WXforum.net
Weather Related Organizations => WeatherUnderground => Topic started by: webcams.travel on January 22, 2018, 08:40:47 AM
-
The team who created lookr.com is going to build an improved WU alternative that works smoothly - if you want us to. But this requires resources. So we are asking weather enthusiasts - like you - out there, if they would be willing to pay a small price for such a satisfying service.
We are not weather enthusiasts ourselves. But we love webcams. And we have a genuine interest in providing a satisfying service for our users. Now, and in the future. Below you see two sample screenshots of how our new service might look like:
Update:
We have two experienced weather enthusiasts on board in this project to make sure we will go into the right direction. And of course, we will stay in touch through your feedback on how to improve and develop what actually makes sense. For example, we already got feedback that it would be enough to update every 5 seconds for rapid fire, since most weather stations won't be able to update every second (as suggested by our survey before).
Please let us know in this survey (https://goo.gl/cZ5DNs), if you are interested in such an improved WU alternative. Thank you.
https://goo.gl/cZ5DNs (Google Survey)
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Please let us know in this survey (https://goo.gl/cZ5DNs), if you are interested in such an improved WU alternative. Thank you.
https://goo.gl/cZ5DNs (Google Survey)
-
65°F and snowing...looks about as accurate as WU. :lol:
-
65°F and snowing...looks about as accurate as WU. :lol:
;)
-
@We are not weather enthusiasts ourselves
In that case, you probably need to find some folks from the survey responses to start giving you an idea of what the "average" enthusiast, who's spent many hundreds of dollars setting up a station, would consider the bare minimum before he/she would consider paying you monthly to display their data.
Many of us already have websites so yours would probably be geared toward those who have no desire to maintain a personal website (or don't have the experience to set up a site).
I just get the feeling here that you don't yet have an understanding of the level of effort and scope of work required to make a go of something like this. Better get some advisors on board.
-
n.b. from admin: I removed two duplicate postings from two boards with the same content as the original post here. (saratogaWX)
-
@We are not weather enthusiasts ourselves
In that case, you probably need to find some folks from the survey responses to start giving you an idea of what the "average" enthusiast, who's spent many hundreds of dollars setting up a station, would consider the bare minimum before he/she would consider paying you monthly to display their data.
Many of us already have websites so yours would probably be geared toward those who have no desire to maintain a personal website (or don't have the experience to set up a site).
I just get the feeling here that you don't yet have an understanding of the level of effort and scope of work required to make a go of something like this. Better get some advisors on board.
Hi Felix
It is always a good idea to bring an experienced advisor on board! And we actually have two, currently. We should mention that, thank you! And of course, we will also allow and listen to feedback from users.
How many (in %) of you would you estimate, don't have or want to create their own website (i.e. be interested in our service)? And how many of you here are actually using WU currently?
-
n.b. from admin: I removed two duplicate postings from two boards with the same content as the original post here. (saratogaWX)
Thank you for your info. Is it OK if we just post a link to this post in the ChitChat board? Because we want to reach as many as possible to participate in order for this project to survive...
-
Update:
We have two experienced weather enthusiasts on board in this project to make sure we will go into the right direction. And of course, we will stay in touch through your feedback on how to improve and develop what actually makes sense. For example, we already got feedback that it would be enough to update every 5 seconds for rapid fire, since most weather stations won't be able to update every second (as suggested by our survey before).
-
n.b. from admin: I removed two duplicate postings from two boards with the same content as the original post here. (saratogaWX)
Thank you for your info. Is it OK if we just post a link to this post in the ChitChat board? Because we want to reach as many as possible to participate in order for this project to survive...
There is no need for duplicate postings. When folks use the unread replies (https://www.wxforum.net/index.php?action=unreadreplies) at the top of each page, they'll see any new posts you make. Lots of people use that mechanism to see "what's new" and that obviates the need to post in multiple boards. Besides, their posts to topics on this thread keeps everything in one place.
-
There is no need for duplicate postings. When folks use the unread replies (https://www.wxforum.net/index.php?action=unreadreplies) at the top of each page, they'll see any new posts you make. Lots of people use that mechanism to see "what's new" and that obviates the need to post in multiple boards. Besides, their posts to topics on this thread keeps everything in one place.
OK, sounds good. Thank you for your info and support!
