You do realize these private businesses get their information from the National Weather Service, don't you? So why not cut out the middle man and just get your weather from the NWS? I never understood why people are willing to get 2nd hand info...
Why do people use Accuweather and other private forecasting companies?
- Thread starter grampi
- Start date
- Status
Exactly. Weather.gov doesn't have pop-up ads, loads quickly, and has weather formatted in many different ways to suit different tastes in consumption.
Interestingly, it's handled by dozens of regional forecast offices, with a bit of individual autonomy.
Interestingly, it's handled by dozens of regional forecast offices, with a bit of individual autonomy.
Because people don't get the level of interaction that they get from accuweather and wunderground gives. I personally get my weather from accuweather and wunderground because they also take in to consideration personal weather stations getting you more up to date data then weather.gov. Also, those two sites also bring a very interactive radar system that's updated ever 5 min not 30 min as weather.gov gives. Also, weather.gov is the slowest loading website that I visit. I have 1gbps down service using multiple dns servers and weather.gov service is the pits. I don't mind the ads on anywebsite, but I was born in the 80's and have lived through the birth of the actual internet as we know it today. It comes with the territory.
Because they need more specific information than the NWS provides, or they want meteorologists who may in fact be better at their craft than the NWS ones (not a slam on them as a whole). Read on...
In the New Orleans area, there was a phenomenal meteorologist, Nash Roberts. He started out doing weather forecasts after WW II for oil companies doing drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. They have billions of dollars of rigs and equipment and thousands of people working the rigs. The related support companies who serve the rigs have thousands more. They need someone who really understands the weather from their perspective.
In the early 1950s Nash went to work for WDSU-TV in New Orleans, though later was hired by different stations.
in 2004, he was the only one to accurately forecast what track Hurricane Katrina was going to follow. The other weather locals at first almost made fun of him but had to eat their words despite their computer superiority (this was not the first time).
He actually made it a point to understand the weather and not just read NWS copy though he thoroughly respected it. Locally, "What does Nash say?" was a real question based on his decades of accuracy. His forecasts were not always perfect, but accurate; he learned from erroneous forecasts and shared that. He was genuinely honest and a nice guy.
Re Katrina, a common question in New Orleans about any possible hurricane approach was "Should I leave?". Nash's honest answer was if he told his wife to leave, then get out because he was always going to protect her. He told her to leave for Katrina, and shared that with the public.
This is what I know from having been born and raised there for 25 years, though now living in the Atlanta area for 40+ years. And am still a weather junky of sorts ;o) in part, thanks to Nash Roberts.
Others here will be able to address other meteorological specialties, such as flying where you need very detailed reporting higher in the atmosphere. The NWS probably has that info, but a reliable specialist may interpret the data differently and potentially more accurately.
HTH,
In the New Orleans area, there was a phenomenal meteorologist, Nash Roberts. He started out doing weather forecasts after WW II for oil companies doing drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. They have billions of dollars of rigs and equipment and thousands of people working the rigs. The related support companies who serve the rigs have thousands more. They need someone who really understands the weather from their perspective.
In the early 1950s Nash went to work for WDSU-TV in New Orleans, though later was hired by different stations.
in 2004, he was the only one to accurately forecast what track Hurricane Katrina was going to follow. The other weather locals at first almost made fun of him but had to eat their words despite their computer superiority (this was not the first time).
He actually made it a point to understand the weather and not just read NWS copy though he thoroughly respected it. Locally, "What does Nash say?" was a real question based on his decades of accuracy. His forecasts were not always perfect, but accurate; he learned from erroneous forecasts and shared that. He was genuinely honest and a nice guy.
Re Katrina, a common question in New Orleans about any possible hurricane approach was "Should I leave?". Nash's honest answer was if he told his wife to leave, then get out because he was always going to protect her. He told her to leave for Katrina, and shared that with the public.
This is what I know from having been born and raised there for 25 years, though now living in the Atlanta area for 40+ years. And am still a weather junky of sorts ;o) in part, thanks to Nash Roberts.
Others here will be able to address other meteorological specialties, such as flying where you need very detailed reporting higher in the atmosphere. The NWS probably has that info, but a reliable specialist may interpret the data differently and potentially more accurately.
HTH,
Last edited:
Wunderground and weather.com are both Weather Channel websites-they're not perfect, but if you run AdBlock they're not horrible. I run the Wunderground app on the iPhones & iPads, again, not perfect, but good enough. If any weather source got this past storm correct I would like to know who they were, I got more accurate info looking at the Southeast regional radar the night before it happened.
eagle23,
you brought back good memories with Nash Roberts. It was almost comical that the local weatherman (Bob Breck, Dan Milham) would give his take then the news pipe in Nash Roberts to get the real answer.
