# Review: Fibery in the First Half of 2024 **URL:** \ **Category:** News & Announcements\ **Created:** [August 21, 2024, 11:56am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527 "2024-08-21T11:56:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mz\_et](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/mz_et/32/9561_2.png) [@mz\_et](https://community.fibery.io/u/mz_et)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2024, 12:51pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/21 "2024-08-23T12:51:19Z")
If permissions were standardized and consistent across the ecosystem (think access templates but everywhere), I could see paying a lower amount per month for a lower type of user. Something in between Admin/Member and Guest. ---
**Author:** ![Oshyan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/oshyan/32/11431_2.png) [@Oshyan](https://community.fibery.io/u/Oshyan)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2024, 4:33pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/22 "2024-08-23T16:33:40Z")
I think this (cost of low-needs/short-term users) is probably one of the biggest examples, but representative of a larger thing which I was pushing on from a different direction previously: what are Fibery’s easy, potentially “viral” onboarding ramps? Few to none that I can see, really. Especially with the sunsetting of the free plan. An easy and affordable way to bring in collaborators would be a strong example of that in a business context. I had previously been arguing for a more Notion-like personal-to-business conversion flow, and still believe it has a lot of potential (Notion just rolled out charts that are a fraction of the capability of Fibery and can’t be created with AI 🥱 ), but that’s probably not Fibery’s future. _Some_ good onramps are necessary, not just for user fluency in the use of the tool, but before that, in how they get to the tool in the first place. Fibery remains largely unknown outside of a few circles, it’s not found on ToolFinder or often listed in comparisons of tools (like ClickUp, Monday, Wrike, etc.), and when it is (infrequently) mentioned it is often with surprise at not having heard of it before (and also often with a lot of praise!). I don’t say any of that as if it’s something Fibery team is not aware of, but it seems to be a problem still unsolved and I would consider the development of that “flywheel” to be the top priority. What is it that not only gets people to _use_ the tool but to _share_ it in some way? Stating the obvious, but sometimes it needs restating. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![YvetteLans](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/yvettelans/32/6101_2.png) [@YvetteLans](https://community.fibery.io/u/YvetteLans)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2024, 10:12am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/23 "2024-08-24T10:12:35Z")
> [@webinit](#): > > It is always a matter of deciding whether it’s worth adding them as a paid user, or just using Trello as it’s simpler and free. Adding new users for small projects on an annual plan often doesn’t make good business sense. Fully agree. We are facing this both with freelancers for smaller projects as with clients. We’ve built a beautiful CRM. It’s such a pain in the ass that we are using Google spreadsheets when we are onboarding a client because we can’t collaborate with them in the workspace. We are also selling Fibery workspaces to a specific group of customers. And it’s literally one of the two things that we give a disclaimer for: - Fibery doesn’t fully work well on mobile - And you can’t collaborate with freelancers/clients in the workspace if you’re not willing to pay for them. Would be so awesome if we can have a solution for this 😄 Because almost every working human is looking for a good solution to communicate/collaborate with others. ---
**Author:** ![webinit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/webinit/32/5548_2.png) [@webinit](https://community.fibery.io/u/webinit)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2024, 10:32am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/24 "2024-08-24T10:32:59Z")
Well said. ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 4:23pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/25 "2024-08-26T16:23:36Z")
Out of interest, what would you say are the characteristics/limitations that distinguish a (ideally free) user with ‘limited functions’ from a regular user? In other words, if a ‘limited user’ is able to create and edit entities, why would anyone pay for a regular member licence? Is it the total number of entities they can work on? Is it the max number of edits per week/month? Is it the number of distinct types (dbs) that the user can interact with? ---
