

Flickr, I'm disappointed. The truth about the free terabyte. - gummify
http://griselda.posthaven.com/flickr-im-disappointed

======
daeken
The pricing changes might not be great (I won't attempt to evaluate them --
I'm not a Flickr customer nor in the target market whatsoever), but the 300MB
cap claim is silly. You say it yourself: it's only been a few hours since they
made this announcement at all, and they _just_ removed that cap from the terms
of service. They'll get to removing the technical restriction soon, I'm sure.

C'mon guys. I'm as big a fan of rage-fueled blog posts as anyone else, but
can't we give them even a _little_ breather before breaking out the pitchforks
and torches?

------
dot
That's an old, cached message. There is no 300mb limit anymore.

~~~
gummify
This message was from just two hours ago. But why make big announcement and
then make changes? Should be other way around?

------
webology
Large scale deploys are hard. Give them some time for the dust to settle
before over-reacting.

~~~
gummify
It's just disappointing when larger companies that are supposed to be
experienced with marketing announcements have messy executions, it just
affects the service image/credibility. Well, at least it's good for start-ups
to learn from them!

------
aeurielesn
Despite the wrong execution on the process of rolling out the changes, the 1TB
free is real.

So, can Flickr be considered as a _reliable_ backup solution for my
photographs?

~~~
gummify
The 1TB is definitely real. They had unlimited storage before for pro users.
The fine print was confusing (i.e. max 300mb uploads per month). But I guess
consumers now favour an actual measurable number (1TB) than unlimited. Flickr
is a social community, not sure how reliable it is a backup solution. Good
question though. Recently in the news they accidentally had some user's
private photos as public :S

