Originally Posted by whmcsguru
Blesta won't replace WHMCS. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's just not happening. Here's quite a few reasons why:
#1 : WHMCS is backed by cPanel. This is no small feat, and these giants won't just let their investment go.
#2: WHMCS is actively developed. When was the last time we saw a major Blesta update? Almost 3 years ago. Yes, v3 has been out for that long. The last time we saw a major WHMCS update? March/April with 6.3
#3: WHMCS will have php7 support, likely before ioncube does.
#4: Did I mention they're not really actively developing Blesta? See http://www.blesta.com/forums/index.p...gateway-vault/
for a perfect example. Topic created September 2013. very, very valid gateway (Quantum vault) , yet where is it? They still haven't bothered to put it together.
#5: Extendability . You can do so much more with WHMCS than you can anything else.
Yes, I'm slightly biased. I've been working on WHMCS installs for years, but Blesta doesn't have a chance at 'replacing WHMCS'. As it sits right now, nothing does. Nothing out there has the power to take the beast that is WHMCS down. Trust me, I've tested almost all of 'em.
In time, someone will dethrone the king, always happens (anyone remember moldernbill ?), but typically, that's an upstart, someone just starting out. Nukern might stand a slight chance, but they need to get away from the whole 'cloud' idea. That's just scary as anything for billing software.
Edit: I didn't read the entire thread and just saw Paul's response. But I think my points still remain
Whilst I agree that WHMCS won't be overtaken in terms of market share anytime soon, Blesta is taking up traction.
All of your points can be argued against and in some cases, are not fair comparisions.
#1: Being a profitable, independent company has it's own advantages. Blesta is much more personal company whereas WHMCS is the larger, harder to reach out to specific people company. For example, can you reach out to Matt at WHMCS? No. can you reach out to Paul? Very easily.
#2: This isn't entirely fair considering you're comparing a major version (v3) to a minor update (6.3). Comparing major to major, WHMCS 6 was released in July 2015. WHMCS recently released 6.3 yes, they might be faster at releases but then again WHMCS has significantly more resources and money (cPanel). 6.2 was released in December 2015 and 6.3 in March 2016. Also, WHMCS is working on minor releases (6.3 for example) whereas the priority for Blesta is a major release (4.0) so this is going to take more time. If you look at dev.blesta.com you can see 4.0 is well under way and they are being actively developed.
#3: In any case, you will be waiting for IonCube to support the loaders and readers. To say Blesta isn't going to (or doesn't already?) support PHP 7 wouldn't be accurate.
#4: The same can be said for WHMCS and Stripe: https://requests.whmcs.com/topic/str...gateway-module
-- 3 years in the waiting also.
#5: Not exactly true. Sure Smarty and the plugin system makes things nice and easy though Blesta is 99.9% open source so the possibilities are endless.
Now how about the points where WHMCS can't compare:
1. Blesta has a proper multicompany support.
2. WHMCS doesn't have a proper multicurrency system (Yes it has the features but its an accounting nightmare). Want to change currency for a client? You have to go over their previous invoices and adjust them manually, change affiliate commissions and so on).
3. I'll just link to: http://billingbrawl.com/
- No need to say more.
So yes, WHMCS is very popular, it is powerful and it will probably remain in the #1 position for a long time to come though Blesta is getting more and more popular and I can see why.
As far as WHMCS and Stripe, there are plenty of workarounds , plenty of active modules for it. There's no reason for them to immediately jump on the bandwagon there. The same can not be said about Blesta.
There is a need though. The people that are giving them that #1 position in terms of market share want an official module otherwise they wouldn't put in a feature request for it.