On Sitejabber, businesses may not offer incentives or pay to remove reviews. Learn more about our Review Guidelines.
Weather.com has a rating of 1.4 stars from 268 reviews, indicating that most customers are generally dissatisfied with their purchases. Reviewers dissatisfied with Weather.com most frequently mention many ads, day forecast and high speed. Weather.com ranks 44th among Weather sites.
We monitor reviews for authenticity
This use to be a good site, get weather anywhere, for any length of time. Store your favorite locations... now it is the slowest, most cubersome, ugly viewing site I have ever seen. Just curious who signed off on this new version. That person must of hated the weather channel. Ummm... try again or lose all your veiwers.
JUST WHEN YOU THINK THESE STUPID $#*!S COULDNT DO ANYTHING WORSE THAN FORECASTING THE WEATHER, SURPRISE THERE'S THIS $#*!TY SORRY $#*! EXCUSE FOR A WEBSITE. GUESS DUMB $#*!ING LAZY ASSES WITH THE MOST SKILLESS JOB IN THE WORLD CANT DO ANYTHING RIGHT.
This site comes across to me that they primarily want my visit to drive advertising revenue. Headlines are often WAY overblown, trying to scare people into further clicks. Weather dot com could be a hero, a site we could all respect and trust and be proud of, but for now they are completely unethical and seem to be greed driven. I'm ashamed of this site, and I wish they would represent our nation better.
IBM has such poor programming for the Weather Channel website. For my zip code *******, they show on their hourly forecast for Thursday 6:00 am a temperature of 30 degrees but on the daily forecast forecast for Thursday the projected low is 39 degrees. This contradiction happens often just my first complaint about it.
TWC puts up videos with BS headlines just to sell ads. Anything but the weather is what there doing. Hopefully soon, they'll realize how the were in the early 80's and go back to doing weather.
I use to like the Weather Channel online a few years ago... but it is SOOOO slow... gets stuck all the time and is just a waste of time... I started using my iphone for weather Every time you click on something you get a message that it is running a very long script
I can't believe they just let it be bogged down like it is...
This website is an abomination... slow to load and klunky. With the name weather.com and ownership by IBM... yes, IBM... this website should be an absolute marvel as opposed to what seems to be a middle school website project. (Note: the Weather Channel sold the name and website to IBM. The TV channel leases the name back from IBM)
Weather.com has great content. It's a shame you can't ever read any of it. Over the last year, the site has slowed to the point it's completely worthless. I have very high speed internet and it takes me over 10 minutes now to load the 10 day forecast.
That's pathetic for a major news site and no other well-known news service has such slow loading speeds.
If you cannot access the content, the content is worthless. I predict that weather.com is rapidly becoming one of the least used websites for weather information now because of this long standing problem. It's that bad.
I hike, camp, and hunt during the winter. Is there a reliable source for weather? I am worried that I will get hit by a winter storm days before weather.com realized it happened or updates the web site.! SPECIAL NEWS BULLETIN! A HUGE WINTER STORM HIT THREE DAYS AGO, EVERYONE BRACE YOURESELVES! This site is garbage.
Lousy slow and gets worse every day constantly waiting for ads to load, I guess they figure a way around adblocker.
I have a connection of 120 Mbps yet the weather dot com site takes over a full minute to fully load the page. Unacceptable in this day and age of high speed internet. And if you want the live weather map, strap yourself in for another long wait for that page to load as well...
I think weather.com has gotten too greedy for its own good. The site has long loading ads and cookies that track beyond its own domain.
Slow and most times unresponsive. Trying to watch the radar and it runs at 1 frame per 2-4 seconds. Takes entirely too long to load one webpage and then they make you click two or three more times just to get all the information you want. I know why they do this - so you load more ads and they make more revenue. The articles are click-baity and half the time dont even seem relevant to the weather? And this terribly-running site asks me to DISABLE MY ADBLOCKER? Yeah, right. I can't even imagine how slow it would be if I disabled my freakin ad blocker - probably 1 frame per 5 minutes.
TWC, I will happily disable my ad blocker when you hire someone who can make sense of your over-cluttered crapfest website. How many more clicks will it take for you to be able to afford that?: thinking:
There are so many ads on weather.com that it's basically unusable. If you are able to take a 5-minute break waiting for each page to load, then you'll be fine. Otherwise, use accuweather or something else.
There was a time that Weather.com was a useful source of weather related information. The site has become absolutely useless. The ads and scripts make finding information impossible and the site's responsiveness is absolutely horrible. It's too bad - this used to be the place to go for weather updates. Obviously, the revenue from the ads has outweighed the overall goal of the website of providing reliable weather information. Too bad.
Where to start? Unresponsive mobile site (tablet and phone) because it is full of useless click bait and eye candy, running countless scripts. Useless in the extreme.
That website is so slow filled with bloat to the point it isn't usable. Pretty much skip this and save yourself the time of waiting forever for it to load only to slam you with scare news.
It is so slow and bogged down by scripts, it is an absolute abomination. It takes minutes to find information that should take seconds. My computer fan always runs when on the website. How can they not be aware of this?
Many people don't know that the U.S. Virgin Islands are owned by the United States. In purchasing the Islands from Denmark, they took on an obligation of reasonable care of the Islands. When Irma hit St. Thomas and St. John, many felt that these Islands, though devastated by the hurricane, took back seat to the Florida news. Now comes Maria, and many of us who live Stateside but have familial ties to St. Croix have sadly learned that no one is providing news coverage. Through social media we have come to learn that thus far the damage may be comparable to, if not worse than Hurricane Hugo which all be decimated the Island in 1989. No word from the Weather Channel though - they just moved on to Puerto Rico weather. The greatest fear is that the U.S. Virgin Islands appear to be a forgotten trinket of the U.S. and thus its residents may never recover from this disaster.
She looks like a stupid deer in car headlights. She can't read the information showing on my T. V. She has a shrill voice, and pushes her way into every person on air. What happened to Jim Cantore, he was the reason I watched the weather channel. He seems to be cut out on the coverage of hurricane Irma. Replacing him is a big mistake. He had a lot of followers. No more, weather channel. I watch fox for news now. Erika Navarro is an obvious suck up to those higher up the chain. She treats Jim C. Like dirt.
Answer: Won't get any better. They now force you to turn off your ad blocker or you can't use the site. Move on!
Answer: That's not a question.