WXforum.net

Weather Station Hardware => Weather Web Cams => Bloomsky Sky Camera+sensors => Topic started by: PaulMy on February 24, 2016, 06:22:46 PM

Title: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on February 24, 2016, 06:22:46 PM
Anyone having failure of their BloomSky?
I had it quit yesterday afternoon,  A WiFi reset started it again.
It quit again this morning but was away so could not take a look.  Now a couple of WiFi resets has again got it running.
 
BloomSky support have been very responsive to my calls.
 
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: waysta on February 24, 2016, 07:07:07 PM
Update: Spoke too soon, ironically DOA and off line Feb. 25, but back online okay with a complete reset 2/26

I've been lucky so far - 100% coms reliability (including a night of -21F); no disconnects since mid January.  (at least no disconnects that required a reset, I suppose there could have been missed data here and there, but none that I've noticed)  Bloom Sky is on a pole above the garage roof, probably about a 50 to 60 foot diagonal line from an indoor wall mounted Netgear R7000 Nighthawk WiFi router at the other side of my ranch home.

Others have more experience with WiFi issues.  Tell us what you learn.

PS: I keep an old Moto Droid around to run Android "WiFi Optimizer".  It makes a spectrum analyzer like graph of the WiFi channels so you can change your WiFi router to a least used channel in your neighborhood, Channel 9 for me.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on February 24, 2016, 07:19:41 PM
Hmmm

based on the comments here on the forum it looks to me like the support is very good, but on the other hand, the product quite unreliable. I mean look how many people here have it - not so many - and they've only had it for couple of days and already so many problems... with a product that should work without any problems several yrs
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: cjohlandt on February 24, 2016, 08:02:28 PM
I wonder if there's a problem with the most recent batch of BloomSky's?  My initial Kickstarter unit had a black ring on the camera and they replaced it with no hassle.  I've had my current unit for over 6 months now and have had zero problems and the initial Kickstarter editions have been in use since last summer.  Keep in mind that the experiences on this board represent a relatively minor subset of all BloomSky users.  Looking at their map (https://map.bloomsky.com/?utm_source=Weatherlution&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=nav%20bar%20link (https://map.bloomsky.com/?utm_source=Weatherlution&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=nav%20bar%20link)), they've got over 3,000 units deployed worldwide.

-Chris
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: sacreyweather on February 24, 2016, 08:45:40 PM
Knock on wood, mine is running just fine and has withstood over 2.50 inches of rain with no issues.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jumpin Joe on February 24, 2016, 09:26:41 PM
Well, I'm one of the unfortunate.  My unit is having video issues. BloomSky's tech support has been great.

Waiting for a new unit, they are exchanging it.

Joe
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on February 25, 2016, 07:48:51 AM
From my experience I’ve had one unit replaced.  This was due to what started out as a possible UV sensor failure which then seemed to work or dry out.  But, then the camera gave out.  Bloomsky was quick to replace it which included a prepaid shipping label.

One of my current units continues to have a problem (?) with the on/off button.  It was my understanding that while the device is operating normally, the on/off button will flash (green) for a few seconds.  Mine does not.  Other than that it seems be operating fine.

All of the units I’ve dealt with have very quirky on/off buttons.  Although I was able to get them turned on, they reminded me of priming a hand water pump. 

The other area that needs attention is with the app and how it handles a simple router/Wi-Fi reconnect.  Although there is a separate button in the app for this action, it appears to loop (?) back to the ‘add new device’ screen.  This is fine, except then it asks for you to name your unit.  You shouldn’t have to rename the unit if all you’re doing is resetting your Wi-Fi.

The other area of concern is that of the Wi-Fi range.  I understand this is not totally the fault of Bloomsky, however like many producers of Wi-Fi gear, the advertised Wi-Fi  range often falls short of delivery.  In defense, it’s often hard to predict or estimate the average users’ environment with microwaves, cordless phones, walls, etc. 

Only time will tell how these units hold up.  From what I’ve seen they’ve done fairly well dealing with the brutal cold weather.  The next test will be this summer when the sun can produce temps well into the 90’s and a heat index beyond that.

Overall the Bloomsky support team has been very good.  Informative, courteous and helpful.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: txweather.org on February 25, 2016, 11:17:24 AM
Working fine since day 1.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on February 25, 2016, 11:45:45 AM
Mine stopped working yesterday afternoon after working well for a few weeks.
It now says offline.  I tried several resets but it won't come back online.
I left a message with Bloomsky support.

