BurnieM Posted October 23 Posted October 23 (edited) Well that is a stuff up. Seems like they did not bother with asking how people were using their website or doing adequate testing of the hundreds of changes they made. Very pretty tho. Still trying to find the radar pages. Found the links but all the NSW radar pages are missing and it goes to a generic 'Weather map' page. Zooming in gives an almost useless display. Not happy BOM Edited October 23 by BurnieM 3 1
tillmanr Posted October 23 Posted October 23 Willy weather app is still operating. Easy to set your location. 1
PureCaboose Posted October 23 Posted October 23 I use this page as well: Zoom Earth ZOOM.EARTH Zoom Earth 3
T510 Posted October 23 Posted October 23 I use Windy for most of my forecasting, it's got some great aviation specific features. It is quite information heavy though and took a little while to refine the data I needed to display 1 1 2
onetrack Posted October 23 Posted October 23 The new BOM radar page is in this link, below - you can click on "more radars" to find the BOM radar sites. The problem is, however - I clicked on the radar site I wanted to check out, and the page came up with blank imagery! https://www.bom.gov.au/weather-and-climate/rain-radar-and-weather-maps#more-radars The new BOM website is a disaster, ABC radio had 774 callers yesterday that all stated their extreme disappointment with the new site. BOM has a long way to go to make this new site user-friendly, and to get the bugs out of it. It's all graphics-intensive, but the graphics are poor, anyway. I try to set up more than one location to check weather, and it won't allow any more than one location to be selected as "favourite". Time to rev up these website developers, they must have just bought off-the-shelf programmes. 1 2
rgmwa Posted October 23 Posted October 23 The radar returns also look `fuzzy' compared to the old site. Once you set up a view of a location and maybe add some optional extra layers (roads, railways etc), you can't save that view and setup as a `favourite' because it defaults back to square one. As another example, the old 7-day town forecasts were very easy to read and provided comprehensive information at a glance. Not any more. The information is there but far less easy to read and needs a lot more clicking and scrolling to get there. The whole thing is a mess. I'm not surprised that they got such a negative reaction. 1 2
BurnieM Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 (edited) I have no inside knowledge but I have worked in IT for many years. My best guess it this joke was created by a private company because the internal IT was understaffed and underfunded. IT would have said we need to spec it really tightly because of the huge mass of data and user types and this will take a while. CEO says not good enough private company you spec it then build it. What could possibly go wrong ? Not even the 20th time I have seen this. Edited October 23 by BurnieM 1 2
rgmwa Posted October 23 Posted October 23 You can still access the old site here: https://reg.bom.gov.au/ 1 2 1 1 1
johnm Posted October 23 Posted October 23 yes - a fair majority of IT service providers need to take up an activity that occupies their fingers & time ............. I always suggest knitting ......... if I ever give then feed back 2
turboplanner Posted October 23 Posted October 23 20 hours ago, BurnieM said: Well that is a stuff up. Seems like they did not bother with asking how people were using their website or doing adequate testing of the hundreds of changes they made. Very pretty tho. Still trying to find the radar pages. Found the links but all the NSW radar pages are missing and it goes to a generic 'Weather map' page. Zooming in gives an almost useless display. Not happy BOM Yes, serious issue; I'm looking for the radar pages also. It may be temporary, but then again it may be to cover themselves. In Victoria for about five times in a row they have predicted disastrous storms to hit. They've broadcast that through Melbourne media and each time Melbourne Radar shows the storm coming in from SA but passing through the north of the State. In the last few days the Radars went off and the predicted storm was just winds around 80 km/hr. 1 1
facthunter Posted October 23 Posted October 23 The wind change was frontal and there were Plenty of trees and Powerlines down. Storms are cells. Someone 4Kms away may get a deluge and you get nothing . More likely to be intense in Tropical areas .WE rarely get heavy rain from the south in Victoria. Nev 1
