For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

KJW said:

For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Where it as always been.

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

roughbarked said:

KJW said:

For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

I don’t know what you’re referring to, but from the link I gave, I was able to get to the original versions of the pages I like to look at, such as the radar loop, and the observations from the local weather station.

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

Maybe you need to dump those cookies.

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

This seems to link to all the Tasmania areas in old format:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/map.shtml?ref=hdr

KJW said:

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

I don’t know what you’re referring to, but from the link I gave, I was able to get to the original versions of the pages I like to look at, such as the radar loop, and the observations from the local weather station.

The only BoM site I actually had bookmarked was the seven day forecast for my little town.

Finding it with the search bar on the page you linked takes me to the new-look seven day forecast.

I’m not complaining though, it does its job.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

This seems to link to all the Tasmania areas in old format:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/map.shtml?ref=hdr

Yep, that takes to me to the old one, ta.

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/cambelltown.shtml

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

KJW said:

For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.
I tried just now using the older http bookmark and the site went straight to the new one but all my https bookmarks still open exacty as they always did and they all say reg but the new site doesn’t.

Link to the new “Bureau Home” page = https://www.bom.gov.au/

Link to the original “Bureau Home” page = https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

When I go to my village through that link, it’s the new one again.

This seems to link to all the Tasmania areas in old format:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/map.shtml?ref=hdr

Yep, that takes to me to the old one, ta.

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/cambelltown.shtml

…I notice the frosts haven’t yet stopped for the year. We’re heading for 0 tonight and -2 on Tuesday morning…

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

This seems to link to all the Tasmania areas in old format:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/map.shtml?ref=hdr

Yep, that takes to me to the old one, ta.

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/cambelltown.shtml

…I notice the frosts haven’t yet stopped for the year. We’re heading for 0 tonight and -2 on Tuesday morning…

They’ve certainly stopped here. We had one frost this year, although the official low for that day was still above zero.

roughbarked said:

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.

The bookmark I had been using for years took me to the new version. I wasn’t aware that the “reg” version existed until I managed to find it in the new site in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Michael V said:

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

Yep, that takes to me to the old one, ta.

https://reg.bom.gov.au/tas/forecasts/cambelltown.shtml

…I notice the frosts haven’t yet stopped for the year. We’re heading for 0 tonight and -2 on Tuesday morning…

They’ve certainly stopped here. We had one frost this year, although the official low for that day was still above zero.

I surprised you get frosts at all up there.

KJW said:

roughbarked said:

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.

The bookmark I had been using for years took me to the new version. I wasn’t aware that the “reg” version existed until I managed to find it in the new site in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Heh. Well thanks for taking the risk.

KJW said:

roughbarked said:

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.

The bookmark I had been using for years took me to the new version. I wasn’t aware that the “reg” version existed until I managed to find it in the new site in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

LOL

KJW said:

roughbarked said:

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.

The bookmark I had been using for years took me to the new version. I wasn’t aware that the “reg” version existed until I managed to find it in the new site in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Heh.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Michael V said:

Bubblecar said:

…I notice the frosts haven’t yet stopped for the year. We’re heading for 0 tonight and -2 on Tuesday morning…

They’ve certainly stopped here. We had one frost this year, although the official low for that day was still above zero.

I surprised you get frosts at all up there.

Me too.

We don’t get them every winter though, but I guess it averages about one a year.

Unlike when we lived in Armidale.

There, the latest frost one year was December 28. The earliest another year was January 5. We had snow one Christmas day. The longest consecutive frosty mornings was over 180. We had a three day respite, followed by a further 50-odd consecutive frosts. It was quite common there to have the frost settle within half an hour of sundown.

Michael V said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Michael V said:

They’ve certainly stopped here. We had one frost this year, although the official low for that day was still above zero.

I surprised you get frosts at all up there.

Me too.

We don’t get them every winter though, but I guess it averages about one a year.

Unlike when we lived in Armidale.

There, the latest frost one year was December 28. The earliest another year was January 5. We had snow one Christmas day. The longest consecutive frosty mornings was over 180. We had a three day respite, followed by a further 50-odd consecutive frosts. It was quite common there to have the frost settle within half an hour of sundown.

I’ve seen frost thirty feet up trees up there in that country.