**Author:** ![webinit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/webinit/32/5548_2.png) [@webinit](https://community.fibery.io/u/webinit)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 6:38pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/26 "2024-08-26T18:38:00Z")
Great question. In my mind it was initially at the view level without really thinking it through, as I was thinking about Trello, but database level makes more sense to me. It’s attractive to have entity creation and edit limits, depending on how generous those limits are, but that seems to fit less what I had in mind. ---
**Author:** ![grex22](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/grex22/32/10249_2.png) [@grex22](https://community.fibery.io/u/grex22)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 7:00pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/27 "2024-08-26T19:00:05Z")
As a digital agency using Fibery to manage client asks, it would make sense for us to have “external” users limited to a certain database, perhaps further restricted by a Relationship field. Therefore, a client could login to comment / add / edit a Task, but only Tasks that are associated with their Company (a relationship on the Task). Perhaps that extends to other use-cases, such as allowing a contractor to CRUD Entities related to the Project they’re assigned to? Perhaps the permissions model boils down to a per-Entity permission. Meaning, you basically get assigned to an Entity and could CRUD on all Entities directly related to that “primary” Entity? Just spit-balling here… It is a good question, once you start thinking about how to actually implement it in something as flexible as Fibery… ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 8:37pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/28 "2024-08-26T20:37:41Z")
> [@grex22](#): > > it would make sense for us to have “external” users limited to a certain database, perhaps further restricted by a Relationship field. > > Therefore, a client could login to comment / ~~add~~ / edit a Task, but only Tasks that are associated with their Company (a relationship on the Task). This seems to align well with granting external users access to an entity and its related items via an access template? > [@grex22](#): > > allowing a contractor to CRUD Entities related to the Project they’re assigned to? Unfortunately, this doesn’t align with the current access template model 😕 Part of the problem is that creating entities is a database level permission, and since Fibery doesn’t have validation constraints, it’s not easy/clear how to only allow creating entities via a relationship. ---
**Author:** ![Robert\_B](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/robert_b/32/7198_2.png) [@Robert\_B](https://community.fibery.io/u/Robert_B)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 9:00pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/29 "2024-08-26T21:00:08Z")
Hi Chris, It’s clearly important to balance a few things here. I think you could accomplish what you want with a few adjustments. 1. Limit access to certain stuff of course. 2. Create a new item (essentially a task) - perhaps later a milestone. 3. No modifying items. 4. No deleting items. 5. BETTER SUPPORT of “foundational” tools - even only limited to Google docs). That could theoretically be just a LINK or just an uploaded file - but this is one area where Fibery lacks: ---- If you make it a file, it’s just a detached additional document with no “built-in foundational collaborative support”. Sharing a folder with a client that doesn’t have to be a Fibery folder - think google drive, dropbox, box, [box.net](http://box.net) (and I don’t know where to put MS onedrive in there) - that way you just let those tools handle the sync and hard stuff, you open your platform to way more people, and you simply integrate better with them. ---- If you make it a link then you (and collaborators) need to do a lot of unnecessary copying and pasting. The above is largely how you handle customers. For vendors and deeper collaborators just go with something similar to how Slack handles it - and charge less for that type of user. I don’t think you provide that user for FREE because you’re not Slack. And I still think one of the best ways you can provide a better collaborative experience - but perhaps I’m too customer-focused - is to enable something similar to Coda-like embedding/framing of external items (google docs, one drive) - for only things like docs/spreadsheets - and have them able to be treated like an entity but open within the fibery space like a full fibery item not just a small embed. I don’t now how Coda does it but I love that feature. ---
**Author:** ![YvetteLans](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/yvettelans/32/6101_2.png) [@YvetteLans](https://community.fibery.io/u/YvetteLans)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2024, 10:04pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/30 "2024-08-26T22:04:59Z")
For us I think it would feel logic that a free user has access to 1 entity + all it’s related items. So a customer has access to his/her customer project. A freelancer/contracter that works on a project has access to that project. When a person works regularly in the workspace (i.e. a freelancer / virtual assistant that works on all kind of projects) then it feels logic for me to pay for that person. > [@Chr1sG](#): > > This seems to align well with granting external users access to an entity and its related items via an access template? This would be perfect I think! ---
