[rendezvouscp]

I think one of the things that separates our points of view is that I see Iron Money, the apps and service, as the product, with the API as a great extension for helping developers build cool stuff on top of their data; I don’t really see the API as the product I’m trying to push. Point for point:

1. This makes sense and is what I thought would be my biggest hurdle. Thankfully, this has never really been an issue. A lot of people are surprisingly willing to trust their finances to a third-party they don’t know that well.

2. I agree, although I think it’s even more valuable to have professionals audit the source code. Both together is probably optimal for security.

3. I realize that, in the example you cite, it was helpful to have the source open, but in the case of a (usually) consumer product, I don’t think this argument holds much weight. Iron Money mainly targets young singles and couples who want their finances on the iOS devices and Macs, and having it be open-source rarely plays into the decision to purchase.

4. I agree. I don’t think Iron Money is really marketed as a closed-source library, but the point stands. In any case, I would probably open the source if the service was shut down.

Thanks for taking the time to write up your thoughts; they definitely provide food for thought.