"We're not a Swiss bank for images," Cook said. "If users want online storage, they should be willing to pay for it."
I agree. Unfortunately for Kodak, there are other resources out there -- Snapfish, Shutterfly, Flickr -- that don't take as tough a stand when it comes to old-school notions like profiting from operations.
Gradually, though, I believe this will change. The culture of freeloading that has long defined the Web can't last forever.
I'm not saying this is a good thing. I like freeloading, and I don't want to have to pay to keep my e-mail, calendar and contacts in Google's or Yahoo's servers.
But the question is whether I'd want to save a few bucks by having my e-mail beholden again to my ISP or by schlepping around an appointment and address book.
The honest answer is that I wouldn't -- just as many Kodak Gallery users, I'm sure, won't want to give up the convenience of storing their photos online with one of the world's most trusted photography brands.
Free is a great price. But you get what you pay for.
--
David Lazarus' column runs Wednesdays and Sundays. Send your tips or feedback to david.lazarus@latimes.com.
