Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday November 02 2018, @10:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the TANSTAAFL dept.

Flickr will end 1TB of free storage and limit free users to 1,000 photos

Flickr was purchased in April by professional photo hosting service SmugMug, and today, the first major changes under the new ownership have been announced. There's a serious downgrade for free users, who are now limited to 1,000 pictures on the photo sharing site, instead of the free 1TB of storage that was previously offered.

As Flickr explains in its press release announcing the change, "Unfortunately, 'free' services are seldom actually free for users. Users pay with their data or with their time. We would rather the arrangement be transparent." It makes a certain amount of sense — servers aren't free, after all — but for free users with more than 1,000 photos, it's not ideal news.

[...] In what may be the nicest quality-of-life change, starting in January, all users — paid and free — won't have to use Yahoo to log in to Flickr anymore.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @12:06PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @12:06PM (#756799)

    I will just sit back and watch flickr fade into obscurity.

    How so? Free users with more than 1000 images will either pay for the service, reduce their number of images (probably by setting up multiple free Flickr accounts), or abandon the platform all together for ... what free service that will give them storage for more than 1000 images?

    I don't use Flickr so I don't have a horse in this race, but storage of 1000 images for free seems reasonable.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by requerdanos on Friday November 02 2018, @04:14PM (3 children)

    by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 02 2018, @04:14PM (#756901) Journal

    Free users with more than 1000 images will either pay for the service, reduce their number of images (probably by setting up multiple free Flickr accounts)

    storage of 1000 images for free seems reasonable.

    Well, you can make an argument that "1000 images is reasonable" simply because "anything free we give you is reasonable, citizen", but Terabytes is a unit of measure of storage, and "image" isn't. An "image" is just a container for an arbitrary number of pixels.

    If I had 3000 200px x 200px "images" on the service, and found out that I could only have "1000 images", I could form 600px x600px composites that are still "images", upload those, and still have room for over 600 more "images", while still storing the same amount of data that I had when it was in "3000 images".

    You could make a script to do it in a few minutes using something like wget and imagemagick. Going from a limit on amount of storage to "number of images" is faintly absurd, whatever the numbers are.

    • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Friday November 02 2018, @04:56PM

      by Sulla (5173) on Friday November 02 2018, @04:56PM (#756921) Journal

      I did not RTFA but did they put a usage cap on it too? What happens if you did upload more than 1tb of photos? They could be assuming that the majority of people who upload 1k photos will not exceed 1tb, but for the few that do they are still saving space.

      --
      Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @05:40PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @05:40PM (#756951)

      but Terabytes is a unit of measure of storage, and "image" isn't.

      Oh FFS. "Each" is a unit of measure, and 1,000 eaches (or maybe 1024 if they are flying their geek flag) is a limit just like 1,000 GBs.

      • (Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday November 02 2018, @06:12PM

        by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 02 2018, @06:12PM (#756977) Journal

        "Each" is a unit of measure, and 1,000 eaches [is] a limit

        You are not only right about that, but you have helped me to understand the mindset that they have, and are working with. Thank you.

        or maybe 1024 if they are flying their geek flag

        No one with a geek flag would change a storage quota to a "number of inodes" quota without the intervention of someone technology-clueless.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @06:32PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 02 2018, @06:32PM (#756986)

    what free service that will give them storage for more than 1000 images?

    Hmm, Google Photos? 15GB free storage

    Amazon Prime has unlimited photo storage? Yeah, I know, you pay for Amazon Prime, but you get unlimited photo storage in addition to the other benefits that you would pay anyway.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04 2018, @07:11AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04 2018, @07:11AM (#757520)

    what free service that will give them storage for more than 1000 images?

    DeviantArt