×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Flickr To Abandon Early Adopters

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the enjoy-the-side-of-the-road-suckers dept.

Yahoo! 254

An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet's Steve O'Hear opens old wounds for Flickr veterans. 'An email dropped into my in-box yesterday from Yahoo. Titled "Flickr: Update for Old Skool members", the message went on to explain that Yahoo was discontinuing the old email-based Flickr sign-in system and that from March the 15th, all users will be required to have a Yahoo ID to sign-in to Flickr. It was one of those déjà vu moments when I thought, hang on a minute, haven't we been here before?. And of course we have.' Yahoo tried to pull this stunt almost two years ago, after it first acquired Flickr. So why open up old wounds? Yahoo say it is to make the service easier to manage as they add new features, such as localization. Many users are calling this BS, saying it's all about Yahoo marketing its other properties to Flickr's user-base. Much of the criticism is being lead by a prominent user named Thomas Hawk who also happens to be CEO of Zooomr, a direct competitor to Flickr."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

254 comments

Get a Picasa account (-1, Troll)

denisbergeron (197036) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848134)

And shut down you yahoo and Flicrkrck account anyway

Re:Get a Picasa account (1)

TigerPlish (174064) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848808)

And shut down you yahoo and Flicrkrck account anyway
Meh, Picasa the app is fairly cool, Picasa the website / photo sharing site is worthless, imo.

Flickr's coolness comes from its Interestingness algorithm, something Picasa lacks.

So? (5, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848136)

I wouldn't call this "abandoning" anybody. They're asking users to use a (free) Yahoo login. It's not what I'd call a big deal. Yahoo did this when they acquired Launch (launch.com). Why would this bother anybody other than the tinfoil-hat types? What am I missing?

Re:So? (2, Funny)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848200)

What am I missing?
The fact that the old Fickr knew how to spell "school" and Yahoo does not.

Re:So? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848276)

I don't think old Flicker was that good a speller either.

Re:So? (4, Insightful)

NewWorldDan (899800) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848434)

Seems pretty obvious to me. Yahoo has a standard way of doing things. Maintaining an old non-standard alternate way of doing things is a bitch. It can clash with current security protocols. While I'm sure that Yahoo wants to market their other services, I suspect there are more pragmatic reasons for making this change.

Re:So? (2, Insightful)

sean_ex_machina (1026748) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848494)

You are missing the chance to stir up trouble in the hope of luring people over to your Flickr knockoff site, that's what you're missing.

It's a drag. (4, Interesting)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848704)

One of my biggest problems with Flickr is that it requires a Yahoo ID.

It's just obnoxious; it makes signing up for it into a much bigger deal, than making a one-shot account (like on Slashdot, or any other discrete service). It just makes it feel like more of a commitment.

I can't tell you how many times I've had people ask me how they can comment on my Flickr photos, and I have to tell them that they need a Flickr name, and they look into it, until they realize it's going to mean getting a Yahoo ID, and that's a big turn off. (My entire family falls into this category; none of them want to get a Yahoo ID. Probably because they're confusing it with Yahoo Mail, but it doesn't matter. The point is people don't want one.)

I always wished that I had got on to Flickr before the instituted the Yahoo ID requirement, because I can never remember what my idiotic Yahoo ID is (it's not the same as my Flickr username), and thus I really only ever use Flickr from computers that have it saved/cookied.

Basically: Yahoo ID's are a drag. I don't want to "build a relationship" with Yahoo. I don't want any of their other crummy services. I just want Flickr, and so do a lot of other people. They've shot themselves in the foot with this requirement -- as I said, I personally know quite a few people who've decided not to touch Flickr because of the mandatory Yahoo ID -- and now they're going to make the hole a little bigger.

Re:It's a drag. (4, Insightful)

JFitzsimmons (764599) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849056)

I don't get it. What's stopping you from making a yahoo account and only using flickr?

Re:It's a drag. (1)

homer_ca (144738) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849284)

That's what I thought too. Sure, Yahoo would like you to to log in to Flickr with a Yahoo account that you use for everything else because then they could aggregate all your browsing into a marketing profile, but Yahoo accounts are free and you don't have to give them any real personal info. Make one just for Flickr and clear your cookies if you log into another Yahoo account.

Re:It's a drag. (1)

Eric in SF (1030856) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849468)

Yahoo! Terms of Service are clear - supply any fake info on your Yahoo! Loging and you run the risk of having your Yahoo! and Flickr accounts deleted without warning. Create a fake account at your own risk.

Re:It's a drag. (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849074)

One of my biggest problems is the fact that the UI sucks.

Granted, a free image hosting site is great, I'm not knocking that.
The UI is horrible and I can't stand albums that are on that site.

There is some pretty amazing imagery there and it's a shame it's on such a sorry site.
It feels incomplete.

Re:So? (3, Informative)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848860)

Actually, it is a little more complex than that.

The problem is that Yahoo! has a nasty habit of deleting accounts for a number of reasons, and there have been several instances of this happening [flickr.com].

I've had my Yahoo! account disappearing, my mails disappearing etc. I guess when you've paid for the service (some of us Pro users) and have put in several years of effort uploading thousands of photographs (a lot of the pro users in Flickr are professional photographers), you are a little worried about your photos disappearing overnight.

I wrote a detailed rant about it, The Flickr Fiasco - Why Yahoo! Should Learn to Listen to Its Customers [metlin.org].

I guess it boils down to the fact that as paying customers, we thought our opinions would have a say in the matter. But it turns out that it does not, and they are going to go ahead and do something that almost the entire Old Skool userbase of Flickr is against. I do not know, I guess maybe I am being naive in some ways.

*shrug*

Breaking: Free users don't have rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848942)

Oh my god! If you don't pay for the service, they may delete your content.

Oh my god!

We gotta do something about this. Web 2.0 should be mandated to have everything for free.

Now why was it I maintain my own hosting account again? Hmm, could it be? Naw... and to think, I get my own email address too.

Re:Breaking: Free users don't have rights (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849270)

> Oh my god! If you don't pay for the service, they may delete your content.

Umm, which part of, "some of us paying customers" did not make sense to you?

If your Yahoo! email account goes to hell for some reason, you lose your Flickr account and everything in with it. This has happened to a lot of folks, and people do not want this happening to them.

And since we are - I repeat - paying customers - we thought we should have a say in the matter.

Re:So? (4, Insightful)

winkydink (650484) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849136)

I guess when you've paid for the service (some of us Pro users) and have put in several years of effort uploading thousands of photographs (a lot of the pro users in Flickr are professional photographers), you are a little worried about your photos disappearing overnight.

Wait a minute... are you telling me that there are professional photographers who store their content on Flickr and don't have backup copies? Excuse me, but that doesn't sound very professional. That sounds stupid.

Re:So? (1, Informative)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849324)

Wait a minute... are you telling me that there are professional photographers who store their content on Flickr and don't have backup copies? Excuse me, but that doesn't sound very professional. That sounds stupid.

You don't get it, do you? It's not just about backup - it is about everything else. The organization, the tags, the categorized way of storing your pictures.

It is not merely the photos, but rather the meta-data. People who like photography put in a lot of work on their photos, and have them categorized and tagged in detail. Not to mention user comments and the like.

They are worried about losing that.

Consider this - you have taken a photograph 5 years ago, and you wrote all about it. Do you think you'd be able to remember anything in detail about it today? Now imagine this for 5,000 photographs. Do you think you'd be able to remember everything about every photograph that you'd categorized and organized?

That is what people are afraid of losing.

Do you think it would be easy to go back and redo all that? I would imagine not.

Re:So? (5, Insightful)

winkydink (650484) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849676)

OK, you invested all this time in creating metadata and didn't back it up. And you're earning a living off it to some degree. Sorry, again, it's not very bright to not have a backup of the data that is critical to your continued success.

Re:So? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849362)

Wait a minute... are you telling me that there are professional photographers who store their content on Flickr and don't have backup copies? Excuse me, but that doesn't sound very professional. That sounds stupid.

Stupid is when you make assumptions about what someone actually said instead of, you know, reading their comment.

Even if you do have the pictures backed up, it takes a substantial amount of time to upload them to yahoo, tag them, title them, etc etc. Having all your hard work uploading and categorizing go to hell because Yahoo is pathetic is, well... really pathetic.

Of course, Yahoo is a known reprobate. Sure, they provide useful services to the web for free - for example I'm on a freecycle mailing list, and they host it. But they're also a spyware-bundler (ever installed yahoo messenger?) and they do various other annoying things. So the responsible thing to do would have been to leave flickr when it was purchased by yahoo. This would of course have incurred the same overhead in time as losing your yahoo account... but you'd know that it wouldn't just happen to you unexpectedly. And you wouldn't be supporting yahoo, which let's face it, really is less than responsive to the desires of even paying users which is what this is all about.

Bottom line though is that if you don't like how you're treated, barring some kind of contract, your sole remedy is to take your money elsewhere. Sure, sometimes you can petition or whatever and convince them that they're going to lose a lot of money if you do that. But then maybe they're actually losing money on flickr subscribers, and their goal is to get rid of them...

Re:So? (1)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849388)

that doesn't sound very professional. That sounds stupid


Those two terms aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm a professional photographer who knows better than to a) use Flickr at all, and b) store my photos on disks I don't control. Photography is no different from other professions, we have plenty of hacks who are able to earn a living despite knowing little more than where the shutter release is located.

With the increasing number of cheap digital SLR bodies and even cheaper lenses to clamp on them I suspect this will only get worse in the coming years.

Re:So? (-1, Flamebait)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849482)

You poor professional. If only there were some way to keep all the people you don't like from buying cameras.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17849336)

SPOT ON !

Stupid, stupid, stupid Yahoo !
I am Old Skool Pro User and I DO NOT WANT A YAHOO ID !!

Thank you for you eloquence in explaining the matter at hand.

Re:So? (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849510)

Hang on... you dumped your Yahoo account, and you're upset, that they... dumped your Yahooo account?

Every business gets suggestions from their customers. Many are implemented, many are not. If your suggestion is 1. Just plain dumb 2. Too expensive 3. Too difficult or 4. Something that only a tiny fraction of users care about, it won't get adopted. I'm sure that Yahoo knows about the handful of "Old Skool" (whatever that means) users, and quite honestly don't care. If you've got millions of customers, and a hundred are asking for this bizarre request, why would they care? Every business gets wacky requests from some of its customers from time to time (mine is no different). It's up to the business if it's worth the time, money, and effort to fulfill those requests. If they don't, and those customers making those wacky requests leave, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It might even be a good thing, because every business has customers that are more trouble than they're worth. I gotta imagine that people moaning about going through "all of the trouble" to get a Yahoo account fall in the category of being more trouble than they're worth.

Re:So? (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848866)

I was an early adopter of Flickr, and really liked it. The concept, the interface, the community, it was all great for my purposes. However, I really don't like today's Yahoo, either as a service provider, or as a company. This is for a multitude of reasons, most of which have been repeated ad nauseum here on /. and elsewhere.

When Yahoo bought Flickr I didn't immediately jump ship. I did like the service, and it didn't seem that Yahoo had messed with things all that much. They seemed to be staying in the background of their acquisition for once and let it continue being what it was good for, rather than immediately poking around and screwing things up beyond recognition and destroying whatever it was that made the "little guys" it purchases successful in the first place (cf. Webring, Egroups, Geocities, etc.) This move, however, was the last straw which dissolved my final bit of loyalty to Flickr. Zap goes my account, and the two months of paid time I had left on it.

Flickr was fun while it lasted, but on the bright side that was the motivation I needed to quit being such a lazy bastard and shove a Gallery script into the next overhaul of my website, and upload the better stuff to Wikimedia Commons while I'm at it.

Re:So? (4, Insightful)

crlove (857212) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848982)

Thank you for saying what I was thinking. I was a very early adopter of Flickr, just converted to a Yahoo sign-in (which they've been suggesting you do anyway)when I received the email, and... that's it! I sign in with a different account name. No big deal.

Pretty inflammatory title for a Slashdot article. I got confused when looking at my RSS feeds and thought I was seeing Digg's.

Re:So? (2)

cetialphav (246516) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849408)

Same here. I have been a Flickr user for a very long time. Switching is not a big deal, so I don't understand this hatred at all. It isn't like Flickr is kicking people off or deleting their photos. And Flickr has given plenty of warning that this was coming; I think they have bent over backwards to try to accommodate people. Flickr is Yahoo; they are not separate entities so it makes sense to have a common login. Do people really hate Yahoo that much?

I worked in retail for a long time and one thing I learned is that you just can't make some people happy. They will always find something to complain about. I found that it was better to let them storm out mad. You wouldn't really lose business because they get mad at your competition, too, and end up coming back.

I think the Yahoo/Flickr haters will find something to despise at every other photo hosting site.

Re:So? (1)

cmacb (547347) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849260)

"Why would this bother anybody other than the tinfoil-hat types? What am I missing?"

The problem is that this looks a lot like (because it probably is) a bait-and-switch tactic.

When you get a Yahoo ID you also get a Yahoo e-mail address which you may not need or want. By default you also agree to be marketed to from a list of about 15 categories, and they ask some personal questions that many people would rather not answer. I have a Yahoo ID which I sign onto about once a month to delete the THOUSANDS of spam messages that have accumulated there (about half the spam goes to the spam folder, but almost as much stays in the inbox because yahoo sucks at identifying even the most obvious cases). My Yahoo e-mail ID is totally useless for mail, as I'd never find a legitimate message in all the junk that shows up there (often with dates in the future so that any legitimate message would be way down the list).

Most of the service providers are moving in the opposite direction. When Google acquired Blogger, the companies that created Docs and Spreadsheets, (and some others I think) they had to merge in overlapping name spaces which is a pain. But in every case that I've been involved, they ultimately allow either Google ID, or foreign ID, in the form of an external e-mail address to be used to sign in. The benefit is that external e-mail addresses are guaranteed to be unique. I'd much rather be known as me@mydomain.com rather than have to come up with some odd combination of letters and numbers that nobody else has thought of.

Yahoo went along with this trend too for a while, but my guess is that sagging ad sales has caused someone at the top to reverse course so that they can con advertisers with inflated user counts etc.

Re:So? (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849588)

I have a Yahoo ID which I sign onto about once a month to delete the THOUSANDS of spam messages that have accumulated there

Why? You get an email account that you don't like and you don't use. So.... what's the point? Don't use it. End of story.

Re:So? (1)

AudioEfex (637163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849586)

I wouldn't call this "abandoning" anybody. They're asking users to use a (free) Yahoo login. It's not what I'd call a big deal. Yahoo did this when they acquired Launch (launch.com). Why would this bother anybody other than the tinfoil-hat types? What am I missing?

You aren't missing anything. I'm actually embarrassed for /. because of the obvious slant of the title. They aren't "abandoning" anyone, and it's just a bunch of disgruntled people who like to complain about the little irrelevant crap in life while ignoring the bigger issues of the world.

They aren't restricting access to anyones account, they aren't changing anyones account, they are simply making people get a login and password to conform to the company that now pays the bills at Flickr. This is nothing more than that loser with the other site (why does he care so much about Flickr if his own site is so awesome?) trying to stir up some controversy. And /. fell for it, unfortunately.

Oh no, the bad guys want you to have a Yahoo ID so their system is easier to administrate. Duck and cover. Or go pay for your own webspace elsewhere. Yahoo could have just folded Flickr into Yahoo Photos and dropped the service entirely - stop crying about having to change your login info. The world will continue to spin. Pay attention to the rest of the world and you'll see that there are much bigger fish to fry.

This brings out classic human nature : if Flickr cost $4.99 a month and these changes were made, people would have said, "Well, you get what you pay for." Give someone something for free, slightly change it, and suddenly you are the evil enemy.

Anyone who complained about this should quit flickr out of protest. It's the only right thing to do - I'm sure the world won't miss your pics too much; if you have time to sit and cry over this non-issue then I doubt they are very interesting.

AE

Re:So? (1)

lioncoeur (955084) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849686)

You obviously dont know the meaning of pain. I severed myself from anything to do with Yahoo (miserable sods) when they ganked my Rocketmail account back in the day.

Question (5, Insightful)

LMacG (118321) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848148)

How does "require a different sign on method" equate to "abandon"?

Re:Question (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848294)

How does "require a different sign on method" equate to "abandon"?
Because you have to create a new user id / account? So you could have to abandon your old flickr account?

ac because my karma has taken a hit recently from trollmods rating me offtopic.

Re:Question (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848788)

Because you have to create a new user id / account? So you could have to abandon your old flickr account?

That's almost entirely wrong. You do have to create a new Yahoo ID (if you don't have one already), but you can then merge your old Flickr account with it, so you don't lose any of your settings, photos, etc. You even keep the old e-mail address, so you are not forced to use the Yahoo Mail one.

See:
http://flickr.com/help/signin/ [flickr.com]

Re:Question (1)

Salvance (1014001) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849452)

Primarily because the users are worried that they'll start getting a ton of unsolicited mail, popups, etc. while logged into the Yahoo network. If you're an "old skool" user, you can at least direct all messages to spam and won't be "logged in" after leaving flickr. My personal opinion is that Yahoo is evil, and will do everything possible to collect information about me while I'm surfing. Take their toolbar, or even worse, their purchase of MyBlogLog. Users view both as spying, and most want nothing to do with it.

S0? (4, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848150)

" Many users are calling this BS, saying it's all about Yahoo marketing its other properties to Flickr's user-base"

Which is within their rights as the owner of said company.

Jeez people, if you don't like it find another place to post pictures of your drunk cat.

cram it, you hack. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848192)

"I used to log in like this, now I have to log in like *this* ONOZ!!!!" Nobody cares.

Zoomr? (4, Interesting)

BandwidthHog (257320) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848274)

I’ve been a fan of Mike Hawk’s photography for a while now, but man, Zoomr couldn’t really be a more blatant clone of Flickr if it tried.

Re:Zoomr? (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848824)

I think that's the point.

It's Flickr, which a lot of people like, but without Yahoo, which a lot of people hate.

I wonder if it works with the FlickrExport plugins for iPhoto and Aperture...if it does, I might be interested. I narrowly missed getting onto Flickr before the Yahoo buyout, and everyone seems pretty universally convinced that it's gone downhill since then. (Few features have been added, and those that have are of a blatantly revenue-generating nature, e.g. printing.)

It's pretty obvious that Yahoo bought Flickr for its userbase, and the whole idea is to develop Flickr users into users of Yahoo's other (ad-laden) services, and also use Flickr to bring in more users -- hence, the continual refusal to develop a feature to share photos privately with non-members. If you want to share photos of your family gathering (that you don't want publicly accessible to every nutjob in the world), you have to limit it to "Family" or "Friends," who can only be other Flickr members. It would be trivial to allow users to create a hidden photo album with an obscure URL, and then only distribute that to people they want to see the photos, but this request has been ignored for upwards of a year or more now.

Re:Zoomr? (3, Funny)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849630)

Few features have been added, and those that have are of a blatantly revenue-generating nature


What manner of abomination will be forced upon us next? Plagues of locusts? The earth yielding of its dead? Who knows what will come next when we live in a time when a for profit corporation can make a service available free of charge and then commit such obvious atrocities as trying to get some money back out of it.

I, for one, just did not see this coming. I uploaded thousands of pictures to someone else's server and spent hours and hours and hours typing in metadata. Maybe I paid some kind of monthly fee and maybe I didn't, and maybe I read the User Agreement that stated that at any given time and for any reason, or no reason at all, the company that owns all this stuff I keep sending them can pull the plug on the whole works and all the work I put into it would be vaporized. Regardless, I expected that forever and ever this service would be made available to me, on terms set by me, by virtue of my having spent a lot of my time on it and becoming emotionally invested in its 'community'.

Re:Zoomr? (1)

cetialphav (246516) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849640)

everyone seems pretty universally convinced that it's gone downhill since then. (Few features have been added, and those that have are of a blatantly revenue-generating nature, e.g. printing.)

