Flagsmith

We have to talk about LaunchDarkly’s new pricing model. TLDR: It’s unfair, unpredictable and it penalizes resilient software architecture. LD is switching to usage-based pricing, which means you no longer pay per user, but per “service connection.” The new model will result in a significant billing hike for many customers, but there’s an even bigger issue. The pricing is now completely decoupled from the value of feature flags. That’s a problem. Two LD customers serving the same MAUs, evaluating the same flags, and getting the same value out of LD can get vastly different bills, purely because of how their software is architected. More connections = bigger invoice. You could try keeping the connection count down, but that means consolidating into fewer, larger instances. The outcome then is a larger blast radius and reduced fault isolation. Which is… exactly the problem that feature flags should be solving. To avoid ballooning your invoice, you have to optimize your architecture for your LD bill. Not for resilience. It goes against all engineering and feature flag best practices. You shouldn’t stand for it. Migrating is a hassle, but if you’re considering it: implement OpenFeature. It makes it easier to swap providers and avoid vendor lock-in. And if you’re looking for a LaunchDarkly alternative with a reliable pricing model, check out Flagsmith. The price is right, the product is even better: https://lnkd.in/d9tEJVYE

Renewing your feature flags management platform shouldn't feel like a trap.

Ship faster. Kill bad deploys instantly. No renewal surprises. Just flags that work.

Self-host on your own cloud. Run flags across web, mobile, and server-side. Open source, auditable, fully yours.

Flagsmith is fully open source. Audit the code, self-host on your infra, contribute to the roadmap. No black boxes. No Suprises at Renewal. Just Feature Flags that Works.

Migrating flag platforms takes a sprint, not a quarter. Open source, transparent pricing. See why developers are switching to Flagsmith.