New Whiteface web site

[highpeaksdrifter]

http://www.whiteface.com/newsite/index.php

This is a hugh improvement from the old one. What ski areas do you think have good web sites? Greg, Oil, DMC and you other Web guys most have some opinions.

 

[Vano]

I like Jay Peak's website. It is probably getting more outdated these days but their flash based Trail Map / Snow Report is great. I like the powder meter as well - one of the few NE resorts where having one actually makes sense.

 

[Greg]

I always thought Ski Butternut's Web site was well done. Many folks think that MRG's site is good, most notably because of the truthful snow reporting. This was actually discussed once before. That old thread was actually the foundation for the ski area challenge.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

This was actually discussed once before.

This is a little off topic and I don't mean to rant, but the above sentence gets written alot like the old threads are sacred or something. AZers come and go and probably just a core group posts in the off season. I don't see why it should matter if a topic is revisited. If somebody doesn't want to discuss it again they don't have to.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

The new website may be fantastic, but that trailmap is simply awful. You can't read anything. You can't tell anything about the feel of the mountain - what's steep, what's flat, what's narrow, what's wide? Just an abomination. Same for Gore. ORDA ought to be ashamed. Pony up the dough for a Niehues, please. My 3 year old nephew could do better than what's there now.

 

[Greg]

This was actually discussed once before.

This is a little off topic and I don't mean to rant, but the above sentence gets written alot like the old threads are sacred or something. AZers come and go and probably just a core group posts in the off season. I don't see why it should matter if a topic is revisited. If somebody doesn't want to discuss it again they don't have to.

No. I don't mean it that way. Certainly topics are going to come up repeatedly. Situations changes, perspectives change, etc. That thread is a bit old so a fresh one certainly is warranted. Sometimes, however, a topic repeats every couple of months. My only reason for mentioning it was sort of a lead-in to the comment about that discussion resulting in the ski area challenge concept. Plus it's interesting to look back in the context of this thread.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

This was actually discussed once before.

This is a little off topic and I don't mean to rant, but the above sentence gets written alot like the old threads are sacred or something. AZers come and go and probably just a core group posts in the off season. I don't see why it should matter if a topic is revisited. If somebody doesn't want to discuss it again they don't have to.

No. I don't mean it that way. Certainly topics are going to come up repeatedly. Situations changes, perspectives change, etc. That thread is a bit old so a fresh one certainly is warranted. Sometimes, however, a topic repeats every couple of months. My only reason for mentioning it was sort of a lead-in to the comment about that discussion resulting in the ski area challenge concept. Plus it's interesting to look back in the context of this thread.

I wasn't getting on you Greg. I was thinking about mentioning it before and decided to post my little rant the next time it came up. No offense to you bro, you do an outstanding job. I love it here.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

The new website may be fantastic, but that trailmap is simply awful. You can't read anything. You can't tell anything about the feel of the mountain - what's steep, what's flat, what's narrow, what's wide? Just an abomination. Same for Gore. ORDA ought to be ashamed. Pony up the dough for a Niehues, please. My 3 year old nephew could do better than what's there now.

I agree, but the web site does say a new Interactive Map is coming soon.

 

[skibum1321]

I think that Mad River's site is good in terms of truthful snow reports but is really weak on the design side. It looks very amateurish. They have some really good stuff such as videos and some cool pics but they could really use some more content too. Maybe get some backgrounds up there - I would love an MRG background for my computer - that'd be badass. They are also lagging behind in not having an interactive trail map. It's probably just money. But their website is always praised, so I thought I'd put out the other side of the argument. I

For good websites, I would say that I like Stowe's. They have a ton of good content and it is pretty navigable.
I also like Sugarbush's site but they could also use some backgrounds and bigger pics. The aspect I really like on their site is the section where you can submit your own pics and they choose a winner each week.

 

[Greg]

They are also lagging behind in not having an interactive trail map.

It's just some simple rollovers, but they do have a somewhat interactive trail map:

http://www.madriverglen.com/maps/iMapLarge.php#

In fact, they were one of the first to provide trail-by-trail descriptions on their online trail map. Sure, there are no interaction lift, lodge, learning area, dining, etc. depictions on the trail map, but this is MRG so the "trail" in trail map is the operative word.

