G-M0N3Y-2503

From what I understood it was a price issue, I wonder if the licenses could be upgraded for extra at some point.

I thought "Early adopter Tax" was because you have to report all the bugs and do all the initial testing. So they pay in their time too 😛 I didn't think there was any of that kind of logic TBH, sales are just what makes business sense. Buyers remorse is more to do with the perceived value, and in IMO for a lifetime licenses and the scope of the product in that time, the value will be there at any price. That said at $300 of my dolllarydoos, I don't think I could justify buying it for someone who may just use a share folder only, but maybe subscription pricing will make it more reasonable for them to buy it.

From my perspective, I invested for software gain and Linus invested for software and monetary gain. Sometimes investments don't pay off, but I believed and still believe in the direction enough to risk it. As a software developer myself, learning is part of the journey, so it's actually a good sign they are forthcoming with what they learnt and have the confidence to continue, IMO. As long as there is progress being made, it's just a matter of enough before resources run out.

It has been alleged to work, there was a post from the admins that went over options a month or two back with more details.

Most apps seperate config and user data. I'd guess the reason for this would be, people primarily care about the user data (Photos). So the config data like user profiles/Album organisation are less important. The idea being, maybe immich turns into a dumpster fire and you want to use something else, at which point you only care about the photos. So that app data, or config data as I called it are historically different, so additional work may be necessary.

They recently mentioned concerns about reselling licenses, which is to say they seem cautious in this respect. So I'd guess we'd be waiting a while. That said, I have non-techy people in my life that store important things on USBs. I think the only network attached I could convince them of would be as you suggest.

I think the way this would work is by having two virtual networks (bridges) on the NAS. A network switch but virtual. One sends all outbound traffic through a VPN and the other through your regular network. So apps like a torrent You might plug into the VPN switch and the others you'd plug into the regular switch. So all apps would be supported. Only question would be what VPNs are supported. But then again, some support open standards like OpenVPN or Wireguard so you'd be able to connect a few different options by just implementing them.

So the difference really comes down to the account you use to login and manage each system . if you want to give someone else access to manage one of the systems. If the license is on your account, you have to give them your login. Otherwise, buying on a seperate account you have to give them the seperate login. The latter not being as cheap as the former.

@oliver12 taking a guess, i think it would probably "work", except it would only have one account on both. So at that point it's just your backup on offsite machine, rather than a backup to a buddies machine who also happens to be offsite. If you wanted to gift this machine so that your parents could have their own, you'd need to give them your account at which point they could also access the machine you have.

Ooh the VM stuff sounds great! I've setup a SteamOS system instead of Windows, Exactly like the blog suggested, already! But it's been a pain managing it so looking forward for that to be easier! As an aside my PCI IDs haven't been stable adding/removing NVME drives on a consumer Motherboard, meaning I have to fix the VM every time I change unrelated hardware. So that could be a thorn in a curated approach when you get around to it.

It sounds like the additional licenses wouldn't really work for a buddy backup use case, because there wouldn't be much of a way to separate the systems without some kind of licence transfer. Is that correct?

They said with 1.0 I'm pretty sure, so hopefully by the end of the year! 🤞

So keen for this, ATM it's taking a minute to do a full refresh. and for comparison, TrueNAS Also, do we know if we will be able to disable the remote deck? I already have a VPN

Not a recommendation, there probably is or will be a better place to follow it at some point. But, if you want all the docs development notifications, it's open source! So you can follow the progress here

In terms of being "correct" even. I use domain names on my network, so the IP address doesn't have the cached credentials. But to PsychoWards point,I think it makes sense to use from a discoverability point of view. You can't google your local network if you don't remember the exact address.

I hope that one day we'll see GPU virtualisation not relegated to datacenters, maybe if Intel makes a card worth splitting up. I've looked into the software side and there are too many competing ideas that all require a lot of maintainers by the looks of it so I'm doubtful of long-term support.

I've seen ICY Dock show up before, so this is an example of what to look for. https://global.icydock.com/product_329.html

All I've heard is that USB components in general aren't built for sustained load, and may burnout and die, on USB drives specifically, the flash memory might die too. One dude said he had a graveyard pile of dead USB adaptors from when he thought he knew better. But it'll otherwise work for some undetermined amount of time until then. In data enters they use a cable that carries something like PCIe from the compute to a separate box with just a bunch of drives (JBOD) So your idea is fine just not USB,, I'm not sure what's specifically available at a reasonable price though.

I'll add if you have a m.2 NVMe or normal PCIe there are cards that will divide it into multiple NVMe/SATA etc, but at a divided bandwidth in case you demand the utmost speed. I think people call them HBA cards.

I was reading a TrueNAS forum post the other day, and the problem seemed to be that most USB to X adapters aren't built for the kind of load that these NAS operating systems have, so they tend to burn out and die more often than not. The other potential problem with that scenario would be the multi-disk aspect; depending on how it's designed, it might only show up in the OS as one drive rather than 4-5.

I would love the ability to set up a temporary virtual machine to test a proposed change before running it on the real deal. The specific use case that came to mind was that I wanted to migrate Immich manually, like in the topic. But firstly wanted to: understand what a clean install of Immich would look like in terms of the TrueNAS config. Do a dummy run in the VM to run into any issues there. I realise this kind of feature probably would come after subscription licensing or similar. But even if it were some sort of nuclear auto unclaimed after a period option that would work for me.

I was making plans for backing up immich elsewhere, and I noticed that in the documentation about the types of data it says that certain parts should be ready only externally. However, if I understand the new share layout (I'm still on the old config) it is sharing the read only (uploads) and read/write (external library) all the same. Are we expecting noone will go to the Photos/immich folder on the NAS and edit files they shouldn't? Or am I missing something? Seems like a recipe for trouble otherwise.

I mean it's only released in a test capacity as far as I am aware. So we only get updates when the team needs public testing. So if you've deployed like I have truenas is inevitable at this point.

I am running a handful of Apps/VMs on my system that I want to easily share with my family and allow some modifications, like starting their VM. In its simplest terms, this could be a portal with all the available apps shown and redirect to their respective port instead of having to manage URLs with different ports currently. The current dashboard would likely be good enough if additional local users could have a login. The next obvious can of worms would be user management, one login for all "supported" apps and SMB? Disallow destructive tasks?

For completeness, at least in Australia, the remote UI is very slow, which is another reason for this. I understand a remote-hosted server will always be necessary for some of the niceties of "just works" (HTTPS certificates/Servers through firewalls). But it would be good if it could hand off in some cases to a peer connection, like with WebRTC ICE.