by scapecast on 7/10/24, 1:57 PM with 18 comments
Conventional wisdom says that you should build a large community of users, and then you'll figure out how you monetize a subset of those users. The standard argument that follows is that you'll offer a SaaS version of the open source for those users who don't want to deal with self-hosting.
I'm not sure that argument holds. If you have a technical user who is perfectly capable of self-hosting, and I would argue even gets joy out of doing so, why would that user let go of that joy and pay up?
The inevitable path then is a license change (Business Source, anyone?), or even going entirely closed-source (e.g. Panther did that)
Curious to hear how everyone thinks about this topic, both from a user and provider perspective.
by sircastor on 7/12/24, 3:57 PM
Many years ago, I installed and managed OpenWRT on my routers, and FreeNAS on a home-built NAS. It was fun and interesting for a while, but I grew tired of the maintenance and keeping up. It had moved from hobby and became a job. I was full-time network administrator for my own house.
People are infinitely variable. Some will get a lot of fulfillment out of doing it themselves. Some will not. Some will lose interest in self-hosting, but still want your service. There might even be someone who makes an OSS version of the services that you offer for money (see SorryCypress)
Avoid getting too wrapped up in the psychology of your users.
by jqpabc123 on 7/10/24, 2:58 PM
Attempting to monetize after the fact often involves some sort of ethically questionable, bait and switch type behavior.
by zzo38computer on 7/11/24, 12:08 AM
- Priority support (or even, any support at all, if you prefer to not offer any free support at all)
- Preinstalled hosted instances of the software (in case the user does not want to set it up themself on their own computer)
- Physical media, e.g. CDs and DVDs
- Printed documentation
- Customized software solutions (if the user does not wish to modify it by themself)
- Precompiled binaries (possibly, only when using commercial "app stores" e.g. in iPhone/iPad)
- An explicit license to use it in case your company requires an explicit license (this is how it is done with SQLite, which is public domain, but charges money for a "Warranty of Title" in case you need that)
- Computer hardware designed to work with the software
You can combine multiples of the above. (Which are appropriate would depend on what your business is; some are not appropriate for some kinds of products/services.) (In some cases, I might even be willing to pay for some of the above, e.g. for some software, I might like to purchase printed documentaion if it is available, even if I can also access it for free on the computer.)
There are other possibilities, but I think that many of them will be unethical and should be avoided.
You do not have to force everyone to pay; someone who does it by themself will do so, and might refuse to pay anyways even if you do change the license (might instead prefer to no longer use it, or write their own, etc).
by Ologn on 7/12/24, 4:31 AM
Google releases the Android Open Source Project, the basis of things like LineageOS. Facebook releases React under the MIT license. These are not open source companies, but they release major software under FLOSS licenses.
by bruce511 on 7/12/24, 5:36 AM
This is really just wishful wisdom. Conventional wisdom starts by deciding what value you can add to society and who will pay for it.
Doing the work now, and figuring out the business later isn't a strategy that often ends I success.
As a provider I create OSS out of the excess created selling commercial software to customers. The OSS stuff doesn't pay for my coffee, never mind anything else.
by grayscale123 on 7/15/24, 2:07 AM
However, I also have experience of seeing "open core" work as a good business model for several providers. In a complex setup, while the core can be self-hosted for smaller workloads, the need to run production-scale workloads means you need to buy the SaaS license from the provider. Gitlab comes to mind as an example.
by austin-cheney on 7/11/24, 1:05 AM
* retail
* advertisements
* subscription
* partnership/affiliate
* white label
* data broker
* consultant/freelancer
* resource timeshare
* licensing
* support fees
Normally business models focus on how to do business, this could include sales or operations, not build revenue. Examples of business models might include:
* security, threat analysis, and risk management framework
* talent identification/acquisition model
* regulatory compliance policy
* performance/research analysis model
* total cost of ownership
* procedures for operations and plans
* knowledge management and internal engagement
* systems architecture
by ecesena on 7/11/24, 4:35 AM
It’s hard because it’s hardware, but generally speaking people are happy to pay for a finished product vs build themselves (which is also more expensive without economy of scale). Until you reach the scale of an Arduino, then knock offs become an issue.
So, I guess, up to a certain scale.
by petabyt on 7/10/24, 3:43 PM
by fallinditch on 7/10/24, 11:25 PM
by jfoster on 7/11/24, 2:19 AM
That said, perhaps anyone using NextJS is inclined toward convenience rather than deriving joy from self-hosting.
by r2b2 on 7/10/24, 3:45 PM
Ex. Bitwarden, Infisical, Docker, etc.
by JSR_FDED on 7/10/24, 2:16 PM
by jarule on 7/10/24, 3:07 PM