Zulip committed the cardinal sin of stripping out notification support from their mobile apps for anyone not paying to force people to pay them.
Every other messaging app out there that is open source covers the minimal costs associated (and for Zulip, with an unpaid userbase that is tiny, these costs are laughably small) to host the infra associated. Note that Firebase Cloud Messaging itself is free. Wire, Signal, Threema, every single XMPP app, Element: none of these force users to build and distribute modded apks just to get notifications.
It was a tactic and it sucked and it burned any and all goodwill I had for Zulip.
throwaway81523•9mo ago
I was pretty sure Google charges for use of FCM above a certain small volume, but anyway a FOSS app should use OpenPush or whatever the current thing is. Is Zulip FOSS? I haven't been paying attention to this segment.
I'm a Zulip fan (and poster of this story), so you can take this with a grain of salt if you want.
1. Regarding "minimal costs" of notifications, the project lead said in an HN comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38661960) from when this was announced, "The problem statement is not that we need to fund the costs of delivering push notifications. We need to fund the costs of building Zulip -- the server, apps for every platform, support for a vast range of different self-hosted configurations, etc." That was on the announcement thread on HN, so you can find more from him and other commenters there.
2. They offer free plans (for the app/service itself, and also just notifications if you're self-hosted) for lots of non-commercial organizations (including open source projects and communities). Discounts for larger non-profits and others. The info is prominent on their pricing page: https://zulip.com/plans/
3. There's a discounted plan for just mobile notifications.
Ok I'm not sure I understand the issue here. I'm not an Android whiz but I thought FCM was inherently invasive, so if I ran Zulip from a security and privacy perspective, I'd want to self-host it including running my own notification server. It doesn't bother me at all if Zulip charges people to use their hosted plans, and I'm suspicious of the existence of a gratis one ("if you're not the customer...").
I guess though that an openpush/unifiedpush(?) client is another thing to install on the phone though. I probably care more about the web version than the mobile apps. I've been using nextcloud talk but it's kind of awful.
lima•9mo ago
I'm fine with paying for it, but what's worse is that the notifications aren't end-to-end encrypted, and the plaintext passes through their server and Google's.
For some use cases where self hosting is required for compliance reasons, this is a deal breaker. And spinning your own mobile apps isn't quite practical.
tabbott•9mo ago
We're very actively working on end-to-end encryption for notifications; it'll be in the Zulip 11.0 release this summer if at all possible.
While I'm here, the Flutter rewrite of the mobile app is launching next month, and while the initial launch won't add much functionality over the previous React Native apps, the rewrite is way faster, less buggy, and a lot more pleasant to add new features to.
lima•9mo ago
That's very nice to hear! I've been a big fan for a long time, and this has been a blocker for many deployments.
tabbott•9mo ago
I lead the Zulip project, and frankly this comment is highly demoralizing.
For what it's worth, Zulip is entirely FOSS. In contrast with most commercial open source software on the market today, Zulip charges only for Cloud hosting, push infrastructure, and support -- not the software itself. We offer free or highly discounted plans for non-business use.
And yet, even we get attacked because we stopped letting businesses use our push infrastructure for free too. How are we supposed to publish a professional quality self-hostable product without any monetization?
If you oppose all forms of FOSS monetization, no matter how reasonable, you're advocating for a world where FOSS cannot compete in many product categories.
And if you want FOSS to succeed in team chat specifically, the real issue is that Microsoft Teams and Slack have entrenched their duopoly with some pretty effective anti-competitive tactics (Microsoft Bundling and Slack Connect, most importantly), and that fact isn't on many people's radar as an issue at all.
emptysongglass•9mo ago
I wrote my comment because I want you to stop this practice. Being demoralized doesn't appear to change your mind about the decision to do what not a single other FOSS messaging app out there does. Zulip is the only one. Maybe reconsider Zulip's stance given how completely alone it is in its choice.
Your team made the decision, now you get to own it. And I'll keep putting a light on it until it changes. You call it vitriol, I call it fair warning to anyone considering adopting Zulip.
I am not a business and I certainly would not touch Zulip with a ten-foot pole given your team's decision.
owebmaster•9mo ago
You are not an user/customer but you want to change the project? That's definitely not a fair warning, you are being completely unreasonable and should spend your time better in place of smearing other people's work with baseless accusations. People like you kill others motivation to do good for others for some kind of sadistic pleasure
emptysongglass•9mo ago
I was a user. They're not baseless accusations, they're statements of technical fact and a statement of ethical belief. I don't believe it's right to deny users (including non-business users like myself) a capability that costs peanuts to run as a strong-arming tactic to get them to pay. I know exactly what I'm critiquing and why.
