Overall, it is much harder to use to find R space than with the prior expert mode, especially with connections. Also, lately it will sometimes come up with strange results, like showing business class for cash not being available (when it is and can be found by using segments), or for the return only showing me one or two options when other times it will show dozens. Or the same search a minute later coming up with entirely different connection options. It is at the point that I have to do a couple of identical searches, a couple of segment searches, and then check ITA as well to make sure I know what my options really are. The only thing that was good about the new site was that it compared economy versus mileage upgrade versus business for cash for a given flight, but without dependably showing all the flight options that isn't much help.

Figured as much, but just thought I would throw it out there in case it was a factor.

Anyway, being forced to the new site has really opened my eyes to the very valid complaints throughout this thread. It is incredibly bad. You can't even see/access all the flight search fields without a lot of scrolling? Who the hell thought this was a good design?

This is not a situation where some people are just adverse to change. This is just a crappy step backward.

It is also disappointing that there has been no engagement from UA Digital Insider since starting this thread back on August 5.

This is a great explanation of what is going on with the supposedly "per segment" prices.

"Old site" RIP

Couldn't on the old advanced search page either.
I dunno. There are a couple legit complaints like requesting a GPU-eligible fare and not having one returned. But not liking the UI on the results (it shows more info in the same space) or claiming it is impossible to search different cabins in each direction (decidedly untrue) are questionable gripes based on not having learned the new site IMO.

Or getting different results after running the same search twice. Or having a calendar show one-stop fares when nonstop was selected. Or having my default airport show as JFK with no way to change it even though United no longer flies from JFK (Edit: I figured out how to change it).

It's not that the site looks different. It's that it doesn't work properly.

Still haven't seen you address the inability for the new calendar to be toggled to show nonstop award space. Even AA and DL have moved to making that possible while UA moves 15 years backwards.

Loss of the ability to do a paypal/phone order hold is big too, though that was intentional I'm sure.

I don't think a customer should have to "learn" how to use a company's website in order to spend money with that company. A modern commercial website should be easy to use and informative-almost intuitive. Not full of busy graphics, filters, partial information and known glitches. UA's new website inhibits commerce and discourages customer interaction and use.

And I think that's a delusional dream.

If you had no prior bias/experience then the learning curve is not all that significant here. The basic process - put in airports and dates and buy flights - is trivial to "learn" and really not much different from most other OTAs or airlines.

The "hard" parts are advanced features which are now performed differently from the old site. Some of those are likely on purpose and some are likely not. But it is a far cry from the "nothing works OMFG it is awful I cannot do business with this company" rants coming up in this thread. For the vast majority of customers (and revenue) the site is working just fine. Whether we like it or not.
Of course you did. Because most of these things are relatively easy to set/change. Just means looking for what it was and remembering how it was set whenever ago.

I should have been more clear, it is impossible to search different cabins in each direction if looking for a specific fare class in one direction (say, W or V to upgrade).

Ugh. At least I was finally actually able to book an itinerary to completion, although not without an extended 'processing' screen wait.

Yup...and that's one of the missing features which is a reasonable complaint. Though I think we can also agree that it is a decidedly advanced query and not something the vast majority of customers are doing.

And if they fixed the part where you could select the GPU-upgrade fares and it actually returned those fares rather than lower ones then this will be resolved, too. It is broken but the framework to have it working is there. It is not like the functionality is not accounted for in the site design.

Just booked my first ticket and had the same result. Thought for sure I was going to get back an error since I had to multi-city search to get a lower fare then just a normal one way search.

Agreed.

There are bugs, but when they're fixed, it won't be nearly as aggravating.

I do wish the married segment logic had a little more tweaking as well.

Not sure what he could say or offer beyond passing our comments upward (which I hope he is doing). He can't agree with us, lest he be in trouble internally, and he can't defend lest we come down on him.

I just find the new really not clean/sharp/easy to view, and it I liked the prior way of seeing which were partner flights vs UA. I'm finding it painful to have to click and open every option, and when it opens it takes up so much real estate with big fonts etc so I can't really get a real view easily -- very romper roomy looking to me (I know that's a trend now on web sites, but for something like this it is annoying).

I agree it's annoying.

I suppose I'm missing it, so can someone please explain what (if any) added functionality the 'new' (I propose it be dubbed SNAFUnited) website delivers for customers that the 'classic' site did not?