Who exactly are you referring to? Me? If so that is totally incorrect. TWC? Do you really think their staff of highly paid IT techs can not create the same thing? If so your dreaming.

At this point WW is neither licensed nor copyrighted so ANYONE can do whatever they want with it. If not with the source code certainly with the name and webpage designs it creates. Open Source licensing would put some LEGAL controls in place.

Ed, creating an open source project is not enough, there needs to be enough interest by programmers to develop something like this, obviously the interest is not there for some reason. In my previous post I mentioned there already is an open source project for a Weather Watcher program, however:
- it has only one programmer
- haven't been updated for more than a year
- is the only similar program on sourceforge!

Even open source project has to abide with licensing, i.e., they cannot acquire data from other sources without paying the fees, hence they might end-up with the same fate as 'our' WW.

Ed if you are going to quote then post the full statement:

"A - No it is not. They can allow anyone to develop the code some more and then sue them into submission to get ownership of the code. After all its makes use of their data that is not meant for free distribution. This has already happened before with users that tried to create sequels to video games deemed abandonware."



It has already been done because its cheaper and discourages competition. I have been approached a few times to help create user supported versions of abandonware games and dead gaming portals. Every time i declined and warned about the likely outcome. Every time they were allowed to code for a year or two until the code was stable and then they got assaulted by the layers of those that owned a franchise, a data set, a server or distrubution rights and ended up loosing the rights to use their own code.

Maybe you should listen to those that are factual and less to your imagination Ed (no offense meant).

A key reason could have been the existence of WW. And with it's demise the interest could grow.


True, but if WW was Open Source maybe someone could change it to pull data from other sources.


Why? I quoted the part I was responding to. If someone what's to read the full posting they only have to scroll up a post or two.


I don't agree with your interpetation of events. It sounds like you took possession of a company's copyrighted property, modified it then I assume tried to profile from it yourself. The owner of the copyrighted property found out and claimed their ownership.

The WW source is not owned by a company. If someone reversed engineered Mike could not claim prior ownership. It's not copyrighted or protected under a Open Source license.


There is no license covering "abandonware". People chose to modify something that they didn't own and the owner said No. Big surprise.

What if someone goes to your car in the train station's garage and modifies it for their own use while you're away. What do you think you will do when you find out? Have them scrape the decals off and remove the speakers and etc and simply take the car back??

How about clothes in your closet that you don't wear everyday that they "customize" for their needs, like cut off the sleeves, maybe the pant legs, then you go to use them for your brother's wedding.

Still think "abandonware" means giving up ownership rights?


Maybe, but not in this case. And no offense taken.

Have you thought of using NOAA instead of TWC? The National Weather Service is tax payer funded - you, as a tax payer - have a Right - to use their data (in fact, that is where TWC gets theirs...)

If you can hook into the NOAA site instead of TWC - you'll get access to the same data - but no constraints on use.

You can access NWS data in Weather Watcher Live. No need to reinvent the wheel

ah... so this is not about the weather channel and expense - this is about income. A converstion from free - to shareware.

I can understand your decision. It just seems it would be preferable to tell all your loyal (albeit - not for pay) fans... the truth: You've decided to make the program shareware, instead of free - rather than hiding behind an "excuse" of "The Weather Channel made me do it"... (seeing as you are obviously still accessing the weather channel in your for pay program)

I have enjoyed using your program - I have used it for many years.
I have also tried the "for pay" version - and find that, for me... it just has way too much "stuff"... with a way too large interface.

all I want is to look down and see the temperature.
I want to get my emergency warnings, and occasionally look at a map indicating snowfall forecasts and thunderstorms incoming.

I dont need a huge elaborate "here is everything you ever wanted to know about the weather" weather program...

This was the reason I never upgraded to pay
and this is the reason I probably wont.

I will miss your program... dearly
thank you for all the years of work... it really was the Best weather program I ever found (and I would never have looked for anything other)...

How sad.