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on February 25, 2016, 12:35:36 PM
Yours too Tom? Wow... well then I guess I dont regret much I did not get one.... looks to me like it more often does not work or stops working than works fine... at least here on the forum
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: waysta on February 25, 2016, 12:58:44 PM
I'm down now too.  They might be doing some system wide upgrades/improvements?  I try to remain optimistic, but I'm having some doubts now too ...
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on February 25, 2016, 01:08:30 PM
I only see two possibilities:

1. the device is extremely unreliable
2. it is what you suggested - some kind of upgrade, but then I still think this is unacceptable - not letting the users know? And in fact, even if they did let you know, the upgrades cannot be done in a way that means your cam is offline for hours/days!
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on February 25, 2016, 01:18:45 PM
Mine is working at the moment.

I've been running one near half-a year now.  The only issue I've had is a "psychedelic" camera that they replaced.

I've never had it just stop reporting except when I let the battery run out.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on February 25, 2016, 01:21:56 PM
Since Dec 25, 2015:

https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/eaB1rJytnpS4rJqo

88 followers can't be wrong... 8-)
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on February 25, 2016, 01:22:41 PM
Mine stopped working yesterday afternoon after working well for a few weeks.
It now says offline.  I tried several resets but it won't come back online.
I left a message with Bloomsky support.

It it "offline" everywhere, or just the app?

A couple weeks ago mine said "offline" in the app, but was still accessible through the web.

I had to completely shut down the app on my iPhone, then re-opened it, and then it was fine.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on February 25, 2016, 01:34:21 PM
My details table is being updated regularly, but the camera still shows the effect from the snow we got until mid morning, but I now see a small spot of the neighbour's driveway so it must be working.

It looks like a lot of sites are having that same snow effect on their camera, at least from clicking on the map locations in nearby Michigan.

Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on February 25, 2016, 01:37:37 PM
My details table is being updated regularly, but the camera still shows the effect from the snow we got until mid morning, but I now see a small spot of the neighbour's driveway so it must be working.

It looks like a lot of sites are having that same snow effect on their camera, at least from clicking on the map locations in nearby Michigan.

Paul

Thanks Paul

Praying for warmer weather...lets melt some of that snow.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on February 25, 2016, 01:44:04 PM
I can connect to my BloomSky using app on my Android but its offline in App and Dashboard and API giving errors.  Did try resets, different router and recreating device, ng.

As mentioned they may have a system issue since there are so many new BloomSky installed over last few weeks.

I really like this product and I know they still ironing out bugs and new features so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.  It's possible I have a defective unit but hopefully their support can resolve this for me quickly.

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: waysta on February 25, 2016, 01:45:59 PM
mine's DOA since 8:56 am this morning (had hours lag in data iOS and WU before that)  Problems started some time after I sent an email about my baro thread to Bloom Sky yesterday (could be a coincidence). 

In iOS I used to have to click on some nearby station on the map one or two times to get my Bloom Sky to update.  Now, if I click on a nearby station then on my temp circle I get nothing in the lower part of the map (my station is gone ..., except for the blue temp circle, bummer)

It's been 100% reliable as to up-time for weeks before that.

Got to say, not in a hurry to climb to the roof and remove the heavy pole mount to be doing resets.

2/26 Update: So, I did the climb 2/25 evening, an entire reset using the iOS App, and all seems okay Feb 26 (but, on a wood stand in the backyard for now).

 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on February 25, 2016, 05:26:19 PM
There is quite a bit of ice and snow built up on the unit...
A little wiping off of the lens and all is good again https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/eaB1rJytnZSmmaar (https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/eaB1rJytnZSmmaar)
 
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on February 26, 2016, 04:12:17 PM
I can connect to my BloomSky using app on my Android but its offline in App and Dashboard and API giving errors.  Did try resets, different router and recreating device, ng.

As mentioned they may have a system issue since there are so many new BloomSky installed over last few weeks.

I really like this product and I know they still ironing out bugs and new features so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.  It's possible I have a defective unit but hopefully their support can resolve this for me quickly.

Here is an update.

I contacted Bloomsky support and today they called me back and had me download a new diagnostics tool to help determine the problem.  The diag tools needs python which I had to download.   Unfortunately when I run tool I get errors so I'm waiting for support to give me next steps.

I've also reached out to lijun from Bloomsky who is also trying to help me.