-
I do applaud what you are doing
but WU do seem committed to getting back to how they used to be for reliability
(see the thread about that)
so maybe see how that pans out before spending too much more time and resources on this?
although doing the survey first is a good idea
-
I do applaud what you are doing
but WU do seem committed to getting back to how they used to be for reliability
(see the thread about that)
so maybe see how that pans out before spending too much more time and resources on this?
although doing the survey first is a good idea
Thank you.
Well, from what heard, it seems not to be the first time, WU is "committed to fix issues". So who guarantees you that there will be no more issues in the future - even if they fix the current issues? The question is, what is the motivation behind WU? Are they just always going to be reactive to the issues continuously arising? Or are they keen on providing a good service which does not run into severe issues in the first place?
-
So who guarantees you that there will be no more issues in the future - even if they fix the current issues?
Who guarantees that your (proposed) service would be any better? Do we get our money back when it crashes?
The question is, what is the motivation behind WU?
Their motivation is the PWS data and to a lesser extent ad sales. "Watson" ingests all of this (as well as weather data from dozens of other sources) and sells weather and climate data to corporate clients for big money. IBM has no use for WU as a website, which is painfully evident over the last few months, but if they start losing en masse accurate PWS contributors like you find at this site it threatens their business model.
-
The question is, what is the motivation behind WU?
Their motivation is the PWS data and to a lesser extent ad sales. "Watson" ingests all of this (as well as weather data from dozens of other sources) and sells weather and climate data to corporate clients for big money. IBM has no use for WU as a website, which is painfully evident over the last few months, but if they start losing en masse accurate PWS contributors like you find at this site it threatens their business model.
I totally agree!
-
I would pay. My weather webcams are "my thing". If they could be displayed in HD I would pay. Low res images do not do justice to 1080p and 1440p cams. As far as WU goes. They suck. End of story. Being bought out by the Weather channel was a slow moving disaster that has picked up speed.
-
So who guarantees you that there will be no more issues in the future - even if they fix the current issues?
Who guarantees that your (proposed) service would be any better? Do we get our money back when it crashes?
The question is, what is the motivation behind WU?
Their motivation is the PWS data and to a lesser extent ad sales. "Watson" ingests all of this (as well as weather data from dozens of other sources) and sells weather and climate data to corporate clients for big money. IBM has no use for WU as a website, which is painfully evident over the last few months, but if they start losing en masse accurate PWS contributors like you find at this site it threatens their business model.
A) Good point. Well, if you use lookr.com, you can at least see that the timelapse are always working (in case the webcam delivers new images, of course). We don't have 250.000 weather stations running, but at least 60.000 webcams.
B) OK, but still, they are motivated by not losing something. Avoiding something is a less weaker motivation than the one you have when going towards something, like creating something great and beautiful. Something you WANT to use, not something that NEEDS to work...
-
I would pay. My weather webcams are "my thing". If they could be displayed in HD I would pay. Low res images do not do justice to 1080p and 1440p cams. As far as WU goes. They suck. End of story. Being bought out by the Weather channel was a slow moving disaster that has picked up speed.
Thank you, jas340.
That is exactly what we mean by creating something beautiful. Of course, we want your HD webcam to shine, not just to work!
PS: Do you know your average webcam image size (in KB) for your 1440p resolution?
-
The question is, what is the motivation behind WU?
Their motivation is the PWS data and to a lesser extent ad sales. "Watson" ingests all of this (as well as weather data from dozens of other sources) and sells weather and climate data to corporate clients for big money. IBM has no use for WU as a website, which is painfully evident over the last few months, but if they start losing en masse accurate PWS contributors like you find at this site it threatens their business model.
I totally agree!
OK, but still, they are motivated by not losing something. Avoiding something is a less weaker motivation than the one you have when going towards something, like creating something great and beautiful. Something you WANT to use, not something that NEEDS to work...
-
It's an interesting idea, but for me I'm not interested in paying to provide something to a company for them to profit from. That would definitely be a win-win for them and I don't fault the company from attempting it, but I don't see myself being involved in it. There are several "free" reporting sites that appreciate and seek data to incorporate in their public websites. These may not have web/weather camera feeds but I built my station to furnish data...my weather-cam was an afterthought.
Also, starting from scratch and building a public presence/awareness of anything close to what WU has will take quiet a while...just as it took them to get to where they are at in that regard. And, they didn't charge anything to host the data. (I just looked and WU was founded 23 years ago.)
I wish you the best on this but I seriously don't see it working out if you charge people to upload their data to you. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm too narrow-minded, but.... :-k
-
It's an interesting idea, but for me I'm not interested in paying to provide something to a company for them to profit from. That would definitely be a win-win for them and I don't fault the company from attempting it, but I don't see myself being involved in it. There are several "free" reporting sites that appreciate and seek data to incorporate in their public websites. These may not have web/weather camera feeds but I built my station to furnish data...my weather-cam was an afterthought.
