In n8n you draw every step of the flow.
In Lienox you describe the outcome and the agent picks the steps.
Both automate work, by opposite routes. n8n is a visual editor where you define every node, branch and condition up front. Lienox runs agents that read what is actually in front of them and choose the next step themselves. Which one fits depends on whether your process can be drawn end to end.
What each one is
Deterministic flow versus autonomous agent
A visual, self-hostable workflow editor
n8n is a workflow automation tool where you wire nodes on a canvas: a trigger, a few API calls, conditions, loops. Every step is defined before it runs. You can use their managed cloud or self-host with Docker, and its catalogue of ready-made integrations is among the largest in the category.
An agent orchestrator that lives on your machine
Lienox runs AI agents on your own machine, with your API keys (BYOK). You do not declare the steps: you describe the goal. The agent opens the browser, reads the screen, runs commands and decides what to do with what it finds — and when something moved since yesterday, it adapts instead of breaking.
The underlying difference
Four things that change when the flow is not drawn
No node to update when the site changes
A node flow breaks when the API it consumes renames a field or the page it scrapes moves a button. An agent looks at the page in front of it and carries on. That is the difference between maintaining the flow and using it.
No integration, nothing to wait for
If a tool has no node, in n8n you fall back to the generic HTTP node or write your own. An agent with a browser uses the web interface the way a person would, so coverage does not depend on a catalogue.
Self-hosting without infrastructure
Self-hosted n8n is a container, a database and a domain to maintain. Lienox is a desktop app: install it and it already runs locally — no server, no Docker, nothing exposed to the internet.
Pricing does not count executions
Managed plans in this category usually meter per execution or per step, so cost rises exactly when the automation starts paying off. Lienox charges a flat price for capacity; inference you pay straight to your AI provider.
Head to head
Lienox vs n8n, feature by feature
An architecture and model comparison, checked against each product's public documentation at the time this page was published. Plans change; verify current pricing before deciding.
| Feature | Lienox | n8n |
|---|---|---|
| Execution model | Autonomous agent: you describe the goal, it picks the steps | Deterministic flow: every node and branch is defined up front |
| Where it runs | Desktop app on your machine, no server | Managed cloud, or self-hosted with Docker and a database |
| Tool coverage | Real browser with its own cursor + MCP: if it has a web interface, it can be used | Broad node catalogue; beyond it, HTTP node or your own code |
| Tolerance to change | The agent re-reads the screen on every run and adapts | The flow fails when a step changes contract; you edit it |
| Reproducibility | Variable by design: two runs can take different paths | Identical on every run — its biggest advantage |
| Recurring automation | Agent cron jobs, unlimited on the Ultra plan | Schedule, webhook or event triggers |
| Platform cost | Flat by capacity: Free or $8 per month | Free self-hosted; managed plans meter per execution |
| AI cost | BYOK — you pay your provider directly, no markup in between | Also BYOK in its AI nodes |
| Licence | Proprietary, with a permanent Free plan and 100% local execution | Fair-code (Sustainable Use License): source visible, commercial use restricted — not OSI |
| Data privacy | Prompts, files and results never leave your machine | Self-hosted, yours; managed, on their infrastructure |
| Ideal user | Anyone whose processes have too many branches to draw, or that keep changing shape | Anyone with a stable, high-volume process that must come out the same every time |
Self-hosting
"Open source n8n alternative": what you are actually looking for
Almost nobody self-hosts for fun. People do it for one of three reasons: keeping data inside the organisation, keeping cost from scaling with usage, or not depending on a vendor changing its plans. Worth separating them, because they are not solved the same way.
On the licence: n8n ships as fair-code under the Sustainable Use License. The source is published and you can run it yourself, but it is not an OSI-approved licence: there are restrictions on commercial use and on reselling it as a service. If you arrived searching for "open source" in the strict sense, that distinction matters before you build on top.
