Omploader will remain free as in FREEDOM, without ads, for as long as possible. However, we don't appreciate when people use omploader on their high traffic sites instead of using their own damn servers (especially if they have ads on their site).
Omploader was written in Ruby, uses git/vim.. if for no other reason than they seem to be OSS supporters, we should support them.
but then as Linus said, Stallman is a "one-issue" man, so..
]]>ImageShack allows unlimited bandwidth for videos and slideshows, and allows each hotlinked image 300 megabytes of transfer per hour. If a hotlinked image exceeds this amount, it will become inaccessible, and you would need to send us an email in order to have it enabled again.
Don't know if someone even cares, but iirc linking images directly isn't allowed at imageshack.
Well then why is there a big box with the direct link at the top? Hotlinking and linking to images directly is allowed at ImageShack. Agreeing with rwd, I don't see what's so complicated about pasting that link.
]]>Oh, and while I'm at it, I want to say that ImageShack can still be used, you just need to edit the links to bypass ads and stuff.
Here's how to do it:
When you upload an image to ImageShack, or want to use one of your previous images, you get a link under the category "Thumbnail Size" called "Forums." The link looks like this:
[url=http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=200902211210531280x800s.png][img]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.th.png[/img][/url]
What you want to do is copy the url enclosed in the tags.
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.th.png
Then paste that in for the url in the [url=] tag of the original image code:
[url=http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.th.png][img]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.th.png[/img][/url]
Then remove the .th before .png in the [url]code.
[url=http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.png][img]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3882/200902211210531280x800s.th.png[/img][/url]
Result is a thumbnail linking directly to the image, bypassing all the junk:
]]>This is only because people have no clue how to use ImageShack correctly. I've used it for years, and although admittedly they've added an unbelievable amount of advertising, they are reliable. Use the direct link and [url]tags and everything is dandy. Solarwind's script is absolutely awesome as well. (with a bit of modification to copy the direct link in [url]tags to the clipboard when uploaded, to be posted on forums easily)
+1. I would think people using Arch would be capable enough to figure out to use a direct link to the image.
]]>Use solarwind's awesome script for it. http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~x-solarwin … aUpload.py
It looks like a very promising image host.
]]>Please don't use xs.to, it is absolutely dog slow.
Seconded, it usually takes me about 30s to load a frigging desktop screenshot.
]]>Imageshack is a pain in the arse! Is there another script like imageshack-upload for the other image uploading sites?
Amen.
I used to use Photobucket but am in the process of moving my photos to Picasa. Picasa is TRUE "KISS"
here's another:
If I want to see boobies(bottom right corner), I'll ask my wife.
I don't have a wife, but I don't like to look at porn on websites... I must say it is indeed offensive to some people (I don't really give a crap)
I've been using http://deviantart.com for screenshots, but I have adblock on all the time, so I can't tell if there are ads or pop-ups.
I don't use deviantart, but they don't have many ads that I see when I go there. This was tested with Adblock Plus turned off (I only ever turn it off for Google)
I must agree, ImageShack is a PITA, non-KISS, and non-necessary image uploader.
And a good day to you
]]>Please don't use xs.to, it is absolutely dog slow.
Ditto on this; I hate xs.to. In fact, I hate any image host whose thumbnails direct to some HTML page with the image inside instead of the actual image file.
]]>