Yes, I have been put off by their need for personal details. I might persevere by filling in false info.
Printable View
Yes, I have been put off by their need for personal details. I might persevere by filling in false info.
Moving all my pics to another site is a massive PITA but nothing compared to the immense amount of time it would take to repair every picture link. Despite Marco's generosity in allowing editing of old posts I'm afraid I won't be updating mine - life's just too short for that level of faffing.
Unfortunately all this means huge swathes of pictures now no longer exist (except in private folders - or even public ones nobody knows about) :(.
What amazes me in all of this is that so many folks originally chose to use Photobucket, instead of Imageshack, for example, which for me was always more intuitive to use, and now, much cheaper!
Why the apparent 'fanboy worship' of Photobucket, or rather, why was Photobucket chosen, in the first place by folks here, more than any other image hosting site? I'm curious and would just like to understand the reasoning behind it :)
The fact is, if you'd used something else in the first place, you wouldn't be in this situation now.
Marco.
I'm a little mystified. Am I correct in thinking people have been keeping their images only on external hosting sites, as opposed to on their PC and backed up onto other media, such as a memory stick or DVD?
it was free. obvious reasoning i would think. could have happened to any service i guess, especially free ones. sure they can all raise prices without any notice should they want to.
Ive used inageshack for a long time and have a cheap deal off them. if it changes then it will get dumped, and if I lose posted pics then fair enough. I have backups
I used Photobucket because someone mentioned it to me. It was free and I could work it so that was good enough. The only pics I have on there are all Hi-Fi, so not important and some are still on my computer.
Do you have to pay for Imageshack ?