I have used Weather Watcher for years. I started using it after becoming very unsatisfied with Weather Bug.

I had a paid subscription to Weather Bug. Yet I still got ads, still go spyware, still got cookies and the like I didn't want. Each time I did a spyware scan, something linked to Weather Bug came up. The ads on the program became larger, even though I had paid for it. I got no help from the support.

So I switched to Weather Watcher and was pleased with the service. Still am! Sometimes it is wrong but that's not the software's fault. I've never liked The Weather Channel anyway. Since Katrina, they've been so drama focused and not as weather focused.

I will try Weather Watcher Live and will let you know how it goes. If not, then I will just keep going to Weather Underground website for weather info.

As for the previous commenter, I don't believe you would do that after all this time. I've always gotten excellent support from you. The idea you would do this on purpose just to get money doesn't fit the experience I've had with you and your software.

I am very sorry to see Weather Watcher go. I will continue to use the latest version until it ceases to function. It is (was) the best software of it's kind. I have tried to support it in multiple ways and I have recommended it to many users. Will I give Weather Watcher Live another try when and if WW stops working? I have to say, it is very unlikely.

Like ASL4U I have tried Weather Watcher Live and it is not for me. I did not like the new interface and it has way too much stuff that I do not need. In fact, the overwhelming factor that led me to Weather Watcher all those years ago was that I hated the things that WeatherBug did. Of course, being based on the "Weather Cockroach's" data feed, WWL does all those same things. I don't need to see live camera feeds and videos. I don't need news about tropical storms thousands of miles away. I do not like the way many of WWL's features just send me to a page on WeatherBug's web site which still tries to steer me back to all those ads that I ran (screaming) to get away from in the first place.

It's been a good run Mike. I wish you would put in a bit of effort to retrofit WW to use the NWS feed or license it as open source so that someone else can. It is a sad day indeed.

Weather Watcher was discontinued because I cannot afford to give the weather data to you for free, and you do not want to afford the cost that I would have to charge you to recover the kind of money The Weather Channel wants.

By not reinventing the wheel, I'm referring to the massive rewrite that would be necessary to create a version of Weather Watcher that uses NWS's data. It is of little benefit for me to create a weather application that only works in limited areas of the US. I'd rather take advantage of the many available real-time personal weather stations, as well as write an application that can be used outside of the US.


No, this is your perception of the situation.


In Weather Watcher Live? The Weather Watcher Live download page clearly states that the data comes from WeatherBug and NWS (which is accessed through WeatherBug).


It sounds like my software is not for you then.

the best... I said it "Weather Watcher" was the best.
I said, that Weather Watcher Live... was not the best.

your little sit in the tray and tell me the temperature program was absolutely the best...

Once in the tray, Weather Watcher and Weather Watcher Live look the same.

Weather Watcher Live also has a skinned interface, so it would be possible to create a skin that looks exactly like Weather Watcher. So, you're saying you'd be interested in Weather Watcher Live if it the interface looked like Weather Watcher?

I'm not sure. If there was a skin that elimated the stuff I didn't want to see and hid the buttons and maps that took me to Weather Bug's website, I might try it. Unfortunately, there seems to a major lack of skins for WWL.

There is one other thing that put me off Weather Watcher "Live." Weather Bug's data from their own stations is top notch and up to the second. However, those stations are few and far between. Consequently, there is not a WB station close enough to my location to be of any value. I'm stuck with the NWS feed relayed through WB. I get the impression that this is the same data that Weather Channel relays through their feed. Early on, I tested WWL and WW side by side. I had them both updating every 5 minutes and they both checked for updates within seconds of each other. I watched the observed times on both and, in my case, Weather Channel's relay of the data feed was significantly quicker. i.e. WW was more "Live" for me than WWL. That's still an issue today.

Are there any Weather Underground stations by you? I'll have access to their data soon.

http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/hdfForecast?query=michigan&searchType=WEATHER


Yes, I believe it is.