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

KJW said:

For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

ah well thanks anyway

not sure we agree with dismissal of “finding more useful interfaces to be more useful” as “like” though

This still going? Just get the app, put in your location, and Bob’s your mother’s brother…

furious said:

This still going? Just get the app, put in your location, and Bob’s your mother’s brother…

That’s absolutely fantastic for a place with fairly predictable weather. Here, the BoM can get their predictions very, very wrong. Their forecasts have improved in the last ten years lots, but it’s still not great. It’s the hardest place to predict the weather where I have either lived or worked. More info is good to help me make my own predictions.

Since the new BoM site we have no rain, not a skerrick.

Peak Warming Man said:

Since the new BoM site we have no rain, not a skerrick.

Seems like they turned it off.

Peak Warming Man said:

Since the new BoM site we have no rain, not a skerrick.

that’s because you don’t deserve any.

furious said:

This still going? Just get the app, put in your location, and Bob’s your mother’s brother…

that’s not the forum way!

The new website is a doddle to use.. intuitive.. it’s all there.

Ian said:

The new website is a doddle to use.. intuitive.. it’s all there.

Disclaimer: Have only played with it for 2 mins

Peak Warming Man said:

Since the new BoM site we have no rain, not a skerrick.

LOL

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Since the new BoM site we have no rain, not a skerrick.

that’s because you don’t deserve any.

No. It’s because you WAliens are stealing it.

Ian said:

The new website is a doddle to use.. intuitive.. it’s all there.

In a little while the noise will all die down and it will be business as usual.

Why do they have to use “tomorrow” in the forecast. Half the time I don’t even know what day it is today, let alone what day it is tomorrow.

KJW said:

roughbarked said:

My bookmarks were all reg for a long time before this.

The bookmark I had been using for years took me to the new version. I wasn’t aware that the “reg” version existed until I managed to find it in the new site in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Ever thought of going into advertising?

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

KJW said:

For those who don’t like the new Bureau of Meteorology website, I found the original website at:

https://reg.bom.gov.au/

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Kingy said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Quite a few. They are slipping by more quickly.

Kingy said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Yeah. These days they let any old riff-raff in.

Ian said:

Kingy said:

Michael V said:

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Yeah. These days they let any old riff-raff in.

They had an .ftp site and all.

roughbarked said:

Ian said:

Kingy said:

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Yeah. These days they let any old riff-raff in.

They had an .ftp site and all.

In fact they still do.

Kingy said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

Where it as always been.

No. “reg.” has been added at the front.

We have no idea what the “reg” stands for, yet.

It was originally for registered users, requiring a username and password to get in.

It had a lot of technical info including spot fire weather forecasts which is how I had access. Not sure when they dropped the password access but it must have been a few years ago now.

Hey, thanks!

:)

Say what you like about the BoM, they are strictly accurate in their advertising.

They are offering jobs that promise to be “the coolest career move”.

It’s for jobs in Antarctica.

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/s/SxFLhv4xG1

Divine Angel said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/s/SxFLhv4xG1

What Would Walter Joseph Kovacs Do

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/s/SxFLhv4xG1

What Would Walter Joseph Kovacs Do

Probably get on this forum and complain.

Have they fixed it yet?

see here is an example of something that is not a crime but is certainly not victimless

SCIENCE said:

see here is an example of something that is not a crime but is certainly not victimless

Is it fixable?

Can it be fixed?

turns out this place was filled with government shills after all

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-27/bureau-of-meteorology-pushes-ahead-with-new-website/105937612

Bureau meteorologist Michael Logan defended the change, telling ABC Statewide Drive Victoria that the website needed updating. “The old website served us really well, but it had been well over a decade since there has been any upgrades to it,” he said. “The underlying IT just wasn’t as secure, as resilient and as reliable as it needed to be.” Mr Logan said with an IT refresh in the works, they decided to modernise the look of it too. “We took the opportunity not just to improve the underlying IT, but also to meet modern accessibility standards and expectations.”

yeah why take the opportunity to deliver a good thing better and with more access options, when you could instead deliver something different to meet the modern expectation of short attention span and clickbaity grabs (yes at least the minimum standard of the earlier good thing was kept as an option for now)

Mr Logan said the new website design cost about $4 million.

fine then at least it wasn’t at unreasonable cost, forgiven

“We are getting a lot of feedback around it. We welcome the feedback.” Mr Logan is hoping that with time, people will get used to it.

