So it's logical for a brand new website to make you manually peck through 60 dates to see if a nonstop saver award is available rather than allow you to view 60 dates at a time?

In which world is this called progress?

well for me at least, I don't want to have to click through to see what my final price would be. thats why the old site was better to me.

Yes. In my (only one too) opinion.

anyone can tell me how to switch back to old version...
tried to clean cookies and united.com/ual..
It doesn't work...

I agree. I don't like it either. The point I should have made clearer is that UA is following the herd.

There are a few things I like with the new website. What I do not like is I can no longer sort the flights after length in miles. Also, its very slow... some searches takes almost a minute to return any results. Thats just too long to wait.

.bomb
 

I tried teaching an elder united.com but questions I indicate how bad of a web consulting agency marketing firm whatever .bomb hired:

• Why is it different when we visit? - Random luck, frankly.
• Is there a way to get to the same place everytime? - No, .bomb doesn't have many unique URLs acknowledging states for what they'd say are "security" reasons.
• How do I see prices without scrolling? - Scrolling is key to the .bomb experience. Better not use it on a non-desktop.
• Where are my flights? - That expanding tile unless it's the old site where you go into View Reservations ...
• How much is it to use points? - Gosh, where to even start this answer.

All too hard to use for a non-web professional (said as a 9 years frontend web developer), a real web agency would make .bomb easier not harder.

Use Incognito or private mode tab in your browser. I am at 100% using this technique.

The website now will not load at all in Chrome for me. It will do so in Firefox, but in Chrome I just get a blank page with https://www.united.com/web/en-US/default.aspx?root=1 in the address bar. How on earth can I easily load a website for UA?

I just tried private mode tab in firefox.

Still got the new site. :(:(

Interestingly, I get the new site in Chrome (most of the time) or Opera (all of the time), but always the old site on IE/Edge.

Frustratingly, when using the new site to look for award travel for next summer, the new site shows flights that do not show up on the old site. But I cannot book any flights through the new site and calling United, several of the flights that the new website shows me don't even show up on the CSR's computer.

So, the new site is pretty - but it needs to show real flights and actually let me book them to be in any way useful.

This is pathetic. Won't let me finish a booking AFTER being super slow to do anything. Very frustrating and counterproductive.

clear cache and try again.

Welcome to FlyerTalk.

If you want the assistance of the community, or to just share your experience with others, you need to provide us with a lot more detail!

From / To
R/T, One Way, or Multi-City
Dates
Revenue or award
Y, C, F
Specific fare class requested
etc.

Problems you experienced with the new site, and how the old site handled this situation better.

Hopefully somebody here can assist you!

Okay, here is a sample of what I am seeing. Looking for award travel using the "Multi-City" option:

CVG -> CDG on 7/31/16
CDG -> EDI on 8/8/16
EDI -> CVG on 8/12/16

Let's look at just the first leg, the new United site shows a lot of saver awards at either 15K, 30K, 32.5K or 65K miles (plus $5.60 fees). The old site only shows 30k or 65k flights. UA4517/UA915 shows as 65K on the old site and only 32.5K on the new site. But it isn't bookable on the new site (actually, none of the flights are bookable regardless of value - they all give me an error).

Another one: The new site shows flights UA4080/UA987 for 32.5k points vs. 65k points on the old site. The 15 k flights on the new site are 30k on the old site. But the 30k flights are the same amount on both sites.

I cannot find the flight #'s on the new site that didn't exist at all on the old site or the UA agent's computer as of today. Hopefully those have been removed.