 

[bvibert]

I think that Mad River's site is good in terms of truthful snow reports but is really weak on the design side. It looks very amateurish. They have some really good stuff such as videos and some cool pics but they could really use some more content too...

For good websites, I would say that I like Stowe's. They have a ton of good content and it is pretty navigable.

I was just thinking the same thing about MRG's site, then again I think their site goes along with their image of a skier mountain. I would be dissapointed if the site was all fancy and flashy.

I also agree that Stowe's site is pretty good, I really liked their interactive trail map when I was planning a trip there last year. I would expect no less from one of the most exspensive resorts around.

I like Cannon's site too. Some things I was looking for weren't the easiest to find, but I'm a sucker for a good interactive trail map. Especially one that shows which trails are open or closed and which ones are groomed or bumped. :beer:

 

[bvibert]

It's just some simple rollovers, but they do have a somewhat interactive trail map:

http://www.madriverglen.com/maps/iMapLarge.php#

In fact, they were one of the first to provide trail-by-trail descriptions on their online trail map. Sure, there are no interaction lift, lodge, learning area, dining, etc. depictions on the trail map, but this is MRG so the "trail" in trail map is the operative word.

I forgot about that, I really liked the descriptions when I was planning a trip there two years ago!

 

[Sky]

I'm not very discriminating I guess...haven't seen many sites I didn't like.

The talk baout interactive trail maps reminded me that I like Sunapee's version of interation...opened/closed status etc as you roll over it.

Cannon's map is also good as is Wildcat's. Photos on both web sites tend to be awesome.

 

[riverc0il]

i really enjoy MRG's site and i like it just the way it is, especially the trail map. i think interactive maps are crap and over rated. skimp on the scripting and put bandwidth into a nice large size JPG that i can download instead of some small flashy showy image that seperates things out.

i don't think many ski area web sites are very well done, most of them quite frankly are complete crap. even a lot of the major and bigger ski areas and surprisingly even a lot of the corp ski area sites as well. i just updated my own page's links section. on my directory page, i link to the ski area's snow report for easy access. it seems every year i need to redo half the links because the web master's enjoy changing site lay outs without putting in redirects. nice. i've been to them all for new england, mrg is the only stand out i can think of off hand. wildcat has a decent one too, i always seem to be able to quickly find what i want on wildcat's site. i liked cannon's old site before they grabbed stowe's programmer, hate the current design. can't stand web sites like that.

 

[skibum1321]

I've actually been on the Kmart website with the snowstorms of the past couple of weeks hoping to find some pics. It made me realize what a poorly designed website it is (add web design to the running list of things that Kmart sucks at).
My biggest gripe with the site is that you can't necessarily get to the page you want depending on what page you are on at the time. In other words, their navigation menus are different depending where on the site you are. This is really poor web design because it forces me to go back to the home page if I want to go to the snow report. For example, go to the pics page and try to get to the snow report page by clicking on the dropdowns. Also, only the final level of the navigation hierarchy should be a link but they have the snow report on a higher level of the hierarchy being a link. Killington fails again....

 

[skibum1321]

i really enjoy MRG's site and i like it just the way it is, especially the trail map. i think interactive maps are crap and over rated. skimp on the scripting and put bandwidth into a nice large size JPG that i can download instead of some small flashy showy image that seperates things out.

i don't think many ski area web sites are very well done, most of them quite frankly are complete crap. even a lot of the major and bigger ski areas and surprisingly even a lot of the corp ski area sites as well. i just updated my own page's links section. on my directory page, i link to the ski area's snow report for easy access. it seems every year i need to redo half the links because the web master's enjoy changing site lay outs without putting in redirects. nice. i've been to them all for new england, mrg is the only stand out i can think of off hand. wildcat has a decent one too, i always seem to be able to quickly find what i want on wildcat's site. i liked cannon's old site before they grabbed stowe's programmer, hate the current design. can't stand web sites like that.

Cannon and Stowe are designed by different companies - Propeller for Stowe and Circus for Cannon. They just look pretty similar.
Also, it really depends what you are looking for in a website. You are obviously not much for the aesthetics of the website, but rather are more concerned with the information hierarchy and content. I agree that this is the most important part, but I also like a site that looks good. There are some sites that actually do both well and I actually do like Stowe's site.