“We Looooooove Feedback¡ And what do yous think we will do with that feedback¿ We tell you to deal with it¡”

SCIENCE said:

turns out this place was filled with government shills after all

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-27/bureau-of-meteorology-pushes-ahead-with-new-website/105937612

Bureau meteorologist Michael Logan defended the change, telling ABC Statewide Drive Victoria that the website needed updating. “The old website served us really well, but it had been well over a decade since there has been any upgrades to it,” he said. “The underlying IT just wasn’t as secure, as resilient and as reliable as it needed to be.” Mr Logan said with an IT refresh in the works, they decided to modernise the look of it too. “We took the opportunity not just to improve the underlying IT, but also to meet modern accessibility standards and expectations.”

yeah why take the opportunity to deliver a good thing better and with more access options, when you could instead deliver something different to meet the modern expectation of short attention span and clickbaity grabs (yes at least the minimum standard of the earlier good thing was kept as an option for now)

Mr Logan said the new website design cost about $4 million.

fine then at least it wasn’t at unreasonable cost, forgiven

“We are getting a lot of feedback around it. We welcome the feedback.” Mr Logan is hoping that with time, people will get used to it.

“We Looooooove Feedback¡ And what do yous think we will do with that feedback¿ We tell you to deal with it¡”

We’ll spend another 4 million on the feedback.

This image beautifully shows my complaint about the new website.
The new radar no longer gives the black part which indicates there may be hail as well as very heavy rain. I have been able to save several valuable plants thanks to a radar that shows hail cores are on the way, so that I could rush out and cover them.
Plus there are no real time rain temperature and wind speed observations on the radar. It is quite useful to have those displayed in real time.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-29/bureau-of-meteorology-ordered-to-fix-website-after-backlash/105945832

_grabs pitchfork _

Witty Rejoinder said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-29/bureau-of-meteorology-ordered-to-fix-website-after-backlash/105945832

_grabs pitchfork _

He’s taking the pith:

Farmers not happy

Northern Victorian agronomist Malcolm Taylor relies on the website for his work and said the redesign was a “complete cock-up”.

Bubblecar said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-29/bureau-of-meteorology-ordered-to-fix-website-after-backlash/105945832

_grabs pitchfork _

He’s taking the pith:

Farmers not happy

Northern Victorian agronomist Malcolm Taylor relies on the website for his work and said the redesign was a “complete cock-up”.

Well if he was a farmer I’d take notice of him.

Peak Warming Man said:

Bubblecar said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-29/bureau-of-meteorology-ordered-to-fix-website-after-backlash/105945832

grabs pitchfork

He’s taking the pith:

Farmers not happy

Northern Victorian agronomist Malcolm Taylor relies on the website for his work and said the redesign was a “complete cock-up”.

Well if he was a farmer I’d take notice of him.

so

It’s clearly been designed by IT nerds who’ve got no understanding of the client’s needs,” he said.

it was done by dirty wokist liberals

interesting perspective though

A BOM spokesperson said the new website was the “most complex technological transformation ever undertaken by the bureau”. The spokesperson said community feedback on the new website had been “overwhelmingly positive” during a 12-month beta testing phase.

If it’s expensive it must be good¿

Getting positive feedback from people you ask for confirmation bias from is valid¿

“This hairstyle took $4M and 12 months to set, how does it look¿ Do our donkeys look massive in this¿”

I’ve just learned about another interesting weather site.

We’ve known about this one for some time – https://earth.nullschool.net/

This is the new one, for me, at least – https://zoom.earth/

AussieDJ said:

I’ve just learned about another interesting weather site.

We’ve known about this one for some time – https://earth.nullschool.net/

This is the new one, for me, at least – https://zoom.earth/

Ta.

AussieDJ said:

I’ve just learned about another interesting weather site.

We’ve known about this one for some time – https://earth.nullschool.net/

This is the new one, for me, at least – https://zoom.earth/

Thanks.

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

I’m still using the old one.
Over.

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

The rain is celebrating the good news:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

The rain is celebrating the good news:

nice, we managed to get our laundry launed and dryed this week so we’re satisfied

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

I’m stuffed if I can see the difference between Rain reflectivity (dBZ) and Rain rate (mm/h).

I reckon they think we’re all mugs.

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

I’m still using the old one.
Over.