It seems many others have a similar problems recently and found this POST (https://bloomsky.desk.com/customer/portal/questions/16159573-bloomsky-says-offline) on Bloomsky support.

They are working my issue but my patience is running very thin....



Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on March 03, 2016, 08:02:51 PM
A week ago I started this thread that my Bloomsky had quit again, but was able to get it going again by doing a Wifi reset.   I called Bloomsky and they said they would send a new unit.  Since that time it has had intermittent shut downs and restarts - WU sends an email that it has stopped sending and a few hours later sends a message that it is uploading again, without me doing anything.  Both yesterday and today I have had 2 shut downs (no data in the detail table for those times either).  Anyone else have these shut downs and restarts?
 
Now today I received my replacement Bloomsky and if most other Bloomsky users are not getting these periodic shut downs then I will use the new unit.
 
By the way, less than one week to get a new unit from Bloomsky to me in Komoka, Canada and no charges from UPS, and no custom or taxes this time.  I am very pleased with Bloomsky support =D> =D> .
 
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 03, 2016, 08:26:16 PM
Interesting... I know about several people who already got a free replacement, not to mention the number of units they gave away for free... looks like a very good and fair support and very unreliable product :D Which btw. is not very good combination, because they will soon run out of money...
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: thomas on March 03, 2016, 09:03:33 PM
I got my Bloomsky in December, put it outside the next day on a tripod, and it has been working ever since.  This is only a couple months, but it has seen heavy rain, freezing rain, sleet, heavy snow, and a thunderstorm.  It just keeps taking pictures which is what I wanted it for.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 02:43:48 AM
I see no big problem with "reliability".

Customer service seems reasonable.  They issue replacements when something is clearly broken. 

However, I  find them a bit "opaque" as far as technical information goes.  For example, we still have no clear answer about the problems with pressure readings.  I don't understand why they just can't explain what is going on.  It shouldn't be a big secret.

The pressure on my original BloomSky was very wildly off, but the they said it was "in spec".  I'm talking about 40 or so mb (hPa) or worse.

My newer Bloomsky  is better, but still 8 mb off.  There's really no reason it shouldn't be within 1 mb with today's tech. 

Another example is the operating temperature range.  They make claims now that the unit only goes down to -4F, but that doesn't jibe with their original specifications and battery upgrades that go down to -40F.

In short, I wouldn't call their equipment "unreliable", but I'm not pleased that they aren't answering technical questions satisfactorily.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 05:28:40 AM
I see no big problem with "reliability".

Customer service seems reasonable.  They issue replacements when something is clearly broken. 

However, I  find them a bit "opaque" as far as technical information goes.  For example, we still have no clear answer about the problems with pressure readings.  I don't understand why they just can't explain what is going on.  It shouldn't be a big secret.

The pressure on my original BloomSky was very wildly off, but the they said it was "in spec".  I'm talking about 40 or so mb (hPa) or worse.

My newer Bloomsky  is better, but still 8 mb off.  There's really no reason it shouldn't be within 1 mb with today's tech. 

Another example is the operating temperature range.  They make claims now that the unit only goes down to -4F, but that doesn't jibe with their original specifications and battery upgrades that go down to -40F.

In short, I wouldn't call their equipment "unreliable", but I'm not pleased that they aren't answering technical questions satisfactorily.

I agree...thanks for the post.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 05:41:26 AM
I see no big problem with "reliability".

Customer service seems reasonable.  They issue replacements when something is clearly broken. 

However, I  find them a bit "opaque" as far as technical information goes.  For example, we still have no clear answer about the problems with pressure readings.  I don't understand why they just can't explain what is going on.  It shouldn't be a big secret.

The pressure on my original BloomSky was very wildly off, but the they said it was "in spec".  I'm talking about 40 or so mb (hPa) or worse.

My newer Bloomsky  is better, but still 8 mb off.  There's really no reason it shouldn't be within 1 mb with today's tech. 

Another example is the operating temperature range.  They make claims now that the unit only goes down to -4F, but that doesn't jibe with their original specifications and battery upgrades that go down to -40F.

In short, I wouldn't call their equipment "unreliable", but I'm not pleased that they aren't answering technical questions satisfactorily.

Hmm, I see your point and I agree, though I also think this product is unfortunately unreliable. I mean, look at the number of people that use it here and compare that with the number of people who have problems, their station does not work at all. The percentage would be quite high and IMHO unacceptable for something to be labelled as "reliable". Yes, you could argue that it is something new and you would be right, and Im not saying this not understandable, however that still does not mean it can be said it is reliable. I also do not accept the argument "look how many people elsewhere use it" - well yes, but we do not know how many of those have problems and how many other people use it and it does not work for them so they are not even on the map.
There is obviously no reason why the percentage of people who have problems in general should be substantially different from the percentage of people who have problems on this forum with it.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 08:04:31 AM
Hmm, I see your point and I agree, though I also think this product is unfortunately unreliable. I mean, look at the number of people that use it here and compare that with the number of people who have problems, their station does not work at all. The percentage would be quite high and IMHO unacceptable for something to be labelled as "reliable". Yes, you could argue that it is something new and you would be right, and Im not saying this not understandable, however that still does not mean it can be said it is reliable. I also do not accept the argument "look how many people elsewhere use it" - well yes, but we do not know how many of those have problems and how many other people use it and it does not work for them so they are not even on the map.
There is obviously no reason why the percentage of people who have problems in general should be substantially different from the percentage of people who have problems on this forum with it.

You must be seeing something I'm not.  I'd have to see some actual numbers to support your statement.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 08:13:54 AM
OK lets put it this way, I have cooperated with two people to create the plugin for my template, because I myself do not have it. Now I am using a third person´s API key because both of the two I had previously currently dont have any data and their cam does not work.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 08:16:29 AM
I think this is a case of the 'haves' and the 'haves-not'.... :grin:
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
OK lets put it this way, I have cooperated with two people to create the plugin for my template, because I myself do not have it. Now I am using a third person´s API key because both of the two I had previously currently dont have any data and their cam does not work.

Have those people mentioned their cameras not working in the forum?
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 09:19:33 AM
Yes
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 10:08:04 AM
OK, so like I said, I'm not seeing much of an issue presenting itself here.

It's a new product, and bugs are inevitable in a new production line.  So far they seem to be handling the issues well, and I expect they're analyzing the returned cameras so as to improve future production.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 10:22:20 AM
Yes, but I said, I agree, I am not saying it is a "bad product" - it is new, it has bugs just like any other new or even tested products, yes they are dealing with the issues, improving... however, all I was saying is that despite all that, it is (currently) an unreliable product, which does not mean it cannot change. And I hope it changes before they run out of money, because obviously they cannot afford to be sending replacements for free indefinitely.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 10:32:54 AM
Yes, but I said, I agree, I am not saying it is a "bad product" - it is new, it has bugs just like any other new or even tested products, yes they are dealing with the issues, improving... however, all I was saying is that despite all that, it is (currently) an unreliable product, which does not mean it cannot change. And I hope it changes before they run out of money, because obviously they cannot afford to be sending replacements for free indefinitely.

I think we may be hitting a language barrier.

Calling the device "unreliable" is very harsh assessment, especially if you don't have the stats to back up the claim.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 10:46:29 AM
True,

for me "reliable" means certain level of guaranteed functionality. It is of course subjective, but the percentage of failures compared to the number of units (based on this forum), is for my standards "unreliable"
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: waysta on March 04, 2016, 11:06:53 AM
I think they just went ahead too fast, without enough in-house and beta testing.  Possibly they were driven by excitement, and lack of experience in product testing and production. 

They might also be worried about competition.  Is there some similarity to the Netatmo products?  Netatmo already has indoor and outdoor equipment, including wind speed, but so far no sky camera.  I have no experience with the Netatmo products, other than having looked through the Netatmo website.  They look interesting.

My worry is also related to the apparent lack of concern or lower priority for data integrity.  It might be they have put such concerns on the back burner as fixable later. 

Of possibly more concern, could be that in a near theoretical view of "crowd sourced data", the accuracy of individual units simply does not matter.  In that view of instrumentation, for many tens to thousands of units in a given area, remarkably accurate "local" data can result with a relatively wide spread in the "accuracy" of individual units.

If that were the philosophy (not known, just considering possibilities), it would probably run counter to what many of us seem to want, which is the most accurate and well maintained instruments that we can afford (set in the best practical locations we can individually offer), and then feeding the best data we can generate into a network of amateur sourced data (e.g. CWOP and others).

