Top: weather.com, Bottom: weatherunderground.comTwo of the main web sites that let us know if we're wearing sandals or sweaters today are Weather.com and WeatherUnderground.com. While in theory they should provide the same data, the reality is that Weather.com looks, well, really bad in comparison to the less-fancy, but gauge-driven WeatherUnderground.com.
From a brand perspective, Weather.com (The Weather Channel) seems to have the upper hand with its absolute name and the same trusted blue-square logo from the teevee heydays. But such is not the case. In the early 2000s The Weather Channel wanted to capitalize on greater ad dollars, which they thought was possible through developing original programming. Big mistake. We just wanted our weather on the :08s... a little radar... humidity... maybe even some averages and records. Alright, we'll take the talking heads. Paul Goodloe, et al. But they forgot -- or just ignored -- that viewers tuned into that channel to get the information they needed in a succinct forecast, not to see how people in Kansas chase down thunderstorms. That same fatal error has been carried over into Weather.com so that it becomes annoying difficult to get the information that we came to the web site for in the first place.
Despite the unsophisticated logo and a coincidental name relation to a terrorist group, Weather Underground has the upper hand. Now more than ever we seek out information that we want fully and immediately. Weather forecasts inherently come with oodles of numerical data that can be presented in a variety of ways. The appeal of Weather Underground is that they understand this and thus seek to give us data in a glance that has a visual likeness to the information aeronautical professionals use.
On the left hand side of the Weather Underground's local weather page there is a bordered box that calls out the important stats: temp, wind, humidity, pressure, visibility, UV index, etc. We also get a thumbnail of radar in a glance that we can choose to enlarge. If we have the time, our eyes may then sweep to the right to take in the 5-day forecast in one gulp. The colour-coding of the high and low temps and percentages of precipitation lets us take in this information even faster. There are also all sorts of other goodies that we can check out if we want to: latitude and longitude, astronomy, diverse radar views, the time, and even a WunderPhotos gallery for especially interesting weather-related photos. All of this is condensed into the default viewing space of the browser window. The difference between the two web sites is stark in the screenshots that appear above. Conclusion: Weather.com provides 5% of the information Weather Underground provides in the same amount of space.
From a brand perspective, Weather.com (The Weather Channel) seems to have the upper hand with its absolute name and the same trusted blue-square logo from the teevee heydays. But such is not the case. In the early 2000s The Weather Channel wanted to capitalize on greater ad dollars, which they thought was possible through developing original programming. Big mistake. We just wanted our weather on the :08s... a little radar... humidity... maybe even some averages and records. Alright, we'll take the talking heads. Paul Goodloe, et al. But they forgot -- or just ignored -- that viewers tuned into that channel to get the information they needed in a succinct forecast, not to see how people in Kansas chase down thunderstorms. That same fatal error has been carried over into Weather.com so that it becomes annoying difficult to get the information that we came to the web site for in the first place.
Despite the unsophisticated logo and a coincidental name relation to a terrorist group, Weather Underground has the upper hand. Now more than ever we seek out information that we want fully and immediately. Weather forecasts inherently come with oodles of numerical data that can be presented in a variety of ways. The appeal of Weather Underground is that they understand this and thus seek to give us data in a glance that has a visual likeness to the information aeronautical professionals use.
On the left hand side of the Weather Underground's local weather page there is a bordered box that calls out the important stats: temp, wind, humidity, pressure, visibility, UV index, etc. We also get a thumbnail of radar in a glance that we can choose to enlarge. If we have the time, our eyes may then sweep to the right to take in the 5-day forecast in one gulp. The colour-coding of the high and low temps and percentages of precipitation lets us take in this information even faster. There are also all sorts of other goodies that we can check out if we want to: latitude and longitude, astronomy, diverse radar views, the time, and even a WunderPhotos gallery for especially interesting weather-related photos. All of this is condensed into the default viewing space of the browser window. The difference between the two web sites is stark in the screenshots that appear above. Conclusion: Weather.com provides 5% of the information Weather Underground provides in the same amount of space.
No comments:
Post a Comment