mirror of
https://github.com/yusufipk/OpenFrame.git
synced 2026-09-11 17:46:06 +00:00
yusufipk
39e81042bb
The trial now starts inside the product, at email verification, and Stripe grants none at all: checkout creates a subscription that bills immediately. Verifying an address is what buys the seven days, which is also the cheapest abuse control there is. An unexpired trial is treated as an entitlement the account already holds, so a Stripe sync can add access but never retracts a trial that has not run out. That matters most for the abandoned checkout: the resulting incomplete subscription carries no trial_end, and writing it through would have erased the days the account still had and locked it out. Unpaid accounts are bounded by what they can cost us rather than by what they can do: one workspace, one project, 3 GiB of direct uploads. YouTube imports, share links, guests, comments and approvals stay unlimited, because those are the parts worth trying and they cost nothing. isPaidTier() is the new seam; hasBillingAccess() answers a different question now that access no longer implies a card. Signup CTAs, the pricing card, the comparison pages, the terms and the refund policy all said the trial converts to a paid plan by itself. It no longer does, so they say what happens instead. Settings and a banner name both dates that matter: when the trial ends, and the fifteen days after that during which nothing is deleted. /admin/growth compares the two funnels on signup to paid within a fixed 30 day window, not trial to paid. Dropping the card requirement multiplies trials, so the old ratio can fall while more people actually pay, and reading it that way would retire the change for the wrong reason.
718 lines
31 KiB
TypeScript
718 lines
31 KiB
TypeScript
import type {
|
||
ComparisonPageDefinition,
|
||
FeatureRow,
|
||
PricingRow,
|
||
} from '@/lib/marketing/comparison-types';
|
||
import { competitorProfiles, openFrameProfile } from '@/lib/marketing/comparison-sources';
|
||
|
||
const commonOpenFrameWins = [
|
||
'$10/month flat hosted pricing — no per-member or per-guest fees',
|
||
'7-day free trial with no credit card, then unlimited collaborators on one plan',
|
||
'Self-host for free with Docker when you need full data control',
|
||
'Voice notes and drawn annotations on the timeline',
|
||
'Formal approval requests with per-reviewer status',
|
||
'PDF and CSV exports for client handoff',
|
||
'Unlimited YouTube imports on the hosted plan',
|
||
];
|
||
|
||
const commonFreelancerPain = {
|
||
painTitle: 'Feedback should not live in five different apps',
|
||
painNarrative:
|
||
'Freelancers lose hours when clients send vague notes in email, WhatsApp, and screenshots. You end up guessing timecodes, re-uploading cuts, and chasing approvals that never feel final.',
|
||
painBullets: [
|
||
'Comments scattered across email threads and chat apps',
|
||
'Vague notes like "fix the intro around 1:12"',
|
||
'No clear record of which version was approved',
|
||
'Clients stall when the review tool feels complicated',
|
||
],
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
const commonClientApprovalPain = {
|
||
painTitle: 'Clients do not want another login',
|
||
painNarrative:
|
||
'Approval delays usually start before the first note. If a client has to create an account, install software, or decode a complex interface, the review slows down before it starts.',
|
||
painBullets: [
|
||
'Clients abandon review flows that require signup',
|
||
'Stakeholders comment on the wrong version',
|
||
'There is no single place to see approval status',
|
||
'Handoff reports get rebuilt manually after the fact',
|
||
],
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
const competitorFeatureRows: Record<string, FeatureRow[]> = {
|
||
'frame-io': [
|
||
{ label: 'Timestamped comments', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Voice notes on timeline', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Drawn frame annotations', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Comment export', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting option', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'no',
|
||
note: 'Frame.io guests review free via links, but team seats are billed per member.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
wipster: [
|
||
{ label: 'Timestamped comments', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Voice notes on timeline', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Drawn frame annotations', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Comment export', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting option', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'partial',
|
||
note: 'Wipster reviewers are free, but Team plans bill per user seat.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
'dropbox-replay': [
|
||
