S3 is very ubiquitous as a storage backend, as both self-hosted versions like Minio and cloud providers such as Backblaze and iDrive are very common. Symfonium should support it as a media provider.
Right now, I have a few providers configured: a Navidrome instance running on a VPS, another Navidrome instance on my homelab, and a Nextcloud instance (WebDAV) running in a shared hosting environment.
Living in Asia, home internet is very expensive and unreliable, so my homelab sometimes suffers from speed and connection issues. Nextcloud’s WebDAV isn’t much better since it’s a shared environment.
The VPS is doing fine, but the price is higher than I’d like to spend on a music server. Nevertheless, I believe many S3 providers out there will outperform the VPS in terms of speed, since there is no additional software in-between Symfonium and the music.
The supported cloud providers are also not ideal since they require a subscription, and many users wouldn’t trust companies such as Google and Microsoft to not search through their files.
Advantages of S3:
- cheap (for users with small collections at least)
- does not require a separate server
Users would have another option to store their music that may be cheaper, more performant and more convenient, depending on their situation.
This is the thing that perplexes me the most. I’m not an app developer by any means but S3 is so popular yet none of the music apps out there currently support it as a backend. It’s also simple enough for me to use as a storage solution that allows me to sync my Obsidian notes between devices. Symfonium can become the first and best music player to have the ability to play files directly from S3 storage.