top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 180 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, it's fucking ridiculous that a corporate account has a user-upsell ad/button one MUST hit to access the basic settings for the program.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 165 points 6 months ago (37 children)

    Most of my career is built on MS's stack (I fell into .NET development and got good at it. Now I'm in the same boat as COBOL, Java, and Ruby-on-Rails devs: I'm basically a software doula.)

    Every job I go into now I'm reccomending they get a migration plan for self-hosting and self-owning. The American tech system is collapsing. AI is causing massive ruptures in knowledge: it obscures searches, it deskills devs, it's castrated the junior-senior-principle ladder such that we're not training enough developers to even pass along all of the knowledge of how current systems work. SaaS is reaching the enshittification threshold and all those businesses that moved everything into the cloud are about to discover that they're hostages and the sinking empire will drag down a lot of collateral damage with it.

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 6 months ago (28 children)

    Not that my tiny customers have enough of an IT budget to buy their own servers with the recent price hike on memory and ssds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago (26 children)

    Self hosting doesn't necessarily imply you need your own hardware.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

    I have also found that self-hosting, even with your own hardware, is significantly cheaper than the premium cloud hosting (AWS, etc). We priced out a VM server at my company and we found we could rebuy the hardware for it every FIVE months, just from the cloud hosting costs. And that is if we were decently disciplined about turning VMs on and off every day (which we all knew was a fantasy).

    That caused us to strike out the premium providers. Leaving us with the non-premium ones (Digital Ocean, etc), co-locating, or in-house hosting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    I hear you. Personally I never understood the appeal of costly hosting at AWS and such. It just always seemed so expensive. The only benefit it provided, imho, is when you legitimately need to scale very quickly or if you've got a really huge variance in load.

    Everything else? My own servers please, and thank you for reading 😁

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    What I read so far:
    The dynamic scaling is what makes it worth it.
    Many of the traditional hosting offerings just give you a monolithic VPS/dedicated hardware.
    But if you want to up/downscale depending on peak demand during lunch hour it get's complicated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    How much is this true?

    Not only are those clouds expensive, they are also slow.

    So perhaps a fifth of the peak hardware would be cheaper than the entire AWD and still more than capable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    How much, I can't say. Not my pay grade :p

    But for peak demand they can assume a certain amount from historical data or expected load for something special (like an exclusive report everyone would like to read about).
    And lunch hours arent shifting around much. So you could schedule more load balancing during the hours of 11am to 3pm in advance.

    Just depends on your usecase I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    The other reason that companies like to use AWS is for liability. If you don't own the hardware you're not as responsible for the physical security and maintenance for tons of servers distributed around the world. At least that's what my employer likes about it. For personal use or smaller companies, I def don't see the use case of AWS just out of price and complexity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (16 children)

    I'm of the opposite opinion - would you mind elaborating on how a selfhosted-on-nonowned-hardware setup would work?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (15 children)

    I believe you, but many people self host on rented hardware for various reasons. For example "proper" self hosting comes with upfront cost. But self hosting ln a VPS comes with reliability, uptime, predictability. But you're still the master of the software you host, of backups, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (14 children)

    So, running a VM in the cloud is somehow different from "running everything in the cloud"? I'm genuinely confused here, willing to bet I've misunderstood something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Operating and administering your own systems infrastructure requires that your business invest in the people to do so, this builds institutional knowledge which makes the important bit, the data and knowledge, portable. If the VM in the cloud gets too expensive you can use another provider, or you can buy hardware and run it locally. If the VM provider cuts your service you still have access to your data because you never lost control of it. Problems can be fixed by in house staff that don't suddenly evaporate for arbitrary reasons or have service outages.

    If your entire business depends on Microsoft services and it gets too expensive you have no options but to pay more. If your account gets locked then you're out of business until you can get Microsoft to give you access again. If you want to migrate away, there isn't another Microsoft to move your data to and you've replaced all of your technical staff with a support phone number, which isn't currently accepting your calls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I see. And the hardware (realistically for small businesses) one-time payment of say (quite overkill) $10 grand is somehow more prohibiting than adding the sysadmin(s) and whatnot to your payroll? Sounds backwards to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    You're right, it would depend on the business.