{ label: 'Timestamped comments', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Voice notes on timeline', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Drawn frame annotations', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Comment export', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting option', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'no',
|
||
note: 'Replay Add-On is priced per user on top of a Dropbox plan.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
flask: [
|
||
{ label: 'Voice feedback', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Auto-structured spoken notes', openframe: 'partial', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Formal approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review links', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'partial',
|
||
note: 'Flask charges $0 per guest on Pro, but team seats are $15/user/month billed yearly.',
|
||
},
|
||
{ label: 'Published pricing', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'PDF/CSV export', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
],
|
||
'vimeo-review': [
|
||
{ label: 'Timestamped comments', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Voice notes on timeline', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Drawn frame annotations', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Comment export', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting option', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'partial',
|
||
note: 'Vimeo review guests are free via links, but team hosting plans scale by seat.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
};
|
||
|
||
function defaultFeatureRows(competitorId: string): FeatureRow[] {
|
||
return competitorFeatureRows[competitorId] ?? [];
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
function competitorPricingRows(competitorId: string): PricingRow[] {
|
||
const profile = competitorProfiles[competitorId];
|
||
if (!profile) return [];
|
||
|
||
return [
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Per-member or guest fees',
|
||
openframe: '$10/mo flat — no per-seat or guest charges',
|
||
competitor: profile.pricingSummary,
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'External reviewer access',
|
||
openframe: 'Share link, no account required',
|
||
competitor: profile.reviewerAccess,
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Self-hosted option',
|
||
openframe: 'Free (Docker)',
|
||
competitor: profile.selfHosted ? 'Yes' : 'No',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Trial',
|
||
openframe: '7-day free trial on hosted, no card required',
|
||
competitor: profile.pricingNotes[0] ?? 'See vendor site',
|
||
},
|
||
];
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
function competitorPage(
|
||
slug: string,
|
||
competitorId: string,
|
||
overrides: Partial<ComparisonPageDefinition> &
|
||
Pick<
|
||
ComparisonPageDefinition,
|
||
| 'title'
|
||
| 'metaDescription'
|
||
| 'keywords'
|
||
| 'headline'
|
||
| 'subheadline'
|
||
| 'solutionTitle'
|
||
| 'solutionNarrative'
|
||
| 'openframeWins'
|
||
| 'competitorWins'
|
||
| 'faq'
|
||
>
|
||
): ComparisonPageDefinition {
|
||
const profile = competitorProfiles[competitorId];
|
||
|
||
return {
|
||
slug,
|
||
competitorId,
|
||
pageType: 'competitor',
|
||
eyebrow: `${profile.name} alternative`,
|
||
painTitle: commonFreelancerPain.painTitle,
|
||
painNarrative: commonFreelancerPain.painNarrative,
|
||
painBullets: commonFreelancerPain.painBullets,
|
||
bestForOpenFrame: openFrameProfile.bestFor,
|
||
bestForCompetitor: profile.bestFor,
|
||
featureRows: defaultFeatureRows(competitorId),
|
||
pricingRows: competitorPricingRows(competitorId),
|
||
pricingFootnote: 'Pricing and features change. Verify current plans on each vendor website.',
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-dashboard',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
],
|
||
...overrides,
|
||
};
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
export const comparisonPages: ComparisonPageDefinition[] = [
|
||
competitorPage('frame-io-alternative', 'frame-io', {
|
||
title: 'Frame.io Alternative for Small Teams',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'Compare OpenFrame vs Frame.io for freelancers and small teams. Get timestamped review, approvals, guest links, and self-hosting without per-seat enterprise pricing.',
|
||
keywords: ['frame.io alternative', 'frame io alternative', 'fair source frame.io alternative'],
|
||
headline: 'Frame.io power without the enterprise bill',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Frame.io is the industry standard for large post teams. OpenFrame gives freelancers and small studios the review workflow they actually need: one link, one timeline, clear approvals, and optional self-hosting.',
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Built for small teams, not studio overhead',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'OpenFrame keeps the parts that save approval time—timestamped comments, voice notes, annotations, version compare, and sign-off tracking—without tying you to per-member pricing or a full creative-ops platform.',
