It boggles my mind how Windy has chosen to display the radar. Other websites are faithfully showing the snow over my area. I NEED to see this snow to make some important plans. I pay Windy MONEY so I can use weather data to make my plans. I have been watching significant snow fall over my area for hours. It is measurably accumulating on the ground and it affects transportation. I want to estimate when it ends. According to Windy radar, there has never BEEN any snow! This is really getting to me. Not only has Windy known about this problem but they have communicated NO reason for deciding to display different radar signatures than other common websites. Would you please either (1) put forward a reason your affected readers should be paying you to make the decisions you've made about displaying radar, or (2) display the radar signatures that most people consider worth displaying. I don't know if you apply filters to remove weak signals you don't consider interesting, but CLEARLY the radar sites are providing radar data and you are literally NOT showing that data to paying customers. And you do this in silent fiat, not even showing concern about the issue. Please fix this issue. Most people use weather sites with the hope of seeing radar and satellite data llayered on top of each other. Windy does not offer that. However, you don't even provide a single layer of radar data that shows measurable, accumulating precipitation. Do something. I see no need to pay for essentially incorrect data I can get elsewhere for free. >:-[

The radar time-stamp on these images was only five images apart. They should look nearly identical. Windy is missing lots of snow.

@korina - You are passing the buck. If huge swaths of significant precipitation are missed by your radar provider, then YOUR website is still failing to show useful radar data. Get a new radar feed! I would rather have a complete feed from an old WSR-57 than the highly limited data you are passing on. Get a new radar feed, regardless of the provider.

@korina - Thank you. I know I'm not the first to raise this issue. It is fundamental to the trustworthiness of the usefulness of this site.

@korina - You are passing the buck. If huge swaths of significant precipitation are missed by your radar provider, then YOUR website is still failing to show useful radar data. Get a new radar feed! I would rather have a complete feed from an old WSR-57 than the highly limited data you are passing on. Get a new radar feed, regardless of the provider.

The radar time-stamp on these images was only five images apart. They should look nearly identical. Windy is missing lots of snow.

It boggles my mind how Windy has chosen to display the radar. Other websites are faithfully showing the snow over my area. I NEED to see this snow to make some important plans. I pay Windy MONEY so I can use weather data to make my plans. I have been watching significant snow fall over my area for hours. It is measurably accumulating on the ground and it affects transportation. I want to estimate when it ends. According to Windy radar, there has never BEEN any snow! This is really getting to me. Not only has Windy known about this problem but they have communicated NO reason for deciding to display different radar signatures than other common websites. Would you please either (1) put forward a reason your affected readers should be paying you to make the decisions you've made about displaying radar, or (2) display the radar signatures that most people consider worth displaying. I don't know if you apply filters to remove weak signals you don't consider interesting, but CLEARLY the radar sites are providing radar data and you are literally NOT showing that data to paying customers. And you do this in silent fiat, not even showing concern about the issue. Please fix this issue. Most people use weather sites with the hope of seeing radar and satellite data llayered on top of each other. Windy does not offer that. However, you don't even provide a single layer of radar data that shows measurable, accumulating precipitation. Do something. I see no need to pay for essentially incorrect data I can get elsewhere for free. >:-[

@goatsrslow - Since the icons are still being used, perhaps consider the goat to be a gazelle. Maybe that's what it is!

This is the Snow Depth forecast for Livingston, NJ for February 2021. Snow depth models factor in compression, melting, and evaporation. The model is the ECMWF. Note how the snow depth begins to radically increase from Sunday, the 7th! For people clearing their driveways, walkways, and perhaps roofs, planning is essential. Failure to plan can make it difficult to clear additional snowfalls in the second half of the forecast period. Also, shopping planning is a good idea for next Wednesday and Thursday.

For all you folks who are fortunate enough to be able to enjoy snow activities, I wish you a blast! :-D

To download this video just click with right mouse button on this link and select "Save link as..."

This video is licenced under Creative Commons licence (CC-BY 3) and can be used/modified freely in any possible way. Just mention Windy.com

Create your own animation at https://www.windy.com/animate

Windy has the following post that describes how to compare observations vs the forecast.

https://community.windy.com/topic/9425/how-to-use-the-observation-vs-forecast-feature (note that this post refers to an announcement using a broken link - the announcement is not found)

I have followed the posted instructions and they don't work for me. When I turned on the Reported Wind feature, my map did not show wind observations. Plus, despite following the instructions, a comparison table did not pop up. Are the instructions still valid?

Also, I find this distressing because it follows a pattern whereby Windy pages do not seem to respond in a deterministic fashion. I feel like I am using a Monte Carlo UI. Sometimes I have to turn off and on different options until I see the features I want. Does Windy have beta testers who apply dependency tests, or are changes just spot-checked by the programmers?

I find some of the color choices quite unfortunate. This is not the only problem. Most situations involving color choices allow for flexibility. The colors chosen should FIRST consider usability of the chart. Is it readable? Readability depends on color AND brightness contrast AND resolution/character size AND color perception for everyone. The map should be usable by someone with mildly deficient focus and color vision using a tablet, not just the people with perfect eyesight using a large monitor. I remember how pages used to be readable until Apple and Google decided fashion vastly preceded function.