Flickr set to destroy groups.

[redisburning]

Don't be quick to blame the developers, but then again they could be completely incompetent too, who knows 😀

maybe they are making the best of an impossible situation.

but I know that anyone with half a brain and some forethought knows to do a feasibility study. thinking you can do something slightly impossible is a sign of genius, thinking you can do something really impossible is just a sign of arrogance and stupidity.

the site is hideously slow. Im serious, if a load on flickr took literally 3 times as long as google images I would be happy because it would be such an IMMENSE improvement.

they just bought a ton of new servers for all this storage space, so to me it seems like the overwhelmingly most likely scenario is that it is made poorly.

I just played through Bioshock: Inifinite on high settings on my PC and the site runs slower than trying to download a 1080p movie on 56k.

 

[back alley]

why is so slow for some and not so for others?
i have an old macbook and the new flickr runs just fine for me...also on my ipad mini!!

 

[philosli]

Works well. I like it!

 

[Lauffray]

why is so slow for some and not so for others?
i have an old macbook and the new flickr runs just fine for me...also on my ipad mini!!

Off the top of my head, location you're browsing from (CDNs not properly optimized?) and how often you visited the site also improves the caching in your browser, so over time it appears to load faster

 

[Photo_Smith]

The new layout applied to groups ... Sorry, but for the group I admin which is almost entirely question and answer about image processing, the photo pool is a waste of time and the new format will get in the way.

You can always not view the photo pool?

Top old vs new below

This new view allows you to see the first couple of sentences, that way cryptic titled threads like 'my first time' are easier to gauge your level of interest.

I understand if it's slow for some that would be annoying, for me Its been super fast, but possibly that's the browser cache or my 100mbs fibre-link.
On the whole there are worse things in life to get bent out of shape over than continuous scrolling; especially for me with it being a free 1TB hosting site.

 

[Ranchu]

The whole thing hurts my eyeballs. I mean a LOT. Not good for a photo site.

 

[Addy101]

Amazing how people got upset about the changes, also amazing how some want to push their view. I always hated Flickr 'cause of its 1990's feel (to me as a casual visitor), it at least entered the 21st century from a design point of view.

If you don't like what they did with it, why not just move on?

 

[clayne]

Amazing how people got upset about the changes, also amazing how some want to push their view. I always hated Flickr 'cause of its 1990's feel (to me as a casual visitor), it at least entered the 21st century from a design point of view.

If you don't like what they did with it, why not just move on?

Great oversimplification of all the issues!

 

[Ranchu]

I always hated Flickr 'cause of its 1990's feel (to me as a casual visitor), it at least entered the 21st century from a design point of view.

It's the 'design point of view' that it sucks in. It's so much worse now from a 'design point of view' than what it was. The major problem aside from the mystery navigation setup is the way the photos are so close to each other the visual dynamics AND COLOR of each one collides with the visual dynamics and colors of the surrounding photos, above and below as well as on each side.

The clashing is now the primary characteristic of the group of photos, all of them. Then you have the top bar whose shape and content clashes with the pictures below it.

It's just really bad design, and that's OBVIOUS. What's amazing is people try to deny it.

http://www.boucherco.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/grid-base.jpg

 

[redisburning]

I always hated Flickr 'cause of its 1990's feel (to me as a casual visitor), it at least entered the 21st century from a design point of view.

yeah well that 1990s feel was doable with their server/code base.

now they have a 21st century design with 1990s dial-up speeds.

some improvement.

 

[back alley]

well, if nothing else, they sure have generated a ton of buzz!

 

[Ranchu]

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/flickr.com

 

[clayne]

These kind of busy designs fail to surprise me these days now that the ADHD types rule the roost. Something to click on, everywhere. Any smidgen of space left unused is a "problem." On top of that, they're taking away your options to present content in the way you wanted (even if said options were a limited choice).

 

[css9450]

infinite scroll is so ****ing stupid it baffles me how anyone can defend it. there are actually some good things about the new flickr design, but infinite scroll is so idiotic that it makes me want to do physical harm to inanimate objects.

I agree. Every time I log on and try to see what my contacts have posted, its the same routine every time - scroll down ever so carefully, one picture at a time. Careful! Scroll too far and it'll jump ahead two or three pictures. OK, now, scroll back and see which ones it skipped. Fine, now, let's scroll down again. Oooops, it jumped ahead again! Scroll back up and see what it skipped. And so on, and so on. Completely removes any desire to do this anymore. Disarming a bomb is probably less stressful.

A few of my contacts have asked; "how is it possible to have a photo with, say five views and nine favorites?". Simple. Its now possible to mark a photo as a favorite, or to leave a comment, without actually clicking on it first to go to that photo's actual "page". This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but its an indication that people aren't always clicking on their contact's photostreams. Personally, I've hardly clicked on anyone's streams since the changeover; just a few. Seeing the big photo on the homepage takes away the need to click on that person't photostream, I would think. Like was said back on Page 1 of this thread:

Strangely enough, flickr's new emphasis on the photos means we see a lot less photos.

That sums it up for me. I don't spend a tenth of the time I used to spend there.

 

[Vics]

been using it all day...works fine...

Plus one. Seems OK to me. I tried the new groups layout, didn't like it and opted out again.

 

[Keith]

I have to say I'm quite enjoying flickr at the moment. I stayed away from it for years and actually deleted all my pics but all the hoo hah lately has made me take another look at it. Sure the slideshow function is pretty glitchy and tha layout may not be to everyone's taste but what the hell it's free. My one beef is their tendency to oversharpen images which I don't seem to notice until I link a pic to RFF!

I'm now using it to host photos only from my DPMs and I'm actually connected to a few RFFers ... which is nice. 🙂

 

[tunalegs]

Well what do you know?

They launched the new groups today and didn't even fix issues they said they were working on. Also seems like they completely disregarded the feedback they asked for. Amazing, but not unexpected at this point.

 

[Michael Markey]

Well what do you know?

They launched the new groups today and didn't even fix issues they said they were working on. Also seems like they completely disregarded the feedback they asked for. Amazing, but not unexpected at this point.

Yes , not surprising.
They other odd thing is that my "views" appeared to have doubled with this new look site.
Can`t figure out why that should be so.

 

[back alley]

what new groups?
they changed the groups quite awhile ago...what did they do today?

 

[tunalegs]

Yes , not surprising.
They other odd thing is that my "views" appeared to have doubled with this new look site.
Can`t figure out why that should be so.

They apparently changed what counts as a view. Under the old system somebody had to actually click on your images for it to count. Now apparently somebody just scrolling over the image counts. So if somebody has you in their contacts, or your image comes up in a search that counts now.