|
||
openframeWins: [...commonOpenFrameWins, 'Fair-source codebase you can inspect and self-host'],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Deep Adobe Premiere, Final Cut, and enterprise media workflows',
|
||
'Camera to Cloud, DRM, forensic watermarking, and SSO at enterprise scale',
|
||
'Mature metadata, collections, and multi-workspace operations',
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Do clients need a Frame.io account?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Not for share-link review. Frame.io supports external reviewers via links without accounts, but internal project management still uses paid member seats.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Why switch from Frame.io to OpenFrame?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'If you are a freelancer or small team paying for features you never touch, OpenFrame offers a simpler approval workflow, lower hosted pricing, and a free self-hosted path.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can OpenFrame replace Frame.io for enterprise MAM?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Not today. OpenFrame is focused on review, versioning, and approvals—not large-scale media asset management or Adobe enterprise controls.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-compare',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'self-hosted-frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'wipster-alternative',
|
||
'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
],
|
||
}),
|
||
{
|
||
slug: 'self-hosted-frame-io-alternative',
|
||
competitorId: 'frame-io',
|
||
pageType: 'use-case',
|
||
title: 'Self-Hosted Frame.io Alternative',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'OpenFrame is a self-hosted Frame.io alternative with timestamped review, approvals, guest links, and Docker deployment for teams that need full data control.',
|
||
keywords: [
|
||
'self hosted frame.io alternative',
|
||
'self-hosted video review',
|
||
'fair source video review',
|
||
],
|
||
eyebrow: 'Self-hosted review',
|
||
headline: 'Keep client footage on your infrastructure',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'If Frame.io’s cloud-only model is the blocker, OpenFrame gives you the same core review loop—comments, versions, approvals, and share links—on hardware you control.',
|
||
painTitle: 'Cloud review tools are not always a fit',
|
||
painNarrative:
|
||
'Some teams cannot upload client masters to US-hosted SaaS by policy, budget, or principle. They still need timestamped review and approvals—not a return to email chaos.',
|
||
painBullets: [
|
||
'Client contracts restrict third-party cloud storage',
|
||
'Per-seat SaaS costs add up across occasional collaborators',
|
||
'You want auditability over where footage lives',
|
||
'You need a review tool that works air-gapped or on-prem',
|
||
],
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Self-host without giving up the workflow',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'OpenFrame ships with Docker Compose, PostgreSQL, and S3-compatible storage. Optionally wire up your own Bunny CDN instance for streaming. Run on your server, keep projects private by default, and still send clients a simple browser review link.',
|
||
bestForOpenFrame: [
|
||
'Teams with Docker ops capacity',
|
||
'Privacy-sensitive client work',
|
||
'Studios comparing Frame.io to fair-source options',
|
||
],
|
||
bestForCompetitor: [
|
||
'Teams needing Adobe enterprise integrations out of the box',
|
||
'Studios without any infrastructure maintenance capacity',
|
||
'Large distributed teams needing vendor-managed scale',
|
||
],
|
||
openframeWins: [
|
||
'Free self-hosted deployment with full review features',
|
||
'Docker Compose setup with PostgreSQL and MinIO',
|
||
'Optional Bunny CDN integration for self-hosted streaming',
|
||
'Optional hosted cloud if you want zero ops later',
|
||
'Guest share links and approval workflow included',
|
||
],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Fully managed transcoding and delivery without running your own stack',
|
||
'Enterprise security certifications and Adobe ecosystem depth',
|
||
'No server maintenance required',
|
||
],
|
||
featureRows: [
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Docker deployment', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review links', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Version compare', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Enterprise DRM / SSO', openframe: 'no', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Adobe NLE integrations', openframe: 'no', competitor: 'yes' },
|
||
{ label: 'Fair-source codebase', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'no' },
|
||
],
|
||
pricingRows: [
