...she's surprised how much some websites have changed... or not changed.

I do a lot of genealogical research...  Well, when I have the time, which is not really right now.  One valuable resource is Ancestry.com.

August 30, 2012

I use it at the uptown library occasionally (it's free there).  But I only started referring to it back in about 2008.  Here's what it looked like then.

January 1, 2008

Overall, it's not too different.  The user-interface is quite similar (one reason I don't use it for my family tree, but that's another story).  The 2012 version is much sleeker and inviting, though.  

But let's look at it circa 1996:

October 28, 1996

Holy moly, HTML galore!  I've done some (very) simple HTML coding for websites, and this is about my skill level.  The over-usage of clip art would persist until the early 2000s.  But you have to remember, Windows 95 came out and you had all these image choices to plug in to provide instant variety for any publication.  I myself was guilty of that...

Now, although the 1996 version may be pretty stripped down, I actually find it refreshing.  Simple, to the point, easy to consume in a glance.  But completely boring.  And it's obvious that they don't have a lot of information available at this time.  You could probably get as much information from the free US Genweb sites as from Ancestry.com at this phase.  Also, Internet was slooooooowwwwww, so you had to keep it simple.  So to spice things up, it appears that Ancestry.com decided to give themselves a Christmas present:

December 25, 1996

Much better, huh?  We have a nice navigation bar that provides not only clear directions, but also hints at more complexity (and more records to search).  So, did Ancestry.com survive Y2K?

February 29, 2000

Apparently so!  And they've gotten so serious!  At this period, we're seeing the height of the dot-com bubble.  Ancestry.com has realized that they can be a real money-making machine.  We're starting to see the navigation header that will characterize future front pages for the site.  The compact, linear design of the page reflects the technology that was being used by many people--computer monitors were lower resolution.  Also, AOL could only handle so much...  Notice that they've started to introduce actual digital images (see the header, as well as the featured products in the bottom left).

January 24, 2002

 Not much has changed.  Let's jump ahead a few years...

April 22, 2005

The day I joined Facebook (thank you for having that date readily available).  I chose this date because, for me, this is when social media started to really happen.  I've had a website or two here or there, and maybe even a blog at some point way back then, but it wasn't really an integral part of my life.  So where did Ancestry.com stand when the social media revolution was in its infancy?  Surprisingly, it was even more stripped down.  Right to the point - what do you want to find?  In a way, it's really disappointing.  I can't really think of a reason why they'd move in that direction.  So let's see where they are a year later:

April 22, 2006

Even more simple.  I must say, I'm perplexed.

January 6, 2007

Oh, we've got some branding underway...

February 1, 2007

We're seeing the first iteration of the current Ancestry.com logo, site color scheme, and layout.  However, the information has remained the same.  Obviously by this point, Ancestry.com had figured out HOW people wanted to start their site experience.

So what does this journey through the iterations of Ancestry.com say?  It says that digital history is limited by the available technology; that it doesn't help anyone if your interface is hard to use, or is more advanced than your average user.