TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: What's the deal with the "open-source SaaS" trend these days?

27 点作者 chdaniel超过 1 年前
Hi HN,<p>I&#x27;m a non-technical founder.<p>I&#x27;ve built a couple of SaaS companies, many products, etc. Some failed, some allow me to conduct my living.<p>I&#x27;m non-technical so please consider you&#x27;re explaining this to a Neanderthal:<p>What&#x27;s the deal with this increasing trend of open-source SaaS companies?<p>Sure I know of WordPress and what have you - but what&#x27;s the implication of e.g. Cal dot com, who&#x27;s a Calendly alternative, but it&#x27;s open source and it&#x27;s <i>clearly a business</i>?<p>For instance, is it that: • people contribute to it (since it&#x27;s open-source) and the founders can therefore build a better product... • ...whilst the PEOPLE also get a better free product, if they so choose to run it on their instance?<p>Is the above true? Because if so, I get it - it&#x27;s a win-win, and the founders &quot;tap into&quot; a bigger pool of &quot;effort&quot;, if that makes sense.<p>What other implications are there? Thanks so much.

10 条评论

HuwFulcher超过 1 年前
It&#x27;s what you&#x27;ve stated but also there&#x27;s an ethical side to it. Many founders want to give the option for competent users to self-host, only way to do that is open up the source code. They could go completely down the open source route and rely on donations but that doesn&#x27;t usually cut it. The business model then is to provide a managed service where the founders deal with the hosting, updating, security, etc.
评论 #39130615 未加载
a2code超过 1 年前
Consider you are the author of a SaaS. You realize that your product does not have business value in some sense. By open sourcing your SaaS, you minimize the business side and emphasize the technology side. &quot;Look at this cool open-source SaaS I&#x27;ve built. I make for a great Software Engineer.&quot;
评论 #39134190 未加载
chadash超过 1 年前
Personally, an open-source project lets me take a little bit more risk on a startup&#x27;s product. If the company goes under, I can always host myself, even if it&#x27;s a bit of a pain.
ezekg超过 1 年前
If you want to hear if from the horse&#x27;s mouth, I wrote about it a lot more here [0], when I open sourced my business last year.<p>But if you don&#x27;t want to read the entire post, here&#x27;s the tl;dr:<p>1. My (larger) customers wanted the source code for auditing purposes. I was using code escrow for larger customers and it was annoying to manage. If some can have the code, why not all?<p>2. My customers wanted me to eliminate my bus-factor of 1. If I got hit by a bus, the business died. Now it can live on and I can grow on my terms.<p>3. My customers wanted to have an &quot;out&quot; if the business ever decided to shut down. Now they have that &quot;out&quot; via self-hosting&#x2F;forking.<p>4. My customers wanted me to show them they can trust me with their vital business data, and open source builds trust.<p>5. I was tired of dealing with copycats (some verbatim stealing my API schema and docs). Hopefully, moving forward, nobody will want to use a closed source copycat of an open source project.<p>6. My (larger) customers wanted to self-host for compliance purposes (mostly i.r.t. where data is hosted and accessed). If some can self-host, why not all?<p>As you can see, most of my reasons (but not all) stem from what my customers wanted. I didn&#x27;t open source my SaaS for community, or to get free work, or to tap into &quot;a bigger pool of effort.&quot; I did it because being closed source was a major pain point for me and my customers. So I took notes over the first 7 years, and I finally reacted. And I&#x27;ve only seen positives thus far (which I&#x27;ll write more about later this year), so my initial fear wasn&#x27;t warranted. I encourage others to do the same.<p>(<i>My</i> reasons aren&#x27;t going to Cal&#x27;s reasons. Peer wrote about <i>his</i> reasons here [1].)<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;keygen.sh&#x2F;blog&#x2F;all-your-licensing-are-belong-to-you&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;keygen.sh&#x2F;blog&#x2F;all-your-licensing-are-belong-to-you&#x2F;</a><p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cal.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;longevity" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cal.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;longevity</a>
iFelix超过 1 年前
The shift to commercial open source with a hybrid financing model is what&#x27;s driving the trend. It makes it possible to get enough funding to build high-quality software while bringing the costs down for everyone.<p>We&#x27;re doing just that with our own CRM [1]. It couldn&#x27;t have been a side-project as you need thousands of engineering hours to build something decent. But with only a few millions in engineering spend, we&#x27;ll have something that is genuinely as good as the products from billion dollar behemoths. Open Source software will never be able to monetize as well as closed-source. We might only capture 10% of the value we create. But being open source inherently creates strong network effects that tends to push towards a limited number of winners, and the addressable market in CRM is so big that it&#x27;s still possible to build a multi-billion dollar company while massively driving the costs down for everyone.<p>It&#x27;s kind of like the Prisoner&#x27;s Dilemma: If every company keep their software proprietary, they can all make moderate growth&#x2F;profit. But if one goes open-source, they could attract a large community, drive innovation, and potentially reap long-term profits while reducing the overall market size.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;twentyhq&#x2F;twenty">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;twentyhq&#x2F;twenty</a>
acuozzo超过 1 年前
Instead of asking why, perhaps it&#x27;s better to ask: Why not?<p>Consider Bitwarden, for instance. Does it have any real competitors running on a quick rebrand of their stack?<p>Better yet, as a non-technical founder, why haven&#x27;t you stood up a successful Bitwarden competitor? The secret sauce is right there and you can contract-out the rebranding for like $20.<p>It&#x27;s rare to have a tech mote nowadays and without a tech mote competitors will pop up whether or not you choose to go F&#x2F;OSS.
max_超过 1 年前
It&#x27;s makes me confident to depend and use a service because I know that if it shuts down.<p>I can simply run a self hosted solution.<p>This is why I love Bitwarden and Source Hut so much.
评论 #39130239 未加载
thinkingemote超过 1 年前
Where is the value of a business? Is it the idea (or ideas written as code) or the execution (or service)?<p>What do people pay for? The code, or the things the code does?<p>What is valuable to customers? Is trust more important than the unknown? Is expertise valued?<p>What other things apart from code makes up a business? For example customer service, marketing, etc.
评论 #39128019 未加载
comprev超过 1 年前
Some projects have varying licenses to extend their open source product beyond a bare bones system. Some companies pick &quot;open core&quot; license models which lock enterprise features behind a paywall.<p>For example a collaborative software text editor might require connections to a central database for synchronising the various users. The code to handle these connections might not be available, or at least heavily restricted through licensing from using in a business environment.<p>The SaaS company makes money by providing the infrastructure to allow users to actually collaborate with others. Until then it&#x27;s simply a stand alone desktop text editor.<p>Alternatively the company may offer basic collaborative features which only support one 3rd party auth provider and synchronise via the public internet.<p>A customer might want on-prem networking only and Active Directory auth, and will pay for these features.
XCSme超过 1 年前
It&#x27;s mostly a marketing tactic.<p>People find your free product, you lock some core features behind a paywall or make the cloud offerring easier to use, so people switch from free to paid. It&#x27;s a lead magnet.