Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
lostechies.com
Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
1–10 of 90 posts
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#2Github does have per seat pricing (for their enterprise product, which is meant to be hosted locally): https://enterprise.github.com/pricing - it costs $21/seat/month. With their per repo pricing I'd imagine they are more likely to earn more revenue per user, since so many developers will end up having many old pet projects in private repos sitting there.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#3I think the reason its priced like that is its far more profitable than any other way. Developers like loads of repo's for their many side projects etc.
Just a note though, if you're a consulting company and cant afford $200 a month for the 125 repo's, you should be charging more.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#4I really do not get the big deal.
Just set up ssh on your own server and voilà... free unlimited repos.
sure you miss out on some tools. But what's more important... repo storage/usage/access/privacy or a pretty graph of your commits? Perhaps catting a ssh key to the end of a text file is a bit too much complexity for a company who claim to be selling themselves as expert software solutions developers.
And if you do want all that, it does exist and is available to install on your own host.
All for £20 a month. Not even hard to set up multisite replication etc.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#5Disclosure: I'm a co-founder of GitLab.com
I agree that a per seat pricing model is better because it is more predictable and relates to the value a company gets. We plan to use such a model on GitLab.com http://blog.gitlab.com/pricing/
Also, if you self-install GitLab it is completely free (MIT license).
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#6Github does have per seat pricing (for their enterprise product, which is meant to be hosted locally): https://enterprise.github.com/pricing - it costs $21/seat/month. With their per repo pricing I'd imagine they are more likely to earn more revenue per user, since so many developers will end up having many old pet projects in private repos sitting there.
BitBucket's pricing is at $1/seat/month in the worst case though (assuming you match one of their intervals there). But yep I agree, Github is surely significantly more profitable than BitBucket.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#7Github really only makes sense for open source projects.
If you are small shop with private repos, bitbucket does everything github does for free
If you are small-med+ shop you can pay per user and you should really be considering a more enterprise level of project management other than "issues and wiki docs"
First you'll have the money to pay Atlassian for all their tools, and second you will discover you can't live with out them once you have them and will rarely, if ever, visit the bitbucket page for a project (which is a "Good Thing" imo)
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#8Agreed, Github does not make sense for small consulting companies. We have hundreds of repositories (way more than the Github top plan) and only 10 employees. We have been hosting our own git server (previously Gitorious and now Gitlab) and haven't looked back. Way more economic than Github enterprise. I guess these days Bitbucket or hosted Gitlab would also be a reasonable alternative.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#9Disclosure: I'm a co-founder of GitLab.com I agree that a per seat pricing model is better because it is more predictable and relates to the value a company gets. We plan to use such a model on GitLab.com http://blog.gitlab.com/pricing/ Also, if you self-install GitLab it is completely free (MIT license).
Out of interest, how would you say you compare to BitBucket? Your given plan structures seem to suggest that their pricing structure per user is superior.
"A startup with 30 repos and a team of two is completely free." Same with them.
"A professional plan with 60 repos and 5 collaborators is $9 per month." 5 collaborators is free with them.
"A business plan 150 repos and 10 collaborators is $72 per month." BitBucket supports teams on all plans. That plan would be $10, although I will admit I haven't used their teams feature so you may have superior functionality there.
Self-hosted sounds great though, that's a really cool move.
Re: Why GitHub’s pricing model stinks (for us)
#10Sorry, just to confirm: GitHub's cost model aligns with your revenue model (as opposed to your cost model), and this is a bad thing?