Show HN: Open-source alternatives to tools You pay for (osssoftware.org)
hey makers,
I've spent the whole night to compile this list out of
> winners of Product Hunt
> best dev tools on DevHunt
> recently active on GitHub
> most internet backlinks
> most mentions as "alternative to .."
Let me know if I should add anything there.
96 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 160 ms ] threadBut I will improve categories, I'm working on it
Now and then I like looking for alternatives to the apps I use...see if someone's built something better. Happy to add another resource when I do it.
Only thing I'd request to add would be tools for documentation. You have Docusaurus already, but more options exist. I'm sure I could rustle up an idea or two if needed.
this seems like an odd choice of phrasing. those two things are not orthagonal.
Open source doesn't mean slavery for free. We should look to encourage money for open source
Sentry isn't open source, even after their most recent license change. The Business Source License and variants are source available, not open source.
FireCMS is built on top of Firebase, rather than being an alternative to it. It's a similar story with the Jira CLI. They're open source, but they're useless without the backend to talk to.
Plausible Analytics and Papermark are both listed twice. Rustdesk is also listed twice, once as Rustdeck.
The GIMP isn't listed under photoshop. This was a surprise omission.
Many of these projects have commercial backers who offer a paid SaaS offering. Given this is the case I'm not sure linking to SaaS product site when claiming your site offers "Open-source alternatives to tools You pay for" is the expected behaviour. I was expecting it to link to the open source code.
I suppose that maybe this website could be re-labelled ‘source-available’ to appease purists that actually care about this. But practically everyone won’t be affected by the fact that Sentry’s license prohibits creating a direct competitor to Sentry’s hosted service, certainly the intended audience.
Huh, maybe? Words have meaning. It's not about "appeasing purists", it's about not spreading misinformation.
Photopea is listed and is not open source. To my knowledge it's not even source available.
I do wonder sometimes why some people get so particular about drawing this specific distinction because it happens on so many threads. Is the freedom to run a competitor to sentry's saas using the code they wrote that coveted a freedom?
I can see why Bezos wants this, perhaps. And by extension wealthy big tech shareholders eating that profit too.... but who else?
Moreover, "Source available" (a suggested alternative) implies the software is potentially or even likely to be paid which is material difference for those 99.9% of users but is definitely not the case.
I get the sense that there is an underlying political ax being ground by gatekeeping this particular definition. I dont buy that this is about "just calling things by their name" when for non-bezos users the distinction is inconsequential.
> There is zero practical difference between "free and source available" and "open source" for 99.99% of users.
"Free and source available" is not a license. Without a license it is copyrighted.
"Free and source available" describes a group of licenses including sentry's.
That's literally all I said.
I think the list of tools is valuable, it's just that it's in need of a different organization here
happy to get your input
Someone really knowledgeable should review and editorialize the options.
But, this comes at the cost of the data being harder to obtain as it is usually deep within documentation or code. Maybe we can reach a feature specification of technologies sometime in the future.
For example, say you compare a Ferrari to a Toyota. They overlap in pretty much all features. (Steering wheel, gets you from A to B, and so on.) But of course you don't choose between a ferrari and a Toyota based on a feature list.
So "here a list of cars for those who can't afford a ferrari" would be somewhat useless.
Its easy to compare say Windows to Linux from a featurelist point if view. It's much harder to quantify the non tangibles.
So sure, a list that says "x for those using y" is a useful starting point. But it's very much the tip of the iceberg. Expect to do a LOT of research, and a lot of time experimenting before you can determine if "x can replace y for my situation."
But the list is a start...
Both great tools
Was super fun though. The experience is probably part of the reason I'm writing my own editor (in Lua).
It's true that some small software projects can easily live on without much maintenance for a long time, a text editor is no small feat.
"Not going to just break" is a pretty low bar for most things, especially software.
Now, maintenance doesn't necessarily mean lots of code changes but at least some attention and oversight seems critical for anything of the slightest significance
well it was developed mainly by Github so all it takes is reallocating devs away from the project and the progress just halts
Such lists should focus on projects with more open governance and that have open source in their culture instead of just license of some of their modules IMO.
I've descrived the process of picking the tools. If you know a better one, pls tell me
"No, not like that!"
I also find the phrasing rather odd. The open source movement is about "free as in speech, not beer".
Maybe it's meant to list "free alternatives" which is completely valid thing to do.
This list is about stuff you can get without paying for it ("free as in beer").
An example of this is under issue tracking basecamp is listed. Or under CMS there’s DatoCMS.
Semi-unrelated, it's curious how many projects listed in the sibling comments used to be open source and now aren't. Almost like people are routinely using open source to establish market share then changing to proprietary to try to exploit said market share.
i remember using their monaco editor as well (https://github.com/microsoft/monaco-editor), a really powerful editor & the very same used by VS Code (i think you can even get at the AST for TypeScript, for example, in the browser if you poke around deep enough)
crazy cool stuff, and most definitely OSS!!!
At least that's my vision for http://pikapods.com, which allows for convenient FOSS hosting, while sharing revenue with the original project and avoiding any lock-in.
Unfortunately pikapods itself doesn't seem to be open source?
I'd love to be able to throw it on my own VPS but appreciate the hosted option as well - very smooth experience when I tried it
From the comments here, I see one of the ways to improve it: currently, new projects are supposed to be added by their authors. Please consider allowing more community input on the next iteration: the ability to add projects, propose changes, etc.
The greatness of FOSS lies in its community.
I myself can recommend Outline[1] as an excellent self-hosted alternative to Notion and BaseRow as an alternative to AirTable.