It combines YouTube and Twitch into one platform in a really intuitive way. Has its own comment system and rating system for videos. No ads obviously. It’s a whole fucking thing and it’s incredible.
So what’s the actual problem is? It’s just a front end to other platforms, they will not lock you in and than break the app. You can use it and if it goes bad you switch to other front end. I would understand the ‘not free’ objections if it was a tool you introduce into our workflow that would later be hard to replace. Here there’s no lock in. What do you care if it can be forked?
Some people (including me) care about software freedom. The ability to fork and redistribute software while continuing to publish any changes to the code is great.
Not using an open source license but a source available license is not something that I like to see, but it’s their right to do so. There’re enough open source YouTube frontends like NewPipe and LibreTube.
PS: What I really don’t like is them using the term open source. Open source is a well known term that’s well defined. Source available describes exactly what this app is without implying the freedoms associated with open source.
With some tools open source has many advantages, with others it’s mostly about transparency. IMHO this case is the latter case. You won’t gain much by being able to fork it. I don’t like it when people criticize projects only because those don’t align with their personal philosophy. Don’t use it if you don’t like it but there’s really no good reason for others to avoid it.
All people have their priorities. For most people on this community it’s probably being free of cost but for some freedom is also important.
I also don’t recommend against using software that’s not perfect according to my personal philosophy, but I think it’s important to point out any advantages and disadvanages so that anyone can decide for themselves. As I said, most people on here won’t care about the difference between source available and open source.
it’s mostly about transparency
Good point. If they’d use the term source available I’d have nothing to say. The reason I’m so pedantic is because increasingly businesses try to gain good publicity by calling their software open source while using Business Source License and similar, which are source available licenses.
I’ll definitly follow this project and look where it’s going.
Also PS You are looking at the universal APK, which contains the binaries for all CPU structures. OBVIOUSLY the one that’s meant for your phone will be smaller. Mine was like 170 mb
Dude it’s basically nothing. Mp3s have been/could be considered small for like 10+ years. It’s much larger than I think it should be but it’s not like it’s an unreasonable space hog. File sizes have been inflating steadily for years as internet speeds increase worldwide
GrayJay just launched and it’s fucking fantastic.
It combines YouTube and Twitch into one platform in a really intuitive way. Has its own comment system and rating system for videos. No ads obviously. It’s a whole fucking thing and it’s incredible.
https://grayjay.app/index.html
and it’s not free software. only source available with a license that doesn’t allow forking.
And they do it so they can take down malicious copycats on Google Play
Which they could already do, with basic trademark law and just forcing all derivatives to be non-commercial. Cyrptominers are commercial.
Forcing all derivatives work to be non-commercial is incompatible with being open source.
https://opensource.org/osd/
Though I agree that they can already prevent usage of their app name with trademark laws.
So what’s the actual problem is? It’s just a front end to other platforms, they will not lock you in and than break the app. You can use it and if it goes bad you switch to other front end. I would understand the ‘not free’ objections if it was a tool you introduce into our workflow that would later be hard to replace. Here there’s no lock in. What do you care if it can be forked?
Some people (including me) care about software freedom. The ability to fork and redistribute software while continuing to publish any changes to the code is great.
Not using an open source license but a source available license is not something that I like to see, but it’s their right to do so. There’re enough open source YouTube frontends like NewPipe and LibreTube.
PS: What I really don’t like is them using the term open source. Open source is a well known term that’s well defined. Source available describes exactly what this app is without implying the freedoms associated with open source.
https://opensource.org/osd/
With some tools open source has many advantages, with others it’s mostly about transparency. IMHO this case is the latter case. You won’t gain much by being able to fork it. I don’t like it when people criticize projects only because those don’t align with their personal philosophy. Don’t use it if you don’t like it but there’s really no good reason for others to avoid it.
All people have their priorities. For most people on this community it’s probably being free of cost but for some freedom is also important.
I also don’t recommend against using software that’s not perfect according to my personal philosophy, but I think it’s important to point out any advantages and disadvanages so that anyone can decide for themselves. As I said, most people on here won’t care about the difference between source available and open source.
Good point. If they’d use the term source available I’d have nothing to say. The reason I’m so pedantic is because increasingly businesses try to gain good publicity by calling their software open source while using Business Source License and similar, which are source available licenses.
I’ll definitly follow this project and look where it’s going.
Except you have to give one app credentials for all of your platforms. It’s also 335MB!?
Credentials? What are you talking about? There is not sign in or signup required for the app at all.
It’s the universal build. Download for your architecture (arm64) which is 127 mb
Time to upgrade if your phone can’t handle 350MB lol
Time to upgrade your SSD because the new call of duty is 175GB lol.
What a fucking mindset you have on you there 💀
I get what you’re trying to say but 350 MB is close to nothing in 2023.
What are you talking about, it’s about 110 songs with a good enconder, that’s like 8~10 albums.
That’s close to nothing in 2023. It’s not 2003 where 110 songs was huge.
Have you looked at the size of most apps recently? 350mb is slightly on the big side, but nothing crazy.
I’m not saying it in relative terms, but in absolute terms. 350 MB is lots of space that can be useful, it’s certainly not “close to nothing”.
Like, I fear to imagine how much shipping fic would I have to publish annually in order to fill 350 MB in my lifetime…
Also PS You are looking at the universal APK, which contains the binaries for all CPU structures. OBVIOUSLY the one that’s meant for your phone will be smaller. Mine was like 170 mb
Dude it’s basically nothing. Mp3s have been/could be considered small for like 10+ years. It’s much larger than I think it should be but it’s not like it’s an unreasonable space hog. File sizes have been inflating steadily for years as internet speeds increase worldwide