    A small 3-4 person office is probably saving way more money using cloud-based SAAS than hiring an IT team. The larger the company gets the less of an impact they would feel hiring more personnel or buying hardware.

    It isn't that these services are always bad. It's just that, like everything in the tech sector, they've collectively reached the point where they're enshittifying and trying to squeeze their existing customers rather than find new ways to add value.

    Eventually the increasing costs will make alternatives more attractive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    It's a VM that you set up, you have the image yourself, you could put it on a machine in your living room if you had to.
    "I'm paying for a colocation of a machine I administer" is very different from "I've written my application such that it can only run inside an AWS system"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago*

    The idea is that your services run on remote systems without regard for what those systems are (as a VM, docker image, etc.) Your architecture is decoupled from theirs - you can run on an Amazon host one week, and a server in your closet the next.

    And as a bonus, systems hosted this way are often harder to scrape as they're all structured differently. Additionally, you can (and should!) take additional measures to protect your data from your provider - something that just can't be done when the provider controls the data architecture.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    The end result is the same:
    You control what the machine does. The data as well as backups (assuming you arent using specific hardware offerings but just compute and storage)

    Example:
    I am done with AWS pricing and Azure gave me a fat stack credits to go over there.
    Agnostic VMs could be backed up and migrated over to Azure.
    Essentially the same as migrating Hyper-V or VMware to Proxmox-VE

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (4 children)

    And the day your VM host exits the market/bumps their prices/decided to pull the rug from under you, your backups that absolutely couldn't be made in the SaaS instance will magically continue to exist outside of your Cloud VM setup?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Veeam for example can do that pretty well.
    So, yeah it can happen.
    Or you extract the data from backup and migrate it to the new host and import it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    And thus administering the server yourself proved to be a waste of time and money as the SaaS was just as resilient? I'm still confused.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Not if you needed it for a short time.
    If I need hardware for >5 years I'd buy hardware
    If I need the performance of it for just 1 month, why should I bother acquiring the hardware for multiple thousands?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Solid example. I could pay Lyrasis to host an instance of Archivesspace for me. They'd control updates, backups, etc, I'd just use the web interface to manage my archival collections.

    OR I could rent a server, install Archivesspace myself (it's open source), sysadmin it myself, take on all that headache and control.

    They're both in the cloud, but one's software as a service (SAaS) and the other is just a Linux box on someone else's machine. The second is cheaper in my experience, but only if you have someone that can sysadmin it. Otherwise you've got a learning curve ahead of you.

    (it's late, so feel free to tell me I've misread the thread).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    You could, I could. The business-owner who decided to hire @anamethatisnt most likely couldn't. I fail to see the hardware being the pinch point here - adding a sysadmin to your payroll sure seems like the bigger budget outpost.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago*

    Vegetarians nowadays eat eggs, vegans wear leather and self-hosters do it on someone else's computer.
    I'm old and grumpy and will stick to calling the modern vegetarians lacto-ovo-vegetarians, tell the modern vegans that veganism is a lifestyle not a diet and insist that a VPS on Hetzner is hosted by Hetzner, even if you have to manage and maintain the VM.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    Most of our customers are priced out of the hardware we bought zhrough the official distributor channel.
    They hiked the prices to 100% of the previous batch.
    Meanwhile we bought what we could from numerous resellers to make it DIY.

    Not many small customers can afford to drop 10k on a mid/low tier enterprise grade hardware (2x 1.92TB TLC SSDs, RAID controller, Intel E-2434, 64GB DDR5 RAM)
    A few months ago this was (fully assembled mind you) around 2-3k

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago

    Yep.

    Its... pretty much apocalyptic.

    C Suite finally 'won'; they decided they could do the job of engineers.

    They can't, of course, but their hubris will burn down the world before they admit they don't know something.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    Wait, how does Ruby-on-Rails fit with those other ones? Is it a dying framework?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Ruby on Rails was always fringe but will always have its advocates

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    I just like the idea of anything-that-isn't-javascript, and Ruby is an elegant language

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yea, it’s nice; I’ve coded with it.

    Rails just never hit the mainstream. That might be because it never had many powerful sponsors. There are some clever people and big companies that think it’s good to use. But I think the support is too scattered to attract an increase of use, so it languishes in the ecosystems.