It is also fun and interesting as a hobbyist or amateur science effort, to have new and different instruments to look at and to work with.  However, if they are terribly inaccurate as individual instruments, with no way to calibrate an individual unit, they might be of less interest, or just plain frustrating.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on March 04, 2016, 11:11:41 AM
True,

for me "reliable" means certain level of guaranteed functionality. It is of course subjective, but the percentage of failures compared to the number of units (based on this forum), is for my standards "unreliable"

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on March 04, 2016, 11:58:17 AM
I have been doing some analysis of my BloomSky Data Portal data table (downloaded the table into Excel and did a time comparison between data rows).  Since Feb 26 I have had 5 data interruptions greater than 1 hour and 9 more that were from 15 minutes to 1 hour.  In these cases the data started to show again by itself.  The WU notices were from about those times that the data is not recorded.
 
I am now assuming that it may be BloomSky server (or whatever they might be doing) that is the cause of those data interruptions and not my camera/sensor unit.
 
Because of my inexperience in setting up the camera and station on WU it was likely my errors that it took several days to get the new PWS and BloomSky camera on WU.
 
The data is mostly recorded at a 04:40 to 04:45 mm:ss interval and a regular 05:45/05:46 mm:ss interval and occasional 02:50 mm:ss or so mixed in.  The camera images appear to be at about 10 min interval (Jachym's BloomSky plugin has most hours at 6 images but sometimes there are some missing, not including the few longer periods when there appears to be no upload to WU).
 
I will continue to monitor the original unit for a while and then maybe replace it with the new unit in a few days (I don't have to return the original unit).  I don't have any negative opinion on this unit and am assuming part of my experiences so far have been lack of experience :oops:
 
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on March 04, 2016, 12:20:19 PM
Hello,

I've been working with James from Bloomsky support, and Lijun from Marketing over the last 2 weeks.   

According to them I have an issue that others are also experiencing.   Their engineers are stumped since the troubled devices that were returned are working in their labs.

They believe it has something to do with the users network which they cannot resolve at this time. 
They have given me a DEBUG tool which gathers network data to help troubleshoot the issue but tool was not able to get a DUMP from my network/device.  So I was unable to provide them with diagnostic data.

I believe they are doing whatever they can to help resolve the issue but its taking time. 

After all was said I requested a refund which they provided.
They feel a replacement MAY not fix my issue at this time but they are sending me another device anyway!

I'm trying to remain optimistic since I really like this product and really just want a working BloomSky again  :)

Crossing my fingers that the new device will work.

Thank you BloomSky for doing your best.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 12:42:01 PM
...just to chime in....IMHO...I think we need to keep in mind what Bloomsky advertises on their home page......and that is...."It's The Story Of Your Sky".  That's it.  To me the data sector is somewhat secondary.  If this was any other station (and I own several from the different makers) and had any of them had the problem with the pressure with no fix, I would have sent it back long ago. 

I do agree that the recent network issue is a bit alarming.  I recall when I first read how the whole operation relies on WI-FI, I frowned.  For me personally I have a love/hate affair with WI-FI.  I do hope they are able to come up with a fix for the network issue. 

As end users, to be able to help Bloomsky, we should provide them with constructive evaluation based on real usage, otherwise move on and go play with something else.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jumpin Joe on March 04, 2016, 01:35:40 PM
I received my replacement a couple of days ago and can say, so far, that it is working flawlessly. I had camera issues within 30 minutes of installing my original BloomSky.

The folks at BloomSky have been nothing but, GREAT!

I think we need to keep in mind, that they are trying to "learn" from the units in the field and believe that is why so many of us have been allowed to "try them out".

Wishing them much success!!!

Joe
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 05:51:42 PM
True,

for me "reliable" means certain level of guaranteed functionality. It is of course subjective, but the percentage of failures compared to the number of units (based on this forum), is for my standards "unreliable"

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

I agree with all the people who say this is understandable as it is a new product, I agree their level of support is above-average and I agree that they are trying their best to solve all the problems, yet in my opinion, the product - at this stage - is unreliable.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: waysta on March 04, 2016, 06:00:43 PM
As end users, to be able to help Bloomsky, we should provide them with constructive evaluation based on real usage, otherwise move on and go play with something else.

I paid for my unit (with the holiday discount!).  I very much enjoy the technical discussion and investigation.  If we can help them by feedback all the better. 

However, I do not feel obligated to advertise for them, nor to put a positive spin on the data or analysis.

Also, I think this assistance should be a two way street.  While there are many reports of great phone calls, there has been no official feedback yet on either the UV numbers or barometer issues here ...
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 06:26:26 PM


.....yet in my opinion, the product - at this stage - is unreliable.

