Re: Possibly dumb question about 2.11
Gunnar Heikkilä <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.pixory |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Put you mind at ease-- what is going on here is very innocent. Hi Joe, thanks for the explanation. Nevertheless I very much prefer self- contained software unless there is some extraordinary requirement which forces parts of the implementation to be "out there". Maybe I am just old-fashioned... OK, over to the "add things to the wish-list" part of the mail: I already store all of my pictures in "album folders" on my computer, so it is very easy to just put Pixory "on top" of these. Except for one thing: In most of the albums there are a few pictures which I will not share with the rest of the world. They might be too private, or maybe have people in them which I know does not want to be on the net. This forces me to duplicate the whole folder structure into a "Pixory database", where I then remove the pictures I do not want to show. Of course, hard disk space is cheap nowadays, so this is not really a big issue (I need about 10 Gbyte for the original pictures (and then another 10+ for the Pixory duplicate version). The main issue is thus not space, but the need to handle and update two copies of the data. Or three, really, since all of them are burned on CD as well in case the disk gives up. It would be easier and also slightly more elegant if I just could mark some of the pictures as "hidden" (like in PowerPoint). But maybe I am the only one with this problem? BR /Gunnar ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Rent DVDs Online - Over 14,500 titles. No Late Fees & Free Shipping. Try Netflix for FREE! http://us.click.yahoo.com/YoVfrB/XP.FAA/uetFAA/EGnolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/