I am not interested in having a DNA test. Like many others here, I prefer to work back through surviving records of my ancestors to establish a family history.
Lets face it, as you get further back, then there are more and more lines that go forward, if you see what I mean. For example if each great grandparent had, say, 5 siblings, then that is 5 lines going forward for each of the 8 then if each great great grandparent had 5 siblings then that is 16 x 5 lines potentially going forward.
So, there are an awful lot of people out there who share our DNA to some extent or other. So, if a test showed up that there was a match in, say, USA, or outer Mongolia, would I be surprised? No. To establish how they were related, I would go through exactly the same process as I go through anyway to trace my family history.
If a DNA test revealed I was part , say, Nordic and part Indian, for example, yes I may be intrigued, but it would be frustratingly meaningless without the traditional work to set out just who the ancestor was bringing that DNA into the mix. I'd rather stick to what all links together.
As an additional "tool" it may sometimes in some circumstances, have its uses. But not enough to tempt me. And certainly not all it seems to be hyped up to be.
These are my thoughts, as requested.
As Janan pointed out earlier, this isnt a thread for discussion, it has asked for each of us to give our opinion, not to comment on someone else's opinion. So I would appreciate that remains the case.