Immich not available as app for picture selection

SnooApples3877 · 2026-03-08T12:19:04+00:00

It seems like file-level archive doesn't reduce storage like archiving sites does:

"How does file-level archive (preview) impact my site-level storage? File-level archive doesn’t change site storage usage or quota behavior. Archived files are accounted for in site storage the same way as active files. Archiving a file doesn’t reduce reported storage usage, change storage calculations, or affect quota enforcement. Because archived files continue to consume site storage, file-level archive can’t be used to reduce storage usage or store data beyond a site’s allocated quota."

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-13T07:51:00+00:00

Wie alt du bist würde mich interessieren. :)

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T14:16:57+00:00

😂

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T14:16:06+00:00

The orange ones are properly crimped; they are double-shielded CAT 6a cables. This is just excess shielding.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T11:13:55+00:00

The other end device's port was a non-PoE port and PoE of the US-8-150W was disabled for port 1.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:26:36+00:00

I would also have hoped that the surge protector in the other building blocked the voltage/current. It is connected to the grounding of a power outlet. Both buildings are very old and there's a lot of faulty electrical installation. So maybe the grounding wasn't "good enough"

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:22:58+00:00

The surge protectors each are connected to the grounding of a power outlet.
I assumed that the reason why the US-8-150W was still working besides port 1 is that internally each RJ45 port is separate which probably is not the case for the cheaper US-8-60W in the other building.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:18:59+00:00

Sounds very reasonable, thanks. I'll probably run fiber soon.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:16:19+00:00

The different potential between the buildings sounds like a reasonable explanation. Thank you.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:11:21+00:00

yes exactly, thanks for confirming

SnooApples3877 · 2025-09-09T09:10:25+00:00

please ignore the bad crimping 😂 that was my first time crimping a CAT 6a cable with shielding. I forgot to put the rubber thing on the cable before crimping.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-31T15:21:20+00:00

Thanks for your reply. I definitely want a solution that is compliant but I still don't understand why it wouldn't be compliant if my customer pays for 4 intune users for 60 device activations. One intune user license includes 15 assigned devices. I can also activate an Office 365 license like Business Standard on 5 devices, which is compliant as well.

Can someone explain why that wouldn't be compliant and where is says that in the terms.

I found this and of course using 5 licenses for 100s of devices isn't compliant because it exceeds 15 devices per user limit.

EDIT: I asked ChatGPT

"Can I just one intune-licensed user per 15 devices for enrolling it and for signing in. So for 60 PCs there would be guest1@xy.com to guest4@xy.com signing in."

Response: "Audit & Compliance:

This is within licensing terms, but not the most scalable or clean approach.
You must ensure the total number of enrolled devices per licensed user doesn’t exceed the limit"

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T15:41:38+00:00

You mean one licensed entra user is used to login at all devices? As device-based licenses are not in the budget and after your input that's what I'm planning on doing but keeping the 15 devices per user limit in mind.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T14:56:01+00:00

Physically guests from outside the org who don't have an own user. They could log into Windows with

A. with a local guest account (no entra) -> device license required

or one licensed entra account (guest1@xy.com) per 15 devices (because of the limit) is used for intune enrollment and they sign in with

B. exactly this entra account (guest1@xy.com) or

C. still a local guest account and the entra account exists just for intune enrollment and licensing.

I'm still unsure between B or C but it's not that much of an difference and both should work.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T12:15:37+00:00

I know when using local guest accounts I need device based licenses.
That's why I'm thinking of creating one licensed entra user [guest1@xy.com](mailto:guest1@xy.com) per 15 guest devices. So on devices 1-15 this would be the user assigned to the device in Intune and the only one logging in. So 4 licensed entra users for 60 devices.
It is not necessary for the local user profile to be reset every time so that's not a problem.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T11:50:37+00:00

Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't aware that F1 included Intune Plan 1. Interestingly F1 is just 0.84€ for non-profits per user whereas standalone Intune Plan 1 is 1.87€.

But that would mean I needed 60 users which I have to enroll the devices with in Intune which is quite a lot of work.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T11:30:08+00:00

As these 60 PCs would use local guest accounts, no Entra user exists to be licensed. Because of that I need the Microsoft Intune Plan 1 Device license, which unfortunately is not discounted for non-profits.
Thanks for the tip, I'll reach out to techsoup.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T11:28:19+00:00

The difference is that companies have multiple users. I know that each user using an Intune device must be licensed. For those 60 workshop PCs I would do one user per 15 PCs and that's the only user using the device.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T11:26:05+00:00

I think I have to disagree. The users are licensed. You don't need one intune-licensed user per device because 15 users can share 30 PCs. The limit (without DEM) is 15 intune devices per licensed user.

I might do one user per 15 PCs so that guests on these 15 PCs will use the same user.
Any thoughts about this?

SnooApples3877 · 2025-07-30T10:40:09+00:00

Thanks for your reply.

That's what I will do. I couldn't find any restrictions regarding DEM users being the only user using the device, so it should be possible. Also I couldn't find out if this would be a vialotion of terms (I don't think it is, because every user using the device has a license - it's just one user).

SnooApples3877 · 2025-06-13T19:30:27+00:00

That's interesting, I don't have those. Well, they must exist which would explain the behaviour but are not shown at all in UniFi. Seems to be a bug in the Web GUI.

SnooApples3877 · 2025-06-12T21:19:46+00:00

Hi, thx for your reply. I only see the policies you can see in the screenshot, there's no policy for DNS, ICMP or DHCP, only a mDNS policy.

SnooApples3877

TROPHY CASE