jessica_allison1

<B>wj gibson</B>; well, <B>"roll back the interface - until you have more money and people to do it right"</B><P>Humm, that would seem to be too easy but, the most logical comment I've read.<P>We are making a lot of comments without, I'm thinking, knowing all of the <I>REAL</I> reasons behind this change.<P>Bravo Mr Gibson ~ Jessica

Deerfield, Amherst, Sunderland, Zoar, North Adams, Charlemont, Shelburne Falls to name a few. If you took 90 west, you could do the Great Barrington to Sheffield area, maybe pick up some good N. Rockwell art.<P>Hope that helps, Deerfield and Amherst are my old stomping grounds and think you would have some really nice photo opportunities. My third on my favorites list would be Sheffield area. Sunderland and North Adams would give you some Mountain snow photos (if there's snow).<P>Jessica

<B>ANDRE and GROUP,</B> I suppose if folks haven't been using computers for 20 yrs, or have only been on PN, they don't really know what stoneage means, looks like or acts like. Choosing AOL is a great example of a bad choice but I'm sure the choice was dollar driven, not quality driven.<P>As for the <I>"Photo.net needs money to run"</I>, have a great product and you can raise the membership fees. When I read the perks listed for those on the PN management team and the expense accounts, I know why more $$$'s are needed to run.<P>I hate to say that I'm fairly new to this site due to reading about changes to come, I've held off paying a membership fee (I have felt a little guilt but I always take a wait and see approach) ~ here they are and a lot will need to change before I pay.<P>How many of you have looked at other Photo Communities and the look and interface? Some don't have a lot of glitz but are very polished in a basic way. Take a look at "flickr" <B>$24.95 per year ~ unlimited</B>. I know of several top posters that have moved on to either <B>flickr, NatureScapes or BetterPhoto</B><P>Jessica

<B> TORFIN and BRAD,</B> I suppose if folks haven't been using computers for 20 yrs, they don't really know what stoneage means, looks like or acts like. Choosing AOL is a great example of a bad choice but I'm sure the choice was dollar driven, not quality driven.<P>As for the <I>"Photo.net needs money to run"</I>, have a great product and you can raise the membership fees.<P>I hate to say that I'm fairly new to this site due to reading about changes to come ~ here they are and a lot will need to change before I pay.<P>How many of you have looked at other Photo Communities and the look and interface? Some don't have a lot of glitz but are very polished in a basic way.<P>Jessica

It actually looks like we've gone back in time. No background color but looks like all of those older CMOS thread web pages.<P>So, the first 2 "threads" state that they like the <I>NEW</I> look?,?,?<P>Saving $$'s and using old technology!