I have 113k images going back two decades. The screenshot above doesn’t include RAW files, with those included I’m around 2 terabytes of total storage.

• Immich is in fact a photo album, and a damn good one at that.
• Immich keeps google’s grubby paws off my photos. I don’t need or want anyone datamining every precious memory I have in order to modify my behavior to their benefit.
• Immich shares photos between my wife and my phones.
• Immich ensures that if I lose my phone, my photos aren’t lost.
• Immich lets me easily re edit and re-export RAW files without creating duplicates or losing metadata
• Immich lets me conveniently share photos with friends and family without requiring them to have an account anywhere.

Mostly I self-host things when I want data synchronized between multiple devices, or I don’t want to lose it in the event I lose the device it was created on.

Also, like, phone screens are tiny and typing on them is terrible? Why would you want to do everything on your phone?

If encryption is enabled, don’t worry about it. Otherwise ‘dd if=/dev/zero of=definitely-the-bad-drive-do-not-fuck-this-up bs=4M’

Agreed, that should be many tens of pages not one. Also the mobile layout isn’t very good. I think it’s important to remember that normies use their phones for almost everything.

Got a 3 year old kid with another on the way. I just need it to be reliable so the kid can watch Sesame Street and the lights keep working.

I definitely see your point, but the difference is that it’s one thing to learn. Once you know docker, you can deploy and manage anything.

Cons of containers are slightly worse disk and memory consumption.

Pros:

• ease of installation
• declarative, consistent configuration
• security some degree of sandboxing
• dependency management is solved

Stick with the containers

but there is a reason i just explained it to you

Ok but is there room for the idea that your intuitions are incorrect? Plenty of things in the world are counter-intuitive. ‘docker-compose up -d’ works the same whether it’s one container or fifty.

Computer resources are measured in bits and clock cycles, not the number of containers and volumes. It’s entirely possible (even likely) that an all-in-one container will be more resource-heavy than the same services split across multiple containers. Logging from an all-in-one will be a jumbled mess, troubleshooting issues or making changes will be annoying, it’s worse in every way except the length of output from ‘docker ps’

I can see why editing config files is annoying, but why exactly are two services and volumes in a docker-compose file any more difficult to manage than one?

I disagree with pretty much all of this, you are trading maintainability and security for easy setup. Providing a docker-compose file accomplishes the same thing without the sacrifice

• separate volumes for configuration, data, and cache because I might want to put them in different places and use different backup strategies. Config and db on SSD, large data on spinning rust, for example.
• separate container for the database because the official database images are guaranteed to be better maintained than whatever every random project includes in their image
• separate networks because putting your reverse proxy on a different network from your database is just prudent