Triley1057 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 1999, 462 posts, RR: 1 Posted (11 years 9 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3585 times:
By far, the Houston Airport System takes the cake. I can't believe that they will not change this website. For anyone interested check out www.houstonairportsystem.org I have tried e-mailing them a few times but I never get a reply. For all the guys in Houston who started the petition to open the spotting areas back up, I suggest you start a petition to fire the guy who maintains this website. I will be the first to sign it. Pathetic.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7814 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3541 times:
the HAS site is pretty bad. Basically the content is out of date and the design itself is pretty bad. It is a little better than before, but not by much. The design is pretty amaturish, with too many animated text boxes and a non-scrolling frame on the left side, which is also the main navigation bar.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Timf From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 973 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3509 times:
Actually, I don't think DTW's website is that bad. They're pretty good about keeping it updated, and they completely redid it a year ago when the new terminal opened.
I would agree that the Houston website is bad. They still list Terminal A as being under construction, when that project was finished a couple years ago. If you can't keep the site up to date, then there's no point in having the site.
Neilalp From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1034 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3385 times:
Houston's might be outdated, but it looks much better than the new DTW website. At (DTW's site) You'd think they'd put up a new picture of the terminal....nope they stick with the artist's perception. It could be better, but i'm sure there is far worse than DTW & IAH.
Usairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3488 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3383 times:
The PHL airport website is pretty bad too. They don't return emails, they haven't updated their Air Cargo section for at least 3 years, they would post monthly photos of the construction progress, however it ended up that they would miss 3 months and post 4 months worth of pictures at one time. They also keep monthly logs which is like the news for that month, however they typically post it like 2 months late. They really dont have a nice detailed map of the airport, with locations of stores and restaurants.
They decided to put in two web cams which was good, the only problem is the one faces the new terminal but you can only see at most 3 or 4 planes from a distance on the screen. The next cam is pretty good because it shows planes landing and shows about 4 UA gates. However i think they should have picked a better location to show a more wide area of the airport.
GotAirbus From Singapore, joined May 2001, 851 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3299 times:
My goodness...San Antonio Int'l Airport's website is pretty static and the HAS is a nightmare to look at. I think that it is definitely informative for them to post news of US' new security measures but IMO, they splashed too many scrolling newsstickers on their site.
Other than that, I've never been to their airport before.
(gotAIRBUS?) - (Got Commonality?) - (Have A Nice Flight!)
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4047 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3243 times:
Indeed the HAS site is a piss poor excuse for an airport web site and an embarrassment to the city of Houston and it's airports. That said the current site is light years ahead of what it was some 2-3 short years ago. All it took was some prodding from the Houston Chronicle in the form of a scathing column from said paper. At that point HAS was dragged kicking and screaming into the mid 90s (updated in 2000) and forced to give some semblance of a half assed makeover.
I would not hold my breath hoping to see an update in HAS's site for another 10-15 years.
WMUPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 1473 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3215 times:
What about the Chicago Area airports....mainly Chicago Midway...there is no info on that airport...it doesn't even have it's own page. You have to get to it from OHare's website and even that isn't a website to get all excited about.