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosted software cost', openframe: 'Free', competitor: 'Not available' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Per-member or guest fees',
|
||
openframe: '$10/mo flat — no per-seat or guest charges',
|
||
competitor: 'From $15/member/mo for team seats',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'CDN / streaming',
|
||
openframe: 'Optional self-hosted Bunny CDN',
|
||
competitor: 'Vendor-managed CDN',
|
||
},
|
||
{ label: 'Data residency', openframe: 'Your servers', competitor: 'Vendor cloud' },
|
||
],
|
||
pricingFootnote: 'Self-hosting still requires your own compute, storage, and maintenance.',
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Is OpenFrame really self-hostable?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Yes. The repository includes Docker Compose, migrations on boot, and optional S3-compatible storage. You can also use the hosted plan if you do not want to operate infrastructure.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can I use a CDN with self-hosted OpenFrame?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Yes. You can integrate your own Bunny CDN instance for streaming on self-hosted deployments, keeping delivery on infrastructure you control.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Do clients still need accounts on self-hosted OpenFrame?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'No. Clients can review via share links in the browser without creating an account.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-dashboard',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
],
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
slug: 'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
competitorId: null,
|
||
pageType: 'use-case',
|
||
title: 'Video Review Tool for Freelancers',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'OpenFrame is a video review tool for freelancers with timestamped comments, voice notes, guest links, version compare, and affordable hosted or free self-hosted pricing.',
|
||
keywords: [
|
||
'video review tool for freelancers',
|
||
'freelance video review',
|
||
'client video feedback',
|
||
],
|
||
eyebrow: 'For freelancers',
|
||
headline: 'Stop chasing timecodes. Start shipping cuts.',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'You do not need enterprise creative ops to get professional client review. OpenFrame gives freelancers one link, one timeline, and a clear approval state.',
|
||
painTitle: commonFreelancerPain.painTitle,
|
||
painNarrative: commonFreelancerPain.painNarrative,
|
||
painBullets: commonFreelancerPain.painBullets,
|
||
solutionTitle: 'A freelancer-sized review stack',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'Upload or import a cut, share a link, collect timestamped feedback with text or voice, compare versions, and export a report when the client signs off.',
|
||
bestForOpenFrame: openFrameProfile.bestFor,
|
||
bestForCompetitor: [
|
||
'Full-time post houses needing Adobe-native enterprise tooling',
|
||
'Teams already standardized on Frame.io or Dropbox',
|
||
'Studios needing storyboard-to-delivery production suites',
|
||
],
|
||
openframeWins: commonOpenFrameWins,
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Mature NLE integrations for large facility workflows',
|
||
'Specialized tools for EU-only hosting or voice-first feedback',
|
||
'All-in-one suites if you already pay for Vimeo or Dropbox',
|
||
],
|
||
featureRows: [
|
||
{ label: 'Timestamped comments', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'Varies' },
|
||
{ label: 'Voice notes on timeline', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'Rare' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'Varies' },
|
||
{ label: 'Approval workflow', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'Varies' },
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosting option', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'Rare' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Flat pricing without per-member fees',
|
||
openframe: 'yes',
|
||
competitor: 'Rare',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
pricingRows: [
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Per-member or guest fees',
|
||
openframe: '$10/mo flat — no per-seat or guest charges',
|
||
competitor: 'Often per-seat or bundled with hosting',
|
||
},
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosted', openframe: 'Free', competitor: 'Rare' },
|
||
{ label: 'Client accounts', openframe: 'Not required', competitor: 'Varies by tool' },
|
||
{ label: 'YouTube imports', openframe: 'Unlimited on hosted', competitor: 'Varies' },
