In message , Alan White
writes
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:04 GMT, "Dave"
wrote:

I also use Weather link. The only problem I have had is when I have had
strip chart running + upload enabled.
Looks like Alan has had the same problem.

Under those circumstances, the problem I have is an 'error writing new
record' which can only be resolved by a Control-Alt-Delete. A
'rubbish' record is written which has to be manually edited or
deleted. I've discussed this with Davis to no avail. It's very
irritating.

As I said earlier, when upload is enabled I keep tabs on what's going
on by continuously monitoring the web site.

I have to say I don't leave the strip charts running continuously, as
its running on a laptop, so ideally I like the thing to go into a sleep
mode (i.e. hard disk off) most of the time, and just run up every hour
to grab data and do the web upload. With the strip charts on it springs
to life every 10 minutes, which defeats the object of using the laptop
as a low power server.


--
steve

In message , Alan White
writes
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:04 GMT, "Dave"
wrote:

I also use Weather link. The only problem I have had is when I have had
strip chart running + upload enabled.
Looks like Alan has had the same problem.

Under those circumstances, the problem I have is an 'error writing new
record' which can only be resolved by a Control-Alt-Delete. A
'rubbish' record is written which has to be manually edited or
deleted. I've discussed this with Davis to no avail. It's very
irritating.

As I said earlier, when upload is enabled I keep tabs on what's going
on by continuously monitoring the web site.

I have to say I don't leave the strip charts running continuously, as
its running on a laptop, so ideally I like the thing to go into a sleep
mode (i.e. hard disk off) most of the time, and just run up every hour
to grab data and do the web upload. With the strip charts on it springs
to life every 10 minutes, which defeats the object of using the laptop
as a low power server.


--
steve

In message , Alan White
writes
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 21:14:04 GMT, "Dave"
wrote:

I also use Weather link. The only problem I have had is when I have had
strip chart running + upload enabled.
Looks like Alan has had the same problem.

Under those circumstances, the problem I have is an 'error writing new
record' which can only be resolved by a Control-Alt-Delete. A
'rubbish' record is written which has to be manually edited or
deleted. I've discussed this with Davis to no avail. It's very
irritating.

As I said earlier, when upload is enabled I keep tabs on what's going
on by continuously monitoring the web site.

I have to say I don't leave the strip charts running continuously, as
its running on a laptop, so ideally I like the thing to go into a sleep
mode (i.e. hard disk off) most of the time, and just run up every hour
to grab data and do the web upload. With the strip charts on it springs
to life every 10 minutes, which defeats the object of using the laptop
as a low power server.


--
steve

Steven Briggs wrote:
In message , David Mitchell
writes

I'm using Weatherlink, but I think it's pretty average rather than good.
I started with Weather Display which I thought was far superior, but
developed faults and was unreliable.
Weatherlink has certainly been reliable, which is extremely important,
but
one day I will change, so will watch comments here with interest.
Thanks John for the link.

Another weatherlink user here.
Does the job, and is certainly reliable, I not had any problems.

I used WeatherLink for a few months before becoming disillusioned by it.
It's fine for the odd usage, but anything complicated and you soon come
across problems. Little things, like not being able to do anything while
it is downloading data from the station; odd errors (can't find NOAA
headers after running it for a long time); poor flexibility with
templates for publishing to websites; the interface is clunky (feels
like a Windows 3.1 application rather than a Windows XP application);
only runs on Windows; etc.

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/

Steven Briggs wrote:
In message , David Mitchell
writes

I'm using Weatherlink, but I think it's pretty average rather than good.
I started with Weather Display which I thought was far superior, but
developed faults and was unreliable.
Weatherlink has certainly been reliable, which is extremely important,
but
one day I will change, so will watch comments here with interest.
Thanks John for the link.

Another weatherlink user here.
Does the job, and is certainly reliable, I not had any problems.

I used WeatherLink for a few months before becoming disillusioned by it.
It's fine for the odd usage, but anything complicated and you soon come
across problems. Little things, like not being able to do anything while
it is downloading data from the station; odd errors (can't find NOAA
headers after running it for a long time); poor flexibility with
templates for publishing to websites; the interface is clunky (feels
like a Windows 3.1 application rather than a Windows XP application);
only runs on Windows; etc.

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/

Steven Briggs wrote:
In message , David Mitchell
writes

I'm using Weatherlink, but I think it's pretty average rather than good.
I started with Weather Display which I thought was far superior, but
developed faults and was unreliable.
Weatherlink has certainly been reliable, which is extremely important,
but
one day I will change, so will watch comments here with interest.
Thanks John for the link.

Another weatherlink user here.
Does the job, and is certainly reliable, I not had any problems.

I used WeatherLink for a few months before becoming disillusioned by it.
It's fine for the odd usage, but anything complicated and you soon come
across problems. Little things, like not being able to do anything while
it is downloading data from the station; odd errors (can't find NOAA
headers after running it for a long time); poor flexibility with
templates for publishing to websites; the interface is clunky (feels
like a Windows 3.1 application rather than a Windows XP application);
only runs on Windows; etc.

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/

Steven Briggs wrote:
In message , David Mitchell
writes

I'm using Weatherlink, but I think it's pretty average rather than good.
I started with Weather Display which I thought was far superior, but
developed faults and was unreliable.
Weatherlink has certainly been reliable, which is extremely important,
but
one day I will change, so will watch comments here with interest.
Thanks John for the link.

Another weatherlink user here.
Does the job, and is certainly reliable, I not had any problems.

I used WeatherLink for a few months before becoming disillusioned by it.
It's fine for the odd usage, but anything complicated and you soon come
across problems. Little things, like not being able to do anything while
it is downloading data from the station; odd errors (can't find NOAA
headers after running it for a long time); poor flexibility with
templates for publishing to websites; the interface is clunky (feels
like a Windows 3.1 application rather than a Windows XP application);
only runs on Windows; etc.

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...

--
Jonathan Stott
Canterbury Weather: http://www.canterburyweather.co.uk/

Jonathan Stott wrote:

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...


As a matter of interest, does your software allow for manual entry?

I only have an Oregon WMR112 weather station and have no way of direct
downloading of data. I currently use Weather Recorder which is very good
as far as it goes but I find it a little restrictive at times.

--
Howard Neil

Jonathan Stott wrote:

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...


As a matter of interest, does your software allow for manual entry?

I only have an Oregon WMR112 weather station and have no way of direct
downloading of data. I currently use Weather Recorder which is very good
as far as it goes but I find it a little restrictive at times.

--
Howard Neil

Jonathan Stott wrote:

In the end I gave up and wrote my own software. Once I have downloaded
the data from the station and written it to a standard database I can
access it any way I like. Certainly a lot better if you want to publish
the data on your website. I might get round to packaging it up and
distributing it for free on my website some time...


As a matter of interest, does your software allow for manual entry?

I only have an Oregon WMR112 weather station and have no way of direct
downloading of data. I currently use Weather Recorder which is very good
as far as it goes but I find it a little restrictive at times.

--
Howard Neil