Editing MinIO Object Browser: Removal of Management Features (section)

== MinIO's Response ==
MinIO, Inc. stated that the removal of management features was necessary due to maintenance challenges and security concerns. The company argued that maintaining separate graphical consoles for the community and commercial branches was unsustainable, and cited past vulnerabilities in the admin UI as a reason to prioritize security by removing unmaintained features <ref>[https://github.com/minio/object-browser/pull/3509#issuecomment-2910994229 Comment by harshavardhana on PR #3509]</ref>.

However, MinIO’s commercial pricing has been widely criticized as excessively high. The entry-level commercial offering, AiStor, starts at '''$96,000 per year''' for a platform fee, covering up to 400 TiB of storage. <ref>[https://min.io/ MinIO Website]</ref> This makes self-hosting MinIO more expensive than using Amazon S3 itself for many users, especially those with smaller storage needs. There are no lower-cost or tiered options, effectively pricing out small businesses and individual users. <ref>[https://aws.amazon.com/de/s3/pricing/ Amazon S3 pricing]</ref>

In addition to the high cost, MinIO has been criticized for its handling of community feedback. After the release of Object Browser 2.0, users raised concerns and objections in GitHub issues and pull requests. Instead of engaging in open discussion, MinIO maintainers have closed and locked threads where the feature removal is discussed, effectively silencing community concerns. For example, in [https://github.com/minio/object-browser/issues/3544 GitHub Issue #3544], a user wrote:<blockquote>"This dreadful PR forces users to pay for a license by removing all the useful features. It’s outrageous - no technical considerations justify this decision; it’s purely greed and an abuse of the OSS model. Please either revert this ASAP or explain your reasoning with clear arguments rather than blocking responses."</blockquote>This issue, like others, was quickly closed and locked, preventing further discussion. Similar patterns have been observed across other issues and pull requests related to the feature removal, with maintainers providing minimal explanation and then restricting conversation.

While MinIO has stated they are open to community contributions for developing an alternative management UI, their actions—disregarding prior community contributions and shutting down discussion—have raised questions about their commitment to open-source principles and community collaboration.

The absence of prior communication or community consultation raised questions about the transparency of the decision-making process. <ref>[https://blog.min.io/ MinIO Blog]</ref>