4 ms·

Could you enlighten me as to what WP Engine does differently from Automattic that you can't buy from them? Looking at the WP Engine, it's the exact same thing,

Could you enlighten me as to what WP Engine does differently from Automattic that you can't buy from them? Looking at the WP Engine, it's the exact same thing, with the numbers filed off, as Automattic offers.

Aloha 2y ago
Which particular service of Automattic? Like Wordpress.com in hindsight seems to offer it, but its not clear to me that I'm their customer target.
- x3sphere 2y ago
  Wordpress.com would be the equivalent. That said, they don't exactly offer an unmodified WP experience either at least not without upgrading to the higher tier plans. The base plan has plugins disabled for example. Not even sure how it's different from what Matt is accusing WP Engine of.
deepfriedchokes 2y ago
WP Engine offers headless WP CMS to static, for one, and it’s pretty slick. I don’t believe Automattic offers that, yet. But I bet Automattic builds it in, in the near future, and that’s probably what this WP Engine beef is really all about: money.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
partiallypro 2y ago
Wordpress.com is very limited and locked down relative to the .org variant hosts like WPE.
x0x0 2y ago
They offered many features that wordpress.com copied (staging sites with one-button cloning; easy backup and restores; automated updates of php and wp code; tweaks to prevent security issues; automatic cdn) and others like serious engineers answering support tickets to help you sort out whatever fragile, insecure wordpress crap your marketing team, or their wordpress contractors, installed on your site. We shouldn't overrate a lot of those features, because I think they were pretty obvious things to want. But WPEngine was, afaik, the first to market with all of the above in a pretty-cheap and seamless package.
- authorfly 2y ago
  Jason Cohen has done a number of talks on the origin of WP engine as being reliable/fast/secure in terms of preferences at the time of launch; But I think you are right, the features you listed naturally contributed and strengthened those needs.

Aloha 2y ago

Which particular service of Automattic? Like Wordpress.com in hindsight seems to offer it, but its not clear to me that I'm their customer target.

x3sphere 2y ago
Wordpress.com would be the equivalent. That said, they don't exactly offer an unmodified WP experience either at least not without upgrading to the higher tier plans. The base plan has plugins disabled for example. Not even sure how it's different from what Matt is accusing WP Engine of.

deepfriedchokes 2y ago

WP Engine offers headless WP CMS to static, for one, and it’s pretty slick. I don’t believe Automattic offers that, yet. But I bet Automattic builds it in, in the near future, and that’s probably what this WP Engine beef is really all about: money.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

partiallypro 2y ago

Wordpress.com is very limited and locked down relative to the .org variant hosts like WPE.

x0x0 2y ago

They offered many features that wordpress.com copied (staging sites with one-button cloning; easy backup and restores; automated updates of php and wp code; tweaks to prevent security issues; automatic cdn) and others like serious engineers answering support tickets to help you sort out whatever fragile, insecure wordpress crap your marketing team, or their wordpress contractors, installed on your site. We shouldn't overrate a lot of those features, because I think they were pretty obvious things to want. But WPEngine was, afaik, the first to market with all of the above in a pretty-cheap and seamless package.

authorfly 2y ago
Jason Cohen has done a number of talks on the origin of WP engine as being reliable/fast/secure in terms of preferences at the time of launch; But I think you are right, the features you listed naturally contributed and strengthened those needs.