When Nash said it, it is was as good as coming from Moses on the mountain. LOL. Ole Bob and Dan were left backtracking a few times. They got much better over the years but they always deferred to the proverbial "voice from the burning bush" whenever a big storm was coming.
good memories.
We have a Guy in Houston like that now. The young weatherman/women duck and hide and defer to ole pawpaw to make the weather track. You can't teach experience.
you brought back good memories with Nash Roberts. It was almost comical that the local weatherman (Bob Breck, Dan Milham) would give his take then the news pipe in Nash Roberts to get the real answer.
When Nash said it, it is was as good as coming from Moses on the mountain. LOL. Ole Bob and Dan were left backtracking a few times. They got much better over the years but they always deferred to the proverbial "voice from the burning bush" whenever a big storm was coming.
good memories.
We have a Guy in Houston like that now. The young weatherman/women duck and hide and defer to ole pawpaw to make the weather track. You can't teach experience.
Last edited:
For me the answer is - convenience. For daily use I choose a weather app which can provide me the summary at a glance - within 2-5sec. Only couple of times a year I need more detail information - usually for a winter storm. Then I check several websites, including road conditions, etc. Most of them are state and gov.
Can't speak to folks using Accuweather. I prefer Intellicast for it's radar interface with animation and pan & zoom. Also, easily read current conditions showing local weather underground stations and 10 day forecast. That covers it.
Sounds like people like the frills the private sites offer. The reason you see different forecasts and/or more detailed forecasts on some of the private sites is because they put their own spin on it. It may or may not be more accurate, but they're still getting their raw data from NWS. The Weather Channel also gets their data from NWS...
Last edited:
In my area the "forecast discussion" section is where the interesting part is.
Sometimes it reads like there's a real book writer struggling to get out (grin).
The models, for years, have been bad predictors of rain here.
The seasoned forecasters know this, and adjust down.
There's newbies and people who fill in for vacationers. Those guys take
the models too seriously, issue bogus rain forecasts, and the TV news readers run with it.
You can get a feeling from the forecast discussion who's on deck.
Sometimes it reads like there's a real book writer struggling to get out (grin).
The models, for years, have been bad predictors of rain here.
The seasoned forecasters know this, and adjust down.
There's newbies and people who fill in for vacationers. Those guys take
the models too seriously, issue bogus rain forecasts, and the TV news readers run with it.
You can get a feeling from the forecast discussion who's on deck.
Originally Posted by Sayjac
Can't speak to folks using Accuweather. I prefer Intellicast for it's radar interface with animation and pan & zoom. Also, easily read current conditions showing local weather underground stations and 10 day forecast. That covers it.
+1
Can't speak to folks using Accuweather. I prefer Intellicast for it's radar interface with animation and pan & zoom. Also, easily read current conditions showing local weather underground stations and 10 day forecast. That covers it.
+1
I didn't know this. My phone came with a weather app but it was always wrong.I downloaded the AccuWeather app and its usually correct.
Weather.gov does not send people to stand in a storm like the Weather Channel. I enjoy watching them suffer.
Might be the pretty pictures. Gov't sites can be a little dry, and People need to be ENTERTAINED when they check weather, simple facts are no good.
I use the NWS forecasts and read the forecast discussions. The forecast is the cliff note version of what is projected to happen. In the discussion, they are often brutally honest, going so far as to say how little confidence they have in their forecast and why.
I avoid Accuweather and other similar sites - their job is to sell the weather and their product - nothing else. Their long range forecasts (90 days!!!!) are jokes. I am so tired of my friends looking at their forecast and cancelling outdoor events because it predicts it will be raining at 4PM a day ahead of time. What a joke...
Hopefully people understand that the radar they think is "better" is actually just the NWS data with some different graphics package put to it. If you click on Accuweather's sources, they even tell you that. They most certainly have not built their own network of weather radars...
Give me the facts, and the reason for the forecast. Nothing more or less...
I avoid Accuweather and other similar sites - their job is to sell the weather and their product - nothing else. Their long range forecasts (90 days!!!!) are jokes. I am so tired of my friends looking at their forecast and cancelling outdoor events because it predicts it will be raining at 4PM a day ahead of time. What a joke...
Hopefully people understand that the radar they think is "better" is actually just the NWS data with some different graphics package put to it. If you click on Accuweather's sources, they even tell you that. They most certainly have not built their own network of weather radars...
Give me the facts, and the reason for the forecast. Nothing more or less...
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