BurnieM Posted October 23 Author Posted October 23 2 hours ago, turboplanner said: Yes, serious issue; I'm looking for the radar pages also. It may be temporary, but then again it may be to cover themselves. In Victoria for about five times in a row they have predicted disastrous storms to hit. They've broadcast that through Melbourne media and each time Melbourne Radar shows the storm coming in from SA but passing through the north of the State. In the last few days the Radars went off and the predicted storm was just winds around 80 km/hr. Reading between the lines it appears the missing radar pages are not deliberate just a stuff up. The issue is that they are receiving a huge amount of feedback about site problems as well as an even bigger amount of feedback from people who dislike the new website. Lack of testing was definitely an issue here. There is also the political problem of being in the middle of changing CEOs and both the outgoing and incoming CEOs may chose to 'make a statement'. Do not expect this c/f to go away any time soon. 3
red750 Posted November 23 Posted November 23 It has just been announced the new website cost $96 million, 23 times the original estimate. 1 1 1
skippydiesel Posted November 23 Posted November 23 It seems that Government departments (or is it just human behaviour) feel compelled to fix/change things/systems that aren't broken. The BOM has really gone insane on this change - how on Earth can they justify $96.5 million. The $4million, first figure, was crazy enough. The money must be coming from US THE TAX PAYER - would have been better spent on education/hospitals/ etc. Criminal charges should ensue (not holding my breath)😈 1 1
Thruster88 Posted November 23 Posted November 23 Just be thankful that government IT contractors don't grow your food. 2 1
BurnieM Posted November 24 Author Posted November 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, Thruster88 said: Just be thankful that government IT contractors don't grow your food. Being in IT I understand your confusion. IT contractors do what the contract says. Who wrote the contract ? I have been involved in a contract were the company hiring us told us to remove a core conponent of the application. Several team members advised them in writing that it would cause several modules to fail and all others to have limited functionality. 2 weeks before it was due to go live they realised it was a massive c/f. Lots of meetings, lots of loud blame on us. 2 years of legal fights. The contracting company won and the application still does not work several years later. We CAN grow your food but if the manager running the project says 'water is not required' you do not have to be a rocket scientist to realise the end result. Edited November 24 by BurnieM 4 1
facthunter Posted Monday at 11:49 PM Posted Monday at 11:49 PM This sort of thing doesn't confine itself to Governments. Optus is NOT a Gov't organisation Nor is any government worthy of the NAME able or likely to influence directly the result of Professional advice. They can choose to IGNORE it. Which should have to be explained to the Board of Directors and shareholders. Who wrote the TERMS of REFERRENCE is a good question? Nev
BrendAn Posted Wednesday at 10:04 AM Posted Wednesday at 10:04 AM the new ceo of bom was on the radio yesterday and explained the figures. the 96 million has been the known cost the whole time. the 4 mill was only part of the total. i didn't pay a lot of attention but as usual the media sensationalised the story. 1 1
onetrack Posted Wednesday at 01:49 PM Posted Wednesday at 01:49 PM The media are now missing the point that the BOM website is no longer fit for purpose and doesn't provide satisfactory weather information or warnings, because the layout is user-unfriendly and a lot of information is "buried", with no clear indications of how to find it. I want to check weather at two locations regularly, the one I leave from, and the one I'm going to, in the W.A. wheatbelt. To do so, involves a convoluted trail of searching the BOM website. 1 1
BrendAn Posted Wednesday at 06:49 PM Posted Wednesday at 06:49 PM 4 hours ago, onetrack said: The media are now missing the point that the BOM website is no longer fit for purpose and doesn't provide satisfactory weather information or warnings, because the layout is user-unfriendly and a lot of information is "buried", with no clear indications of how to find it. I want to check weather at two locations regularly, the one I leave from, and the one I'm going to, in the W.A. wheatbelt. To do so, involves a convoluted trail of searching the BOM website. Why don't you just use the old BOM site. I only use the app on my phone and it hasn't even changed. I haven't seen this new crap one people are talking about. 2 1
BurnieM Posted Wednesday at 08:19 PM Author Posted Wednesday at 08:19 PM On 23/10/2025 at 2:40 PM, rgmwa said: You can still access the old site here: https://reg.bom.gov.au/ I'm using this and it is still being updated, at least the aviation metars/tafs and radar pages that I use. 3 1 1
BurnieM Posted Friday at 08:36 PM Author Posted Friday at 08:36 PM https://www.itnews.com.au/news/bom-never-planned-to-end-reliance-on-legacy-site-622130 2
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now