Also, starting from scratch and building a public presence/awareness of anything close to what WU has will take quiet a while...just as it took them to get to where they are at in that regard. And, they didn't charge anything to host the data. (I just looked and WU was founded 23 years ago.)
I wish you the best on this but I seriously don't see it working out if you charge people to upload their data to you. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm too narrow-minded, but.... :-k
Thank you for your wishes! It will be hard and difficult to achieve a big user base, for sure. But that is part of the adventure we are looking forward to. And of course, we count on our future users to recommend us, because we do a really good job - that is our motivation ;)
Actually, we were quite (positively) surprised by the feedback we got so far from our survey!
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
We will probably also incude a free offer with only the very basic features to address as many needs as possible.
PS: You can still give us your opinion about it. We still accept answers in our survey: https://goo.gl/cZ5DNs
-
I've already given you my opinion, in more depth than the pie chart. ;)
-
I've already given you my opinion, in more depth than the pie chart. ;)
Thank you! :)
-
how will you get the weather data?
-
how will you get the weather data?
You should be able to send your weather data to us the same way you do currently with WU. Are you currently using Meteobridge?
-
so you mean the data format would be the same as WU
but you would need to change the URL where the data is sent to?
so if what ever you use does not allow that to happen, then what?
-
so you mean the data format would be the same as WU
but you would need to change the URL where the data is sent to?
so if what ever you use does not allow that to happen, then what?
Yes, we will try to make it as much compatible as possible. However, we have not yet started with testing the weather data upload yet. If you want, you can participate in the beta program - just say so in the comment section of our survey.
-
so in meteobridge that has the ability to set the URL to send the wunderground data to?
I do know that you can set the IP address to send WU data to with a WiFi Pro type station
but that is about it, anything else and its likely to be hardcoded, where the WU data is sent to
i.e your market is rather limited
-
how will you get the weather data?
You should be able to send your weather data to us the same way you do currently with WU. Are you currently using Meteobridge?
I have the Davis Weatherlink IP which uploads directly to Davis who then feeds to WUndergound and CWOP. How would your site work for me?
I like not needing a PC on my home network to act as the delivery agent for my data.
-
so your more about webcams but going to collect data too, so do you have any ideas on forecasting too?
Just wondering how you expect my CumulusMX server is going to send data to you.
-
so in meteobridge that has the ability to set the URL to send the wunderground data to?
I do know that you can set the IP address to send WU data to with a WiFi Pro type station
but that is about it, anything else and its likely to be hardcoded, where the WU data is sent to
i.e your market is rather limited
With Meteobridge it should either be possible that we will be added as a default upload setting in the future, or at least you can add your own configuration to upload your data to us (as soon, as we're ready, of course).
-
so your more about webcams but going to collect data too, so do you have any ideas on forecasting too?
Just wondering how you expect my CumulusMX server is going to send data to you.
Our focus will be on allowing you to upload and store webcam and weather data. But we don't plan on creating a forecast too. The idea is to allow you to enjoy your hobby as weather station owners, digging into the data.
-
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
-
so looks like you are really only be able to integrate with meteobridge for weather data?
that will narrow your potential client base
-
so looks like you are really only be able to integrate with meteobridge for weather data?
that will narrow your potential client base
Plus weeWX, it will be a simple task to develop a weeWX uploader.
Gary
-
I have the acurite hub thing - which only sends data to WU - if you can develop a way to allow me to send data without having to use an online computer bridge - or buy a whole new system - I would be willing to pay $100 or so a year to be a member.
I like being able to see local weather stations, data and cams as storms approach my location etc.
M
-
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
You are very welcome.
How is the title misleading? What did you expect from the title?
-
so looks like you are really only be able to integrate with meteobridge for weather data?
that will narrow your potential client base
Thank you for your feedback.
What other options would you recommend/suggest?
-
so looks like you are really only be able to integrate with meteobridge for weather data?
that will narrow your potential client base
Plus weeWX, it will be a simple task to develop a weeWX uploader.
Gary
Thank you, Gary!
I added "weeWX" to our feature request list: https://feedback.userreport.com/1b124292-6404-4a4d-8a5c-6d897c1aab86/#idea/203649
-
I have the acurite hub thing - which only sends data to WU - if you can develop a way to allow me to send data without having to use an online computer bridge - or buy a whole new system - I would be willing to pay $100 or so a year to be a member.
I like being able to see local weather stations, data and cams as storms approach my location etc.
M
Thanks for your feedback!
I added your station model to our feature request list as well: https://feedback.userreport.com/1b124292-6404-4a4d-8a5c-6d897c1aab86/#idea/203650
Can you perhaps add a link with some specifications?
-
What other options would you recommend/suggest?
I would think you should be contacting the 3rd party software developers
-
Pay you for us to send you data? Respectfully, That'd be a big fat no.
Good luck re-inventing the wheel.
-
Pay you for us to send you data? Respectfully, That'd be a big fat no.
Good luck re-inventing the wheel.
I'll second that. If I have to pay to use your website you'll need to pay me for my data.
-
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
You are very welcome.
How is the title misleading? What did you expect from the title?
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
You are very welcome.
How is the title misleading? What did you expect from the title?
Well I can not see your site being a "wu alternative" if you're expect people to pay for the privilege, and not having a forecast.
As people have said if I had to pay for your site, you'd need to pay for my data.
Sent from my ONEPLUS 5T using Tapatalk
-
The following is my opinion and only my opinion. Webcams.travel specializes in webcams. If you do not have a webcam or a webcam that you feel the world may want to see, then this new project is probably not for you. As far as selling the data? I doubt it. This will be a niche market at best.
How many complaints on the board about WU and their total failure in regards to webcams? How about WU limiting upload size to .15mb? Low quality image at best. People care about their webcams and want them on the internet. Would I pay WU for low quality images that don't show up anyway with the knowledge they do sell the info, No. Would I pay a few dollars for high quality images on a nice weather page. Probably.
WU and their moronic decisions now cost me $17.00 dollars a month + an additional $200.00 roughly to get my own site up and running. I only need WU to feed data to my other site or else I would have dropped them like a hot potato.
-
Just my take - but I think it all depends on what you are interested in with regards to services/features. For me, the appealing thing about WU (when it was actually working) - was the ability to figure out what was coming my way weather-wise. I do a lot of duck hunting in December on the St. Lawrence R - which can be decently dangerous if you get caught out there in unexpected wind. We also get a fair amount of freezing rain here in the winter - and it's nice to be able to see temperatures/conditions locally. We lose power a lot - so its nice to pump the heat up if there's a chance of an outage.
So, basically, what I would be looking for is hyper-local conditions in real time - not necessarily forecasting. The weather network/channel forecast is hit and miss - but good enough to get the general idea of what is likely to happen - at least around here.
To get the hyper-local conditions you need lots of members and lots of stations uploading reliably - which was why WU appealed to me. Nice to be able to see the cams as well. I'd pay for that service if it was reliable and easy to use.
-
For hyper local forecasts I absolutely love DarkSky. I found a page of widgets that can be embedded in webpages. Possibly webcams.travel could incorporate one into their new web page template.
https://darksky.net/widgets
-
WU and their moronic decisions now cost me $17.00 dollars a month + an additional $200.00 roughly to get my own site up and running. I only need WU to feed data to my other site or else I would have dropped them like a hot potato.
I take it you cannot upload to another site? Met Office WOW, Awekas, Weathercloud, CWOP, PWS, Weatherbug are a few that accept data and at least 3 of them already take webcams images from Personal Weather stations.
-
What other options would you recommend/suggest?
I would think you should be contacting the 3rd party software developers
Yes, this is true. But before we do that we need to find out which hardware models are the most popular ones in order to support them one by one.
-
Pay you for us to send you data? Respectfully, That'd be a big fat no.
Good luck re-inventing the wheel.
I'll second that. If I have to pay to use your website you'll need to pay me for my data.
Well, it all depends on the situation. If you are seeing yourself as a producer of a good as a business man, than you are totally right.
However, it looks like many of you are running a weather station just for fun, as a hobby, and are looking for a smooth and nice service, that allows them to dig into their data and enjoy their hobby. These are the people we are building this service for.
-
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
You are very welcome.
How is the title misleading? What did you expect from the title?
OK thanks for the update
I think you need to change the "WU Alternative" topic title, as it's misleading
You are very welcome.
How is the title misleading? What did you expect from the title?
Well I can not see your site being a "wu alternative" if you're expect people to pay for the privilege, and not having a forecast.
As people have said if I had to pay for your site, you'd need to pay for my data.
