That's all folks, Plex is starting to charge for sharing
That's all folks, Plex is starting to charge for sharing
cross-posted from: https://poptalk.scrubbles.tech/post/2333639
I was just forwarded this someone in my household who watches our server. That's it folks. I've been a hold out for a long time, but this is honestly it.
They want me to pay to stream content that I bought from my hardware transcoded also on my hardware.
I'll say it. As of today, I say Plex is dead. Luckily I've been setting up Jellyfin, I guess it's time to make it production ready.
Edit: I have a Plex Pass. More comments saying “Just buy a plex pass” are seriously not getting it. I have a Plex Pass and my users are still getting this.
And for the thousandth person who wants to say the same things to me:
- YES I know I'm unaffected as a Plex Pass owner.
- My users were immediately angry at it, which made me angry. Our users don't understand what plex pass is, and they shouldn't have to, that's why I had it. The fact that they were pinged even though it should have kept working is horribly sloppy
- Plex is still removing functionality. I don't care that "People should pay their fair share". If Plex wants to put every new feature behind a paywall, that's completely okay. They are removing functionality.
- "But they have cloud costs". Remote streaming is negligible to them. It's a dynamic DNS service. Plex client logs in, asks where server is, plex cloud responds with the IP and port of where server is located. That's it.
- "Good luck finding another remote streaming" - Again, Plex just opens up an IP and port. Jellyfin also just opens up an IP and port (Hold on jellyfin folks I know, security, that's a separate conversation). All "remote streaming" is is their dynamic dns. Literal pennies to them. Know what actually is costing them money? Hosting all of that ad-supported "free" content that they're probably losing money on.
In short, I don't care how you justify it. Plex is doing something shitty. They're removing functionality that has been free for years. I'm not responding to any more of your comments repeating the same arguments over and over.
You're viewing a single thread.
I never got the idea of selfhosting but paying (except for enterprise-grade support or donations) anyway.
For a good while, Plex was the only game in town that did the job well, and they put the transcoding feature behind the paywall.
Given it wasn't that expensive for a lifetime pass a number of years ago (I remember it was cheaper than a game anyway) and they still seemed relatively user-centric at the time, many people like me felt like they were supporting developers building something that was useful to us.
I still run my Plex server since it's not really costing me not to, but I've been running Jellyfin too for a little while and it more or less can do the same job these days
I put my chips (£100) on Emby.
I haven't regretted my purchase. I can't sell anyone on much either, because Emby does all the same as other services, except they've kept adding features while Plex kept doing the Google thing and taking them away. CPU transcoding is free I believe, as is remote streaming up to 10 devices for each user.. Idk I paid pretty early on, but lifetime license is where it's at. Subscriptions just open your asshole for greedy CEOs to fuck you. Best to keep subscriptions voluntary, like donating on Github or Patreon
Emby was borne out of classic workplace toxicity, in that Jellyfin was becoming too corporate so a couple devs forked off to keep it clean.
I think you have that backwards. Jellyfin is a fork of emby
Yeah; Emby was originally called MediaBrowser and was a free open source project. 'MediaBrowsers' developers decided to move to a closed source paid model to establish some more consistent income and support the dedicated developers they have. Thus Emby was born.
Some users were really unhappy with this decision and forked MediaBrowsers last release to create Jellyfin. Their development has been quite a bit slower, but they've made some significant strides in recent years. It's a more and more attractive option.
One of my biggest reasons for sticking with Emby (besides already having a lifetime premier license) is the dedicated clients available on more platforms. Xbone is my primary streaming device, besides android: Emby has a dedicated xbox client you can install that will take full advantage of the the hardware(more content direct plays, HEVC video for example), where as Jellyfin you've gotta use the web browser which is cumbersome and forces the server to transcode media a lot more.
Indeed I did, I removed my speculative comments..
I'm pretty happy with Emby, which also lets me easily do remote streaming.
In the case of plex, it's not 100% selfhosted. There's a dependence on plexs public infrastructure for user management/authentication. They also help bypass NAT by proxying connections through their servers so you don't have to setup port forwarding and can even easily escape double NAT situations.
I can understand paying for that convenience, but cost keeps rising while previously free features continue to get locked behind paywalls.
Tbh, having users required to authenticate with plex.tv was enough for me to look elsewhere. The biggest reason to self host for me is to remove dependency on public services.
The central user management is not a feature, it’s a hook to force people to pay for self-hosted software.
Can't say I disagree.
100% my experience as well. The external authentication requirement is what made my choose Jellyfin a couple years ago.
With Plex, you're getting the easy ability to grant access to users. You get a single pane that can search across multiple Plex instances, and NAT traversal/port forwarding. Jellyfin makes you figure that out yourself.
