What happens when the vendor changes the deal

In January 2026, SmartSuite discontinued its free plan. Existing free workspaces remained operational until July, after which they ceased functioning. SmartSuite did not engage in unethical practices; they provided six months' notice, the plan was complimentary, and no business owes a vendor a perpetual free tier. The paid plans begin at $30 per editor per month, and the product is well-regarded.

The concern lies not in SmartSuite's actions, but in the fact that the decision rested solely with them, and those relying on the free plan discovered its termination on the same day.

When adopting a hosted work operating system (OS), two distinct aspects are purchased: the software and a standing dependency on the vendor's commercial decisions. The first encompasses the software itself, including views, automations, formulas, and permissions. This is what users evaluate during the evaluation process. The second aspect pertains to the vendor's decisions regarding pricing, packaging, roadmap, acquisitions, and continued existence.

These are not outlined on the pricing page and have no service level agreement (SLA), making them the deciding factor in whether the built solution remains functional three years later.

SmartSuite is not unique in this regard. In recent years, similar occurrences have taken place in the industry: free tiers have been withdrawn, entry plans have been repriced, features have been elevated to higher tiers, resulting in increased costs without any changes, AI functionalities have been sold as separate metered services on top of the seats already purchased, companies have been acquired, and their products have been integrated into another company's roadmap.

These actions are not considered misconduct; they are the decisions a vendor is entitled to make with a product they own and host.

Running the software yourself, as opposed to relying on a third-party provider, alters the dynamics when the vendor makes changes to the deal. When using Appdor, a work OS on Postgres databases rather than within a vendor's infrastructure, the entire installation process is simplified to "docker compose up." Although the vendor can alter pricing, Appdor retains control over its own database, ensuring data accessibility via psql.

Additionally, Appdor's self-hosted build mirrors the vendor's hosted build, eliminating any licensing servers, activation processes, or specific behaviors that differentiate it when running outside of a hosted plan. Therefore, the absence of tiered features ensures consistency across all tiers, eliminating any surprise movements of features as users progress through the pricing levels.

While self-hosting does introduce new risks, it does not eliminate them entirely. The responsibility now falls on the user to manage backups, upgrades, and uptime. For many teams, this trade-off might not be worth it, which is precisely why the hosted option exists. The critical question to ask is not whether the vendor is trustworthy, as they generally are, but rather, if this vendor were to alter the deal tomorrow, what would it cost us to refuse?

Typically, the answer is a migration that is not feasible within the given timeframe, indicating that the deal cannot be refused. Conversely, if the response is that the team would continue using the existing build on their own hardware while deciding on a course of action, this represents a different negotiation standpoint.