I asked a question here: Can Stack Overflow be cloned for internal use? which is obviously on people's minds, because it was closed as a duplicate of this: Stack Exchange clones

So why doesn't Stack Overflow make a private version available - same exact functionality as the public Stack Overflow, but only available to authorized users? Obviously they could charge a fee for this, but I would think this could be a win-win situation for SO and businesses who want the SO functionality but want to keep the questions and answers "in house."


1 Answer 1


Stack Overflow Enterprise is available for internal private use, but that is intended for larger organizations only.

Stack Overflow once tried a subscription service for the public, but it didn't work.

Changes to Stack Exchange

Charging for Stack Exchange hasn’t exactly worked

Our first idea was Stack Exchange… call it Stack Exchange 1.0. We thought we’d make our software available on a SaaS basis, a.k.a. “white label Stack Overflow,” so that anyone could start a site on a new topic in exchange for money.

When we launched Stack Exchange, we imagined thousands of sites would start to sprout up on every possible topic. Harley Davidson belt buckles, mathematics, unicorns, you name it.

However, by setting a price ($129-$5000/month, depending on traffic) to cover the cost of servers and bandwidth, we discouraged a lot of people from making sites that might have been great. And by allowing anyone with a credit card to make a site, we got a lot of ghost-town sites that nobody visited. We also got a lot of duplication: multiple sites on the same topic, competing for the same people and preventing one other from hitting critical mass.

Bottom line, it just wasn’t working. We’ve been in beta for half a year now, and we only have a handful of sites that get enough traffic to provide quality, timely answers to difficult questions.


You must log in to answer this question.

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