Damselfly Web vs Tube
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Damselfly Web
Server-based digital asset manager for large photo libraries
VS
Tube
Youtube-like, video Sharing App
| Feature | Damselfly Web | Tube |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Photo Management | Media Servers |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Python | |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 50 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 700 | — |
| First released | 2011 | 2023 |
| Replaces | Flickr, YouTube | Dailymotion, Vimeo, YouTube |
Why pick each one
Choose Tube if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Tiny footprint — runs in 50 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Damselfly Web or Tube better?
Neither is universally better. Damselfly Web has the larger community, while Tube is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Damselfly Web and Tube free and open-source?
Yes. Damselfly Web is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Tube under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Damselfly Web and Tube with Docker?
Damselfly Web: yes. Tube: check the project docs for container support.