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.
It seems like multiple things are being conflated here and I'm not sure what the reality is because I've never used Plex.
Some people claim this has something to do with Plex needing to pay for NAT traversal infrastructure. Okay, that seems sort of silly but at least there's the excuse that their servers are involved in the streaming somehow.
But their wording is very broad, just calling it "remote streaming." That led me to this article on the Plex support website, which walks people through setting up port forwarding in order to enable "remote streaming"! So that excuse doesn't really seem to hold water. What exactly is being paid for here then? How do they define what "local streaming" is?
Exactly my point. There's some due hard people here saying that remote streaming is only possible because of plex's servers, but that's just not true. They act as fancy DNS or proxying, they lust point to your local server. That's all. Regular DNS or even an IP and port are all it takes to get remote streaming up
There are two types connection in this scenario
I switched away from Plex last year because they wouldn’t let me connect with my box in Hetzner. I’m now using Emby, ironically I’m also paying for Emby’s monthly subscription. Not because I believe I need to, but because I want the developer to continue to work on it.
You do know what caused the Hetzner thing?
People were literally farming Plex in there. They bought a 2-4TB server in the auction and installed Plex and a content farm setup to feed it fresh content.
Then they sold access to the server until it was at capacity. GOTO 10
At one point Hetzner went “fuck this” and just banned Plex altogether. We can’t have nice things because some people are dipshits professionally.
It was Plex that did the IP range ban because people were selling access to their boxes.
Strange how so many people don't have this same attitude towards the developers of Plex.
It’s just that they see Plex more like a faceless corporation now
it might not cost plex much but from the average joe's point of view they might not want to mess around with this stuff, or might have never even heard of DNS or proxies in the first place so those types of people might be more inclined to pay for a feature that does all that for them. thats what plex could be hedging their bets on
The only thing I can think of why they’re doing this is, to drown illegal servers and remove them easily (ones that you see on eBay).
Even if those people people for a Plex Pass, and they get caught.. Plex wins; because they still have their money.
Software support and the company existing, mainly, which I dunno about you but I'm ok with.
It seems deeply opposed to the spirit of selfhosting to have to pay for the privilege of accessing one's own server. If the software itself cost money, that would be one thing, but this whole monetization scheme is skeevy.
Remote streaming means to people outside your home. You can just use a VPN and won't have to pay a dime, just like you wouldn't when you streamed to you TV at home. They offer servers that help lunch through more aggressive NATs and allow its users to just install the app and access the content from anywhere without having to worry about a VPN or something.
I honestly find it baffling that so many people are opposed to lay for a service they are using. Probably shows that most people that pirate are cheapskates rather than anti drm
It’d fit the privilege of using someone else’s software.
It's the confusing mess of subscriptions and seemingly locking basic functionality behind a paywall that's skeevy, not paying for software itself. I have happily paid for software before and would again. Plex has never appealed to me though, and they're certainly doing nothing to make themselves more appealing.