Flickr uproar

What happens, when two views of a site conflict with each other.  The reason I thought of this was the latest Flickr uproar this past week.  In case you are not up on the latest news, Flickr is now allowing 90 second videos to be uploaded to the site, and many flickr purist are up in arms.   Part of the problem is that although many flickr users, especially ones that have been members for a long time, still see Flickr as a site set up for user and owned by a small user friendly company.  In reality Flickr is now owned by Yahoo, whose main focus right now is making money and staying out of  Microsoft clutches.  I think many Flickr users were upset by the announcement, because they were never consulted. There was no beta testing or blog post saying this is what we are thinking about doing, what do you think, instead it just happened.  I am sure upper management ot Yahoo, can't image what all the fuss is about, after all  they make decision like this everyday without consulting the user of the product.   I understand from other posts that there is an option in the default menu to have it set so they don't start playing automatically and that Firefox has an extension to block them altogether.   I personally wish that option was available for all user no matter what browser they were using, since most people especially at work still use IE.   I have nothing against videos, I have an account on a multiple number of video sites including Youtube, Viddler and Seesmic to name a few.  That being said when I go to Flickr, I expect to see still photos.   Plus since it is for pro user only most user will not be able to take advantage of it unless they upgrade, which of course means more  in Yahoo coffers, which is exactly what they are looking for.