.

In conclusion, my assumption is that Ancestry.com becomes the 'master' database and the Family Tree Maker 2012 becomes the 'slave'. All your hard work and research can be undone by the Ancestry.com database re-sync'ing it's 'correct' info with what it sees as your 'incorrect' info and wants you to update it.

Obviously, I may be completely wrong about all of this and I stand corrected if anyone can offer or throw any light on these problems that have been experience by users  and posted in these threads.

[Judesman]

Hello Confusion,

FTM and Ancestry will try to Sync both ways if there are changes in both trees.

The problem is that information is recorded in different ways in both trees so if you download from Ancestry to FTM the info is dealt with differently.  The real problem is that when you Sync FTM then changes the info in Ancestry. The way Source Citations are linked is a real problem (in my opinion). The two trees will also unlink children of an unknown spouse.

There is a lot about this on the Ancestry Message Boards.

Regarding Sync errors some say that it is due to overloaded servers.

There is an Ancestry article here: http://ancestry.custhelp.com/

You need to enter 5433 in the Search Box.

Judesman.

[kazfoster]

HMMMM
think you may have just saved me some money guys - thanks - let me know when it works!!

 

[confusion]

Good day to you all,

kazfoster: you said

HMMMM
think you may have just saved me some money guys - thanks - let me know when it works!!

FTM 2012 in my experience appears to be stable software. Many users are experiencing problems
with the new facility called 'Tree Sync' whereby you synchronize your FTM 2012 tree with the
online Ancestry.com tree. The documentation only 'skirts' through some of the details.
IMO These details need to be clarified because each user's needs and wants will be completely different.


Judesman: you said

FTM and Ancestry will try to Sync both ways if there are changes in both trees.

Yes, agreed that's where we are seeing these problems.

The problem is that information is recorded in different ways in both trees so if you
download from Ancestry to FTM the info is dealt with differently.

Again, agreed. This appears to be the backbone of these posts.

Regarding Sync errors some say that it is due to overloaded servers.

Yes, that can cause a 'slowdown' of synchronization at busy times, and that may also impact
upon the users experience. There are lots of reasons that could be applicable also.

The way Source Citations are linked is a real problem (in my opinion).
The two trees will also unlink children of an unknown spouse.

FWIW:
Can I just add a simple scenario to the above. It is simply conjecture to emphasise my point.

If you have an entry for a John Smith b 1730 d 1800, there may well be thousands of other entries
in the Ancestry.com database that have the same John Smith.

The Ancestry.com database will only have one entry for John Smith b 1730 d 1800.
It would be pointless having multiple entries for the same person. How would the database know which
John Smith belonged to which tree?. It is also bad database design to permit multiple entries such as this.

The green leaf denotes that there are other trees and maybe other records stored on Ancestry.com.
Therefore, this proves that there is only one entry for a particular person/data.
Which 'marries' it up with your FTM 2012 tree.

Which brings me to the ultimate question:
If there are multiple trees using the said John Smith b 1730 d 1800 and any user, makes any change
to his details; this wil be reflected in your tree when you next go online.
Obviously, if the data entered is incorrect or you can not verify it. Can you accept/decline this change?
How does this impact upon the said multiple trees if you change the data to something else?

It would appear that the Ancestry.com data is 'fluid' just like your FTM 2012 data. Therefore, there appears
to be no 'static' data and all data is liable to change upon the whim of any user. IMO Not very good.

Just an idea:
When you use 'Unknown' for a person, how does the Ancestry.com database relate this data to any users tree?
After all there may be millions of entries to the Ancestry.com database using this entry 'Unknown'
I think it may be a word that is disallowed by  the database, hence your unlinking problem.

Why not give your 'Unknown' entry a more meaningful description. Perhaps think about using a unique identifier.
Where you have an 'Unknown' entry, use something like 'Judesman_100', the possibilites are endless using a
scheme like this and, you could manually increment it on the next subsequent use.
The Ancestry.com database would accept this as legitimate data and it would be unique to your database
until you can verify and update the correct details.

I guess that FTM 2012 has thrown up more questions than it or anyone can give answers.

Hope this helps.

[Judesman]

Hi Confusion, thanks for your thoughts.

I think you are suggesting that if I have a family member that is common to someone else's tree and the other party alters some detail of the common family member then my tree will be altered on syncing. I don't think that is right but I may have misinterpreted your suggestion. It is impossible to alter someone else's tree unless you are an editor.

I said this (or something like it) in my post of 5th January:

I have found another problem. In ancestry I recorded a number of children against an unknown Father with a known Mother.  When I downloaded to FTM these children were recorded against one of the Mother's partners. Using the unlink relationship facility I restored the connection with the unknown Father: no problem. But back on Ancestry, since syncing, the same children have been recorded against multiple biological fathers and there is no reference to the unknown Father.

Over on the Ancestry Message Board it has been suggested that FTM 2012 "mangles" correct data downloaded from Ancestry and then exports the corrupt data back to Ancestry via Tree Sync. This is exactly what is happening to me.

I agree that using a known identifier would be a work-around for the unknown spouse problem but the unknown spouse facility works well in Ancestry.  It isn't until FTM gets it's hands on the info that it all gets messed up. As long as FTM and Ancestry record information in different ways I think there will be problems and this is the reason for unlinking.  Ancestry tech support suggested I used the title Unknown!

So many people are reporting problems. I believe the product needs to be taken off the market and some sort of common approach to the display of information needs to be established.

Judesman.
 

 

[confusion]

Judesman:

Over on the Ancestry Message Board it has been suggested that FTM 2012 "mangles" correct data downloaded from Ancestry and then exports the corrupt data back to Ancestry via Tree Sync. This is exactly what is happening to me.

please read my post of Thursday 19th Jan about the compatibility problem.

It isn't until FTM gets it's hands on the info that it all gets messed up. As long as FTM and Ancestry record information in different ways I think there will be problems

same again, read my first post of Thursday 19th Jan

So many people are reporting problems. I believe the product needs to be taken off the market and some sort of common approach to the display of information needs to be established.

Agreed. The software needs an overhaul. It should not be on general release until it is completely stable.
The purchasers should not be used as guinea-pigs trying to iron out the problems that we are now experiencing.