Same. I never changed from it and it was already bookmarked as reg,bom.gov.au

roughbarked said:

Peak Warming Man said:

SCIENCE said:

well hope yous bastard lot are happy now you’re getting what yous want

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-31/bom-reverts-to-previous-rain-radar/105959362

I’m still using the old one.
Over.

Same. I never changed from it and it was already bookmarked as reg,bom.gov.au

pftf we had reg,bom.gov.au bookmarked before the internet even existed

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I’m still using the old one.
Over.

Same. I never changed from it and it was already bookmarked as reg,bom.gov.au

pftf we had reg,bom.gov.au bookmarked before the internet even existed

Sometimes I wonder why you waste your time posting.

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Same. I never changed from it and it was already bookmarked as reg,bom.gov.au

pftf we had reg,bom.gov.au bookmarked before the internet even existed

Sometimes I wonder why you waste your time posting.

beat us to it

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Same. I never changed from it and it was already bookmarked as reg,bom.gov.au

pftf we had reg,bom.gov.au bookmarked before the internet even existed

Sometimes I wonder why you waste your time posting.

Seems to be a strange thing to say from the forum’s most prolific poster.

Witty Rejoinder said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

pftf we had reg,bom.gov.au bookmarked before the internet even existed

Sometimes I wonder why you waste your time posting.

Seems to be a strange thing to say from the forum’s most prolific poster.

I doubt that I still hold that briefly held record.

Bogsnorkler said:

Michael V said:

captain_spalding said:

Was anyone actually asking for BOM to ‘improve’ their website?

Or was it just that someone’s nephew’s or daughter-in-law’s or creditor’s son’s struggling web design company was in need of a useful $86 million?

Riiiight.

https://www.accenture.com/au-en

Link

holy shit what the fuck

Bogsnorkler said:

captain_spalding said:

Bogsnorkler said:

https://www.accenture.com/au-en

Link

Oh, so they’re the culprits, are they?

I’m pretty sure that, given the opportunity and a couple of months, Spalding Jr. and a few of his mates could have turned out something equally as ‘good’ as what we see now, if not something rather better.

And they probably would have been quite happy with only $10 million or so.

but he didn’t because for things like this he probably doesn’t have the name or backing.

fucking hell

SCIENCE said:

fucking hell

hope they do.

SCIENCE said:

Bogsnorkler said:

captain_spalding said:

Oh, so they’re the culprits, are they?

I’m pretty sure that, given the opportunity and a couple of months, Spalding Jr. and a few of his mates could have turned out something equally as ‘good’ as what we see now, if not something rather better.

And they probably would have been quite happy with only $10 million or so.

but he didn’t because for things like this he probably doesn’t have the name or backing.

fucking hell

“…or backing”.

Is that business talk for ‘my husband’s dad is a big wheel in BOM’?

Bogsnorkler said:

Spiny Norman said:

Bogsnorkler said:

probably win98 users…

I haven’t tried the new site for about a week, but the weather radar page was just terrible. The old site radar page was a much better thing for me. If you don’t know how to read a radar display (pretty much anyone that isn’t a pilot) then it wouldn’t matter too much for them though.

don’t see much difference between this and the old one

so that’s their strategy is it, deliver a shitty first drop, then release minor improvements from up their sleeves so eventually everyone is happy with the gradual improvement rather than an overall better product

SCIENCE said:

Bogsnorkler said:

Spiny Norman said:

I haven’t tried the new site for about a week, but the weather radar page was just terrible. The old site radar page was a much better thing for me. If you don’t know how to read a radar display (pretty much anyone that isn’t a pilot) then it wouldn’t matter too much for them though.

don’t see much difference between this and the old one

so that’s their strategy is it, deliver a shitty first drop, then release minor improvements from up their sleeves so eventually everyone is happy with the gradual improvement rather than an overall better product

And now they have it snowing in Victoria at this time of year.
Shakes head at new web site.

wholly fucking fucking fuck

The Bureau of Meteorology revealed its new website cost $96.5 million, not $4.1 million as the agency had originally said. The weather agency said the website needed a “complete rebuild” to meet “modern security, usability and accessibility requirements”. The federal minister for the environment has asked the bureau’s new boss to “to get on top” of the cost and functionality.

wow

fuck

SCIENCE said:

wholly fucking fucking fuck

The Bureau of Meteorology revealed its new website cost $96.5 million, not $4.1 million as the agency had originally said. The weather agency said the website needed a “complete rebuild” to meet “modern security, usability and accessibility requirements”. The federal minister for the environment has asked the bureau’s new boss to “to get on top” of the cost and functionality.

wow

fuck

I would like to see a full audit of all costs.