Sent from my ONEPLUS 5T using Tapatalk
OK, I see your point about the forecast. However, we are not sure yet for how many of you a forecast would be an important part of the whole service. As far as we understand it, the main benefit we deliver would be having the webcam and data archive available to dig into, to analyse by yourself - without the need of a forecast.
-
The following is my opinion and only my opinion. Webcams.travel specializes in webcams. If you do not have a webcam or a webcam that you feel the world may want to see, then this new project is probably not for you. As far as selling the data? I doubt it. This will be a niche market at best.
How many complaints on the board about WU and their total failure in regards to webcams? How about WU limiting upload size to .15mb? Low quality image at best. People care about their webcams and want them on the internet. Would I pay WU for low quality images that don't show up anyway with the knowledge they do sell the info, No. Would I pay a few dollars for high quality images on a nice weather page. Probably.
WU and their moronic decisions now cost me $17.00 dollars a month + an additional $200.00 roughly to get my own site up and running. I only need WU to feed data to my other site or else I would have dropped them like a hot potato.
You are right, our main benefit will be the high quality webcam (real time and archive) images. However, we also want to round up the service by doing the same for the weather data.
This is very interesting. What do you mean exactly by "I only need WU to feed data to my other site"? Would this be something we could offer you as well?
-
Just my take - but I think it all depends on what you are interested in with regards to services/features. For me, the appealing thing about WU (when it was actually working) - was the ability to figure out what was coming my way weather-wise. I do a lot of duck hunting in December on the St. Lawrence R - which can be decently dangerous if you get caught out there in unexpected wind. We also get a fair amount of freezing rain here in the winter - and it's nice to be able to see temperatures/conditions locally. We lose power a lot - so its nice to pump the heat up if there's a chance of an outage.
So, basically, what I would be looking for is hyper-local conditions in real time - not necessarily forecasting. The weather network/channel forecast is hit and miss - but good enough to get the general idea of what is likely to happen - at least around here.
To get the hyper-local conditions you need lots of members and lots of stations uploading reliably - which was why WU appealed to me. Nice to be able to see the cams as well. I'd pay for that service if it was reliable and easy to use.
Thank you for your very insightful and helpful feedback! Yes, we will focus on reliable and easy to use service for sure.
And we will do our best to gain as many weather station members as possible, but we will be very small in numbers at first. However, we will do our best to grow as fast as we can, and of course, we count on your support to let others know about our service as well - which is why we want it to be as satisfying for you as possible.
-
For hyper local forecasts I absolutely love DarkSky. I found a page of widgets that can be embedded in webpages. Possibly webcams.travel could incorporate one into their new web page template.
https://darksky.net/widgets
Thank you for sharing this! It does remind me a bit of https://www.windy.com - do you know/use that site as well?
-
webcam.travel
Can you tell me do you add webcams yourself to your own site from users websites, just curious as to how mine appeared on your website when I dont seem to have an account with you linked to any of my email addresses.
-
WU and their moronic decisions now cost me $17.00 dollars a month + an additional $200.00 roughly to get my own site up and running. I only need WU to feed data to my other site or else I would have dropped them like a hot potato.
I take it you cannot upload to another site? Met Office WOW, Awekas, Weathercloud, CWOP, PWS, Weatherbug are a few that accept data and at least 3 of them already take webcams images from Personal Weather stations.
I upload to all of those except Weathercloud. Unfortunately, just like WU, I do not own or control those companies/sites. They could decide to shut down or just go to hell in a hand basket just like WU. They are also lame websites. Now that I have my own website, it does what I want it to do. I pay to keep the lights on so to speak. The one thing my site does not have is name recognition and exposure.
I am very content with my new site. However, I also applaud webcams.travel for coming on the forum to see if they can make a business model that will work. I support the concept of what they are trying to do.
PS I dislike WU, they have been frustrating me and many of us for years. They took us all for granted for too long.
http://horseshoebendidahoweather.com/template/indexDesktop.php
-
"This is very interesting. What do you mean exactly by "I only need WU to feed data to my other site"? Would this be something we could offer you as well?"
My personal website uses Meteotemplate. It is a template created by Jachym. He is very active on this forum and extremely knowledgeable. My personal knowledge is very limited and I needed a lot of help getting my site/his template up and running. With that caveat, yes if you have a WU account you can feed the data to another template using an API from WU. The limitation IIRC is that you are limited to uploads every 5 minutes.
Another option may be to buy Cumulus by Sandysoft and modify it to add your site to upload to. Again IIRC the development of the program has ended due to the developer moving on to other things in his life. Someone, please correct me if I am incorrect on any of these points.
