[wxqc] Rainfall Reporting from Weatherlink

Tue Mar 14 15:05:51 EST 2006

Hasn't Weather Display changed considerably? Haven't most or all of the
Con's in the review been changed to Pro's? I only viewed it for a short time
and not connected to my Davis Vantage Pro.

I understand how important it is for an individual to try then judge how
well a software product performs to their own needs and appreciate software
companies offering free trials. The problem I have is, since only one
program can communicate on the com port at one time. In order to evaluate
how well other software works with my VP, I have to shutdown WeatherLink and
thus interrupt 2.5 years of continuous data logging. I know the other
software products do their own way of logging, but I will still have a void
in my WeatherLink data file while I try to decide.

I would rather, based on others feedback, decide on a software product
(right now hedging towards Weather Display) purchase and install it, convert
my WeatherLink Logs to it's own format, then be done (and hopefully) happy
with it. I just don't want to lose my data.

Dennis
CW4869

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net [mailto:gary.oldham at adelphia.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 2:21 PM
> To: Dennis Maier
> Subject: RE: [wxqc] Rainfall Reporting from Weatherlink
>
> As to the agricultural module, I got that information
> directly from Russ Heilig, Davis' VP of Sales, and if need
> be, can dig up an old email to that effect, as I have it in
> writing.  Do note - the reviews bear careful reading - that
> you must be able to prove ownership of WeatherLink version
> 5.4 or earlier in order to be eligible to get the
> agricultural module at no cost.  If your initial version of
> WeatherLink
> is 5.4 or later, yes, you'll have to buy the ag module if you
> want it.   You may want to try calling them again and
> invoking Mr. Heilig's name.
> 
> The best piece of advice in my reviews remains true and
> probably always will - each software application is offered
> with at least a 15 day free trial, most longer - give them
> each a spin to see which works for you.  Also visit the
> support forums for the software that have them, and get a
> feel for how complicated, buggy, or stable each is.
> 
> I'm updating my reviews currently, but worth noting is that
> there has not been a full new release of VWS since my
> December 2004 review, and that there is a full new version of
> WeatherView 32 (now version 7), which I have yet to receive
> or test.  Looking over those 15 month old reviews, I am
> stricken by how relatively few things have changed with most
> of the software packages, all of which I actively and
> regularly use.  Watch for updated copies of the reviews over
> the next few days.
> Gary
>
> gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net
>
> ---- Dennis Maier <ddmaier at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =============
> Thanks again Gary,
>
> I purchased WeatherLink at version 5.3 I have my receipt and
> original CD, but Davis didn't care. The only way to get the
> module was to buy it.
>
> PS; After I hit send on my last note I noticed it was sent to
> you personally instead of to the forum so I sent it a second
> time to make it available to all.
>
> Dennis Maier
> 9543 Point Charity Drive
> Sand Point,  MI  48755-9604
>
> (989) 856-3765
>
> ddmaier at gmail.com
>
> 
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net [mailto:gary.oldham at adelphia.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 1:41 PM
> > To: Dennis Maier
> > Subject: RE: [wxqc] Rainfall Reporting from Weatherlink
> >
> > As to the agricultural module, I got that information directly from
> > Davis' VP of Sales, and if need be, can dig up an old email to that
> > effect, as I have it in writing.  Do note - the reviews
> bear careful
> > reading - that you must be able to prove ownership of WeatherLink
> > version 5.4 or earlier in order to be eligible to get the
> agricultural
> > module at no cost.  If your initial version of WeatherLink
> is 5.5 or
> > later, yes, you'll have to buy the ag module if you want it.
> >
> > The best piece of advice in my reviews remains true and probably
> > always will - each software application is offered with at
> least a 15
> > day free trial, most longer - give them each a spin to see
> which works
> > for you.  Also visit the support forums for the software that have
> > them, and get a feel for how complicated, buggy, or stable each is.
> >
> > Gary
> > gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net
> >
> > ---- Dennis Maier <ddmaier at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > =============
> > Thanks Gary,
> >
> > I had read and appreciate your reviews, however they are
> over a year
> > old, and with the newer versions from the software makers
> available no
> > longer accurate from what I can tell. As a matter of fact
> immediately
> > after reading them a week or so ago I called Davis Tech Support
> > regarding your note on their Agricultural Module, and flat
> out told I
> > had to buy it for $95. When I mentioned I had read the
> contrary in a
> > forum I was told that the information was incorrect.
> >
> > Regards
> > Dennis
> >
> > Dennis Maier
> > 9543 Point Charity Drive
> > Sand Point,  MI  48755-9604
> > (989) 856-3765
> > ddmaier at gmail.com
> >
> > 
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: gary.oldham at adelphia.net [mailto:gary.oldham at adelphia.net]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 12:34 PM
> > > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> > > Cc: Dennis Maier
> > > Subject: RE: [wxqc] Rainfall Reporting from Weatherlink
> > >
> > > You may want to check my reviews of all Windows-based
> > software for the
> > > Vantage Pro at http://www.weatherforum.net/reviews.html.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > > CW0146
> > > gary.oldham(at)adelphia.net
> > >
> > > ---- Dennis Maier <ddmaier at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > =============
> > > I'm getting more and more disappointed in WeatherLink,
> > primarily the
> > > "Upload Progress" window now that I'm uploading every 5
> > minutes, but
> > > because of some of the items mentioned below. However I
> do like the
> > > quick response to the changing weather data.
> > >
> > > What are good software alternatives to WeatherLink (hope
> > its ok to ask
> > > on this forum) for the Davis Vantage Pro?
> > >
> > > Dennis Maier
> > > CW4869
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> > > > [mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
> > > > dshelms at comcast.net
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:49 AM
> > > > To: Discussion of weather data quality issues; Discussion
> > > of weather
> > > > data quality issues
> > > > Cc: James.Dudley at noaa.gov
> > > > Subject: Re: [wxqc] Rainfall Reporting from Weatherlink
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jim,
> > > >
> > > > Davis says they will support 1 hour and 24 hour precip
> > > reporting for
> > > > the VP systems. I not sure about the WMII support.
> > > >
> > > > Dave
> > > >  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > > > From: James.Dudley at noaa.gov
> > > > > Dave,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure if I heard this from the group or not. Is
> > > > Davis planning
> > > > > any updates to Weatherlink precipitation reporting.
> > > Currently, the
> > > > > precipitation reported by Weatherlink to APRS/CWOP is a
> > > > running total
> > > > > from midnight to midnight and it only updates once an
> > > hour. I have
> > > > > noticed that other software updates at more frequent
> > > intervals. Is
> > > > > Davis working on something?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jim Dudley
> > > > > CW2553 Hanford Ca
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > wxqc mailing list
> > > > > wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> > > > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> > > > >
> > > > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of
> > the author.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > wxqc mailing list
> > > > wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> > > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> > > >
> > > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of
> the author.
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > wxqc mailing list
> > > wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> > > http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> > >
> > > The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
> > >
> >
> >
>
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060314/27292fde/attachment-0001.html