(Quote)

Whmcs is now more greedy

I ( Host Koala ) moved from WHMCS to Blesta very early on for costs reason. I'm not sure about now but back then the migration when super smoothly with 0 issues. Blesta may lack some extra features (

whmcs is owned by the same venture firms that own cpanel and plesk. When cpanel was purchased they immediately did something similar they are doing now to whmcs. The company that owns cpanel and whm

(Quote)

What is keeping us at whmcs is the lack of modules for other panels. Billing providers, but also affiliate programs, registrar modules, and even proper legal invoice modules.

@Advicerxyz minimal security risks. The WHMCS is behind the scene, it won't be seeing the internet.

Not really impressed by this move by whmcs.

and selling hosting globally I was using WHMCS. I did not make the switch to Blesta 5.0.x yet but I can say that Blesta is a competitive product and is a strong alternative. There is a weird duality

It was weird to adjust, but now whenever I do something in WHMCS I'm just utterly confused and it takes me a minute. There's so much shit in that software that doesn't need to be there.

Tbh, I think time is one of the main things. Not the time spent but the time to re-adjust your opinion. People buy WHMCS because they were recommended/preferred it or just thought because it was most

If you would like to sell your clientexec license for a profit I'd buy it

well the isssue is migrating to people with custom solutions on whmcs

I was actually turned off when I tried WHMCS... The plethora of features turned me off and it seemed too bloated... Switched to Blesta, thought it was good. ClientExec had the <$200 lifetime de

(Quote)

(Quote)

I guess WHMCS has been leading the industry for both enterprise and small hosting businesses.

We use WHMCS in the background.

Theoretically, WHMCS is not increasing prices because of greed. This is how they justify it:

I know many here are using lagom https://lagom.rsstudio.net/ for their whmcs installation