@markjcrane
Mark, this isn’t a competition, nor is FS PBX trying to replace FusionPBX. FS PBX was built as an enhancement—because as much as we appreciate FusionPBX, it hasn’t been a viable solution for real VoIP providers who need stability, usability, and security at scale.
We didn’t build FS PBX out of spite—we built it because users were struggling with FusionPBX. Many VoIP companies found it too difficult to manage, which ultimately hurt adoption and frustrated users. FS PBX solves those pain points by providing a more modern, user-friendly interface, improved automation, and optimizations that make day-to-day operations smoother.
If FusionPBX 5.3 has made performance improvements, that’s great—it shows that optimization was needed. But that doesn’t change the fact that FS PBX has taken a different approach by prioritizing a queue-driven architecture, which significantly reduces load and improves responsiveness.
Your point about "missing features" ignores that FS PBX was never intended to be a 1:1 replacement. While FusionPBX has more features, many of them remain underutilized, undocumented, or require deep customization to work in production environments. FS PBX focuses on what VoIP companies actually use and need, prioritizing reliability over feature bloat.
FS PBX was developed based on real feedback from users struggling to manage FusionPBX in production environments. Instead of just adding more features, we focused on usability, streamlined workflows, and automation.
Instead of dismissing FS PBX, a more productive approach would be to acknowledge that we both bring value in different ways. Rather than taking shots, it would have been far more constructive to have a real conversation about how the modern UI and structured workflow of FS PBX could complement the FusionPBX backend, creating something truly exceptional for the VoIP community.
We’re not here to "win"—we’re here to solve real problems. And the fact that FS PBX has gained traction so quickly proves that these problems needed solutions.
