Suggestions

No Size limit to your family tree.

"No Size limit"???
There may not be a "size limit" to how many you can have on your tree.
But, if you have over 3,000 relatives in your tree you cant view them and neither can any other member that asks you to open your tree to them .

So whats the use of having a pretty comprehensive tree on here if one cannot see it, or display it to anyone else.
I do not bother opening my tree to anyone now, because they could not see it if I did.
A waste of time aint it, and I cant even be bothered with replies to members explaining why.

Don't bother with the Browser and Cache solutions etc. I tried 3 different browsers same on all of them.

:-(

GR only say there´s no size limit to your tree.
They didn´t say you would be able to view it.
Pretty pointless in my view. Why have it all there if you can´t see it??

One word



PATHETIC

Roy

I have just spent the best part of two hours trying to add to my tree .

I am so over this site it stinks ..one problem after another and there is me thinking they had it sorted ...not on your life they are just stringing us all along

I don't think they know how to fix the tree to be honest and just do not want to tell us.

I am very angry now so another complaint off to Genes ..as if I have got nothing better to do with my time :-| :-| :-|

Edit

Just turned off my Auto renewal.....I have had enough :-P

I have just looked at a 4400 person tree that I have access to and can see it in immediate view and can search for people on it and see them in immediate view.
Selecting one of the other views is a killer though.


I can't do the same with a 15000 person tree, apart from seeing the immediate view, which in this case is all living people.

Ken

I am not interested in seeing other peoples trees I just want to add to my own.

Genes have compleatly reunied this site with all the changes .....changes that do not work.
Should have left it alone in the first place .

One excuse after another ...promises that come to nothing :-|

I have worked myself up now ...Genealogy is supposed to calm you down and it usualy does but I am just so fed up with it all, I don't enjoy my hobby anymore :-(

Real Soon Now ?

On 24 October 2012 Genes Reunited Support Team
10:13 (1 hour ago)

Thanks for taking the time to come back to us, and I'm so sorry that this issue is still outstanding.
I completely understand how frustrating this must be for you, however unfortunately there isn't anything we can do ourselves in support to fix this problem. All we can do is ensure that the full details of the issue are passed onto our team of technicians for further investigation, which I can assure you has been done.
Again, my sincere apologies for the length of time this is taking to resolve and for the inconvenience this is causing. We're really grateful for your continued patience.

On 24 October 2012 16:23, Genes Reunited Support Team
wrote:
>
> I really do appreciate how utterly frustrating this must be for you. I can assure you that the developers are aware of the problem with the Ancestor, Descendant and Full tree views not working. Although I can't give you timescales or specifics, I can tell you that the tree development team will be working through all the reported issues in the very near future.


Genes Reunited Support Team
17 Oct (8 days ago)

Thank you for taking the time to report this problem.
Our technical team are aware of the specific problem that you reported and we will be implementing a solution as soon as is possible.
Your patience while we work to resolve this is much appreciated.

Ann-Marie (and others)
Genes Reunited Support Team

no comment

Rollo

Thankyou for taking the time to post that ...it just reads like another fob off to me sorry,Genes

have been making these type of promises for ages now with no improvement in the tre at all.

As I said I don't think they know how to fix it .

Sue :-(

I have over 13k names and many of my contacts have much more than that!

As I only ever use Immediate Family View the current problems with the other views doesn't affect me unduly. In fact full view is rather pointless, in my view, unless you have an extremely small tree. That said, it doesn't negate the fact that GR need to sort it out, or at least in the short term, remove the options that are not working.

More of a pain to me it the inability of Surname Summary to support large trees, as this is the main tool I use for searching other member trees for matching names. It usually manages to accommodate a filter and a single sort, but as soon as I move to the next page it falls over. with a time out.

You may wish to add this one

Contact:

Natasha White
Marketing & PR Executive
Genes Reunited
natasha.white@genesreunited.co.uk

Like IGP I too only ever use Immediate Family View and have no problems with almost 29,000 names in my tree.

I can 'easily' move around my tree in IFM, albeit rather slowly; and if I wish to go to a particular part/person I use the Search tree facility to get there. I can't imagine how I could ever see my 'whole tree' on my 15" laptop screen anyway!

It's the Edit/Input side of the tree that needs sorting urgently in my view.

Simon

Would i be correct in saying that the "Search Tree" facility only works if you know the correct year of birth you have entered for that person in your tree?

So if you are looking for your Grt Grt Grt Grandfather .........but can't remember his year of birth, the only way of finding him is to scroll around your tree.

That takes forever..........so i usually give up anyway!

:-(

Morning Prickly,



I have 15 family members with the name William Richards in my tree.

I have just tried the below....

I put "William Richards" in the search details and it came up with a list of all 15 and their dates were given with them

Try doing it with different names of which you know for certain are correct.

Might be a simple spelling error on your part.

(Try the names of some of his immediate family minus dates)

Have fun Sweetie, :-D :-D

"Might be a simple spelling error on your part."

How very dare you!


:-D

GRU have - more or less - fixed this problem. The fix works best in Chrome.
Hopefully they will improved performance a bit.