**Author:** ![mdubakov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/mdubakov/32/10_2.png) [@mdubakov](https://community.fibery.io/u/mdubakov)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 8:06am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/31 "2024-08-28T08:06:57Z")
---
**Author:** ![mdubakov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/mdubakov/32/10_2.png) [@mdubakov](https://community.fibery.io/u/mdubakov)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2024, 11:18am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/32 "2024-08-29T11:18:57Z")
3 posts were split to a new topic: [Fibery Free plan can be back (soon)](https://community.fibery.io/t/fibery-free-plan-can-be-back-soon/6569) ---
**Author:** ![njyo](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/njyo/32/923_2.png) [@njyo](https://community.fibery.io/u/njyo)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 4:29pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/35 "2024-08-28T16:29:02Z")
> [@Fibery Free plan can be back (soon)](https://community.fibery.io/t/fibery-free-plan-can-be-back-soon/6569/2): > > We are thinking about hundreds of entities per database, hundreds of rules execution per month, no database or space limits, no views limits etc. No surprise looking at [my previous post](https://community.fibery.io/t/new-payment-tier-for-clubs/5091/5), I find the less restrictive numbers that you share much more appealing. 🙂 PS: Thanks for sharing a lovely update on the thinking, I also cannot believe that it’s been 8 months. And I can only second the ask for an update for your anxiety homepage, that is still such a cool representation that definitely made me fall in love. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Illusory](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/illusory/32/10403_2.png) [@Illusory](https://community.fibery.io/u/Illusory)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 6:45pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/36 "2024-08-28T18:45:16Z")
> [@njyo](#): > > And I can only second the ask for an update for your anxiety homepage, that is still such a cool representation that definitely made me fall in love. 🙂 This. Anxiety page is what sold me (I read all marketing pages and that was the last one I saw, which prompted me to sign up). ---
**Author:** ![grex22](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/grex22/32/10249_2.png) [@grex22](https://community.fibery.io/u/grex22)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 7:03pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/37 "2024-08-28T19:03:39Z")
Anecdotal, but same thing here – I was in the midst of shopping around amongst so many other tools that all started to look and sound the same, and the anxiety page was unique and honest enough that I just HAD to give Fibery a try after that. ---
**Author:** ![Sarah\_Arminta](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/sarah_arminta/32/4915_2.png) [@Sarah\_Arminta](https://community.fibery.io/u/Sarah_Arminta)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 7:16pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/38 "2024-08-28T19:16:31Z")
Same, love the anxiety page. One of my favorite things about Fibery is the quirky honesty and transparency. ---
**Author:** ![Tommy\_Hedley](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/tommy_hedley/32/6468_2.png) [@Tommy\_Hedley](https://community.fibery.io/u/Tommy_Hedley)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2024, 8:52pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/39 "2024-08-28T20:52:31Z")
I got sold by the same feeling but from reading the Fibery vs. articles. The openness in admitting that Fibery wasn’t perfect for every use case made a big difference. ---
**Author:** ![mdubakov](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/mdubakov/32/10_2.png) [@mdubakov](https://community.fibery.io/u/mdubakov)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2025, 2:06pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527/40 "2025-02-13T14:06:43Z")
> [@Tommy\_Hedley](#): > > As a major advocate of Fibery for construction, I would love to see more workflow features/improvements (dependencies, true gantt charts) First release today [February 13, 2025 / 🐎 Dependencies on a Timeline, Sidebar changes, Searching text on a Whiteboard, Performance fixes](https://community.fibery.io/t/february-13-2025-dependencies-on-a-timeline-sidebar-changes-searching-text-on-a-whiteboard-performance-fixes/8263) [Previous page](https://community.fibery.io/t/review-fibery-in-the-first-half-of-2024/6527.md?page=1)