3 ms·

If I was running a company of any meaningful size, I would hesitate to allow any 3rd party to become the OS of my company. The OS of my company should be at th

If I was running a company of any meaningful size, I would hesitate to allow any 3rd party to become the OS of my company. The OS of my company should be at the very core of my company - highly customized to give me an edge rather than to level the playing field with my competitors. And that means becoming very good at creating and maintaining the internal IT vision and expertise to make that possible. And that in turn means that I better have amazing IT capability in my leadership. The corollary of that is: Without amazing IT leadership, my company is living on borrowed time, eventually to be crushed by dependencies on one or more 3rd parties like Oracle, SAP, Salesforce, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon and their ilk. So the only way I’d accept strategic 3rd party software into my company, would be, if I have the ability to fully fork it and take it in-house at any time of my choosing, with at most a very manageable and finite remaining financial obligation after the fork. If Twenty.com has a business model, that can accommodate that, it might be onto something special.

charlesTwenty 3y ago
Thanks for the feedback! We have been discussing this a lot. Here is one of the option we have in mind for the upcoming months and we would love to know if this could work in your opinion. Data ownership: a) Twenty makes the distinction between Twenty owned data models (People, Company, Pipeline) and your own data models. b) Let's say you use the cloud version: you can plug your own external database as a datasource. You would be able to describe your own data model through config file, Twenty would understand it and will keep in sync your data with the one stored in Twenty. Your data will remain the source of truth regarding whatever is tied to this datasource. c) So, if you wish to switch to self-hosted, you can, you will have to transfer Twenty owned data to into your own instance through exports / imports. You would not have to transfer your own data as this was already configured as an external data-source. Extensibility: a) Twenty is exposing a GraphQL API on top of your data that you can leverage. It doesn't matter if you are using the cloud version or if you are self-hosting it. b) We are thinking about a plugin system. To enable that, we plan to provide developers API for both FE and BE that will keep consistent between the different versions of Twenty (of course, they will likely be some breaking changes between major versions but hopefully minimal so you can keep using the latest version of Twenty). c) you can build anything you want using these 3 apis, either an external tool leveraging the GraphQL API, either a front-end plugin on FE API, either a backend plugin on BE API. You will be able to deploy your plugins to the cloud version (we will make sure they only impact your own tenant, which is challenging technically). Here too, if you choose to move to self-hosting, you will obviously also be able to write and deploy your own plugins on your self-hosted instance So, if we provide stable APIs and are able to safely run custom plugins into the cloud, it doesn't matter if you are using the cloud version or the self-hosted version. As both are using the exact same source code, you should be able to switch between the two quite easily. If you self-host, you completely own your data, if you use the cloud you don't but you can still fully benefit from Twenty APIs and extensibility.
- noizejoy 3y ago
  Good to see that you're spending quality thought on differentiating by reducing the lock-in problem generally associated with the software/service space you're aiming to compete in. My initial reaction is that the ideas you listed around data ownership and and extensibility hold considerable promise and allow a company to grow not only with you and your other customers, but also to create and grow competitive distinction. And if you refrain from being sneaky about locking your customers in, it would probably limit the enthusiasm of most potential investors, but it would also be a chance to have much less antagonistic customer relationships and a much more likable public sentiment over the long haul. And that gives me pause to wonder, if it might make sense to strengthen the messaging around the fact that you're not taking your customers hostage like most(all?) of the big incumbents. Is you current messaging possibly burying the lede? You're most certainly picking an interesting time to start such an ambitious project. But then again, maybe -- exactly while so much is in upheaval -- now is a great time to do so! My warmest wishes not just for success, but even more for a fun and rewarding journey! p.s. I noticed, what I assume to be a small typo section on your github page: > For the developer community: > A CRM that ban self-hosted for free, on your own network and close to your data sources Was the intent to have something like this? A CRM that can be self-hosted for free, on your own network and close to your data sources
  - charlesTwenty 3y ago
    Yes, as an engineer I am rooting for opensource and to build something that last beyond the company. I also think it will force us to install a good company culture centered around transparency and give back. They are many example of successful businesses that are emerging while being fully/mostly opensource (Hasura is a good example). It might be naive but we think it's the right time and we can get investors on board with that. Thanks a lot for the warm wishes And thanks for the typo! Fixed!

charlesTwenty 3y ago

Thanks for the feedback! We have been discussing this a lot. Here is one of the option we have in mind for the upcoming months and we would love to know if this could work in your opinion. Data ownership: a) Twenty makes the distinction between Twenty owned data models (People, Company, Pipeline) and your own data models. b) Let's say you use the cloud version: you can plug your own external database as a datasource. You would be able to describe your own data model through config file, Twenty would understand it and will keep in sync your data with the one stored in Twenty. Your data will remain the source of truth regarding whatever is tied to this datasource. c) So, if you wish to switch to self-hosted, you can, you will have to transfer Twenty owned data to into your own instance through exports / imports. You would not have to transfer your own data as this was already configured as an external data-source. Extensibility: a) Twenty is exposing a GraphQL API on top of your data that you can leverage. It doesn't matter if you are using the cloud version or if you are self-hosting it. b) We are thinking about a plugin system. To enable that, we plan to provide developers API for both FE and BE that will keep consistent between the different versions of Twenty (of course, they will likely be some breaking changes between major versions but hopefully minimal so you can keep using the latest version of Twenty). c) you can build anything you want using these 3 apis, either an external tool leveraging the GraphQL API, either a front-end plugin on FE API, either a backend plugin on BE API. You will be able to deploy your plugins to the cloud version (we will make sure they only impact your own tenant, which is challenging technically). Here too, if you choose to move to self-hosting, you will obviously also be able to write and deploy your own plugins on your self-hosted instance So, if we provide stable APIs and are able to safely run custom plugins into the cloud, it doesn't matter if you are using the cloud version or the self-hosted version. As both are using the exact same source code, you should be able to switch between the two quite easily. If you self-host, you completely own your data, if you use the cloud you don't but you can still fully benefit from Twenty APIs and extensibility.

noizejoy 3y ago
Good to see that you're spending quality thought on differentiating by reducing the lock-in problem generally associated with the software/service space you're aiming to compete in. My initial reaction is that the ideas you listed around data ownership and and extensibility hold considerable promise and allow a company to grow not only with you and your other customers, but also to create and grow competitive distinction. And if you refrain from being sneaky about locking your customers in, it would probably limit the enthusiasm of most potential investors, but it would also be a chance to have much less antagonistic customer relationships and a much more likable public sentiment over the long haul. And that gives me pause to wonder, if it might make sense to strengthen the messaging around the fact that you're not taking your customers hostage like most(all?) of the big incumbents. Is you current messaging possibly burying the lede? You're most certainly picking an interesting time to start such an ambitious project. But then again, maybe -- exactly while so much is in upheaval -- now is a great time to do so! My warmest wishes not just for success, but even more for a fun and rewarding journey! p.s. I noticed, what I assume to be a small typo section on your github page: > For the developer community: > A CRM that ban self-hosted for free, on your own network and close to your data sources Was the intent to have something like this? A CRM that can be self-hosted for free, on your own network and close to your data sources
- charlesTwenty 3y ago
  Yes, as an engineer I am rooting for opensource and to build something that last beyond the company. I also think it will force us to install a good company culture centered around transparency and give back. They are many example of successful businesses that are emerging while being fully/mostly opensource (Hasura is a good example). It might be naive but we think it's the right time and we can get investors on board with that. Thanks a lot for the warm wishes And thanks for the typo! Fixed!