On the real cost of self-hosting: the binary is free, the rest is not. A serious self-hosted n8n is a container, a Postgres database, backups, upgrades, TLS and an internet-facing domain if you want to receive webhooks. That is somebody's time, every month.
Where Lienox fits: it runs on your machine as a desktop app. No container, no database to back up, no public surface. What you give up is the always-on server: if the machine is off, the cron does not run. For personal or small-team use that is usually the right trade; for a production webhook that must answer 24/7, it is not.
The same job, in both
"Check on the competition and send me a summary on Mondays"
Eight to fifteen nodes, wired by hand
Schedule trigger → HTTP request per site → extraction node with CSS selectors → filter for what is new against what you stored → AI node to write it up → send by email. It works exactly the same every Monday, until one of the sites redesigns its blog and the selector stops finding anything. Then somebody has to open the canvas and fix it.
One cron job and an instruction in prose
You schedule a weekly agent and tell it what you want. It opens each site in the Space browser, reads what is there, compares it with last Monday and leaves you the summary. If a site changed its design, it reads it anyway, because it is looking at it rather than applying a selector.
Which one is right for you?
Pick the one that solves your real problem
Stay on n8n when:
- • The process is stable and has to come out identical all ten thousand times
- • You need to receive public webhooks with high availability
- • Everything you connect has a stable API and the node already exists
- • You want to audit step by step what the flow did and why
Switch to Lienox when:
- ✓ The process has too many branches or exceptions to draw end to end
- ✓ You spend more time fixing broken flows than using them
- ✓ The tool you need has no node, and no decent API either
- ✓ You want to self-host without containers or exposing anything to the internet
Frequently asked questions
Lienox vs n8n
What is the best n8n alternative?
It depends on why you are leaving. If you want the same node model under a different licence, look at Node-RED or Windmill. If you are leaving because maintaining the flows costs more than they save, the useful change is not of tool but of model: an agent orchestrator like Lienox never declares the steps, so there is no flow to repair when the other side changes.
Is n8n open source?
Not in the strict sense. n8n uses a fair-code licence (the Sustainable Use License): the source is published and you can self-host it, but the licence is not OSI-approved and it restricts commercial use and reselling it as a service. If your requirement comes from an internal policy about OSI licences, check that before building on top.
Can I self-host Lienox the way I self-host n8n?
It goes further: Lienox is not hosted, it is installed. It is a desktop app for Linux, Windows and macOS that runs agents on your own machine. No container, no database, no internet-facing service. What you give up is the always-on server: if the machine is off, nothing scheduled runs.
Does Lienox replace n8n?
For deterministic, high-volume processes, no — and you should not move those. It replaces it well when a flow has so many exceptions that drawing it costs more than doing the work by hand, or when the tool on the other side has no API and only exists as a web page. Plenty of people end up running both: n8n for the stable pipes, Lienox for the work that takes judgement.
How does pricing compare?
They are different models, not comparable numbers. n8n is free if you self-host (paying with the time to maintain it) and its managed plans meter usage per execution. Lienox charges a flat price for capacity — Free or Ultra at $8 per month — and AI inference goes straight to your provider at their published price. The useful question is not which costs less today, but which one gets more expensive once the automation starts working.
Does Lienox have integrations like n8n nodes?
Through two different routes. Via MCP you can import tools with per-tool permissions and your own OAuth. And via the Space browser, an agent uses any web interface the way a person would, with a real cursor and an isolated tab. That covers exactly the gap where a node catalogue falls short: anything without an API.
Can I migrate my n8n flows to Lienox?
There is no importer, and one would not make much sense: an n8n flow is a list of steps and a Lienox agent takes a goal. The real migration is rewriting the flow as an instruction in prose, which is usually a good deal shorter than the original canvas. Start with the flow that has broken on you the most, not the biggest one.
Stop maintaining flows and start using them
Free forever on Linux, Windows and macOS. Bring your own AI keys — no execution meter.