Hey everyone! Happy New Year to those who celebrate 
Sharing a video with two concrete proposals to improve Open edX adoption:
Universal mobile app (basic free, custom paid) + clear governance/reporting model
Long-tail growth: why we need a subscription-friendly entry path
Mobile part is pretty actionable. For the subscription/long-tail part I want feedback from people who’ve lived in this ecosystem for a long time.
Is there a text version of the proposal for those of us who don’t like watching videos?
Hi @Ivan_Stepanok, thank you for putting this proposal together — and for the video as well; it was genuinely fun and engaging to watch.
I want to start by saying that I fully agree with the first part of your proposal around a universal mobile app. The problem statement is clear, the direction makes sense, and I don’t have much to add there beyond expressing my willingness to contribute to those conversations and any concrete efforts that emerge.
On the second point around the long tail and a friendlier entry path, I also strongly agree with the underlying diagnosis: we are losing small initiatives early, and often permanently, because getting started with Open edX still feels too heavy for many of them.
Where I’d like to add a slightly different perspective is on what should enable that entry path.
Speaking from experience as the head of Edunext — which was the first company to offer a low-cost, SaaS-style subscription model for Open edX, and which we supported for almost ten years before discontinuing it last year — my view today is that subscriptions themselves don’t need to be the foundation of the entry path.
I think the more fundamental enabler we should focus on first is a truly productized version of the platform.
By that, I mean an Open edX starting experience that is genuinely usable and workable for a small initiative right after setup. That likely requires filling in some important gaps that still exist today, for example (in no particular order):
A step-by-step setup or onboarding workflow
Basic customization for the homepage, course catalog, and key legal/service pages
The new administrator console (which is already in progress, and very welcome)
A robust way to export an entire initiative — all courses and records at once — similar in spirit to what tools like WordPress provide
A clearer and more coherent solution to the extensions / plugins ecosystem
One of the strengths of Open edX is that none of this necessarily needs to live in core. These capabilities could be delivered as officially supported plugins that together form a kind of reference implementation for getting started. Mature, large-scale installations wouldn’t be forced to adopt them, while new and small initiatives would finally have a clear, supported starting point.
If such a productized version existed, even if:
it wasn’t a true one-click install,
it required a consultant or provider to set it up once,
or someone on the team had to invest time learning and installing it,
…it would still dramatically lower the barrier to entry. Importantly, it would also preserve one of Open edX’s core promises: you can start small, and later transition — with your data — to a different provider, a different model, or your own technical team as you grow.
Nothing in this approach prevents companies like Edunext, Raccoon Gang, or others from offering subscription-based entry models if they choose to. In fact, a solid reference implementation would make those offerings healthier and more transparent. People could enter the ecosystem easily and still retain real freedom to evolve their setup over time.
So overall, I really welcome this conversation and appreciate you pushing it forward. If I can add my two cents, I’d strongly encourage us as a community to focus first on building the best possible productized starting version of Open edX together. I believe that foundation would make any entry path — subscription-based or otherwise — much more effective and sustainable.
Sure! Here’s a text summary.
The core idea is: Open edX “technically has mobile” (repo exists), but students often can’t just download an app and log in, because basic mobile is effectively a paid add-on. Competitors (Canvas, Moodle, etc.) treat basic mobile as a default, and Open edX loses on availability, not quality.
Proposal Part 1: Create one universal Open edX mobile app: install → add your LMS (by link/search) → login. This doesn’t kill vendors: branded App Store listings, custom UI/features/integrations stay paid premium work.
Basic mobile becomes free. Content/app store liability model: the app is a client like a browser, not the content owner. Instances/LMS owners remain responsible for their content. Two connection modes: (1) manual add by link (explicit user action), (2) optional curated/whitelisted catalog.
Add a built-in “Report this LMS” flow (illegal content, hate/violence, fraud, copyright, etc.) with a community governance process: triage → temporary restriction if needed → notify LMS owner → repeated issues → delist instance.
Proposal Part 2: Solve the long tail adoption problem: small orgs need a real entry path so they can start without big day-one budgets, then grow into vendor revenue later (customization, branded apps, integrations). I’m proposing a working group to define v1 scope + governance/reporting workflow and ship something real.
I hope that helps!
Hi, thank you for such a thoughtful and detailed reply – it’s genuinely inspiring. It’s a pleasure to read a perspective from someone who knows this problem space far better and more broadly than I do. Your approach makes a lot of sense to me.
Before I became a developer, I ran a network of photography schools for 10 years. I still remember how hard it was to choose the right LMS back then. I was essentially a one-person operation, and I couldn’t afford anything beyond a simple subscription or a one-time payment. I was just starting to enter the online education market and needed a low-cost solution immediately for a very small group of students. There was no way I could take on an LMS that was complex to install and required additional, expensive specialists.
Looking back at that experience, I’m sure I wasn’t the only one. A broad group of early-stage schools, startups, and small organizations needs an entry path with as little friction as possible. Even if it’s “just” a guided installation wizard – that’s totally fine. I can record a video showing how to set it up. What matters most is that the option is realistically accessible to non-technical people with limited budgets.
I’m not attached to how exactly we achieve that (a wizard, a reference implementation via supported plugins, a subscription model, etc.). The important thing is reducing the barrier at the very beginning of the journey. That’s why I’m fully on board with your idea of a “productized” starting version of Open edX.
Thanks again for joining the discussion – it means a lot to me.
This is something that has been discussed off and on for a couple years now at least, and I would love to see it move forward. 