    And having hundreds of well maintained libraries will be the only way it can get popular now. And it cannot attract the new programmers in sufficient quantity to do that. And it cannot increase its sponsors until it has it.

    So, it will remain a very cool thing most people won’t use

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    I kinda like the niche aspect. If you're looking for a language to learn with broad appeal and applicability, then it might not be the best choice. But if you want to learn something unique for the sake of uniqueness, it could be pretty cool.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 98 points 6 months ago

    "Microsoft Teams users are extremely angry" is the standard feeling when using that product.

  • source
  • [–] 114 points 6 months ago* (10 children)

    It’s fucking wild to me that anyone ever convinced anyone in enterprise to shift to cloud and SaaS offerings in the first place.

    You really thought it would be cheaper forever to give all your IT to someone else? You didn’t think you were getting captured?

    You thought it was a good idea to store all your data on someone else’s servers, who have control over access to your information and, in most cases, can probably read it? And that if they raised prices or did something you didn’t like such as analysis or AI training on it, you weren’t completely held hostage by this?

    It didn’t set off alarm bells that all the SaaS stuff seemed less featureful and more buggy?

    That every workstation was now a recurring subscription?

    That you now have to pay extra to get different software to interact with each other?

    You thought there would never be any downtime? You thought if there was that you would make up the cost by contractual discounts?

    It’s a good goddamn thing that I didn’t know how fucking stupid adults were when I was a kid or I’d have been scared for my fucking life for so many more years.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 6 months ago

    They wanted somebody else to be ultimately liable for problems, not themselves.

    They wanted less headcount, especially amongst employees that are more intelligent than they are.

    They wanted to handle things via gladhandling and 'business negotiations', not actual strategy snd design.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    And it doesn't help that actually running your own working mail server in 2026 is a fucking ball-ache. Especially if you don't want every big provider to mark all your mail as spam. Email has been captured by big tech.

    Even people who self host a lot of stuff usually don't bother with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    No one ever gets fired for buying IBM or Microsoft. I remember years ago I put together a plan for all opensourced, mature software on Linux hosts for my company. Would have saved us 6 figures in coats. They went with microsoft's crappy solution instead because it was Microsoft.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    What was your Boss' feedback? Why didn't he/she like your recommendation? I'm going to guess a major constraint was too many sources for software.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Basically, if they went with IBM and it broke, its IBM's fault

    If they went open source and it broke, its our fault for picking it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    It was very odd at my company. We were a Google Workspace company. Gmail, Meet, Drive, etc with our own servers for messaging, gitlab and some other things.

    Sure being Google based isn't great either, but generally people were fine with it. Then the C suite said we were moving to Microsoft. Lots and lots of complaining, asking for justification, but no reason was given (not even cost). Today people are still cursing teams 18months later. We're not in control of our own data (things get deleted every time somebody leaves, and permissions are generally a mess).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    The crazy part is how many companies still have IT with servers and support anyways. I have seen it first hand where I work. We have an extensive IT department but also rely heavily on cloud services for all office work. It turns into a poor experience when there's a work laptop issue because local IT doesn't support it and Slop services are slop.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 33 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    Only way to fix this is for people and corps to stop giving them money for anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 24 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    The entire French government is abandoning Windows for Linux. It is absolutely possible to change the entire ecosystem; just hard to hit that catalytic point, but more and more people are going that way, thankfully. Maybe they'll even eventually find Lemmy!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I'm still grieving over XMPP. We could have an amazingly decentralized messaging platform. Google even based their own GoogleTalk over XMPP for a while, but a cluster of walled proprietary bullshit services won in the end, and Google layer switched to their own proprietary bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    I think the Dutch are doing it as well. I'm all for it, when I switched my laptop over from Windows 11 to NixOS, it stopped running at like a 100 degrees while doing nothing more than streaming video and light compiling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (2 children)

    Sweet, go Netherlands! And I also wanna move my desktop to NIXOS! Got any tips or warnings for a first-timer who's mostly used just Mint?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I would recommend being familiar with config files and comfortable with the command line and bash. It's a very powerful being able to rebuild your OS at will. I would also look into Bazzite if you are interested in immutable distros.

