[ushakov]

Why should I use this instead of 100s others paid and open-source alternatives?

[tibozaurus]

Because using our hosted solution you don't have to care about the infra :)

[remram]

If I use the hosted version, I don't care that it's open source.

If I run your open source software myself, I don't care that you have a hosted offering.

[ushakov]

That’s a naive assumption. I can go with any of your competitors (Datadog, Checkly, BetterStack) and not care about the infra

[tibozaurus]

And mostly closed source :)

[typosaur]

Is being open-source the only differentiator you have?

Only software devs care about this. Your competitors make millions of $ annually, without being open-source.

[robertlagrant]

This seems a bit inappropriately toned. Plenty of businesses care about this, as it de-risks things if you know you can self-host if necessary.

[chrisandchris]

Yes, sure. But the difficulty about monitoring is not the hosting per-se, but hosting in different datacenters throughout the world abd keeping all these services up.

My monitoring should not show "just down" if users from location A can't reach it but everyone else can.

[lucgagan]

I never understood the "de-risk" things angle. Is the idea that you'd self host if the service went under?

[lmeyerov]

It's worth coming up with a stronger public-facing answer

We went through this last year, I think we have a public one, a private one, + our actual more 'serious' telemetry (opentelemetry, ...). For the status pages, I think one we don't pay for, and the other is like $20/yr.

It's a crowded space, both open + closed, so clearer differentiation seems useful for your users and for your own journey: https://github.com/ivbeg/awesome-status-pages