...what types of problems have you had?
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 06:34:34 PM


.....yet in my opinion, the product - at this stage - is unreliable.

...what types of problems have you had?

I personally did not have any because I dont own the device. I said it previously in this thread, while developing the plugin for my template for it, I got an API key from someone else and I had to get API from 3 different people because the first and the second person had problems and the cam did not work.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 07:09:37 PM

Quote


I personally did not have any because I dont own the device. I said it previously in this thread, while developing the plugin for my template for it, I got an API key from someone else and I had to get API from 3 different people because the first and the second person had problems and the cam did not work.


OK…thanks….no problems…..then we’ll log that as another satisfied customer.

But in all seriousness, if you feel that the product is unreliable based on whatever experience you’ve had or gathered, then that’s fine with me. 

In all fairness, I’ve purchased 3 Bloomskys, and have never felt obligated to advertise only to tell the truth about my experiences, which for the most part have been positive.  If I reach the point of dissatisfaction I simply would not buy another Bloomsky, end of story.  My reason for purchasing the unit in the first place was the HD pic (remember that) and for me the data was never an issue, for I need another device telling what my temps are like I need a hole in the head.
Thanks
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 04, 2016, 07:26:32 PM
Hi.
I still quite dont get the point of arguing about this all the time. I never said it was a bad product, I never said the support was poor, I just agreed with Paul, the author of this thread, that just based on my experience, it is not a reliable device (so far :) ) as 2 out of 3 cams stopped working in the first few weeks and based on some other posts on this forum, these were not the only two cams.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on March 04, 2016, 07:32:39 PM
Hi.
I still quite dont get the point of arguing about this all the time. I never said it was a bad product, I never said the support was poor, I just agreed with Paul, the author of this thread, that just based on my experience, it is not a reliable device (so far :) ) as 2 out of 3 cams stopped working in the first few weeks and based on some other posts on this forum, these were not the only two cams.

Hi

You're fine.  We're all fine.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  Like what nincehelser stated earlier..."we'll just agree to disagree."  Thanks for the chat.  I appreciate it.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Dennis Rogers on March 11, 2016, 04:40:17 PM
Well my UV sensor is faulty and the uv info is well off. Should read zero at night, but does not.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on March 11, 2016, 05:50:42 PM
After much frustration with an offline bloomsky for 2 weeks ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)  I received my replacement BloomSky today and lo and behold it works and I'm online :D

Yippe Ki Yay   \:D/

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on March 11, 2016, 06:02:35 PM
After much frustration with an offline bloomsky for 2 weeks ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)  I received my replacement BloomSky today and lo and behold it works and I'm online :D

Yippe Ki Yay   \:D/

Nice... now lets just hope it lasts :D
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on March 14, 2016, 10:19:20 AM
After those early two times when my device quit sending it had been quite good.  So yesterday I connected the replacement device and it is doing well so far (16 hours). 
 
However, my original device quit sending about an hour after I connected the new one.  It was dark but I did see a red light on.  This morning I brought the device inside and plugged it in and now sending data, albeit inside data.  So looks like out of power.  This device is connected to the solar panel and has been outside for about 3 weeks.  We've had some very nice sunny days but also more dreary cloudy/overcast days.
 
So on the reliability, just have to know what the quirks are and then seems ok.  Looks like will have to set up a schedule for regular charging.  And for the second unit if I keep it running, will have to do the same but more frequent as it does not have the solar panel.
 
Paul
 
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: sacreyweather on April 19, 2016, 10:50:42 AM
Well just after 60 days (installed on Feb 15th, 2016) I wake up to find the temp/baro/uv isn't working. Camera is just fine and is still updating. Have tried numerous power cycling and hard resets to no avail. Have contacted Bloomsky regarding this.  I received this response, which I believe is automated:

Thank you for submitting a ticket. Due to the amount of cases we've been receiving, it may take up to 5 business days to get back to your request. In the meantime, please view our support page (https://bloomsky.desk.com/), your issue may have a solution there.

My thought was: 5 days, really?

John
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on April 19, 2016, 12:19:36 PM
Hi John,
Sorry to read about your issue.  I had that "5 day" mentioned to an email inquiry a while back but they got back to me within a couple of days.