It's not exactly difficult if you use Tailscale or really any VPN. So I really don't see the value for the cost; if you're even considering self hosting a Plex server/instance, there's a list of basic knowledge you should have or learn (like what you mentioned).
Its not difficult for technical people like you or me, but my friend who just wants to watch their favorite show on my Plex on their TV won't know how to traffic engineer the traffic over a Tailscale network to my network. My mom won't be installing Tailscale on her laptop and phone.
As long as the technical person does all of the setup on their end, the non technical person only has to enter a domain and port in their jellyfin client.
If you want to be on the hook for all IT requests from folks you share with, this is a fine approach. There are people out there who honestly don't have a problem with that and more power to them. I doubt they are the majority, and a lot of selfhosters completely ignore this aspect of software. There is a reason non-free services exist beyond just "capitalism bad." I mean, capitalism indeed bad, but your time is worth something.
I guess I haven't noticed that. The non technically literate folk I know use smart TVs, or can download Jellyfin from an app store. Then they just use the URL when the app asks for it.
There's no other configuring to do on their end.
They also need to run a VPN client.
Because you're not putting bare jellyfin on the internet, right? You shouldn't be doing that for most services in the first place, but doubly so for something that has a bunch of APIs that require no authentication: https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/5415
Put it behind a reverse proxy!
Great, so now the unauthenticated APIs are proxied instead of accessed directly. That changes nothing, it is still vulnerable.
I'm not sure if you know this, but...that doesn't fix most of the security issues in the linked list. All the reverse proxy does is handle hostname resolution and TLS termination (if you are using TLS). If the application being proxies still has an unauthenticated API, anyone can access it. If there's an RCE vulnerability in any of them, you might get hacked.
I run Jellyfin publicly, but I do it behind a separate, locked-down reverse proxy (e.g., it explicitly hangs up any request for a Host header other than Jellyfin's), in a kubernetes cluster, and I keep its pod isolated in its own namespace with restricted access to everything local except to my library via read-only NFS volumes hosted on a separate TrueNAS box. If there is any hack, all they get access to is a container that can read my media files. Even that kind of bothers me, honestly.
The overwhelming majority of Jellyfin users do not take precautions like this and are likely pretty vulnerable. Plex has a security team to address vulnerabilities when they happen, so those users would likely be a lot safer. I appreciate the love for FOSS on Lemmy, but it is scary how little most folks here acknowledge the tradeoffs they are making.
I've spoken out on this same issue before... and as a previous security instructor/researcher... it's fucking scary how many people shit on Plex for a platform that has had known vulnerabilities in auth for 4 years now, that's existed since the previous code-base... so at least 7 years old and those issues existed in the previous emby codebase going back over a decade.
Plex isn't perfect... there's risks involved there too... but at least when something is brought up as a significant risk it seems to get fixed outside of the implicit risks of the Plex org itself.
All I read in these threads is effectively "WAAAH I don't WANNA pay!"... Without realizing that the payment gave them something significantly more secure.
I'm also not particularly happy with giving a bunch of people VPB access to my setup. Or other potential complications that come with that setup.
I know enough to be able to lock it down, but I dont want the hassle. And other people will want it less.
I paid for a lifetime license years ago which is significantly cheaper than that.
I will say, I really want someone* to make a Jellyfin aggregator so you can use multiple servers at once.
*Not me.
When they monitor what you watch and who you share it with, it’s enshittified. Fuck Plex. I used to be a lifetime drum thumper. Stopped a few years ago.
Plex doesn’t care about you, your comfort, ease. It wants your money and it wants to monitor and control what you do with your own data.
Fuck. That.
Take HomeAssistant for example: you’re free to use it self-hosted, but as soon as you want to expose it securely through the Internet, there’s need for infrastructure that has costs, both in materials and labor. In HomeAssistant’s case, it’s NabuCasa that does it, and costs money, and helps fund the work of HomeAssistant’s developers.
Having things free (libre) and open source is a blessing, but we have become used, entitled, even spoiled, to enjoy the work of very specialized people for free. That’s not always feasible.
Another example, Zabbix, is totally open source and free, they only charge for support and training if you ask for them. It has worked for them for many years, but if they start to struggle with funding, I’d understand if they charged for it.
Home Assistant doesn't require to pay for anything at any point in time for any reason. If you want to expose your instance to the web, they have all the documents on how to do it yourself. There's absolutely nothing "hidden" behind a paywall. The only reason to say is if you want Nabu Casa to handle exposing your instance to the internet and various cloud services like Google Assistant/Alexa. The reason to pay Nabu Casa is if you don't have the technical know how (or lazy like me) and to help fund Home Assistant (which I want).
That's all to say that Plex and Home Assistant are not similar in their pay scheme. It'd be more akin if Jellyfin started charging users to allow a one click way to stream outside the home with no obligation to.