Find all the best dev content at https://daily.dev/fireshipRemember, for every paid SaaS, there is a free open-source self-hosted alternative. Let's take a l...
  • llothar@lemmy.ml
    0·
    17 days ago

    Remember, for every paid SaaS, there is a free open-source self-hosted alternative

    CAD. Free solutions compared to commercial ones (SolidWorks, Inventor, Fusion360, Onshape) are like comparing Photoshop to an open source Paint clone.

  • thesmokingman@programming.dev
    0·
    17 days ago

    It’s very misleading to say “paying for software is stupid” and not consider the total cost of ownership. TCO includes things like infrastructure and maintenance. As an exec, I am constantly faced with two choices: free software that might do what I want or paid software that sort of does what I want. At face value, you would immediately tell me to get the free stuff. That’s where you miss TCO.

    (Read the last paragraph if you think the business lens is bullshit)

    Every FOSS solution I run requires me to deploy and maintain it. I only have so many hours in the day so at some threshold I have to hire more and more people to deploy and maintain. Integrating? That’s on me too because I’m using free software so now I need a resource to glue things together. My “free” option actually costs a portion of my engineering resources. I’m also on the hook for failures. Running my own ERP? I need to have support staff on-call to handle outages.

    Every paid solution I run costs can require some of those things. Let’s ignore paid licenses and just focus on things I can completely outsource. This means I’m no longer on the hook for deployment and maintenance, so if I can show the cost of the paid software is less than my TCO, it’s a better deal. If I have a good relationship with the vendor, I might be able to delegate my integration needs to their product pipeline. I might be able to purchase a support contract that’s cheaper than running my own.

    At some point every company will outgrow certain software. It’s a constant reevaluation of the costs of paid vs TCO of free and when I need to spend resources making it do something it doesn’t. A managed telemetry stack like Sumo or New Relic allows me to scale quickly but cheaply until I have the revenue to build an in-house team to instrument fucking everything.

    The exact same logic applies to my time. I could run free everything. That comes with a higher TCO (usually). I say this as someone who has rebuilt dot files repos on the dot every three years and been running Linux since you could get it in a book at B Dalton at the indoor shopping mall so my tolerance for personal TCO is very high. However, I don’t change my own oil. It’s free! I could do it myself! I don’t want to. I buy certain things, like software, in my personal life because the TCO of FOSS is higher than I want to pay. I have outgrown Windows and Mac so I have some level required cost in Linux. I pay for some things like storage and routing solutions even though I could build and deploy and maintain all of that myself. Sometimes I just want my shit to work and not have to do it myself.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      0·
      17 days ago

      This is a great perspective to voice. Sometimes those of us who are staunch FOSS advocates can lose sight of the big picture. If one’s goal is to be, for example, an eCommerce software vendor, it probably doesn’t make sense to build and maintain your own DB stack or Internet infrastructure even though it is technically feasible. The money and resources needed to maintain that stuff will take away from the ability to improve and maintain the eConmerce application.

    • howrar@lemmy.ca
      0·
      16 days ago

      An important component of the cost to consider is how long we expect a company to support a piece of software, and how much it would cost to migrate everything when they drop support. FOSS wins in this regard, especially if you can get a support contact with the devs.

      • thesmokingman@programming.dev
        0·
        16 days ago

        Neither wins here. I cannot tell you how many libraries I have had to replace because FOSS devs move on. It’s probably greater than the number of products I’ve had to abandon for lack of support but I’m not sure what that is at a percentage level. In the DevOps world everything burns constantly, paid and free.

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          0·
          16 days ago

          It wins in the sense that you still have access to the software and code, and you have the option to either hire someone new to maintain it or switch to something else. Closed source proprietary software only leaves you with the latter choice.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    0·
    17 days ago

    I don’t like statements like “paying for software is stupid”. Developers for Free software have this long standing issue that many people don’t want to pay them. Paying and using closed source proprietary software is stupid, especially if there is good free and open source libre alternatives.

    We need to figure out a monetization plan how to make people want to pay for free software. This will not only incentivize doing Free software, it also makes it possible for people making a living out of it. Everyone benefits from it!

  • Joël de Bruijn@lemmy.ml
    0·
    17 days ago

    I prefer FOSS as much as possible and didn’t read all comments on YouTube but … desktop applications are not SAAS. eg LibreOffice and Adobe apps. But I guess it only requires a different title as the list itself is useful

    • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
      0·
      17 days ago

      These apps aren’t SaaS, but their alternatives are in at least some cases. LibreOffice competes with Microsoft Office, for example, and Microsoft wants people to pay a subscription for it, although I think you can still buy it outright. Pretty sure I’ve heard similar for Adobe products. Not super familiar with all the options, so can’t say if it’s true for all of them.

      • Joël de Bruijn@lemmy.ml
        0·
        16 days ago

        SAAS isn’t about subscription perse although they have them of course. Its about “not needing to take care of”. It’s software on “someone else’s computer” just as with public cloud. In a SAAS construct a provider does the hosting, computing, connection, install, configuration and maintenance. Absolving clients from that burden.

        Comparing proprietary desktop applications (even with a subscription) with FOSS alternatives is useful, it’s just not SAAS.

        • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
          0·
          16 days ago

          So it seems like if you’re using Office on desktop, not SaaS, but they do offer it in a browser, so would that count? Technically, if it’s in JavaScript or something like that, computing is handled locally, but it still feels close enough to count.

  • chobeat@lemmy.ml
    0·
    16 days ago

    If you’re wondering, no Appflowy cannot be used to replace Notion. It’s in their claim but you would have a pretty bad time doing it. Anytype might one day get there, Appflowy is another thing.

        • Stitch0815@feddit.orgDeutsch
          0·
          17 days ago

          An alternative video client. Mostly known for pulling add free youtube. But you can have several sources like patreon or nebula. The app is free and open source but they ask you to buy a license if you like it. It’s made/supportes by futo

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        0·
        16 days ago

        I support them adding ads and commercials into their products like pop ups and stuff or they can sell my information

    • Nonagon ∞ Orc@lemmy.world
      0·
      17 days ago

      It’s just clickbait, which is unavoidable on youtube if you want your video to be seen by more than 5 people. I don’t blame the creator for it tbh, especially because this title is not really misleading, just an opinion.

  • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
    0·
    17 days ago

    I don’t mind paying for software and I regularly donate to open source projects. The problem is that most corporate software is closed and I don’t have the freedom to use it as I wish.

  • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    0·
    18 days ago

    I am a huge fan/proponent of FLOSS where possible.

    That being said, for enterprise solutions with large teams, I have yet to see a FLOSS solution that is as intuitive or ubiquitous as the major players.

    For instance, I fucking hate zoom. Basically everything about it. But I also can’t possibly suggest other platforms for remote recording participants because I deal with people across the computer literacy spectrum. They all understand zoom, regardless of generation or experience with a computer. When they don’t understand it, it’s easy to guide them. I hate it but it’s reality and it’s a major cost when you abandon popular platforms.

    It is a tall ask when folks want me to be the trendsetter who makes my company break from the major platforms to their own detriment in the hopes that others will follow suit all to save a few thousand dollars a year and to advocate for an ideal.

      • oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.org
        0·
        17 days ago

        You can use Zoom without an account, just a link. Signal requires a smart phone and number to sign up. Zoom also supports far bigger groups for video than Signal. Not an alternative really.

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    0·
    15 days ago

    Paying for software is okay, except when it keeps trying to milk you even after paying for it, especially if it’s a subscription. This can come in the form of ads, the sale of personal information, or some other crap (such as binding arbitration).