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.

  • Tanka@lemmings.worldEnglish
    74·
    2 days ago

    Don’t you understand it’s a feature that doesn’t require any of there servers. It uses your internet. They could charge for other things but this one, no.

    • 032 Mendicant Bias@feddit.ukEnglish
      3·
      1 day ago

      Doesn’t it use their servers to set up the connection between the client and the host? And I seem to recall that if you have a double NAT situation (or something like that) then it will actually stream the content over their servers as well.

    • MaggiWuerze@feddit.orgEnglish
      3·
      1 day ago

      But the remote streaming uses their servers. If you wanted to direct stream without involving your servers you already needed a vpn

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      46·
      2 days ago

      But they develop the software and need to fund that regardless of technical reasons.

      • Tanka@lemmings.worldEnglish
        43·
        2 days ago

        Ok, they can still do that for better features and not just for something that can be done for free. They also went public and made a lot ofoney which now the investors also want. Not my problem.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          53·
          2 days ago

          There are other options if you want something entirely free. I’m actually surprised that feature was ever free.

          • Tanka@lemmings.worldEnglish
            34·
            2 days ago

            Because you port forward and share your device to the internet and not use their server. It’s obvious why it was free lol. Why are you suprised? And there were thousands of alternatives to plex that needed pay so it was obvious why they would make a free feature a free feature.