I had both my original and replacement working fine for a while.  Have moved the replacement to my daughter's in Milton, ON and it is still doing fine (replacement didn't come with the solar panel and that is understandable, so they have to recharge periodically).  My original worked fine until about 10 days ago when it just quit.  The temp shot up very high for two readings and it all then just quit - no data, no pictures.  Couldn't get it doing anything at all and tried all the things you seemed to have done.  Called Bloomsky and got a voice message that I could leave a brief description and a recall number.  They called back within 2 hours and after learning about the temp issue they thought it was a sensor failure so have sent me another replacement - still waiting for it.

Support is excellent, but quality control seems like an issue.

Hope it works out for you John,
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: hankster on April 19, 2016, 03:52:15 PM
My rain sensor has stopped working a couple weeks ago. Maybe it needs the crud cleaned off of it but I really don't feel like hauling out the ladder to climb near the gable to do that. Inasmuch as the daytime temps are 2+ degrees high, to me the only thing of value is the camera. Of course that is not a lot of use since you can not access it directly or have it upload to my own web site.

Luckily I got mine for free, I'd be really disappointed if I would have paid $300 for it.

My Davis Vue has been running for over 3 years without the need to do anything to it. The Vue doesn't cost that much more and sure does a lot more.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Dennis Rogers on April 19, 2016, 04:10:37 PM
Well my replacement Bloomsky, on this one the rain sensor is not working. I  my orginal it was the uv sensor.

As for the Davis Vue doing more yes it does and costs more.

What the Davis and pretty much all weather stations can  not do is give a 12 day forcast and the days high.

My Bloomsky gives a 12 day forcast, which works it out itself, which may be trends it's working out.

Gives a more accurate outside temp than my Vantage Vue and since I have the solar panel no battery changes.

I love the fact it gives me a 12 day forcast, which by the way does a pretty good job and even the days highest temp it's prediction is not to bad.

Love to see a Davis give a 12 day forcast and the days high and low temps.

While the predicted days low is often out the top temp is usually 2 to 3 degrees with the days weather.

And when they have the rain gauge and wind speed monitor will be a complete weather station giving far more data and weather prediction than my Vantage Vue and even my Ambient clone which I now prefer over my Davis as it is far more modern.

Love the colour display and tablet like look than a screen stuck in the 1980's and no pc to worry about.

Still love the Bloomsky as its great to see the time laspe at the end of the day and other stations around the world. And the bloomsky compliments my Ambient clone.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: hankster on April 20, 2016, 07:59:52 AM
The Bloomsky does not give you a forecast. That forecast is gotten from other sources, most likely WU. The Bloomsky costs $250. Hard telling how much the rain and wind sensors will cost if they ever come out.

The Vue is $300, a data link is $50 for a total of $350. Both will upload data to WU.

There is no display console with the Bloomsky, it's an app. You can get dozens of apps for weather, the one from WU is nice and pretty and can use the info the Vue uploads to WU. No computer is required for the Vue to upload data to Davis and WU, just use an IP data logger. While I do use a computer I want to have my own personal website. Doesn't matter if Davis goes out of business, I will still be able to continue to use my data, can you say the same if Bloomsky goes out of business? My weather web site - http://nfmweather.com/weather/ with years of past data that I control.

Even with the low number of Bloomsky's on the market there are many reports of failures. You have even had two. With many more Davis systems out there you read of very few failures and most of them are for systems that are many years old. You can get the high and lows for all readings on the inside Davis console. BTW, here is my Davis created page with the weather info, I can get the forecast from WU. http://www.weatherlink.com/user/northfortmyers/ If I want to see my own data on a mobile device I go to http://www.nfmweather.com/weather/mwxindexbig.html or I want pretty I go to http://www.nfmweather.com/weather/mwxgauges.htm

Here is my all day weather video using an old cell phone looking out my back window and a free app. https://youtu.be/LRChwQYNkC8
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Dennis Rogers on April 20, 2016, 04:21:35 PM
Have had my Davis Vue running with no problems for 4 years, no issues. But prefer the Ambient much more modern and no crap 80's console. Come on Davis we arw in the age of lcd screens and colour. Not stuck in the past with crap consoles that look horrible.

