this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
495 points (92.0% liked)

Selfhosted

46653 readers
1042 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I tried testing a movie from my home server in plex through firefox and repeatedly got this message, even after reloading.

I knew that they had paywalled the apps on mobile and streaming from outside the network but now they have also blocked watching your own movies through your own hardware.

I do get the point that making software should be able to sustain people but I dont see the move of plex as a fair thing to do. Yes, they have made great software but taking your home server hostage feels like the wrong move.

Even a pop up that says "we need you to donate please" would have been fine. make it pop up before every movie, play donation ads before any movie but straight up disabling the app is kinda cruel.

Anyway, i have switched to jellyfin and it is insanely good. please give it a try. you can run it alongside plex with not issues (at least i had none) and compare the two.

In any case, good luck. Let me know if you need help.

(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tkw8@lemm.ee 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

I've never been a Plex user. Always been with Jellyfin. I've heard that plexamp is a killer app but finamp has always been sufficient for my pretty basic needs. But I have a question for you (meant in good faith). You say,

I do get the point that making software should be able to sustain people but I dont see the move of plex as a fair thing to do. Yes, they have made great software but taking your home server hostage feels like the wrong move.

If Plex needs a sustainable business model, asking for donations isn't enough. So what is the move for them? What do they do to both fulfill their need for a sustainable business and also not upset their userbase? (I'm not defending Plex or this move of taking your server hostage, in any way.)

I'm genuinely curious how, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, they should have played this or at a minimum, made better moves than they did.

Very glad you're with jellyfin btw. You can check out some cool plugins at awesome-jellyfin.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Donations isn’t going to cover the hunger of a 40 million dollar VC round. Those investors want more than a return, they want plex profitable ASAP

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Investors are like parasitic leeches to any business model. As soon as you add them, the business has to grow in order to satisfy the leeches who provide no benefit to the model other than to be attached to it. If you ignore the leech, they'll drain all your lifeforce, so your only option is to satisfy them and feed them. Unfortunately, they are also ravenous creatures who are never satisfied. If you feed them a little, they'll want more next time in an endless cycle.

Once you are infected by investors ... eventually they will destroy whatever you created.

[–] tkw8@lemm.ee 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You have this semi-backwards. The VC isn't really a leech because Plex pitches the venture fund with a well developed enshittification plan already in place. Assuming everyone is acting in good faith (i.e. the VC doesn't just want to just shut it down and sell Plex for parts), Plex's (enshittification) plan is the reason it makes sense for the venture fund to invest in the first place. Plex promises their plan is why the VC will make an outsized return on their investment and it is what the VC validates as part of their pre-investment due diligence. But that plan is created (and sometimes even put into operation) before any VC investment occurs.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 day ago (5 children)

So what is the move for them?

Plex has a two-pronged VOD service. They have ad-supported "live television" and they have content to rent.

I don't know if that's enough to sustain them but I don't really care. I've been a PlexPass owner for over ten years. I have only asked that they resolve bugs and made requests for things like proper organization of classical music (which they've explicitly stated they will not consider).

You do bring to light something I hadn't considered; that they see Plex as a business model. From my perspective, I want to buy a fully developed product with the expectation of bug fixes and security patches etc over time. I genuinely can not think of a single thing the developers have added to the service that I've used in the past ten years.

So, what kind of business model charges money to do things that don't have an apparent impact on the user experience?

Plex has been one of my most used applications in the past decade. However, it has its limitations and they are actively imposing more limitations on the experience in favor of "a sustainable business model".

The issue is that their sustainable business model is interrupting the users' sustained use of a platform they've already paid for. I've had to go through all of my devices and disable all auto-updates to ensure I do not get the "New Plex Experience".

What we should be asking is why "selling a product" is no longer a business model.

[–] tkw8@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What we should be asking is why “selling a product” is no longer a business model.

Such a good question. Off the top of my head, I can think of two reasons: one cynical, one a little more practical.

Cynical first lol: Maxmize profits. Why charge once when you can charge monthly. I'll move off this bc it's a topic that's been beaten to death, esp. here on Lemmy.

The more practical reason is probably because most software interacts pretty directly with the internet in some way. When we were just installing MSOffice98 with clippy, software didn't need constant security updates, patches, etc. Remember when there was an update for MSOffice and you'd install Service Pack 1? That was one of the first patches I downloaded from the internet and it was a big deal back then. Now updates come out at least monthly, many times more often than that. I guess that means that you have multple product cycles occuring concurrently, which creates a financial model with a lot more unknowns... which in turn makes it harder to forecast what a product should cost, considering it would be the only revenue generated, per license for the life of the product.

I think selling a product is still a very viable business model, but you have to be a lot more accurate about revenue forcasting and product pricing. I guess it means you have a lot less room for error (from a business perspective).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There are a few ways Plex could have played this:

  1. By attrition. Stop the sale of plex pass, but leave those users and their access alone. New sign-ups get new rules about features/$.
  2. By using some of their revenue to paywall Premium features, keep a cut-down but functional version for non-paying plebs. It doesn't have to be all-or-nothing, even for streaming outside your network (which you could cap at X number of hours per month)
  3. Start making Plex features a-la-carte, meaning, $2/mth for HDR, 4$ for streaming, etc. Or bundles.

The point is there are lots of companies who do this right and don't have such a blatant disregard for the user. In the long run, this will not help Plex, it will help other streaming service helpers who are actually willing to respect users.

I know you're not defending Plex and I acknowledge that. However, I see a lot of "How are they supposed to make their money?" arguments here, hence my description above of just a few models Plex could have chosen instead of f**king the customer.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Plex really needs to do a Tailscale style connection to your server. But instead they chose to keep their outdated method of funneling all of their traffic through their servers, and need to charge lots of money in order to pay for it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Make sure your home server config isn’t mistaking this client as a remote user. Check your networking, etc

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] oakey66@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I had a plex pass and was still having tons of issues streaming to other devices such as Apple TV. So I switched everything over to jellyfin with news server and have everything scheduled through radarr and sonarr. Never going back.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Exposing Jellyfin/ plex through routing or SNAT plus dyndns would be a cheap option.

As soon as one rents a VPS (to expose the selfhosted at home service through routing/ tunneling) it would cost at least 2€/ month?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] twinnie@feddit.uk 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is just some glitch. They’ve not said anything about watching stuff locally becoming a pay thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Stillwater@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a fork of open source software. If only "line go up" didn't have to be the way things worked they could have stopped developing features no one wants just to squeeze out profit, and sustained without enshittifying. Maybe.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] atthecoast@feddit.nl 1 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

I’ve never seen the appeal. A simple smb share and Kodi work perfectly fine no?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›