Hacker News Reader

Comment by tubbo | Hacker News Reader

This statement is total bullshit. Weather Underground doesn't have better data or coverage than the Weather Channel. If you're really looking for more coverage, check out the weather blogs.

View on HN

They do have a huge network of personal weather stations that the Weather Channel doesn't have. It's mentioned in the blog post that the Weather Channel was going to start incorporating that data on weather.com.

How many fans will stop publishing their data to spite them for the acquisition or if the site gets more evil? I wonder.

A fairly large number of them in my area (I'd say like 80%+) are associated with things like schools or hospitals, so I bet a lot of them are going to stick around.

It's still sad though. Weather.com doesn't have anything that works as well as the WunderMap, and certainly nothing I can leave running 24/7 in a browser unless I want to restart it every few hours.

I used Wunderground for years, but in the past few months, their local data went crazy. They were emitting ridiculous data like eight degrees hotter than any other station. I reported the bad data, and I got back a form email about how great their "new" algorithms were. They definitely need some outlier filters to kill off idiots putting their thermometers in the sun over asphalt, or whatever was the problem. I looked around and, oddly enough, ended up using weather.com. I now have a morbid fascination with their record of the high for the day at some exact time...

The real skill in weather seems to be from WeatherBill, now The Climate Corporation:

http://ecorner.stanford.edu/author/david_friedberg

When there is big money on the accuracy of the weather prediction and measurement, they tend to get it right.

I haven't seen that around me. My only issue is that a PWS that was near my house went offline, so the "nearest" to me is a buoy in Lake Michigan which in the evening is about 10-15 degrees cooler than everywhere else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com