If you can’t see the code for what you’re buying, you’re more addicted
You don’t know exactly what you are getting and you are stuck with it when you no longer want it.
The idea behind creating and selling proprietary software is simple: if you can’t see the code for what you’re buying, you’re more addicted. With hundreds or thousands of employees involved and tools deeply integrated into the technology infrastructure, the cost of transition is too high. You are locked.
Open source code does not have these restrictions. Unlike cable TV, you know exactly what you’re getting because the source code is in the public domain. If you’re not happy with the integrations created by the community or the tool company, you can create your own. OSC is a monthly subscription that you can cancel after you’ve viewed the entire library. It’s better for the consumer and that’s why this model wins.
But lock-free is just one of the key benefits, data ownership is just as important.
In times of GDPR, CCPA, YMCA, etc., owning your data is essential for full compliance. There are currently many legal uncertainties for European institutions regarding the use of any SaaS tool that transfers data to servers located in the United States. You cannot use either Google Analytics or Zapier. The solution in many cases is not to analyze or automate. Government agencies or larger companies cannot afford the reputational risk and associated penalties associated with exposing non-compliance with privacy laws.
In Germany, cities, municipalities and states must opt for an open source alternative when available. According to a survey conducted by the University of Maastricht, in Europe 49% of public institutions use OSC.
The Privacy Shield, which was the legal basis for data sharing between the US and the EU, was not renewed because data processing agreements were never meant to be final. We need to rethink how we build technologies to protect user design data and reduce the power of data aggregators. The regulatory framework already favors OSC and will continue to do so in the long term, representing a significant competitive advantage for OSC.
No-Code is so popular it’s amazing why corporations are starting to use it more and more.
Well, maybe because everyone wins with the rise of No-Code. No-Code is attractive: it turns code into a product and design. It gets right to the point: delivering value through functionality. Commoditization significantly shortens the feedback loop between developer and user, resulting in faster iterations.
The beauty of No-Code is that each stakeholder gets something different from it, something different
But in the end, when it comes to expanding the functionality of the project or the issue of protecting the personal data of your customers, then you are defenseless.
Moxly’s Team is revolutionizing this area by providing all the features in one window.
Let’s look at the combined benefit of combining OSC with no-code interfaces in larger organizations. We will do this by figuring out why all stakeholders would want to use OSS or the No-Code interface.
Let’s start with the technical director:
Why the CTO is digging OSC:
Why a software engineer digs OSC:
Growth in productivity and ownership is yet to come
and Moxly takes the approach to creating products by significantly lowering the barrier to entry for entrepreneurship. It is much cheaper and easier to test your business idea, and many are starting to take advantage of it.
This explosion of entrepreneurial spirit has not yet occurred in large organizations in the form of ownership and initiative (intrapreneurship). To this day, they are limited by data privacy and lack of integration for the legacy stack that the organization maintains. Offering them OSC with a no-code interface is the key to unlocking their potential.
Open source Moxly is in full swing. The argument outlined above is just one of many reasons why we are so excited to build in this space. Others are composability, collective effort, or the ratio of value creation and value acquisition, but these are topics for other articles.