4 ms·
It's not even selling fancy cameras. It's reviews of digital cameras that are all either obsolete or about to be. Much of the data is only of historical interes
by twblalock 3y ago
It's not even selling fancy cameras. It's reviews of digital cameras that are all either obsolete or about to be. Much of the data is only of historical interest.
Amazon is not running a charity or a public library. It's foolish to expect them to run a site like this forever. If the original owners wanted this to be preserved they should have sold it to someone who contractually agreed to preserve it, or donated it to the Internet Archive or something.
Besides, the old stuff should all be free from archive.org, right?
- celsoazevedo 3y agoThe Archive Team is planning to archive the site. It should end up on the Wayback Machine: https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview
- ghaff 3y agoThe Wayback Machine seems to be well-populated with content from the site. (And one suspects Amazon knew that the site was already being preserved in this manner.) e.g. https://web.archive.org/web/20230201053243/https://www.dpreview.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20230201053243/https://www.dprev...
- MDGeist 3y agoTrue that a lot of the content is only of historical value, but wouldn't it potentially be in amazon's interest to keep the site going to keep covering new things that amazon is actively selling? They could have just killed off old content after a certain date.
- mullingitover 3y agoI definitely spent thousands on Amazon after reading reviews on dpreview. The affiliate money alone should’ve been more than enough to keep the site running. After this I am firmly determined never to spend a cent on cameras at Amazon.