-
Another option may be to buy Cumulus by Sandysoft and modify it to add your site to upload to. Again IIRC the development of the program has ended due to the developer moving on to other things in his life. Someone, please correct me if I am incorrect on any of these points.
I don't think you can buy Cumulus just yet. Steve is on long term vacation and there is no new development for quite a while but he still monitors his forum and usually provides quick support. What the future holds is uncertain.
However Cumulus as it is currently can provide data to other sites through the regular processing and uploading of template files. Example: AWEKAS.
Enjoy,
Paul
-
webcam.travel
Can you tell me do you add webcams yourself to your own site from users websites, just curious as to how mine appeared on your website when I dont seem to have an account with you linked to any of my email addresses.
Thank you for asking this. Actually, it is possible for everybody to add a webcam - however, the webcam owner can claim ownership of his webcam anytime (with the according proof, of course).
-
I upload to all of those except Weathercloud. Unfortunately, just like WU, I do not own or control those companies/sites. They could decide to shut down or just go to hell in a hand basket just like WU. They are also lame websites. Now that I have my own website, it does what I want it to do. I pay to keep the lights on so to speak. The one thing my site does not have is name recognition and exposure.
I am very content with my new site. However, I also applaud webcams.travel for coming on the forum to see if they can make a business model that will work. I support the concept of what they are trying to do.
PS I dislike WU, they have been frustrating me and many of us for years. They took us all for granted for too long.
http://horseshoebendidahoweather.com/template/indexDesktop.php
Thank you for your kind words!
-
My personal website uses Meteotemplate. It is a template created by Jachym. He is very active on this forum and extremely knowledgeable. My personal knowledge is very limited and I needed a lot of help getting my site/his template up and running. With that caveat, yes if you have a WU account you can feed the data to another template using an API from WU. The limitation IIRC is that you are limited to uploads every 5 minutes.
Another option may be to buy Cumulus by Sandysoft and modify it to add your site to upload to. Again IIRC the development of the program has ended due to the developer moving on to other things in his life. Someone, please correct me if I am incorrect on any of these points.
Thank you very much, this is very helpful. I added "Cumulus support" to our feature suggestion list:
https://feedback.userreport.com/1b124292-6404-4a4d-8a5c-6d897c1aab86/#idea/203936
-
Another option may be to buy Cumulus by Sandysoft and modify it to add your site to upload to. Again IIRC the development of the program has ended due to the developer moving on to other things in his life. Someone, please correct me if I am incorrect on any of these points. I don't think you can buy Cumulus just yet. Steve is on long term vacation and there is no new development for quite a while but he still monitors his forum and usually provides quick support. What the future holds is uncertain.However Cumulus as it is currently can provide data to other sites through the regular processing and uploading of template files. Example: AWEKAS.
Cumulus (1.9.4-b1079) has been up and running since May 2013 here at BeeWeather. It's like an old mule, just keeps plodding along. Never a glitche (due to it) and does everything I want it to do. Yeah, Steve is traveling Europe with his wife and I'm jealous...I sent him some green matter to him back around Christmas (something I try to do once a year). I think he said they were in Spain at the time and that I was buying them supper and a bottle of wine that night! :lol:
Cumulus is a great little piece of software, add in Ken's templates and scripts and SHAZAM!!!, you've got your weather station online and deploying data to multiple other agencies. Nice.
-
Another option may be to buy Cumulus by Sandysoft and modify it to add your site to upload to. Again IIRC the development of the program has ended due to the developer moving on to other things in his life. Someone, please correct me if I am incorrect on any of these points. I don't think you can buy Cumulus just yet. Steve is on long term vacation and there is no new development for quite a while but he still monitors his forum and usually provides quick support. What the future holds is uncertain.However Cumulus as it is currently can provide data to other sites through the regular processing and uploading of template files. Example: AWEKAS.
Cumulus (1.9.4-b1079) has been up and running since May 2013 here at BeeWeather. It's like an old mule, just keeps plodding along. Never a glitche (due to it) and does everything I want it to do. Yeah, Steve is traveling Europe with his wife and I'm jealous...I sent him some green matter to him back around Christmas (something I try to do once a year). I think he said they were in Spain at the time and that I was buying them supper and a bottle of wine that night! :lol:
Cumulus is a great little piece of software, add in Ken's templates and scripts and SHAZAM!!!, you've got your weather station online and deploying data to multiple other agencies. Nice.
Sounds great :grin: