A year ago the question on the 100 files limit was raised and answered by Eric Suez:
(Thread now closed for comments)
Hi, Intelligent. I checked, and this is correct. The limit is currently 100, but this will undoubtedly change once we implement a way to measure and manage storage. I believe the team is starting at 100 and measuring how this feature is being used before upping the limit.
We'll assume that by now they have finished with the measuring and have concluded that however small are the files, it's the count that counts.
Our website is customized with a lot of 1Kb images, perhaps 30 Kb's worth, that comprise roughly a third of our capacity. I wonder what is the logic behind that calculation?
With flash banners, branding graphics, and various PDFs we have reached the maximum number of files - and we're a small network, not 6-months old!
We will now have to use a dummy discussion to upload more files as they become necessary. Is it an oversight that no limit was set for this type of lame file management?
Again I can't fathom what might be the logic behind this...
A work around is to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service).
It is incredibly cheap .14 cents per GB and .01 cents for every 10,000 requests. http://aws.amazon.com/s3/
I use the S3Fox Organizer (http://www.s3fox.net/) with Firefox and it is a simple drag and drop. Once uploaded. just right click the file to edit the ACL to be viewable by everyone.
I also mapped my "Bucket" (What Amazon calls your folder) to a subdomain of my site.
I use this to host my images in a Wordpress site so the images load very quickly. You only pay for the bandwidth that you use.
Just a thought.
Yes, I'm aware of external storage facilities.
For personal stuff I have a Flickr Pro account and a Picasa web album.
The point is that at 600$ per year, I'm expecting something a little more professional than a 100 files upload limit and an add/delete-type of file manager.
Actually, we haven't finished. We haven't added "a way to measure and manage storage" which is an important step. I will pass along your thoughts about how this is lame to our product team. Not sure if we have plans to raise this limit, but if I can find out I'll let you know.
One hundred files is a ridiculously low limit.
The lameness resides in a) the fact that actual storage space is not considered. My 100 files could all be huge FLV animations - it's not, I'm wasting precious file count with small design items. It probably works out at a statistical level with thousands of networks, but for a single NC it is clearly not enough.
And b) there are no other limitations on files that can be uploaded on discussion threads (or are there?)
I'd prefer to have storage on my community (we have a lot more than 100 worksheets etc..) than use a 3rd party server. I don't see why we can't for the money we are paying Ning.
Let's get this done!
On another note - I'd really love if Premium members actually got custom service. I've never once had Ning actually say - let us fix this just for you or do something to work personally with me as a work around. In today's world, there should be "customization" . In this case, why not say to those who request - okay, we've extended your limit to "x" files?