GENMSC-L Archives

Archiver > GENMSC > 2002-06 > 1024449024


From: "DSuarez" <>
Subject: Re: Ancestry.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 01:10:24 GMT
References: <d7.1918a61e.2a40bb0a@aol.com>, <G3MP8.5311$Px4.277100837@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, <Xns9231984F3CFA3TansyRagwortNetscape@209.142.136.250>


Sherry,

How many people live as close as you to a National Archives branch. I'm
about an hour from the Laguna Niguel Archives. I could drive up there but
then I'm stuck with their hours, their machines, which are often pretty
crummy, and other people who want time on the machines so that I'm limited
to an hour at a time. Once Ancestry gets its indexes completed it will be
infinitely better than the National Archives.

Donna


"C'est Moi" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "DSuarez" <> wrote in
> news:G3MP8.5311$:
>
> <snip>
> >
> > Absolutely. The census records are worth a subscription by
> > themselves. As for the cost, there is plenty of cost in going to
> > archives, researching and photocopying. Somehow people seem to
> > think that physical research is cheaper than cyberspace research.
> > This is simply not true not to mention that Ancestry is so
> > incredibly convenient. I recently got DSL and Ancestry is now so
> > fast that I never have to wait for even the largest image to load.
> >
> > Donna
>
>
> I guess it's all relative. It doesn't cost me that much to drive across
> the bridge to the Seattle branch of NARA and look at the census records
> there!! Just time..... Copies are about 10 cents each, if I remember
> correctly.
>
> Of course, if you have to rent them from the FHC, then that's another
> story.....
>
> Sherry


This thread: