So...

So, got any good Sup Forums-approved photobucket alternatives since they're obviously dedicated to sinking their own ship?

Not interested in self hosting.

>post image on Sup Forums
>wait for thread to be archived
>????
>PROFIT!

postimages.org/ or imgur

Why would any company willingly do this? They've shot themselves in the fucking foot. IU should become a CEO because making good decisions can't be that fucking hard.

just use mixtape.moe

google drive

Isn't this only being done to people using Photobucket to host their images for their websites and shit?

Especially for commercial use, but even personal use, if you're hosting a website, don't use ANOTHER website's image hosting services and expect them to be cool with it.

So what did you use it for?

Thumbnails on my anime/hentai recommendation site.

>photobucket

Isn't it the current year? I honestly can't remember seeing anyone use photobucket since, ummmm ... 2010? Or something?

Do you use it to provide graphics for your Geocities web site?

I'd probably just use imgur dog

Simple/just werx

imagebam

>commercial hosting on a free image host

dumb ass

Same thing will happen if you move to Imgur.

Buy a 2TB hard drive or two and host them yourself.

why use this piece of shit instead of hosting the pics yourself
I see idiots on forums use it

Dropbox gives you 10GB total public traffic per day. That should be enough for a small site and low resolution jpegs.

Imgur would likely work better but that's its own sinking ship. Short of similar free options, you might have to bite the bullet with Amazon.

The one thing I've hated about the internet for so long is that every site treats bandwidth like it's a precious commodity. It's not fucking oil. There isn't a finite amount of it!

It is when you've hit your bandwidth limit.


If you have constant visitors 24/7 (like photo bucket) having more concurrent users means you need more bandwidth, to get more bandwidth requires infrastructure, servers and routers, etc.

Further, they're also paying monthly for the bandwidth connection, even if they aren't paying for every single bit of data that goes through the pipes, they're still paying for those pipes, and the least number of pipes they're paying for and still able to provide their service is what they're after, it's cheaper to only buy what you need.


tldr; on the scale for a site like photobucket there is 100% a reason they treat bandwidth like a precious commodity.

>bandwidth doesn't cost money

it doesn't

...yes it does

What you're talking about is traffic, which still does cost money (electricity has a cost moron).


Further, as the other poster said, on the scale of photobucket you're dealing with hundreds of terabytes of data spread across several servers, and dealing with thousands of concurrent users.

You can pretend bandwidth doesn't have a cost, but you're a fucking moron if you actually think that's true.

You could use Mediagoblin. I hate such services like Photobucket!

Absolute fucking retard.