$96 million, yeah sure.

Something is not right.

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

SCIENCE said:

wholly fucking fucking fuck

The Bureau of Meteorology revealed its new website cost $96.5 million, not $4.1 million as the agency had originally said. The weather agency said the website needed a “complete rebuild” to meet “modern security, usability and accessibility requirements”. The federal minister for the environment has asked the bureau’s new boss to “to get on top” of the cost and functionality.

wow

fuck

I would like to see a full audit of all costs.

$96 million, yeah sure.

Something is not right.

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I would like to see a full audit of all costs.

$96 million, yeah sure.

Something is not right.

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

Google results for most expensive website design

Examples of expensive websites

Cars.com: An online automotive marketplace that cost approximately $110 million to build.

British Airways: An overhaul of its website in the early 2000s that cost an estimated $50 million.

Slack: The development of its website and web application is estimated to have cost around $30 million.

Zappos: The online retailer’s initial launch and development cost approximately $27 million.

Groupon: The global e-commerce marketplace launched in 2008, with an initial development cost of around $25 million.

I don’t believe those either.

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I would like to see a full audit of all costs.

$96 million, yeah sure.

Something is not right.

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

Some people are rich now.

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I would like to see a full audit of all costs.

$96 million, yeah sure.

Something is not right.

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

I guess if we ever get them, the submarines will cost us a lot more than $380G.

Just using the old radar site right now to keep an eye on the storm that going to be very close to us when it passes.
It’s very close to the ‘turning everything off and unplugging it ‘ stage.

Spiny Norman said:

Just using the old radar site right now to keep an eye on the storm that going to be very close to us when it passes.
It’s very close to the ‘turning everything off and unplugging it ‘ stage.

I’ve been watching the wiggly flight paths of aeroplanes dodging the storms not all that far from us.

Good luck.

Michael V said:

Spiny Norman said:

Just using the old radar site right now to keep an eye on the storm that going to be very close to us when it passes.
It’s very close to the ‘turning everything off and unplugging it ‘ stage.

I’ve been watching the wiggly flight paths of aeroplanes dodging the storms not all that far from us.

Good luck.

It passed us without any drama fortunately.
Just having a look at your place ..
… yeah you’re fine. Maybe a bit or rain in an hour or so.

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

Spiny Norman said:

Just using the old radar site right now to keep an eye on the storm that going to be very close to us when it passes.
It’s very close to the ‘turning everything off and unplugging it ‘ stage.

I’ve been watching the wiggly flight paths of aeroplanes dodging the storms not all that far from us.

Good luck.

It passed us without any drama fortunately.
Just having a look at your place ..
… yeah you’re fine. Maybe a bit or rain in an hour or so.

They have died significantly in the last hour or so.

Michael V said:

SCIENCE said:

Divine Angel said:

I wonder if that includes upgrades to reporting stations? My local weather station was taken offline two weeks before the new website rollout, with the official explanation being it was too old to integrate observation data with the new site. (Now my observations come from the airport 20kms away.)

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

I guess if we ever get them, the submarines will cost us a lot more than $380G.

ah well at least the great barrier reef only cost us $444M but nobody remembers that

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-24/bom-website-approved-by-coalition-ceo-says/106047518

The Bureau of Meteorology’s new chief executive has revealed the agency’s controversial website redesign was approved by the Turnbull government.

SCIENCE said:

Michael V said:

SCIENCE said:

yes Madeleine, something is quite wrong

sadly it says

It said the cost breakdown included $4.1 million for the redesign, $79.8 million for the website build, and the site’s launch and security testing cost $12.6 million.

anyway we guess $4M is pretty bad but could just be a very expensive lesson

but $80M we… uh…

if it really was used for stations then maybe

but then again perspective we suppose, just wait and see what $368G buys us in 30 years

I guess if we ever get them, the submarines will cost us a lot more than $380G.

ah well at least the great barrier reef only cost us $444M but nobody remembers that

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-24/bom-website-approved-by-coalition-ceo-says/106047518

The Bureau of Meteorology’s new chief executive has revealed the agency’s controversial website redesign was approved by the Turnbull government.

Let’s see a full audit.