I recently launched a web app(B2C). But people say they're worried about putting their data in and being locked it in, and say that if you make it open source, I'll use it.<p>The problem is that this is a commercial project and I have to make a living with it(otherwise I'll starve). So I have to find a way to make money while being open source.<p>If I turn the project into open source, making money will be quite limited. But it doesn't seem wise that I'm more afraid of failing later so that not doing the thing to get more users now, considering that most startups just fail.<p>Should I make the product open source in order to grow now in any way?<p>(Perhaps one way is to get paid only for hosting the web app. But if I make it open source, hosting it is so easy that anyone can do it. If this will be really successful, someone could even distribute the hosted version for free (I'm working on the expectation that this will really be successful, so this assumption makes sense).<p>I'd like to know if there is another way to make money while making the product open source.)
The model I use for some for-profit things I do:<p>People who pay are your customers. Everyone else is free advertising / marketing / product or service testing / feedback group.<p>Note that "who pay" doesn't necessarily include "those who might pay" but can include "those who would pay".<p>The ones wanting your site open source more likely fall into the "might pay" group. I've used a plugin architecture to test the resolve of "might pay" vs "would pay" groups. By exposing APIs for at least import/export I removed the downside of "data held hostage". "Might pay" also frequently turns out to be "won't pay" most of the time.<p>I wouldn't recommend you open source your site unless you see a lot of potential for open source contribution or where review[1] is expected. I would suggest considering some sort of plugin or API for users. This is a good enough bridge for most people. Especially business to business linkages or even b2c.<p>[1] crypto is an example where review is worthwhile.
This may be a model to consider: <a href="https://github.com/sponsorware/docs" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/sponsorware/docs</a><p>Also, this may help you: <a href="https://opensource.guide/getting-paid/" rel="nofollow">https://opensource.guide/getting-paid/</a>
I don't think your problem is that it's not open-source.
Your problem is marketing and positioning.<p>For one thing, the copy on the website is not commercially oriented at all. I sense your earnestness, but copy needs to be clear and compelling. A reader needs to come out of it thinking - YES! this is just what I needed. You start off by mentioning a combination of two tools I've never heard of, and why would I even care, I'm reading about YOUR thing.
Look up Pedro Cortés on LinkedIn - he does a lot of video reviews of SaaS landing pages.<p>Two - and just as important - the use case is so abstract, you're counting on your users to imagine how they would use it. Instead, for a knowledge organizing tool, it should be pitched at the challenges people regularly have trying to organize knowledge. (For example, having a gazillion links and tabs. I could imagine this as something really helpful to solve that problem, especially if you can then export it all in some convenient structure [CSV, JSON].)
You've got the core of a product, but it's not quite a product yet, that's my impression at least. It could be though!
Best of luck
> worried about putting their data in and being locked it in<p>Your product got a problem and your consumer offered a solution. AFAIK, consumers' solution solves nothing. You should focus on fixing your problem instead of making it open source.
At least in my research, a common business problem is for a potential customer to ask for a feature, the business sinks a ton of resources to build the feature, and then the customer who asked for the feature is long gone.<p>So, IMO, I wouldn't go open source just because someone asked for it. There needs to be a much more compelling reason.<p>That being said: Depending on what your product is, and its architecture, there's nothing wrong with open sourcing part of your product. There's also nothing wrong with open sourcing it at a later date, or providing access to the source code to your customers under some kind of NDA.<p>Furthermore: What is your value proposition? Why do your customers pay you? Is your product really a product, or is it something you should develop on contract for someone? (And provide the source to the customer?) Is it something you really should open source and sell support?
You could provide an "Export Data" function, and even supply them with regular, scheduled exports.<p>Also - you can still license your product with a closed source license, but allow your customers to run "On-Premise" ... i.e. they can still run your product for themselves, and own their data, but are also paying you a license fee for the pleasure.<p>It's a different revenue model, but can work - afterall, this is how business was done with software, pre SAAS.<p>Often, companies who license in this way offer $xxx.xx per year - getting them support and upgrades for the year. Then, if they cancel after the year is up, they get to keep it - with no upgrades. It's important that your pricing model reflects this scenario.<p>One of the upsides of this model is that you have zero infrastructure costs.
I'll say sell a virtual Appliance (think GitHub Enterprise) for those who want to self-host. The truth is it's really hard for people to pay for what they get for free.<p>Open sourcing is an option but don't expect to make money right away - it's a longterm game.<p>I have some experience in monetizing open source, if you want to reach out. I developed osTicket (popular ticketing system) and ended up launching hosted version - which is doing well now. Was able to hire a team and we are profitable.
About 3 weeks ago we open-sourced PART of what our API will do.<p>We got 700+ stars on GitHub and 200 signups for beta just from the GitHub.<p><a href="https://github.com/kotartemiy/newscatcher" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/kotartemiy/newscatcher</a><p>Try to open source some part of your solution. Charge for some additional stuff. The open-source part will make you more credible in front of the clients.
> But people say<p>Does everyone say that? Then you have a problem.<p>Do just a few people say that? Then ignore them, or figure out a way for them to save their data off your site.
Your claim is dubious. People don't balk because of closed-source. They balk
because they don't know whether your SaaS is worth relinquishing their
personal data.<p>Until we know what it is your SaaS does, it's impossible to advise on open
sourcing. Generally, however, unless you've patented an algo, always open
source. For the last 15 years, code is cheap commodity, and getting cheaper.
The only companies capable of sustaining a proprietary model are big and old, which is
not you. You will need to feed yourself from high-touch service level agreements.