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'What makes a good freelancer video review tool?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Clients should review in the browser without friction, every note should land on a timestamp, and you should always know which version is approved.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can I start free?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Yes. The 7-day hosted trial does not ask for a card, and self-hosting with Docker is free.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Is OpenFrame only for video?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'OpenFrame is video-first: comments, voice notes, annotations, versions, and approvals are built around the timeline.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-dashboard',
|
||
relatedSlugs: ['client-video-approval-tool', 'frame-io-alternative', 'wipster-alternative'],
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
slug: 'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
competitorId: null,
|
||
pageType: 'use-case',
|
||
title: 'Client Video Approval Tool',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'OpenFrame is a client video approval tool with share links, timestamped feedback, approval requests, and PDF/CSV exports for freelancers and small teams.',
|
||
keywords: ['client video approval tool', 'video approval software', 'client sign off video'],
|
||
eyebrow: 'Client approvals',
|
||
headline: 'Get to “approved” without another login wall',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Clients review in the browser, leave timestamped notes, and approve the exact version you need to ship.',
|
||
painTitle: commonClientApprovalPain.painTitle,
|
||
painNarrative: commonClientApprovalPain.painNarrative,
|
||
painBullets: commonClientApprovalPain.painBullets,
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Approvals that clients actually complete',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'Send one link, collect precise feedback on the timeline, request approval from specific reviewers, and keep a record of who signed off on which version.',
|
||
bestForOpenFrame: [
|
||
'Editors and producers who need formal sign-off',
|
||
'Agencies with non-technical clients',
|
||
'Teams that export approval records for delivery',
|
||
],
|
||
bestForCompetitor: [
|
||
'Marketing orgs needing multi-asset proofing across PDFs and websites',
|
||
'Large teams with compliance-heavy approval chains',
|
||
'Studios standardized on incumbent review platforms',
|
||
],
|
||
openframeWins: [
|
||
'Approval requests with pending, approved, and rejected states',
|
||
'Guest share links with optional password and expiry',
|
||
'Timestamped comments, voice notes, and annotations',
|
||
'PDF/CSV exports for delivery documentation',
|
||
],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Enterprise proofing suites with reviewer groups and automations',
|
||
'Deep Adobe integrations for facility-scale post',
|
||
'Voice-first feedback tools for spoken review sessions',
|
||
],
|
||
featureRows: [
|
||
{ label: 'Explicit approval states', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Per-reviewer approval tracking', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Guest review without account', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Password-protected share links', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Export approval history', openframe: 'yes', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
{ label: 'Multi-asset marketing proofing', openframe: 'no', competitor: 'partial' },
|
||
],
|
||
pricingRows: [
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Per-member or guest fees',
|
||
openframe: '$10/mo flat — no per-seat or guest charges',
|
||
competitor: 'Varies by platform',
|
||
},
|
||
{ label: 'Self-hosted', openframe: 'Free', competitor: 'Rare' },
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Client seats',
|
||
openframe: 'Free via share links',
|
||
competitor: 'Often free via links',
|
||
},
|
||
{ label: 'Export reports', openframe: 'PDF/CSV included', competitor: 'Varies' },
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Do clients need an account to approve a video?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'No. Clients open a share link, enter a name if needed, and can approve from the browser.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can I see who approved which version?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. Approval requests track reviewer decisions per version.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can I send a password-protected review link?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. Share links support optional password and expiry settings.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-compare',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'wipster-alternative',
|
||
],
|
||
},
|
||
competitorPage('wipster-alternative', 'wipster', {
|
||
title: 'Wipster Alternative for Video Review',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'Compare OpenFrame vs Wipster for freelancers and small teams. Get guest review links, version compare, approvals, and lower pricing with optional self-hosting.',
|
||
keywords: ['wipster alternative', 'wipster vs openframe', 'video review alternative'],
|
||
headline: 'Wipster-style review without agency-scale pricing',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Wipster is a solid video-first review tool. OpenFrame matches the core approval loop while adding voice notes, exports, and a free self-hosted path.',
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Same review outcome, simpler economics',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'If you mainly need clients to comment on timecodes, compare versions, and approve a cut, OpenFrame covers that workflow at a lower monthly cost.',
|
||
openframeWins: [...commonOpenFrameWins, 'Lower hosted entry price for solo operators'],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Mature NLE review panels for Premiere and After Effects',
|
||
'Long track record with agencies and universities',
|
||
'Supports audio, PDF, and image review in one place',
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Does Wipster charge for reviewers?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'No. Wipster includes unlimited reviewers. OpenFrame also supports guest review links without client seats.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'When is Wipster still the better fit?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'If you rely heavily on Wipster’s NLE panels and agency workflows already in production.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Does OpenFrame support version compare?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. You can compare two versions side by side on one timeline.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
'dropbox-replay-alternative',
|
||
],
|
||
}),
|
||
competitorPage('dropbox-replay-alternative', 'dropbox-replay', {
|
||
title: 'Dropbox Replay Alternative',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'Compare OpenFrame vs Dropbox Replay for video review. Get a dedicated approval workflow, guest links, and optional self-hosting without Dropbox plan lock-in.',
|
||
keywords: ['dropbox replay alternative', 'dropbox replay vs', 'video review without dropbox'],
|
||
headline: 'Video review without Dropbox lock-in',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Dropbox Replay is convenient if your files already live in Dropbox. OpenFrame is a focused review platform that does not require a storage suite to function.',
|
||
solutionTitle: 'A review tool, not a storage add-on',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'OpenFrame is built around review, versions, and approvals first—so you are not paying for a file-sync platform just to collect timestamped client notes.',
|
||
openframeWins: [
|
||
...commonOpenFrameWins,
|
||
'No Dropbox plan or Replay Add-On required',
|
||
'Dedicated project and approval model',
|
||
],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Native if your pipeline already lives in Dropbox',
|
||
'NLE integrations tied to Dropbox storage',
|
||
'Large file transfer and archive features via Dropbox',
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Is Dropbox Replay free?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Replay is included with limits on most plans. Full usage typically requires a paid Dropbox plan and often the Replay Add-On.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can OpenFrame replace Replay for NLE markers?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'OpenFrame focuses on browser review, approvals, and exports rather than in-editor marker sync.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Do clients need Dropbox accounts?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Not necessarily for all Replay flows, but the product assumes Dropbox storage context. OpenFrame uses standalone share links.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
'vimeo-review-alternative',
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
],
|
||
}),
|
||
competitorPage('vimeo-review-alternative', 'vimeo-review', {
|
||
title: 'Vimeo Review Alternative',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'Compare OpenFrame vs Vimeo Review. Get dedicated approvals, voice notes, exports, and self-hosting without tying review to Vimeo hosting plans.',
|
||
keywords: ['vimeo review alternative', 'vimeo video review alternative'],
|
||
headline: 'Review workflow without Vimeo plan lock-in',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Vimeo Review is convenient when you already host on Vimeo. OpenFrame is a standalone review platform with its own hosted and self-hosted options.',
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Decouple review from distribution',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'You should not need a video hosting subscription to run a professional approval loop. OpenFrame works whether your master lives on YouTube, direct upload, or self-hosted storage.',
|
||
openframeWins: [
|
||
...commonOpenFrameWins,
|
||
'Standalone product—not a hosting bundle',
|
||
'Unlimited YouTube imports on hosted plan',
|
||
],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Built into Vimeo when you already distribute there',
|
||
'Premiere integration and Vimeo player polish',
|
||
'Review links tied to hosted library and version history',
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Do Vimeo reviewers need accounts?',
|
||
answer: 'No for review links. Guests can comment after providing name and email.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can OpenFrame import YouTube videos?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. Hosted OpenFrame supports unlimited YouTube URL imports.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'When is Vimeo Review enough?',
|
||
answer: 'If your team already hosts, delivers, and reviews entirely inside Vimeo.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-dashboard',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'dropbox-replay-alternative',
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
],
|
||
}),
|
||
competitorPage('flask-alternative', 'flask', {
|
||
title: 'Flask Alternative for Video Feedback',
|
||
metaDescription:
|
||
'Compare OpenFrame vs Flask for video feedback. Get structured approvals, guest review links, exports, and self-hosting alongside spoken-note workflows.',
|
||
keywords: ['flask.do alternative', 'flask video feedback alternative'],
|
||
headline: 'Structured approvals beyond spoken feedback',
|
||
subheadline:
|
||
'Flask is compelling for voice-first review. OpenFrame is for teams that also need formal approvals, exports, guest links, and optional self-hosting.',
|
||
solutionTitle: 'Capture feedback and close the approval loop',
|
||
solutionNarrative:
|
||
'OpenFrame supports voice notes too—but it also tracks approval status per reviewer, compares versions, and exports a handoff record when the cut is cleared.',
|
||
openframeWins: [
|
||
...commonOpenFrameWins,
|
||
'Formal approval requests and status tracking',
|
||
'Self-host or use managed hosting',
|
||
'$10/mo flat for the whole team — not per seat',
|
||
],
|
||
competitorWins: [
|
||
'Best-in-class spoken feedback that auto-structures into notes',
|
||
'Free tier with all features (1 asset at a time, no card)',
|
||
'MCP/agent workflow integrations',
|
||
'Premiere export and upmarket production focus',
|
||
],
|
||
pricingRows: [
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Team pricing',
|
||
openframe: '$10/mo flat — unlimited members and guests',
|
||
competitor: 'Free (1 asset) · Pro $15/user/mo (yearly) · Enterprise from 15 seats',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Per-guest fees',
|
||
openframe: 'None',
|
||
competitor: '$0 per guest on Pro',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Self-hosted option',
|
||
openframe: 'Free (Docker)',
|
||
competitor: 'No',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
label: 'Trial',
|
||
openframe: '7-day free trial on hosted, no card required',
|
||
competitor: 'Free plan — no card required',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
faq: [
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Does OpenFrame support voice notes?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. Reviewers can leave voice notes anchored to timestamps on the timeline.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'How much does Flask cost?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'Flask offers a free plan (1 asset at a time, no card), Pro at $15/user/month billed yearly with $0 per guest, and custom enterprise pricing from 15 seats.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'When is Flask the better fit?',
|
||
answer:
|
||
'When your reviewers primarily talk through notes and you want AI-structured feedback capture.',
|
||
},
|
||
{
|
||
question: 'Can clients approve without an account in OpenFrame?',
|
||
answer: 'Yes. Share links support guest review and approval flows.',
|
||
},
|
||
],
|
||
visualVariant: 'landing-dashboard',
|
||
relatedSlugs: [
|
||
'client-video-approval-tool',
|
||
'video-review-tool-for-freelancers',
|
||
'frame-io-alternative',
|
||
],
|
||
}),
|
||
];
|
||
|
||
export const comparisonPageMap = Object.fromEntries(
|
||
comparisonPages.map((page) => [page.slug, page])
|
||
) as Record<string, ComparisonPageDefinition>;
|
||
|
||
export const comparisonSlugs = comparisonPages.map((page) => page.slug);
|
||
|
||
export const compareFooterLinks = comparisonPages.map((page) => ({
|
||
href: `/${page.slug}`,
|
||
label: page.eyebrow,
|
||
}));
|
||
|
||
export function getComparisonPage(slug: string): ComparisonPageDefinition | undefined {
|
||
return Object.hasOwn(comparisonPageMap, slug) ? comparisonPageMap[slug] : undefined;
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
export function getCompetitorName(page: ComparisonPageDefinition): string | null {
|
||
if (!page.competitorId) return null;
|
||
return competitorProfiles[page.competitorId]?.name ?? null;
|
||
}
|