I'm not going to source-build and force a community of folks to source-build an APK to access an essential technical capability of a messaging app. Zulip is essentially rendered as useless in such a case. That is wrong and unethical.
tabbott•9mo ago
Zulip's notifications service is free for community use, as well as business use up to 10 users. If you're not a business, why would you need to build a fork? Just spend 5 minutes filling out the brief community plan form and you're all set.
I can't say that the mobile notifications model is perfect. I have my frustrations with it. One of them that might not be obvious is that various military/government installations on airgapped networks are all freeriding.
Alternative options are (1) having no meaningful monetization of self-hosting or (2) moving away from being fully FOSS.
What would you like to see us do?
112233•9mo ago
Your comment made me want to check other FOSS messaging apps!
Briar — no push notifications.
IRC - could not find foss client with push notification support (maybe you know one!)
Delta chat — do not seem to provide the service themselves.
emptysongglass•9mo ago
Delta Chat does provide notifications.
Briar allows you to run its Mailbox app on another device, giving you the tool to host your own notifications without building your own binary.
I know because I run both.
2025051000•9mo ago
DeltaChat, when using a self-hosted Chatmail server, has a service that detects incoming mails for a user account, pulls a token ID out of their account info (file in the maildir), and sends a request over HTTP to the push server run by the DeltaChat team. This sends it on through APNS/FCM, then scrubs the data from memory. The notification only wakes up the app. No encryption needed.
The project runs on a shoestring budget and has no problem delivering 15 million+ push notifications per month without charging the users any money
tabbott•9mo ago
As of 18 months ago, both Mattermost and Rocket.Chat, the other popular self-hostable alternatives to Slack, required a paid plan for mobile push notifications at the time we started charging for them (they are open core, so they also gate dozens of other features on paid plans). We didn't invent the idea.
For example, Mattermost's $10/user/month plan is proprietary software with roughly the features that Zulip provides as entirely FOSS (with a $3.50/user/month push notifications service).
By the way, since you mentioned Signal: Signal is great, but it's really just not comparable.
Signal is a SMS replacement/messenger app with minimal features that requires very low COGS per user, and launched with a $50M grant from a billionaire. Zulip is a team chat app designed to replace much more complex and capable products (Discord, Slack, Microsoft Teams).
emptysongglass•9mo ago
You've left out Element, which does provide a similar suite of features with its Spaces. I concede Mattermost and Rocket.Chat. Thanks for the correction.
tabbott•9mo ago
Yeah, Element hasn't tried push notifications for monetization, and they are FOSS. I will note https://element.io/pricing only advertises self-hosting options starting at $10/user/month.
I wish them the best of luck, and hope they're seeing success. Certainly in 2025 Europe should be thinking hard about the risks of a huge portion of workplace communication happening in Cloud-based chat and email applications owned by a few US companies (Microsoft/Google/SalesForce).
Honestly, we've had the same problem that Arathorn highlights in that thread. When I first started, I imagine businesses self-hosting Zulip would pay for support and fund the project that way. In practice, Zulip is too easy to operate for self-hosters to do that, and the better we make the product, the less support people actually need. The support-only business model can work, but I don't think it's workable for chat.
mrd3v0•9mo ago
It is just one comment on Y Combinator's link aggregation service. People who haven't tried starting a serious FOSS project, do not understand how unsustainable it is. Funny thing is, like you mentioned, the monetisation isn't even imposed on the software itself, the entire software is free. It is on the *gratis* service to host it.
Entitlement knows no bounds. Don't worry about those disheartening comments, they are not coming from a place of genuine concern.
kyleee•9mo ago
Did the person say they oppose all forms of FOSS monetization?
mindwok•8mo ago
Hey friend, just wanted to chime in and say please don't be demoralised. Building a thriving business AND being OSS is extremely hard (I also work in this space) and I have immense respect for anyone who chooses to try and balance those things. Your work means a lot to me and my organisation, please keep building awesome stuff!
emptysongglass•9mo ago
Every other messaging app out there that is open source covers the minimal costs associated (and for Zulip, with an unpaid userbase that is tiny, these costs are laughably small) to host the infra associated. Note that Firebase Cloud Messaging itself is free. Wire, Signal, Threema, every single XMPP app, Element: none of these force users to build and distribute modded apks just to get notifications.
It was a tactic and it sucked and it burned any and all goodwill I had for Zulip.
throwaway81523•9mo ago
phonon•9mo ago
https://github.com/zulip/zulip
Cyphase•9mo ago
1. Regarding "minimal costs" of notifications, the project lead said in an HN comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38661960) from when this was announced, "The problem statement is not that we need to fund the costs of delivering push notifications. We need to fund the costs of building Zulip -- the server, apps for every platform, support for a vast range of different self-hosted configurations, etc." That was on the announcement thread on HN, so you can find more from him and other commenters there.
