If a web-app fully satisfies the poster, should being free be an actual qualifier for an alternative? It would not make sense (in the perspective of the priced web-app) for there to be something out there with similar features but free.

I am thinking that these type of questions should be closed as not a real question if no other qualifiers are given.


1 Answer 1


I personally don't care for such questions, since I think if you really need to get something done through a webapp, you shouldn't care whether it's free or not, and you should get all the available options free or not, and make your decision accordingly.

It's also a pain because why would we want two versions of every question?

Where can I find great webapps that do {x}?


Where can I find great free webapps that do {x}?

However, if the poster really doesn't have any money, I suppose the non-free options don't help them, so I don't think it would be entirely fair to disallow this sort of question.

But on the whole, I think more people would benefit from the former question, and it will be easier to have a comprehensive(ish) list of all web app options for {x} in one place.

So I vote, we combine these questions and have a rule that asking for specifically "free" options for {x} will be generalized into "good web options for doing {x}", period.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .