36 ms·
Well, it's better than a lot of these "open source" product announcements that are actually not even close to open source. They just want to capture the marketi
by bityard 3y ago
Well, it's better than a lot of these "open source" product announcements that are actually not even close to open source. They just want to capture the marketing and SEO advantages of being labeled such. A lot of these have been popping up lately (especially around low/no-code and ML tools) and are actually under a proprietary or other non-open-source license. (Sometimes the founders even push back and say, "but it's on github, you can read all of it, that makes it open source according to my definition!")
Open Core is a fine concept and can work well, my only ask is that companies which do it clearly explain which features/functionality are in each version so that I don't have to sift through marketing drivel to figure it out myself. Or start using the software and click on an interesting button only to be told, "oh snap, you gotta pay for that."
- ssddanbrown 3y ago> Sometimes the founders even push back and say, "but it's on github, you can read all of it, that makes it open source according to my definition!" Last year I started to take an interest in these kinds of cases and created a repo to document such projects and their communications on the matter. Here's the repo if this is an area of intrigue for you too: https://github.com/ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases https://github.com/ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases