Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="YYota" data-source="post: 50801" data-attributes="member: 12812">Thanks a lot for the answer, yes I understand the need for thousands of pictures with tagging. But considering how slow it is for less than 100 pictures right now, I believe the advantages are completly offset by the sluggish speed.This reminds me when acdsee switched to a database... old good version 2 is still the fastest viewer out of all acdsee versions. And a media pc is primarely a media viewer no? Therefore speed should come over features. Because you can have the greatest features, if it's dead slow, noone will use it.So an option would be good, hoping it's not too much work if ever it gets considered <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Thanks again for your replies and the great job!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="YYota, post: 50801, member: 12812"] Thanks a lot for the answer, yes I understand the need for thousands of pictures with tagging. But considering how slow it is for less than 100 pictures right now, I believe the advantages are completly offset by the sluggish speed. This reminds me when acdsee switched to a database... old good version 2 is still the fastest viewer out of all acdsee versions. And a media pc is primarely a media viewer no? Therefore speed should come over features. Because you can have the greatest features, if it's dead slow, noone will use it. So an option would be good, hoping it's not too much work if ever it gets considered :-) Thanks again for your replies and the great job! [/QUOTE]

Verification