Is open Source SaaS is just SaaS with better marketing
pkrulz101 Tuesday, February 04, 2025The OS community celebrates that we've "cracked" the open source business model with products like Cal.com, Plane, and Twenty - where the pitch is "the software is 'free', you just pay for hosting." We're all broadly aware that it's primarily a clever GTM strategy. Build in public, get community buzz, ride the "open source alternative to X" wave, and leverage that for sales.
When a user pays for traditional SaaS, they know they're buying software functionality, with hosting being implicit. The OSS model just flips the narrative: hosting is explicit, while software is "free." But if 99% of users lack the technical capability to self-host, manage security patches, handle DB migrations, or meaningfully contribute code - aren't we just reframing what they're paying for? The benefits of OSS (auditability, no vendor lock-in, community governance) are real, but they primarily serve technical users. For everyone else, a "hosting fee" is functionally identical to a SaaS subscription. Maybe the narrative: you're paying for the operational expertise/convenience that makes the software usable for non-technical users, and the "open source" label is mostly a marketing tool to stand out in a crowded SaaS market.
IDK really keen to just get some thoughts - don't get me wrong, I really love OSS and use the stated products above everyday. But I'm just curious to get other opinions.