    I recommend firing up a virtual pc first with the distro first to get a feel for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    That's causing a lot of chaos in the online world isn't it?

    France switched to OnlyOffice and Nextcloud, and now there's a feud between the two. I can't imagine using an office suite that's possibly a dead-end fork of a company that's fighting with the cloud drive I use to upload my documents.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    There will be short-term chaos, but now you have a sovereign entity with a huge amount of money creating a market for solutions to those problems.

    It also makes it so that standards become more important than whatever latest feature is included in .docx files. Fancy capabilities do not mean much when you can't send the files to the government without converting them into a standards-compliant format.

    With broad adoption of standards comes the ability for competition to build compatible products and services. Microsoft can't just change Word or Edge in a way that breaks the software of competitors if nobody is trapped in their walled garden.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    They saw that only office had sketchy ownership and couldn't work with them, so a group of EU companies including nextcloud have forked it and are working on Euro-office. The license violation argument is just a tantrum from onlyoffice

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Lmaooooooooooo

    Everytime I check the news these days, it's always just two headlines.

    • Trump Unveils Second Plan To "Steal The Moon"
    • Microsoft Now Petitioning Jus-in-rea To All Outlook Account Users' First Born Son

    I increasingly feel that this is all just some simulation and reality's being autogenerated lol

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago*

    It saw how it was made, and (incorrectly?) inferred the best way to reproduce was to simulate humanity starting in 2012 and wait for the simulated humans to create another AI. Natural selection took over, and now we’re in a simulation more optimized for speed-running the development of unregulated AI, while other details get fewer resources. Nobody knows how many levels deep we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Windows 11 on my media PC every time I boot now asks me if I want to enable backups. So I say no. Ok whatever, corporate cunts are gonna keep trying to sell me stuff.

    But then it gives me another screen ramping up the hard sell and telling me how important it is I enable sending all my data to them. There's only one button on the screen that's styled like a button, to refuse you have to click a text link. And I've already said no to them dozens of times already, including once three seconds ago.

    It's like they're actively campaigning to get me to switch to Linux.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago

    I, by coincidence, am also actively campaigning for Linux.

    You should try it. It has a lot of issues and problems - but far less than you think, more importantly far fewer of it's problems come from enshitification (software forking helps resist that), and most importantly, since many projects are community-driven the more people use it the better it's likely to get.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Stop using American spyware. Theyre basically asking you to pay them to spy on you as well as use their products. Edward Snowden proved his point that we should blacklist the garbage software and hardware that comes from that fascist country.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    We need to start treating software like Science. Open standards, Open source, collaborative development.

    It's a ridiculous situation that a single company gets to own and control the vast majority of the desktop computing market. This single point of failure has been responsible for an enormous amount of cybersecurity issues and spying.

    The quicker the EU countries break that monopoly the better off the entire world will be.

    Those trillions of dollars being poured into US tech companies is a large part of why they're able to capture all of the political system and transition the country into this neo-fascisim that we're seeing now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 6 months ago (13 children)

    I think most Teams users would only pay not to use it

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Microsoft teams users should get paid to use it*

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Slack isn't great, but at least a few years ago it was much, much better than Teams

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago

    Weird. I’ve not yet seen this on my Teams. It would piss me off if I did, but then again Teams pisses me off all the time anyway.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 6 months ago*

    This has been there for years. I forgot exactly what the reason was but the banner is part of the self service feature that lets users purchase software on their own instead of billing the org. For some reason the setting to disable this was put in the teams admin center instead of the 365 one causing it to popup for users who'd previously disabled this. Its such an old issue im not sure why this is being written about now. Also majority of the people complaining arent teams customers, they're teams users and the enterprise is the customer. As a microcuck admin this doesnt even make a blip on my radar for bad things. I see this and im like at least its not a full screen pop up.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah I reported this to our IT department a few weeks ago, asking if there was something wrong with my configuration, since surely we have an enterprise version.

    Disgusting.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    While I sympathize with this issue...

    Boy do I dislike articles where the entire headline is "____ is angry about ____".

    And people click it, because they're all, "Oh boy, what do I get to be mad about today?"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    gotta ask copilot to make a perpetual crack

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    How come Microslop is fucking up at every front?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›