I don't care what sort of graphics they have, I just want them to get it right!I have lost count of the times I have put my washing out before going to work having heard that it was going to stay dry and it rains!!

I think the new graphics are ace!

It shows you where the sun will be and where the cloud will be and if that cloud will rain.

I'm glad the cartoon clouds have gone.

Now all they need to do is predict it right :)

Trouble with them is (I feel) that they appear to give such a precise picture of what to expect that even more people are going to be caught out.

Chris

It does look as if it is likely to be considerably more accurate, tho of course they'll get it wrong sometimes.

I think that graphics are just that and nothing else. I understand that the graphics are on a blue screen ( as used for visual effects in Star Wars) The presenter stands in front of a blank blue screen and cannot see the graphics which are added by a computer - except perhaps on a small monitor. So they just have to make vague jestures hoping that they are in sync with the pictures.

The graphics certainly look impressive, but like Star Wars whether they reflect reality is another matter.

The forecasts behind the graphics haven't changed so I'm not even going to comment on the accuracy or otherwise. I'll just suggest that the aim of any improvements like this should be to offer more clear and more detailed information.

I feel that the new graphics offer this potential but have been made more cluttered instead of more clear so that we can have moving raindrops and 3-D representations. We get ludicrous situations such as peering through a haze of raindrops falling on London to try and see whether the sun is supposed to be shining in Yorkshire. And I suspect there is some subtle distinction between different kinds of raindrops indicating steady rain or passing showers, and if not there should be. What's the point showing an precise blob of raindrops sitting exactly on Manchester if all it means is there is a 10% chance of a shower today? Seems to me like the whole thing is another dumbing down of a type that the BBC is getting better at all the time. Maybe we could have a "real" weather forecast on BBC2 ;)

I never saw what was wrong with the forecasters sticking little plastic clouds onto a map by hand! Bah humbug! At least you had the fun of watching some of them fall off! :) I have to confess I find the new graphics somewhat of a busy, cluttered jumble, but it may just be a getting used to it thing. Or I'm getting old and finding it too much for my elderly eyes to take in. Too much going on BBC, too much!

Alcina

I like the new graphics but I suspect the further south you live in the UK, the clearer they are. As for forecasters sticking plastic clouds on a map, I don't remember those, but for some reason it's reminding me of the Fast Show - Scorchio!

I do not like the new weather graphics. On the national forecast there are no inland temperatures and they seem to have done away with proper night time minima altogether.

The local forecast is not much better - there is a huge difference in temperatures between, say, the Fens and where we are in Northamptonshire, although we are only a few tens of miles apart, I do wish that was indicated much better.

The 5 day forecast on the BBC website is very suspect - it can predict -5C here and +3C night time minima (for the same night) when I type in the next town 5 miles away.

I like proper isobars and proper windspeed indicators and proper minimum temperatures. I am not a luddite and the new graphics may look pretty 'swish', but we are actually getting less information now in areas that matter to me and my gardening.

They are a breach of the trafes descriptions act.

They are supposed to be forecasts of the weather not just of precipitation.

They have a board dedicated to complaints about it at bbc.co.uk. I don't think they ever look at it though. (They were forced to do something about the maps -by parliament of all things.)

I saw a temperature map today! Just like the ones online. They still had to have the random temperature numbers pasted on in inappropriate places (the nearest one to Manchester is quite often pasted right over the peak district and god knows whether they mean Manchester, Sheffield, Stoke, Derby, or all four) because nobody knows which shade of pale yellow means what. Anyway, I'll take that as an improvement.

The wind arrows are still a disaster. The 3D representation (notice it is still slanted and they go back to the more extreme slant on the closeups) means that a small arrow over the Northern Isles (if you can see them at all as they whirl around madly) is a severe gale while a huge arrow in the English Channel is a mild breeze. No wonder all those crofters are angry.

I'd just like to know why the weather map stops at Plymouth.

Here in Cornwall we rarely if ever (apart from the floods in Boscastle) we are never mentioned with regards to the weather.