I wouldn't say universally. I can't think of a single instance where things have gone downhill. Features have definitely been added, and the site has become a lot more reliable. They used to have tons of downtime before they got the benefits of Yahoo's infrastructure.

I don't think Flickr makes a lot of money from the printing. In fact, you really have to look for that feature. There was a lot of demand from users for printing. Flickr did it because people really, really wanted it.

it's pretty obvious that Yahoo bought Flickr for its userbase, and the whole idea is to develop Flickr users into users of Yahoo's other (ad-laden) services

Is it that bad for someone to try to run a profitable business? Why else would Yahoo buy Flickr? Why else does Google provide free maps and email? Of course they are in the ad business. Of course they want to expand the number of people who see their ads. They aren't trying to hide that from anyone.

Conflict of Interest (5, Insightful)

slughead (592713) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848304)

Much of the criticism is being lead by a prominent user named Thomas Hawk who also happens to be CEO of Zooomr, a direct competitor to Flickr.

I'm sorry, was this supposed to reinforce the "OMG YAHOO IS EVIL" slant of this /. post?

So a guy who's competing with Yahoo says Yahoo sucks? ... ? ... Anyone else see a possible problem in his motivation for saying something like this?

Re:Conflict of Interest (1)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848504)

Not only that his every second post also seems to drop in the fact that Zoooomr is an amazing alternative to Flickr !

I went there to see and the site just sat there with a little loading icon in the corner and refused to do anything else ! Maybe it was overwhelmed or something but that's not an ideal advertisment.

Re:Conflict of Interest (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848554)

I'm sorry, was this supposed to reinforce the "OMG YAHOO IS EVIL" slant of this /. post?
No. How would disclosing that much of the criticism is being lead by a competitor of Yahoo lead anyone to conclude that Yahoo is evil? Obviously this disclosure was intended to led you to at least consider the opposite possibility, that Thomas Hawk is stirring up the fuss for his own purposes. You will note, in fact, that it managed to lead you to exactly that conclusion. Understand yet?

Re:Conflict of Interest (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848578)

I'm sorry, was this supposed to reinforce the "OMG YAHOO IS EVIL" slant of this /. post?

Seems more like an ad to me. "Yahoo is evil. Oh, by the way, on a totally unrelated topic, I have a competing product...."

An anonymous READER? (5, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848308)

Hey, we already have a term for these people, let's call a spade a spade, and a coward a coward.

With that said; if you paid for this service, vote with your dollars, and go pay someone else. If you're using a free account, stop bitching. They're giving it to you for free! If they want you to identify yourself by your high school nickname, you should be grateful... even if they did call you "logger [b3ta.com]".

Re:An anonymous READER? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849314)

If you're using a free account, stop bitching. They're giving it to you for free!
Ummm... in many cases, it's the large body of free users that creates a situation where a company can offer for-fee accounts & draw in people who are willing to pay for one.

If all of Flickr's free users fled overnight... well, there's goes the social part of the Flickr experience.

I suspect that didn't occur to you when you wrote your post. It's easy to just say STFU leecher, but there's more to a community than who's paying for what.

Re:An anonymous READER? (1)

Thuktun (221615) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849372)

Week one was spent checking out the fit birds who came from the other schools, [...]

We met a lad on our first day who was introduced as Logger. Initially he seemed more popular than most of the council estate white trash I schooled with, as alot of his junior school mates seemed at pains to introduce him to the rest of the school.

In hindsight, I ought to have been suspicious, this was, after all, the eighties, "john's not mad" was still fresh in our pre adolescent minds, and "joey deacon" was still the insult de jour.
Hooodam, that's some kinda furrin speak, there.

Re:An anonymous READER? (1)

darkstar949 (697933) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849472)

Ok, that's fair in regards to the free users, but what about the paying users? If you were paying $XX a month or a year for a service and one of those services is a being about to use a non-Yahoo ID login, then wouldn't you be a bit annoyed when they change the rules on you? Personally, I can see where a lot of the paying users are coming from - if you are paying for a service and they change the rules on you they should either give you a chance to get your money back or find a way to provide a compromise for the paying members.

Conflict of Interest? (4, Funny)

grenz (969305) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848312)

Is it really that serious an issue when the man leading the charge is the CEO of a rival company? Next you'll be telling me that the CEO of AMD thinks that Intel is making inferior products.

boo effing hoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848316)

ohnoez i can't use my email to log in to flickr!

wait, people starving in the streets? no, who cares about that... YAHOO IS TEH EVIL!!!

Prominent user, eh? (5, Interesting)

hpa (7948) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848336)

Much of the criticism is being lead by a prominent user named Thomas Hawk who also happens to be CEO of Zooomr, a direct competitor to Flickr.
Am I the only one who finds it strange that the CEO of a direct competitor would be a prominent user of Flickr?

Re:Prominent user, eh? (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848490)

Have you seen Zoomr? It's obvious that he's spending a lot of time on Flickr just copying every single design element from them.

Re:Prominent user, eh? (1)

suffe (72090) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849514)

Actually he entered the Zoomr picture after the base flickr-rippof-design was in place. He doesn't show any signs of wanting to diverge from there, but it most certainly is not his creation.

Re:Prominent user, eh? (0, Redundant)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848506)

It makes sense really, the two sites are kindred spirits in a way. After all, they both appear to have some sort of pathological hatred of the letter "e".

I'm out (1, Redundant)

z80 (103328) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848352)

I registered very early for Flickr, back when it was in beta and you could email the founders with questions and get a reply within five minutes. I became a paying member last year but this fsckup with the Yahoo login (I don't like, or trust, Yahoo) made me delete my Flickr account.

Re:I'm out (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848492)

How does 'I don't like, or trust, Yahoo' not apply to using your Flickr account prior to them changing things?

There are probably something like 1000 people who care. It doesn't have to be that big a pain in the ass before they simply start ignoring people. Sure, they don't get to do it very often or they end up with no users, but when it comes down to making special accommodations for a very small number of users in order to better service all of their users(maintaining special infrastructure means they aren't doing something else), it isn't that surprising.

You'd think they would learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848364)

Yahoo messed up the SCOX message board and all the posters moved over to InvestorsVillage. If they aren't serving the public the way it wants to be served, they will be abandoned in a heartbeat.

One of the joys of open source is that anything can be forked. As people abandon Yahoo for an alternative I can hear them calling "Fork You".

Maybe I missed something here, but... (-1, Troll)

Subgenius (95662) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848410)

How much are users paying monthly for their Flickr accounts?

Thought so.

Don't like it? Start your own service.

Damn crybabies.

Re:Maybe I missed something here, but... (1)

Colonel Angus (752172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848544)

$25USD/year if they're on a Pro account.

But I digress... this is all really childish. The only thing these people have to do is a) create a free throw-away Yahoo! account, b) log in using this free throw-away account, c) tell flickr to use their preferred account (ie, their original account used when signing up) for all communications and, the hardest of all, d) stop pretending like they have more than 3000 people that they keep in regular touch with.

I think those flipping out over this are making mountains out of molehills here.

Re:Maybe I missed something here, but... (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848600)

Before I deleted it, my pro account cost me $25 per year. Not a lot, but not a freebie either.

As an interesting aside, I had to merge a Yahoo ID with my Flickr account before it would let me sign in to delete my Flickr account over the issue of forcing me to merge a Yahoo ID with my Flickr account. Fun!

Storm in a tea cup (5, Informative)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848448)

The amount of wailing and hair pulling going on over this in the Flickr forums is simply awe inspiring, it's really amusing to see the number of people with no sense of perspective whatsoever.

Anyone who posts a comment such as the one I am about launch into is shouted down immediately and called all sorts of nasty names, this is less amusing and simply disturbing.

It's no big deal, the only difference is that people now have to log in through Yahooo rather than Flickr maintaning a separate login system just for them. Nothing else has changed, the Flickr experience is identical from that moment onwards.

Common complaints are

1) Yahoo will log me off all the time
2) I don't want a "silly" Yahoo login name
3) I am genetically incapable of remembering any more logins
4) I will lose my "old skool" status and reputation
5) Yahoo will send me spam all the time
6) Yahoo are evil and I'm so right on I don't support evil

To which the answers are

1) No it won't ( I have a Yahoo login to Flickr and it has stayed logged in for months now )
2) You still keep your flickr screen name, no one will see your Yahoo name
3) You won't have to remember your old Flickr login anymore and thus have more room in your impoverished memory for a new one
4) Since you are the only person who sees how you login this is a stupid claim based on a worrying sense of misplaced elitism
5) I've had Yahoo e-mail since 1999 and can't remember ever getting any spam off them in all that time and if you don't want to use the e-mail you don't even have to sign up for it
6) Yahoo have owned Flickr for over a year now so if you don't support them on moral grounds why are you still using Flickr in the first place ?

This "old skool" thing is simply ridiculous, ok so you discovered Flickr maybe 6 months before other people did - there are no prizes for this and it has no effect whatsoever on your value to society or as a person in general !

Seriously, they really should just shut up and change their login or shut up and find something else which is happy to accept a huge bunch of whining holier than thou nuisances. Either way they should shut up because it's quite unpleasant listening to this caterwauling.

Re:Storm in a tea cup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17849232)

This "old skool" thing is simply ridiculous, ok so you discovered Flickr maybe 6 months before other people did - there are no prizes for this and it has no effect whatsoever on your value to society or as a person in general !

Figures - this is exactly the kind of BS you'd hear on /. from someone with an upper-six digit UID...

Re:Storm in a tea cup (1)

Chess Piece Face (247847) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849266)

7) The amount of time spent repeating the signup form over and over to find an available Yahoo handle is getting ridiculous. And the more of these type of forced signups they do, the worse it will become.

Been through the process twice recently - once for some Pepsi contest and later again to get Messenger. Using Messenger legitimately requires signing up and that handle will be used for some time. The Pepsi one I stopped using when the contest ended, thus creating a junk account and robbing another user of the handle pepsidoodoo@yahoo.com (the sixth or seventh but first available handle I could find).

Call me a whiner if you will. But you can't deny that proposing and failing to acquire a handle repeatedly - one handle at a time - is not going to make for happy customers.

Old Skool bonus: I quit using Yahoo! when they took over my Rocketmail account and pulled this same stunt.

Re:Storm in a tea cup (1)

teh_chrizzle (963897) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849628)

Call me a whiner if you will.

i will: you're whiner.

sorry, i couldn't resist :-)

seriously tho, you are spot on about the junk accounts problem. i would imagine that 75% of those accounts are used by bots and spammers.

i quit using yahoo when the email/IM spam became unbearable and then my account got hijacked.

Re:Storm in a tea cup (1)

Paulrothrock (685079) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849272)

There is a valid complaints. First, I hate having all kinds of different usernames across different sites. I'd much rather log in using my email address than some arbitrary name. It reduces the amount of information I have to remember. And for photo sharing sites, I'd much rather use my actual email address than some arbitrary yahoo ID because I don't get email there.

As someone who develops web apps professionally, I always recommend using your email address as your username, even if the "screen name" that's displayed is different. Why should Flickr be any different?

At any rate, I've moved all my information over to Google, so as long as there's a convenient way to move to Picasa, I'll use it. Besides, I already have my own Gallery 2.0 on my web host space.

Re:Storm in a tea cup (1)

electricalen (623623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849316)

Um, how about

7) My company (like a lot of other companies) bans free web mail services like Gmail, Hotmail, and Yahoo including their login pages, which now also stops me from logging into Flickr.

Answer?

Re:Storm in a tea cup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17849528)

Do your work instead?

"Many users are calling this BS (1)

popo (107611) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848454)


> "Many users are calling this BS, saying it's all about Yahoo marketing its other properties to Flickr's user-base."

And this is somehow unacceptable? They're a portal with multiple service offerings.
They also gain tremendous synergies from integrating these services, as do all portals.

Why does the OP feel he has the right to be shielded somehow from this integration, or from
Yahoo's other free service offerings?

This is a little OT, but I have to say that personally I think Yahoo is on a tear and no one has
noticed. IMHO Yahoo's mail beta blows huge holes in Gmail, which has a wacky threading
system and an interface that's damn hard to love.

Re:"Many users are calling this BS (1)

NullProg (70833) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849256)

And this is somehow unacceptable? They're a portal with multiple service offerings.
They also gain tremendous synergies from integrating these services, as do all portals.


You forgot to say they also...

optimize seamless communities
generate vertical e-services
leverage synergistic convergence

    and best of all

engage e-business content

Enjoy,

Beware the ides of March (1)

inselaffe (1057582) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848456)

Was it Caesr who said that?

Re:Beware the ides of March (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848720)

No, it was some foreseer. If Caesar said that, he would've probably been even more cautious, knowing something terrible would happen to him on that day.

Direct competitor to Flickr ? (1)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848488)


Seems like rather an important tid-bit at the end there...

"Much of the criticism is being lead by a prominent user named Thomas Hawk who also happens to be CEO of Zooomr, a direct competitor to Flickr."

So, they are further integrating Flickr into Yahoo, what's wrong or surprising about that?

yahoo and big consolidation (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848542)

when I got my home at&t/yahoo adsl account, they made my synch my yahoo chat and myyahoo login id with the signon and email. guesss they know what I'm doing now

Same thing happened (1)

Some_Llama (763766) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848596)

When they merged with SBC, i used to have a pacbell.net login and email address but after the merger they wanted me to create a new yahoo ID to use instead.. i just ignored them for my main account, but for sub accounts i followed suit and was rewarded with a host of "free" applications that they wanted me to install to continue using their services (although direct setup of POP3 still works) and a new "improved" home page type "portal" that was full of obtrusive ads. UGH!

If I didn't game so much I might have looked into Comcast (which also makes me mad as there are only 2 options for DSL) but i value my low ping/lag.

Re:Same thing happened (1)

yodleboy (982200) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848864)

christ you sound like my mother in law. you do know that you don't HAVE to let them install /install yourself all the "custom browsers", media players etc? i have yet to have an ISP that "requires" that, and have had no issues using the internet without their baggage installed. you can always uninstall you know... so far this has held true for AT&T Cable, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, SBC DSL.
the m-in-law was amazed that she didn't have to have her pc clogged up with that crap and could just use Firefox...

yahoo login works fine - no downside (5, Informative)

Splork (13498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848626)

i've been using a yahoo login on flickr for years. i receive -zero- marketing from yahoo and the login process is hidden anyways since a cookie stored in my browser keeps me logged in. theres no reason to dislike this change. get over it.

Reason #7 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17848686)

How about: "Because I already have a Yahoo ID, and deliberately set up my Flickr account under a different e-mail address because I use different accounts to keep my tasks separated- I don't want to send photography-related e-mails to my Yahoo account that I use for something else."

Awe-inspiring (5, Interesting)

aftk2 (556992) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848756)

The gnashing of teeth over these decisions is simply awe-inspiring. Basically, the points of contention boil down to:
1. Flickr wants you to signin with a yahoo account.
2. Flickr will limit you to 3000 contacts.
3. Flickr will limit the number of tags on your photos to 75.

That's it. In response:
1. Jesus. Just get a Yahoo ID. Can't find your precious flickr ID on Yahoo (since Yahoo has a mizillion members)? Just take your ID and add "flickr" at the end. It'll probably be available. You can still get email updates at whatever email address you like, and this change doesn't change anything about your nickname on the site! This is LITERALLY a change to the login process, and ONLY the login process.

2. I suspect this measure is probably the first move in Flickr announcing some other social networking features (Friends or some such, some other data type), that will allow you to do much the same thing you do with contacts, allowing contacts to be, you know, PEOPLE YOU FUCKING CONTACT!

3. This move is great. Using the Flickr API can get downright stupid when you attempt to browse a tag and the same damn pictures come up, because some unattractive lady has tagged her picture with a million different keywords. Stop tagspam.

Seriously...what a pathetic display of whining (the vast majority) and opportunism (Mr. Hawk)

Re:Awe-inspiring (1)

ubuwalker31 (1009137) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849126)

I think you pretty much summed up my thoughts about flickr in a nutshell. I mean, wtf is the big deal about getting a free yahoo e-mail account? Except for the fact that you can't forward mail from it anymore...

On the otherhand, I hope that in exchange for having to sign in with a yahoo account and limiting contacts and tags, that they will increase the upload limit on photos. I tried to upload 100 pictures from my vacation, and flickr crapped out on me saying that my monthly upload alotment was used up. Screw that. Thats why I use photobucket.

Alternatives? (2, Informative)

dcormier (556305) | more than 7 years ago | (#17848834)

I am [flickr.com] an old skool member (as Flickr likes to call us) and I'm serriously considering ditching my Flickr account for something else, even though just last week I paid for a 1 year Pro account. I was considering doing this before I saw anything by Thomas Hawk. I have a number [flickr.com] of reasons [flickr.com].

The problem is finding something else.

I've looked at Zooomr [zooomr.com]. I found it a bit slugish and unpolished. I don't mind that, but I wasn't encouraged when I could find no obvious way to contact someone with suggestions or questions, even after creating an account and logging in. One thing is what appears to be somewhat soft IE7 support (notes on photos don't work properly, for example). Whether you like IE or not, it does hold a very large part of the browser market and should be supported on any site that is even thinking about competing with the 800-lb gorillas.

What else is out there? I know Flickr is the biggest, but what other site has the community, ease of navigation and browsing (another thing a bit lacking on Zooomr, but that shouldn't be hard for them to tweak), and quality (I know no one has the quantity) of content that Flickr has?

Re:Alternatives? (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849122)

So, what you're saying is that Flickr is the best thing out there for whatever Flickr does (I can't figure out what the point is... to show off your own photographs?), but you're worried about some legal technicality in Yahoo's Terms of Service? Are you serious?

Get over it (0, Flamebait)

Servo (9177) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849076)

Is this not a free service? Why do you think Yahoo bought them? Freaking socialist, get a life.

Re:Get over it (1)

suffe (72090) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849674)

No, it's not. You can use it as such but a surprisingly high percentage of users pay. If Slashdot would have such high numbers the editors could probably drive around in Ferraris again and play it like it was the late 90s.

Hmmm (1)

deKernel (65640) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849154)

So let me get this straight. Yahoo bought Flickr, and now Yahoo wants to do something different with Flicker.

If someone does not like what is going on then make a statement with your wallet because that is what business's really listen to. Stop giving them money.

Not all of us are weeners (5, Informative)

Dan100 (1003855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849374)

Until yesterday I was also an "old skool" member (and I'm also a Pro account owner). When I got the mail announcing the change, I thought a bit about for a while then said "sod it" and merged my account.

Was there any difference in my Flickr experience after the switch? No.

More old skool then you (1)

WizKidr (1058654) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849410)

As some who has been with Flickr since day 0, and I'm among the old old skool members, hearkening back to the pre-Flickr days of gameneverending, I don't feel I've been abandoned. When Flickr wanted me to change my log-in the first time I dragged my feet, letting them work all the kinks out, which they seem to have done. When I got the email the other day I made the switch and have had no problems. Besides counting this time I've only had to "log-on" Flickr twice. If you want something to whine about whine about bringing back "Flickr Live", or "gameneverending." PS: I have the record for the longest running user icon...

Please stop with the verb-r (1)

gavinpquinn (1026592) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849598)

Why is everyone ripping off a naming convention? I hope Flickr and yahoo sue every verb-r rip-off out there. Have some creativity? Most of these -r sites don't even make their own look!

Yahoo Told Everyone About This Back in 2005 (1)

macbort (224663) | more than 7 years ago | (#17849610)

I'm completely missing the point of all this outrage toward Yahoo/Flickr here. These same "early adopters" are whining about the exact same thing they complained about almost 1 1/2 years ago (late August 2005).

This Yahoo account requirement is not new news - they let people know [wired.com] about it a long time ago [bbc.co.uk], and have even extended the drop-dead date from "sometime in 2006" to early 2007.

I'm one of the "old-schoolers" and made the change to the Yahoo account last year - it wasn't a big deal. It's just a frickin' web app...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...