Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Nov 2009 00:02 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 396067
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-03-16
No need for sarcasm, it doesn't add any more weight to your argument.
In case you missed my point, I was referring to an overkill for certain scenarios. Picasa and Facebook have their place, but it doesn't mean there isn't more room for other tools, sometimes more appropriate for the task at hand.
When was the last time you took a 32G SD card out of a digital camera and uploaded it in full to <put-your-favorite-online-host-here>?
It takes time. Much time. Hours sometimes. If you want to save bandwidth and selectively upload files, then you have to pick them one by one. OTOH, if you only want to let someone browse the photos and pick one he likes and then instantly see it in full size, local server with thumbs preview is the only reasonable option.
Of course, if you want it permanently online, then an online host is the way to go, but that's not always the case. I guess we perceive the words "casual" and "immediate" differently. So be it, I can live with that.
Edited 2009-11-24 04:04 UTC