wxmx Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 the biggest annoyance is that the issue of slowness/errors seems to be in the coding of the page or something? loading each image if you just have the image URL and change the numbers is not nearly as slow (it's basically instantaneous) as clicking next the prescribed way. there must be a way to fix the issue to make it smoother.. why not do so? Yep, you're right, the server side script is what is consuming the most time. After monitoring the whole request-response process, it takes ~5.8s to run the .jsp script...while it only takes ~75ms to load the image directly... there's some big inefficiency in there... and there's evidently no caching approach (nor for the opcode nor for the content serving). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I'm sorry, but the vitriol and name calling is pretty unnecessary. So does the piss-poor quality of the site, but there it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I'm sorry, but the vitriol and name calling is pretty unnecessary. i think its pretty neccessary until they fix it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srain Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 at Ji and other 's complaining because they can't get the NCEP site instantly while hitting the refresh button repeatly. I have enjoyed the new site for months. If you have a valid complaint or positive input, send an e-mail. What a bunch of cry babies some around here are... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 good job guys..btw..i never complained about the site in my last 10 years of using it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midlo Snow Maker Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 good job guys..btw..i never complained about the site in my last 10 years of using it lol same here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 good job guys..btw..i never complained about the site in my last 10 years of using it Fail. Never knew a jet streak and a vort max were the same thing... and sure RH implies precip, but isn't that taking it too far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midlo Snow Maker Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 almost entertaining on what will pop up next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 It's 2012. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 So does the piss-poor quality of the site, but there it is. i think its pretty neccessary until they fix it good job guys..btw..i never complained about the site in my last 10 years of using it Fail. Never knew a jet streak and a vort max were the same thing... and sure RH implies precip, but isn't that taking it too far? You think that name-calling and being whiny is necessary....instead of trying to help them fix the page with constructive feedback? Really? There is clearly an issue with the 4 panel stuff (which aren't static images obviously). This can/should be an easy fix. The slowness (documented by others) is a whole other (and more significant) issue. I honestly wish they would just decommission the site entirely (this is my opinion, and mine only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 By the way.....for those of you that have passed along useful information (and real, useful information), I am personally passing it along to contacts at NCO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 You think that name-calling and being whiny is necessary....instead of trying to help them fix the page with constructive feedback? Really? There is clearly an issue with the 4 panel stuff (which aren't static images obviously). This can/should be an easy fix. The slowness (documented by others) is a whole other (and more significant) issue. I honestly wish they would just decommission the site entirely (this is my opinion, and mine only). We've all provided constructive feedback. In fact, in some of the posts you are quoting, there are images showing specific problems. It's a bit silly of you to focus on the frustration and pretend like there has been no useful feedback and nothing but "vitriol" (hardly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVblizzard Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 If you don't like it don't use it...simple as that. My main sites for models are SV, IWXM, and Ewall. Even with the old design of the NCEP site, I never used it much because there were always better options out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMo Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I don't think there was a lot of positive feedback when it changed, but it changed anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 We've all provided constructive feedback. In fact, in some of the posts you are quoting, there are images showing specific problems. It's a bit silly of you to focus on the frustration and pretend like there has been no useful feedback and nothing but "vitriol" (hardly). There have been at least three different people that have made comments about "those idiots", or various ways of demeaning the people that work on the site. I'm not apologizing for finding this inappropriate. The threads on this issue have been littered with 99% useless whining. Posting screen grabs of mislabeled graphics with mocking commentary is not useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I don't think there was a lot of positive feedback when it changed, but it changed anyway. Obviously there wasn't enough feedback during the 6 month (or more) experimental period (where they were soliciting feedback), else I'm not sure it would have gone ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 On a separate matter, the Re-Analysis sites have had a hardware issue. The estimate is that the hardware issue will be fixed on January 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 this is really getting out of hand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 this thread is an abomination. Those who have had issues and been polite are fine. But we have people calling professionals inept, classless, morons, and idiots. Why is this type of stuff tolerated on the main board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 There have been at least three different people that have made comments about "those idiots", or various ways of demeaning the people that work on the site. I'm not apologizing for finding this inappropriate. The threads on this issue have been littered with 99% useless whining. Posting screen grabs of mislabeled graphics with mocking commentary is not useful. How are the screen grabs not useful? They show that the site is putting the wrong images in. That's a straightforward problem (to describe, at least, but perhaps not to fix). Look, I know you want to defend these people because you work there, and that's fine, but you have to realize that the site they produced is, by the standards of web-development, fairly low quality and buggy, not to mention poorly designed. They may not be idiots, but they are incompetent. There's really no disputing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 this thread is an abomination. Those who have had issues and been polite are fine. But we have people calling professionals inept, classless, morons, and idiots. Why is this type of stuff tolerated on the main board? They aren't professionals if they are making a site like that. Note, we aren't talking about the meteorologists and researchers, here. We are talking about the PHP cowboys who produced the site. I don't know if they work for NCEP directly, or if they are some company that got contracted to make the new site. Either way, they clearly aren't up to the task. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 If you don't like it don't use it...simple as that. My main sites for models are SV, IWXM, and Ewall. Even with the old design of the NCEP site, I never used it much because there were always better options out there. Would you mind weighing in on my thread in the Marketplace called "Paysites"? I'd like to know the pros and cons of Accuweather Pro and StormVista Platinum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 How are the screen grabs not useful? They show that the site is putting the wrong images in. That's a straightforward problem (to describe, at least, but perhaps not to fix). Look, I know you want to defend these people because you work there, and that's fine, but you have to realize that the site they produced is, by the standards of web-development, fairly low quality and buggy, not to mention poorly designed. They may not be idiots, but they are incompetent. There's really no disputing that. Of course screen grabs are useful (you apparently missed my point about the mocking tone, name calling, etc.). I've said all that I have to say about it. I have relayed various comments to people within NCO (based on some of the feedback in this thread, and issues I've experienced myself). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Of course screen grabs are useful (you apparently missed my point about the mocking tone, name calling, etc.). I've said all that I have to say about it. I have relayed various comments to people within NCO (based on some of the feedback in this thread, and issues I've experienced myself). People can express frustration. I'm sorry that people aren't falling over themselves to talk about how great the site is except for that one glitch or two. The fact is, NCEP had a site that worked great for many years and that many of us came to rely on (inasmuch as we actually *have* to rely on weather sites) and they turned it into something that is poorly designed and buggy. That is frustrating. People will express that and not always with directly constructive feedback. What you should take from that is that NCEP made a poor decision and that it is so poor that people aren't merely pointing out a few bugs, but they outright and fully dislike the site. That's actually useful information. Also, there has been no real name-calling. At worst, they've made vague references to whoever is behind the new design. They have not called you an idiot, nor any specific person (I also have to laugh when you find calling someone an idiot on the internet an example of vitriol -- there are so many worse things that have been said that it's pretty tame to, rightly, call the designers idiots). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 That. lol @ this thread. This is why the NWS should only output raw data to the public. Because of a few unsatisfied weather forum posters? Donald Southerland or Jorge shouldn't be able to see NWS model products? Why? Some of us pay taxes as well that funds the NWS. That pays for nuclear weapons systems as well, but the DoD might have somewhat more valid reasons for not making information on that available to the public than that Ji won't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohleary Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The folks who designed and implemented the site are for the most part not Mets...which in my personal opinion, is part one of the problem. Secondly, there were several issues during the development that again, in my personal opinion, should have caused the project to halt and have been completely re-thought. This didn't happen, it was just full steam ahead nevertheless. Some of the issues that are being experienced are due to both of these. It's unfortunate as it seems a perfectly functional site was sacrificed simply so that it could be replaced by something with more modern technology, which in my personal opinion, is the case. But the folks who are working on the site are being told what to do by management, and them by their management and so on...so it's hard to find where the blame lies for any of this. The ones on the front lines, the ones a few of you are libeling by calling them morons and idiots (look in the mirror), are the last ones that deserve it, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KEITH L.I Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 He didn't even stop to think about who we are calling idiots. I think he really thinks that Keith was calling everyone at NCEP, researchers and mets alike, idiots. Maybe I mispoke calling them idiots..sorry..however when you upgrade a site,you would think they would give it a few test runs,before you put it into service.And there has to be somebody at the NCEP who can fix a website..I mean that's all they deal with is computer forecasts..If they cant fix it..take it off line and put the old one back until they fix it..it makes perfect sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WidreMann Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The folks who designed and implemented the site are for the most part not Mets...which in my personal opinion, is part one of the problem. Secondly, there were several issues during the development that again, in my personal opinion, should have caused the project to halt and have been completely re-thought. This didn't happen, it was just full steam ahead nevertheless. Some of the issues that are being experienced are due to both of these. It's unfortunate as it seems a perfectly functional site was sacrificed simply so that it could be replaced by something with more modern technology, which in my personal opinion, is the case. Obviously, it's programmers who made the site, which makes sense. It sounds like they didn't work very well with the mets or the people who actually use the site. But the folks who are working on the site are being told what to do by management, and them by their management and so on...so it's hard to find where the blame lies for any of this. The ones on the front lines, the ones a few of you are libeling by calling them morons and idiots (look in the mirror), are the last ones that deserve it, IMO. It's easy to blame management, and they are certainly at fault, but I doubt that the specific web design failures can be blamed on management. There was someone in the process with a technical background who made some bad decisions. Someone who was actually building the product failed to do a good job. Even with bad management, there's no reason for mismatched images and weirdo JavaScript links. Well, I suppose really bad management could make that happen, but it seems unlikely. Conspiracy theory: Santorum is trying to discredit the NWS and the first step is making a bad model products site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Because of a few unsatisfied weather forum posters? Donald Southerland or Jorge shouldn't be able to see NWS model products? Why? Some of us pay taxes as well that funds the NWS. That pays for nuclear weapons systems as well, but the DoD might have somewhat more valid reasons for not making information on that available to the public than that Ji won't like it. There are plenty of other private/public sites and user software for the public to view model output graphically in a timely enough manner. I think the NWS is just wasting too much time and resources with advanced GFE grids, graphical model output, camtasia briefings and the like. The op time spent is increasing with social media, emergency response and decision support becoming larger programs as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 There are plenty of other private/public sites and user software for the public to view model output graphically in a timely enough manner. I think the NWS is just wasting too much time and resources with advanced GFE grids, graphical model output, camtasia briefings and the like. The op time spent is increasing with social media, emergency response and decision support becoming larger programs as well. I'm not sure some of the stuff I like, such as the SPC site SREF means for severe weather are available, although I haven't checked the TornadoVideos.Net related TwisterData site recently. Of course, if they became sole source, they probably start charging for it. I get creaky in my middle age, the Raleigh site, the e-Wall, Utah.edu, FSU, SFWMD and NIU.edu are my main source of free weather. That and NWS AFDs. I follow the Facebook of neighboring NWS offices, just in case I might miss something. PPV AccuWeather has a lot more data for the Euro, including stuff like QPF, 2 meter winds and forecast skew-Ts that I don't see elsewhere, but other than that, having AccuWx PPV doesn't seem to have the great advantage it did 10 years ago or whenever they started the PPV service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.