2. They offer free plans (for the app/service itself, and also just notifications if you're self-hosted) for lots of non-commercial organizations (including open source projects and communities). Discounts for larger non-profits and others. The info is prominent on their pricing page: https://zulip.com/plans/
3. There's a discounted plan for just mobile notifications.
Here's their original announcement post, with an update linked to from the top: https://blog.zulip.com/2023/12/15/new-plans-for-self-hosted-...
throwaway81523•9mo ago
I guess though that an openpush/unifiedpush(?) client is another thing to install on the phone though. I probably care more about the web version than the mobile apps. I've been using nextcloud talk but it's kind of awful.
lima•9mo ago
For some use cases where self hosting is required for compliance reasons, this is a deal breaker. And spinning your own mobile apps isn't quite practical.
tabbott•9mo ago
While I'm here, the Flutter rewrite of the mobile app is launching next month, and while the initial launch won't add much functionality over the previous React Native apps, the rewrite is way faster, less buggy, and a lot more pleasant to add new features to.
lima•9mo ago
tabbott•9mo ago
For what it's worth, Zulip is entirely FOSS. In contrast with most commercial open source software on the market today, Zulip charges only for Cloud hosting, push infrastructure, and support -- not the software itself. We offer free or highly discounted plans for non-business use.
And yet, even we get attacked because we stopped letting businesses use our push infrastructure for free too. How are we supposed to publish a professional quality self-hostable product without any monetization?
If you oppose all forms of FOSS monetization, no matter how reasonable, you're advocating for a world where FOSS cannot compete in many product categories.
And if you want FOSS to succeed in team chat specifically, the real issue is that Microsoft Teams and Slack have entrenched their duopoly with some pretty effective anti-competitive tactics (Microsoft Bundling and Slack Connect, most importantly), and that fact isn't on many people's radar as an issue at all.
emptysongglass•9mo ago
Your team made the decision, now you get to own it. And I'll keep putting a light on it until it changes. You call it vitriol, I call it fair warning to anyone considering adopting Zulip.
I am not a business and I certainly would not touch Zulip with a ten-foot pole given your team's decision.
owebmaster•9mo ago
emptysongglass•9mo ago
I'm not going to source-build and force a community of folks to source-build an APK to access an essential technical capability of a messaging app. Zulip is essentially rendered as useless in such a case. That is wrong and unethical.
tabbott•9mo ago
I can't say that the mobile notifications model is perfect. I have my frustrations with it. One of them that might not be obvious is that various military/government installations on airgapped networks are all freeriding.
Alternative options are (1) having no meaningful monetization of self-hosting or (2) moving away from being fully FOSS.
What would you like to see us do?
112233•9mo ago
Briar — no push notifications. IRC - could not find foss client with push notification support (maybe you know one!) Delta chat — do not seem to provide the service themselves.
emptysongglass•9mo ago
Briar allows you to run its Mailbox app on another device, giving you the tool to host your own notifications without building your own binary.
I know because I run both.
2025051000•9mo ago
The project runs on a shoestring budget and has no problem delivering 15 million+ push notifications per month without charging the users any money
tabbott•9mo ago
For example, Mattermost's $10/user/month plan is proprietary software with roughly the features that Zulip provides as entirely FOSS (with a $3.50/user/month push notifications service).
By the way, since you mentioned Signal: Signal is great, but it's really just not comparable.
Signal is a SMS replacement/messenger app with minimal features that requires very low COGS per user, and launched with a $50M grant from a billionaire. Zulip is a team chat app designed to replace much more complex and capable products (Discord, Slack, Microsoft Teams).
emptysongglass•9mo ago
tabbott•9mo ago
I think they've had a pretty frustrating experience with corporations freeriding on their work. See, for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34129623.
I wish them the best of luck, and hope they're seeing success. Certainly in 2025 Europe should be thinking hard about the risks of a huge portion of workplace communication happening in Cloud-based chat and email applications owned by a few US companies (Microsoft/Google/SalesForce).
Honestly, we've had the same problem that Arathorn highlights in that thread. When I first started, I imagine businesses self-hosting Zulip would pay for support and fund the project that way. In practice, Zulip is too easy to operate for self-hosters to do that, and the better we make the product, the less support people actually need. The support-only business model can work, but I don't think it's workable for chat.
mrd3v0•9mo ago
Entitlement knows no bounds. Don't worry about those disheartening comments, they are not coming from a place of genuine concern.
kyleee•9mo ago
mindwok•8mo ago