37
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
37 points (84.9% liked)
Open Source
31799 readers
433 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Could be self hosted
If you're willing to spend all the money on setting up and running a server, why not just spend way less money to get more phone storage and use OSM?
Setting up a server just for this is clearly overkill, but if you already have a homeserver it would be great to be able to deploy the backend. Sadly there is no such thing currently
I totally agree. Running a server on a home machine that's already running 24/7 is trivial. I don't know why this guy is acting like it's a big deal. I've got a $100 mini-PC running multiple servers already. What's one more?
It's not a BIG deal. I self-host a ton of stuff. It's just a bigger deal than spending a bit more for phone storage for the vast majority of people.
This is true for literally every selfhosted app
I agree. Hence why I wondered why that would be an acceptable option compared to simply changing OPs posted requirements for far less cost and headache.
Not necessarily. Most people in the US are locked into some kind of ridiculous contract that makes swapping/upgrading their phone a pain in the ass and a financial burden. To be fair, these same types of people probably lack the ability to run a home server so maybe my point is moot ๐