3 ms·

That was a disappointingly poor article. It seems a product no-one has heard of (a "best kept secret"), which requires a monthly subscription, and is used by n

That was a disappointingly poor article. It seems a product no-one has heard of (a "best kept secret"), which requires a monthly subscription, and is used by no blog of note, is going to try to challenge WordPress. It is unclear in the extreme why it thinks it has any chance of doing that.

slantyyz 15y ago
Don't know if it's a good product or if the article is well written (I try not to read anything from Pando) but I thought Squarespace was pretty well known. They used to (and maybe still do, I stopped listening to TWIT) get a lot of plugs from their sponsorship on several of the TWIT network's podcasts, which have a pretty big combined listenership.
- evan_ 15y ago
  They sponsor many of the 5by5 podcasts- Merlin Mann's Back To Work in particular.
fruchtose 15y ago
I agree, and it seems that Pando is spreading the notion on the basis that Squarespace is making money. This paragraph is most important in the article: > In fact, the company mostly serves smaller blogs and businesses. It has tens of thousands of users, Casalena said, compared with WordPress’s 73 million and Tumblr’s 51 million. The key is Squarespace’s users are all paying a monthly fee. Squarespace is positioned as an alternative to paying some developer $5000 to make a site. This paragraph at once defines and antagonizes the thesis of the article. It defines the thesis in that, if Squarespace is making a product worth using, it will spread to areas outside its current target audience. However, at the same time, it would be ludicrous to assume that independent bloggers currently comfortable with WordPress would switch to a non-free product any time soon--we're talking about moving millions of users of a free product to a paid one. How many of these bloggers can afford to move? What are the advantages of moving? The article is disappointing because it does not answer any of these questions while assuming the conclusion.

slantyyz 15y ago

Don't know if it's a good product or if the article is well written (I try not to read anything from Pando) but I thought Squarespace was pretty well known. They used to (and maybe still do, I stopped listening to TWIT) get a lot of plugs from their sponsorship on several of the TWIT network's podcasts, which have a pretty big combined listenership.

evan_ 15y ago
They sponsor many of the 5by5 podcasts- Merlin Mann's Back To Work in particular.

fruchtose 15y ago

I agree, and it seems that Pando is spreading the notion on the basis that Squarespace is making money. This paragraph is most important in the article: > In fact, the company mostly serves smaller blogs and businesses. It has tens of thousands of users, Casalena said, compared with WordPress’s 73 million and Tumblr’s 51 million. The key is Squarespace’s users are all paying a monthly fee. Squarespace is positioned as an alternative to paying some developer $5000 to make a site. This paragraph at once defines and antagonizes the thesis of the article. It defines the thesis in that, if Squarespace is making a product worth using, it will spread to areas outside its current target audience. However, at the same time, it would be ludicrous to assume that independent bloggers currently comfortable with WordPress would switch to a non-free product any time soon--we're talking about moving millions of users of a free product to a paid one. How many of these bloggers can afford to move? What are the advantages of moving? The article is disappointing because it does not answer any of these questions while assuming the conclusion.