3 ms·

Just fuels my cynicism about "free" offerings. Sooner or later, companies decide they want to monetize as much as possible. I'm not saying it's unfair. But it

by adamc 5y ago

Just fuels my cynicism about "free" offerings. Sooner or later, companies decide they want to monetize as much as possible. I'm not saying it's unfair. But it makes me less interested in trying things just because they are "free".

nicce 5y ago
The current trend seems to be that sadly. You offer your services for free or for reduced price. Once you got enough users, you start taking all the money you can get.
ensignavenger 5y ago
Fortunately, GitLab is open core, and I have only used the features in it that are available as Open Source, so if I need to migrate, I can migrate to my own, self-host, system. And that is why I avoid free offerings that aren't open source. I also avoid paying for non-open source saas... because you never know when they will raise the price or make other changes that make it no longer work for you. Moral of the story is- use and buy open source! Not open core.
- candiddevmike 5y ago
  Someone has to maintain that software. Doesn't matter if it's open source, open core, or paid, someone has to maintain it. Just because something may not be open source doesn't mean you should shy away from it, on the contrary it might be better supported in the long run than an open source project that doesn't have a monetization/support model. People want to get paid for their work, this notion of OSS maintainers being saints who work for free may fly for small hobby projects, but once shit gets real and folks are slamming you for bug/feature requests it gets old, fast.
  - ensignavenger 5y ago
    I specifically mentioned paying for Open Source.
- adamc 5y ago
  In many situations, that is unrealistic. Somebody has to pay for me (or some other engineer) to set up and maintain said open source. It is often cheaper to just pay for the offering. There is business risk in being trapped in non-free, but sometimes that is still the prudent option. I like open source -- mostly because it can be debugged! -- but it's not the solution to every problem.
swearwolf 5y ago
If a company offers a free tier and a paid tier of their product, and the free tier is sufficiently useful, you can bet their salespeople hate it. Even when it’s the thing driving customers to their platform in the first place. They see it as unnecessary competition. While sales leadership may not be the most important people in the org chart, sales focused thinking permeates executive culture. Sooner or later, the that free tier will end up in their crosshairs. Some companies have the discipline to hold out longer, but when quarterly performance is at risk, it’s only a matter of time.

by adamc 5y ago

nicce 5y ago

The current trend seems to be that sadly. You offer your services for free or for reduced price. Once you got enough users, you start taking all the money you can get.

ensignavenger 5y ago

Fortunately, GitLab is open core, and I have only used the features in it that are available as Open Source, so if I need to migrate, I can migrate to my own, self-host, system. And that is why I avoid free offerings that aren't open source. I also avoid paying for non-open source saas... because you never know when they will raise the price or make other changes that make it no longer work for you. Moral of the story is- use and buy open source! Not open core.

candiddevmike 5y ago
Someone has to maintain that software. Doesn't matter if it's open source, open core, or paid, someone has to maintain it. Just because something may not be open source doesn't mean you should shy away from it, on the contrary it might be better supported in the long run than an open source project that doesn't have a monetization/support model. People want to get paid for their work, this notion of OSS maintainers being saints who work for free may fly for small hobby projects, but once shit gets real and folks are slamming you for bug/feature requests it gets old, fast.
- ensignavenger 5y ago
  I specifically mentioned paying for Open Source.
adamc 5y ago
In many situations, that is unrealistic. Somebody has to pay for me (or some other engineer) to set up and maintain said open source. It is often cheaper to just pay for the offering. There is business risk in being trapped in non-free, but sometimes that is still the prudent option. I like open source -- mostly because it can be debugged! -- but it's not the solution to every problem.

swearwolf 5y ago

If a company offers a free tier and a paid tier of their product, and the free tier is sufficiently useful, you can bet their salespeople hate it. Even when it’s the thing driving customers to their platform in the first place. They see it as unnecessary competition. While sales leadership may not be the most important people in the org chart, sales focused thinking permeates executive culture. Sooner or later, the that free tier will end up in their crosshairs. Some companies have the discipline to hold out longer, but when quarterly performance is at risk, it’s only a matter of time.