Jump to content

photobucket forcing me to upgrade


MancheKid86
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, I used Photobucket in the past alot on here, sucks for my builds and such but $400 is outrageous!

 

$400 says:  "We don't want to be in this 3rd party photo hosting business - there is no way we can make any money.  Please take your pictures and GO AWAY!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all are free to create  your own website, host your own photos. 

 

I owned/created two websites, gripsnstocks.com and jeepseekers.com 

 

The idea behind jeepseekers was to have a Jeep specific trading source, below is a vid ad that I did for someone here. I thought it was a good idea, apparently, no one else did. 

 

 

 

 

Plenty of hosting sites out there, I used Hyperstreet...............godaddy sucks @$$. 

 

Use your name, joeblow.com -I think I was paying about $17 per mouth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Photobucket either goes back on their "give us $400 a year to host pics" decision or the owner of the pics manually moves them to a better host, they're gone. You can see them if you right click on them and open them in a new tab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's a warning gonna do for you?  They'll keep your photos in your account, they just won't be linked anymore.  

 

It's simple extortion.  Wanna keep the hosting they've been providing?  Pony up $399/yr.  No ifs, ands or buts.

 

Photobucket posted a response to several angry blog posts on their website citing the changing trend in advertising based web business.  They're blaming it on their service being overrun by ad blocker software keeping them from getting paid for the advertising hits they're not getting now.  Not unlike having a DVR and fast forwarding through the commercials.  It's why we're seeing product placement/plugs in our shows now.

 

If they'd have told me it'd be $50, even $100 / year to keep up the unlimited hosting service, I'd pay it.  But $400?  That's robbery.

 

 

The public damage this has done to the internet is MASSIVE. The inconvenience is MASSIVE.  I sincerely hope Photobucket's revenue loss is MASSIVE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I have never liked or trusted the concept of "cloud" computing. Sure, it's convenient -- when it works, and the "cloud" is available. But once they get you hooked on "the cloud," they can change the terms of service and jack up the price at will, and you're held hostage.

 

I agree with Yellaheep -- the damage this has done to the Internet community is incalculable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You either use someone in the cloud as a host, or setup your own host. That's how it works.

 

I think PB is knocking off subscribers who use ad-blocking software first. How many of you who are still able to use PB hosting are using ad-blockers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's a warning gonna do for you?  They'll keep your photos in your account, they just won't be linked anymore.  

 

It's simple extortion.  Wanna keep the hosting they've been providing?  Pony up $399/yr.  No ifs, ands or buts.

 

Photobucket posted a response to several angry blog posts on their website citing the changing trend in advertising based web business.  They're blaming it on their service being overrun by ad blocker software keeping them from getting paid for the advertising hits they're not getting now.  Not unlike having a DVR and fast forwarding through the commercials.  It's why we're seeing product placement/plugs in our shows now.

 

If they'd have told me it'd be $50, even $100 / year to keep up the unlimited hosting service, I'd pay it.  But $400?  That's robbery.

 

 

The public damage this has done to the internet is MASSIVE. The inconvenience is MASSIVE.  I sincerely hope Photobucket's revenue loss is MASSIVE.

 

My thoughts exactly. Screw 'em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, it sucks when I click on a link and there are no pics but today the world relies on the internet to makes us smart that photo bucket is probly doing us a favor. Half of my build thread doesn't work now but I'm ok with that. I never got many comments anyways. i wouldn't be suprised if more places started making you pay to post pics

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, it sucks when I click on a link and there are no pics but today the world relies on the internet to makes us smart that photo bucket is probly doing us a favor. Half of my build thread doesn't work now but I'm ok with that. I never got many comments anyways. i wouldn't be suprised if more places started making you pay to post pics

 

 

That wouldn't surprise me, either, and it also won't surprise me if all those companies go out of business rather quickly. What they fail to grasp is that the end users have come to expect the Internet to be basically free. We all know that it costs a company money to maintain servers and to provide a service, but nobody asked them to offer us free photo hosting. They came to us and said, 'Here it is -- use it!" So we did. Then they started piling on with advertisements. Yeah, okay, the ads pay for the service, we get that. But when they piled on so many ads that they interfered with the usability of the service, the use of ad blockers became a self defense mechanism for the users. If Photobucket had not been so greedy about the way they managed the ads on their site, users wouldn't have needed ad blockers.

 

So now Photobucket can't make [enough] money from ads, so they want to charge the end users. But the amount they decided on simply isn't reasonable. All it's going to do is drive people away. And I can't escape the thought that this is ultimately what they want -- to get rid of the pesky freeloaders (like most of us) who only have a few hundred or a few thousand images hosted under the [formerly] free service so they can devote their server space to the photo and video professionals who have far too many images hosted to even think about downloading them and moving them elsewhere.

 

I think more people are going to start hosting their own photos. We can sign up for our own web hosting, with lots of server space, five or ten or more dedicated e-mail addresses, and technical support for creating our own, personal web site for a LOT less than $399 a year. Photobucket is just going to push more people to do that sooner than they would otherwise have done so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You can see them if you right click on them and open them in a new tab.

This does not work for me. I'm running Firefox as my browser, what are you using?

 

I can't see them at all on Chrome either.. I've even tried going into the code for the web page and pull the link but that didn't work either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what you guys are using as your browser. I use Firefox. When I right click one of those blocked images, it just opens the same image in another page of the same tab. I am not offered any option to open in a new tab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what you guys are using as your browser. I use Firefox. When I right click one of those blocked images, it just opens the same image in another page of the same tab. I am not offered any option to open in a new tab.

Firefox is rather tired now. 

 

 

No problems with Chrome of IE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I have about 30 photos hosted with PB. Just got an email telling me i need to upgrade because i am using them for 3rd party hosting. 

 

Sooooo... They appear to be going after everyone that is using PB for 3rd party hosting regardless of the amount of stored images. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can sign up for our own web hosting, with lots of server space, five or ten or more dedicated e-mail addresses, and technical support for creating our own, personal web site for a LOT less than $399 a year.

Where? Every non-self-hosting forum in existence has taken massive hits from the PB ban and is looking for the same answer for their members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sooooo... They appear to be going after everyone that is using PB for 3rd party hosting regardless of the amount of stored images. 

 

Yes, that is correct.

 

One site often suggested as a replacement is imgur.com. Just found this on another forum:

 

 

 

Amazon Prime photospace won't give you clean image file links that end in .gpg .gif etc. so they can be rendered with IMG tags.

 

Imgur is off the list right out. They say in their terms of service that using them for linking to forum posts violates their TOS, even though everyone does it. And Imgur has been quietly engaging in SJW fights with various right wing and gun boards, so you have to add an extension or monkey with your browser's HTTP referrer settings to prevent them from seeing the website they've banned.

 

So, imgur.com isn't an option, and Amazon Prime isn't an option. I'm still looking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...