The Ambient clone is my main station. I took my Davis down as I prefer the modem screen and look of the ambient
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: hankster on April 20, 2016, 05:58:50 PM
I don't even use the Davis console other than to feed the data on-line. I have a $50 tablet on the shelf that loads my website data every 10 seconds. That way I can customize what info I want to see and highlight what is important. The only good thing about the Davis console is that it will run off of batteries for a year without being plugged in.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: RainmanWeather on April 20, 2016, 09:52:33 PM
Just to provide a contrasting experience, I got one of the original Bloomsky kickstarters last year. It has been running for nearly a year now without a single hiccup. It was put up in early May last year and then got the solar panel for it in August. It literally has not been touched since attaching the solar last summer.

My observation is that when things just work nobody says a thing, but then when there are problems they are screamed about from the hilltops. that is why reading product reviews can be misleading. For me, Bloomsky has been 100% reliable.



Hello World
(http://weatherlution.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/4E6768322BF_1431206878-300x300.jpg) (http://weatherlution.com/hello-world/)


Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Dennis Rogers on April 20, 2016, 10:13:04 PM
Think the first has most likely has the better components, and when they go into the proper production stage put cheaper parts and cut corners then you get the issues. But then the first can also be the most risky as your a beta tester.

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: RainmanWeather on April 20, 2016, 10:32:29 PM
Think the first has most likely has the better components, and when they go into the proper production stage put cheaper parts and cut corners then you get the issues. But then the first can also be the most risky as your a beta tester.

Good points, though with the kickstarter it was known risk and at only $99 a fairly reasonable one too.

It certainly is possible that cheaper components could be put in as a product matures as well as more reliable ones as initial failures show up. Personally haven't seen any evidence that either has happened with Bloomsky.

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: nincehelser on April 20, 2016, 11:25:54 PM
It certainly is possible that cheaper components could be put in as a product matures as well as more reliable ones as initial failures show up. Personally haven't seen any evidence that either has happened with Bloomsky.

I've seen no evidence that is happening, either.

However, it seems the software driving the Bloomsky is improving.  I haven't been on the farm for a few months, but now I'm getting more detailed alerts about rain events than I used to.  Being 700 miles away it's hard to judge how accurate they are, but it seems to be a step in the right direction.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on April 21, 2016, 07:38:56 AM
...still waiting for them to fix the pressure reading in the phone app.....?
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: sacreyweather on April 21, 2016, 08:28:33 AM
Heard back from James at Bloomsky yesterday. Supposed to emailing me an RMA number and a return label for a replacement. I'll keep you apprised.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on April 22, 2016, 09:04:20 PM
My replacement arrived today and have it back up and reporting https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/gqBxp6apnJSnoJim

Called them Apr 12th, they said they would ship a replacement.
Arrived April 22nd and no shipping charges, nor duty/taxes into Canada.
Now what to do with the failed one?

Excellent service!
Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: Jáchym on April 22, 2016, 09:07:42 PM
:-) Nice.


Keep the old one, in case this one stops working you can try to put together the working parts of both and make a new fully functional one :D :D
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on April 22, 2016, 09:28:18 PM
Not sure if I can take it apart without breaking it.  And putting it back together again is another story...

With software you can just write a new version, with hardware, well a broken piece is a broken piece #-o


Paul
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: sacreyweather on April 22, 2016, 09:46:03 PM
Heard back from Bloomsky. They are sending me a replacement and also gave an RMA number for the defective one. "Hopefully" the replacement will last longer than 60 days this time.
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: SpringHillWeather on April 23, 2016, 02:17:20 PM
Now what to do with the failed one?


Target Practice?   :twisted:
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: VaJim on April 25, 2016, 10:34:32 AM
Now what to do with the failed one?


...when I spoke to them, they wanted the failed one back...??
Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: PaulMy on April 25, 2016, 04:20:16 PM
Quote
...when I spoke to them, they wanted the failed one back...??
  The difference is the import/export paperwork for out of the country.  On my original BloomSky I had to pay about $45 in duties, taxes and brokerage fees to UPS over and above the $19.99 shipping paid to BloomSky.  For the replacements haven't had to pay anything as I asked them to put on the package "No Charge Replacement Under Warranty".  They have treated me well!

I won't discard the failed unit yet unless in case someone sees some value in it...

Paul

Title: Re: Reliability?
Post by: sacreyweather on April 30, 2016, 02:00:24 PM
Hi Folks,

Got my Bloomsky replacement up and running. Actually got it yesterday, but its impossible to install when you nearly 5" inches of rain/thunderstorms yesterday.

https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/gqBxp6apnJSnoKaz (https://map.bloomsky.com/weather-stations/gqBxp6apnJSnoKaz)


John