In response to Dear Ancestry.com: Are You Fixing These Problems? (posted 17 January 2019), I received 38 comments on the post, and several via email.
I am not sure Ancestry will ever come around on this one. When they crunch the numbers, the estimates are that only 2-4% of users would actually use a Chromosome Browser. The costs of developing a Chromosome Browser, added to the costs of supporting the browser (lots more calls and emails to Member Services, which means more training and possibly more people), when weighed against the increase in the subscriber base or DNA subscriptions, the math doesn't work out.
The public statements around the Chromosome Browser have mirrored that - most people won't use it, it is of small overall value (to Ancestry), it is complex, and what Ancestry provides is so much better that you don't really need a Chromosome Browser.
If only 2% to 4% of all AncestryDNA testers actually would use a chromosome browser, that translates to 300,000 to 600,000 of their 15 million AncestryDNA testers. But those 300,000 to 600,000 Ancestry users are probably year-over-year subscribers - and probably the devoted genealogists who want to learn as much as they can about their genetic genealogy and all of their genetic cousins who show up in their matches; folks like me and many of my readers.
I think we all realize that this is not a zero sum game, and that competition makes every company better - there is more innovation and development of tools and techniques.
Also in Industry News
A comprehensive analysis of evidence-based information to help manage myopia - News-Medical.Net
Applying AI to map how COVID-19 virus attacks the heart
Abnormal calcium levels in mitochondria may cause neuronal cell death in Alzheimer's disease