richmondez

If you are going to worry about archival then when reencode it at all? Just remux the content from the dvd into a suitable container and be done with it.

Rocky now is what Centos used to be, a downstream rebuild of Redhat Enterprise. Cento Stream is now a rolling release and is pretty much RHEL unstable.

I felt the /s was implied but clearly enough people actually believe that linux is only for people who master arcane command lines that it could be taken as a genuine belief.

Finally linux will have parity in useability with windows.

But there are games that have the same problems today, they just look better because they have higher resolution assets but as still riddled with bugs and control issues.

Better by which objective metric? Amount of content? Total size of game code and data? Got to disagree with you otherwise.

I’d argue that is true of any generation, a few games are must plays and endure as such, then there are many that are just okay even at the time and then a bunch of crap it’s hardly worth playing.

Tell that to console manufacturers. Or Apple for that matter.

Technicality of usage rights is very relevant, framing as a purchase where it actually isn’t is dishonest and the fact that they make more money being dishonest doesn’t make it right. Other than that you used an awful lot of words to basically agree with me.

No, no ownership is being conferred except to a number, the supporters club key let’s call it. That is what you are buying, it’s like an NFT. And just like NFTs it’s being marketed as though you are purchasing the work itself which you absolutely are not doing. You are paying for the right to say you paid.

If you don’t pay you are in exactly the same state as if you paid regarding your license to use the software, it’s licensed to you under the terms of the agplv3. If they were selling a support contract that would be fine too, but again, no, you get no extra support over what anyone posting a issue on the tracker will get. Even if it were a support contract then it should be made clear that is what you buy.

Buying confers ownership of something even if it’s just a legal agreement like a software license. No ownership over immich is being conferred, nothing is being conveyed to anyone so it’s incorrect to term it a purchase, much less a purchase of immich.

None of those things are true. Paying money is in no way guaranteeing the current developers will wake up wanting to maintain it tomorrow, nor am I purchasing access to an update service. It isn’t a purchase of anything and shouldn’t be framed as one. It’s a Contribution or a donation that gives nothing in return and saying it’s something else is dishonest.

Except it’s misleading as you aren’t really buying it, you are buying a supporters badge key as I understand it. Might as well be selling an immich NFT. I still don’t think this is being upfront and it’s still a dark pattern it’s just slightly less misleading than the blatantly false buy a license wording.

The wording is still misleading because you aren’t purchasing immich and if you were, what exactly would you be purchasing? Control of the project? The immich name? You aren’t purchasing a license to use it as you already have that. A supporters badge key? Okay well be upfront that that is what you are selling because you aren’t selling immich itself.

He’s being a dick and suggesting you fix this in immich rather than provide this stop gap workaround. I for one appreciate your diligence in pointing this out as I’d seen no mention of it prior to your first post.