Insider Unfair to Archives.com
The NARA census website is working well now (Tuesday night, Pacific time), and my Twitter and Facebook friends have been reporting greatly improved site response starting mid-day, so it seems like they got things under control.
They were hit with probably 4x their estimated traffic yesterday and then those massive numbers *increased* today, Tuesday. There's only so fast anyone can reasonably scale up with those kinds of numbers of visitors, and with such "heavy" (big high-res images) data.
So yeah, maybe you could cool it a bit with the "ZOMG EPIC FAIL!" stuff. We all know that Ancestry.com really wanted to win the 1940 Census contract over Archives.com, and yet they didn't, so you certainly wouldn't want your readers accusing you guys of "sour grapes" now, right?
I am not part of Ancestry.com nor do I represent them. My opinions are my own.
When you say that "we all know that Ancestry.com really wanted..." I must confess I did not know. I’m surprised to learn they had bid on the contract, so your information is news to me. Might I inquire what your source is for that news?
Insider Unfair to Ancestry.com
Seems disingenuous for you to call Ancestry 3rd, when they have the highest quality images up, as well as have always been reachable, when Archives.com (the NARA site) wasn't even usable that first day, and barely improved the 2nd day. Personally, I would rather get something (even if they aren't all there) than sit waiting endlessly for empty images.
Additionally, you haven't mentioned that Ancestry has the only currently searchable indexes up (except the 500 or so records from somebody else)
Do you have an axe to grind from your time at Ancestry?
The least you could do for you readers is provide a balanced opinion. IMO the best experience over the whole 1940 excitement is and has been Ancestry.com
The Rowdy *
NARA did the image scanning so Ancestry.com’s images can’t be better than everybody else’s.
Your point on usability is well made, but I assigned places based on the order in which the horses crossed the finish line, not for how pretty they looked when they did so.
Perhaps Archives.com should have been disqualified since they started at the finish line while everyone else started at the starting line. Hit head on by a water cannon, they stumbled backwards while the rest of the field closed down on them. That they fought their way back and crossed the finish line more than a day ahead of Ancestry.com earned them a second place finish, despite the deluge that continued unabated.
Don't give up on your favorite horse just yet. The race for indexes has just began and as you point out, Ancestry.com has established an early lead.
Insider Unfair to FamilySearch
No one wrote in to say I was unfair to FamilySearch! Maybe I’m being too easy on my employer.
They remain a long way from the finish line. They are by far the slowest horse. The best they can do is take fourth. I’ve seen better looking horses in a glue factory. I’ve seen faster horses on a carousel.
How was that? Any takers?