cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/6355296

I cannot count the number of times I’ve heard, “This product is X, but open source.”

And I’ll admit it—I’ve done the same when describing Lago. When I’m not in the “startup pitch” mood, I default to, “We’re Stripe Billing, but open source”. Or my co-founder might say, “We’re like an open-source Chargebee.” Frankly, it gets the job done.

Of course, if that’s all there was to us, we would have failed by now. What we’ve learned is that open-source tools can’t rely on being an open-source alternative to an already successful business. A developer can’t just imitate a product, tag on an MIT license, and call it a day. As awesome as [commercial] open source is, in a vacuum, it’s not enough to succeed.

  • blindsight@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Love it. Trust is also why I’m using Logseq for note taking and “Building a Second Brain”. I’m putting lots of sensitive personal and work information into it, so having plain text files stored locally in a standardized format is critical. My data is completely safe and future-proof.

    Ironically, the lack of vendor lock-in is likely going to lead to me sticking with Logseq for a very long time.

    I also pay/donate $5/mo to get access to their fully-encrypted cloud sync (and to support the project). I really like the idea of nobody having access to the content of my notes, as would be the case if I used Google Drive or OneDrive to sync plaintext files.

    As the article says, in cases where trust is important, open source has a significant advantage.