If you're choosing between Ghost and Medium, and would like something that is hosted, I recently released Silvrback (https://www.silvrback.com). It has the simplicity of Medium, while giving you control over your own brand.
Ugg. I really like where you were going with that, but you lost me at this: "People shouldn't spend any time configuring a server for a blog."
Maybe some people shouldn't be spending any time configuring a server for a blog, but I have been increasingly working to take back control of my data and it's related services. That means I want to be able to install things on a server of my choosing. This also means FOSS wherever I can possibly put it. I would even happily pay for the FOSS, but the thing I hate the most about medium, svbtle, and the others, is that I can't use the platform where I want to and I don't see gpl/mit anywhere.
I understand that your intention is the hosted segment, but I really think you could gain a lot more traction by going to a one time price, FOSing the code, and still offering a paid hosting service for those that want it.
Maybe it's just because the older I get the more I am aligning with RMS.
Yeah, you're right. There's always going to be a group of people that want to configure everything themselves and setup their own servers. I'm not really targeting this group with silvrback. Open source ghost would be the best route for you.
However, there are a number of people looking for hosted solutions so they don't have to waste any time with config issues. This is where Silvrback comes in. Also, Silvrback should really only be compared to the hosted version of Ghost (which isn't out yet). Comparing it to open source isn't really possible.
"Comparing it to open source isn't really possible."
I don't really understand this line of reasoning. You are running code on your servers, are you not? Your code is either closed or open. (closed) How is comparing it to open source not possible?
Just not possible in the sense that a hosted solution has the expectation that everything is managed for you. An open-source solution requires you to do the work of setting it up, configuring, handling traffic spikes, backups, etc...
I see your intention now, but you are using the words in the wrong context with the wrong definition. There are plenty of hosted open source products that require little to no setup.
