Originally Posted by
alanw
Sorry, I have to call BS on that "it will slow down FT for everyone" line of crap. Completely false.
Besides, who said anything about FT having to host "all" those avatars? Just enable remote images only and problem solved. No storage, no bandwidth, no technical capacity (whatever that is) increase.
Or say they decided to be generous and host "all" those avatars for everyone. If the limit on avatar image size is, say, 30k, that means everyone on FT can have an avatar and it will require a whopping what, 6GB of extra disk space! Hey, I've got a $20 bill right here. Problem solved.
And if the vast majority of FT users don't want avatars then it won't be an issue at all, will it?
Remote hosting? Talk about a disaster -- security, performance, moderator ability to control easily....
Do you have any clue what goes into the performance and responsiveness of an application like this for all users?
It requires CPU, I/O, and memory resources, not to mention network bandwidth (there is a network component between FT servers and the Internet itself) to load these images on page views for those that choose to show them. Disk space is not the only concern, here. If it was, I wouldn't worry about such a thing at all as disk is plentiful and cheap.
If you think that loading an additional 2.5MB (60k per avatar, 40 posts per page) wouldn't create an additional hit and wouldn't warrant a detailed capacity and performance study, well, I can't convince you. And with a finite amount of resources, avatar viewers will reduce available resources for EVERYONE.
The simpler the website and bulletin board, the fewer technical resources it requires to run.
I'm not saying it would slow down FT. I'm saying it might without the proper sizing/simulation/modeling study and no real business would simply turn this on without doing the proper risk assessment and capacity plan, via change management. Service Management 101.