What are you using as a Google photos alternative? Currently I’m using Nextcloud but I’m thinking of switching to a more dedicated solution.

I mainly need to upload photos from my device automatically, have an UI to see and classify them, albuns and sharing.

    • DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.comEnglish
      271·
      1 year ago

      Yep, until PhotoPrism revealed themselves to be the greedy cunts they are.

      I sponsor my favourite tech projects annually, as I believe in supporting independent and responsible open-source development.

      I became a paid Github sponsor for PhotoPrism because they promised features like multi-user were coming, and they indicated that paid sponsors would get access. After what seemed way too long a wait, they finally released the features many of us had been waiting for, only to stick them behind a monthly paid subscription. For self-hosted users. 🤨

      So, I switched to Immich about 6 months ago. I’ve found Alex and the rest of the team to be very active, and quite responsive to support requests, including on Discord. Additionally, the development is fast-paced and new features are coming all the time.

      My money’s going to Immich. PhotoPrism can go get fucked.

      • azron@lemmy.mlEnglish
        510·
        1 year ago

        The user feature is available for non paying users too. If you want a gui for managing that is now behind plus. I don’t see exactly how wantng to make a living off of your work makes you a greedy cunt especially when it seems the features trickle down as they should. Am I missing something?

        • surewhynotlem@lemmy.worldEnglish
          14·
          1 year ago

          It’s about expectation setting. You can’t say “paid donators will get X” then say “actually you won’t, give us more money for X”.

          • tuhriel@infosec.pubEnglish
            12·
            1 year ago

            Also, there’s usually no reason as a user to pay monthly for a feature in a self-hosted application.
            The Dev has no monthly costs for that feature. Let me buy the application/feature, and if you need money for a new feature, create a feature that is worth buying again. No need to bully the user into a monthly subscription…

    • ShortN0te@lemmy.mlEnglish
      7·
      1 year ago

      Nah. The Premium model is kinda bullshit. As a free tier open source user you will always be a second class citizen.

      Also everyone who wants to commit code has to sign away his rights for them.

      tl;dr maintainer gets money from open source contribution over the premium tier, but hinders everyone else to do the same with the AGPL licence.(kinda)

      That’s not a good foundation to start off.

      • azron@lemmy.mlEnglish
        31·
        1 year ago

        So you think it is bad cause others can’t take their work and make money off of it? Seems to be a real problem in open source right now that others are doing exactly that and something I don’t begrudge a small development team doing.

        Not affiliated with them just been using and happily subscribed for a year+ now. Better than Google getting my money.

        • ShortN0te@lemmy.mlEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          No, i think it is bad that the owner takes away the rights from the contributors.

          AGPL alone does already solve the problem.

          But both, is not sustainable.

          Also the trademark owner can relicense the code anytime and just close the source. It is not community project

          I think many developer feel like me. Just look at the contributor list on both projects.

          • azron@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2·
            1 year ago

            That’s a fair point. I think you are right that it is not a community project. Something for me to consider. Thanks for the response.