I have Ancestry (all but the newest offerings) and they seem to have the
best index for accuracy, even though it is not perfect. Remember the
index
was retyped by volunteers who had to decypher the old handwriting, and
yes,
people were missed.
I also have access to Genealogy.com.. and it is not as good as Ancestry,
but
each has items not available on the other. Don't forget that passengers
comming to America via Ellis Island are online at
http://www.ellisisland.org
And also..don't forget the files online at http://familysearch.org
Marge
"Genjunkie" <ancestraljourney@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:c0oln4$180u2q$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> When several organizations I belong to recently began offering remote
> access to Heritage Quest I remembered the positive things about it
> that I had read in these groups.
>
> After using it for several weeks, I must say that it pales by
> comparison to Ancestry.com. There are no primary marriage, probate,
> land or other records there, and the large section dedicated to
> "books" is largely useless for those of us who check the sources of
> secondary materials instead of taking them at face value.
>
> Worse still, the census records are shabbily indexed. For example, I
> have found several individuals in the Ancestry.com census index who do
> not show up at all in the Heritage Quest database.
>
> The only advantages I see are:
>
> 1.The few "indexed" census years HQ has, such as the 1860, that AC
> does not. (Although, let's face it, if we cannot trust the index what
> good is it really?)
>
> 2. The images are clearer on some of the earlier census records.
>
>
> I tried genealogy.com last month and found it ridiculously inadequate.
> All in all, I'd rather pay the $100 per year for Ancestry.com and get
> a tool I can use with confidence.
>
>
>
|
