3 ms·

The title made me wonder where they would go with this, then it starts with "Imagine Apple decided Spotify was a big enough business threat that it had to take

The title made me wonder where they would go with this, then it starts with "Imagine Apple decided Spotify was a big enough business threat that it had to take unfair measures to limit Spotify’s growth on the App Store." Um, okay - apple's store is not open, and spotify is not open source - so the article is over in it's first line.. but let go further Lock Spotify out of its developer ecosystem - sharecropping on someone else's land has risks - good thing about then a plugin or theme gets kicked out of wordpress.org's system is that WP users can "sideload" from anywhere with any sort of 'jailbreaking', you don't even need to click/tap 'it's okay to load from outside sources' (point 1 from the story) point 3 - this is completely false - see https://wordpress.org/news/ https://wordpress.org/news/ - and everyone got to see news about this in the wp-admin dashbaord (I think I recall from more than one source) the other 4 points are eye-roll worthy from me, again see point one. This is not the first time a similar thing has happened with the wordpress plugin or theme directory. The rest of this post is clearly very one sided and includes other falsehoods such as "The response was universally negative:" Growing tired of the article, I scroll and I see a headline "Is WP Engine the only enterprise-ready WordPress hosting provider left" are you kidding me? Disagree with the entire piece. and a return how about "Imagine Apple decided Spotify was a big enough business"... that they could easily afford to pay 30% of the proceeds they make from an app that lives in their ecosystem so that Apple can continue to develop, secure and grow - so that the app could enjoy those benefits and all can grow.. and if they didn't pay up, they get kicked out of the Apple store, I mean that would be outrageous! And you could re-write the article replacing automatic with apple.. oh wait.

pessimizer 2y ago
> then it starts with "Imagine Apple decided Spotify was a big enough business threat that it had to take unfair measures to limit Spotify’s growth on the App Store." > Um, okay - apple's store is not open, and spotify is not open source - so the article is over in it's first line.. Exactly. "Imagine that Apple wrote a GPL streaming music app, and Spotify was a redistributor of that app with almost no changes, but also used some of their own infrastructure to serve part of the backend of their fork. Now imagine that the reseller started doing nearly as much business as Apple with the app, but barely contributed any code. Apple asks Spotify to contribute more, Spotify replies 'lol.' Then, Apple tells Spotify that they can't call their fork 'Apple Music' anymore, and bans the Spotify fork from relying on Apple's infra for what Spotify doesn't find profitable to do."
CRConrad 2y ago
> Um, okay - apple's store is not open, and spotify is not open source - so the article is over in it's first line.. Only for people (wilfully?) blind to the screamingly obvious parallel.
- stevenicr 2y ago
  As mentioned later in the comment, the real parallel to consider is that this whole thing (I believe, am I wrong?) started with: Matt/Wordpress asking for (sizable) donation from wp-engine, and them refusing (maybe they offered an amount but balked at what was being suggested?) and then they got kicked out of the 'wordpress store' (.org directory and access to it) my limited understanding is that Apple demands you pay 30% of what you make from your apps, regardless.. and I think fortnite and a couple others have balked at that and got kicked out.. my DDG first result suggests Matt asked for 8% of wp-engine revenues.. and given that automattic/wp does WAY more for enhancing and securing the actual thing that their users use, compared to what Apple does for fortnites code.. seems that the parallel the author attempts to draw with Apple and it's store is hilarious- it actually shows that Matt is asking for less and providing more to wp-engine.. way more.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    The amount is not the parallel they're drawing. That's what makes your insistance on only seeing that so, to borrow a word, hilarious.
    - stevenicr 2y ago
      I don't see the amount as being the issue they pointed out, the parallel as far as I read it, is that it would be horrible if Apple kicked out an app for not paying them money. And the piece leaves out that indeed Apple does kick out apps for not paying money, AND if one was to consider the amounts it makes the ask from Automattic seem even less of an issue comparatively, AND if one was to consider the amount of stuff Automattic does that enhances the product it's even more puzzling that it's left out or not considered. This is without getting into open source and all sorts of other things that make the parallel hilariously bad.

pessimizer 2y ago

> then it starts with "Imagine Apple decided Spotify was a big enough business threat that it had to take unfair measures to limit Spotify’s growth on the App Store." > Um, okay - apple's store is not open, and spotify is not open source - so the article is over in it's first line.. Exactly. "Imagine that Apple wrote a GPL streaming music app, and Spotify was a redistributor of that app with almost no changes, but also used some of their own infrastructure to serve part of the backend of their fork. Now imagine that the reseller started doing nearly as much business as Apple with the app, but barely contributed any code. Apple asks Spotify to contribute more, Spotify replies 'lol.' Then, Apple tells Spotify that they can't call their fork 'Apple Music' anymore, and bans the Spotify fork from relying on Apple's infra for what Spotify doesn't find profitable to do."

CRConrad 2y ago

> Um, okay - apple's store is not open, and spotify is not open source - so the article is over in it's first line.. Only for people (wilfully?) blind to the screamingly obvious parallel.

stevenicr 2y ago
As mentioned later in the comment, the real parallel to consider is that this whole thing (I believe, am I wrong?) started with: Matt/Wordpress asking for (sizable) donation from wp-engine, and them refusing (maybe they offered an amount but balked at what was being suggested?) and then they got kicked out of the 'wordpress store' (.org directory and access to it) my limited understanding is that Apple demands you pay 30% of what you make from your apps, regardless.. and I think fortnite and a couple others have balked at that and got kicked out.. my DDG first result suggests Matt asked for 8% of wp-engine revenues.. and given that automattic/wp does WAY more for enhancing and securing the actual thing that their users use, compared to what Apple does for fortnites code.. seems that the parallel the author attempts to draw with Apple and it's store is hilarious- it actually shows that Matt is asking for less and providing more to wp-engine.. way more.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  The amount is not the parallel they're drawing. That's what makes your insistance on only seeing that so, to borrow a word, hilarious.
  - stevenicr 2y ago
    I don't see the amount as being the issue they pointed out, the parallel as far as I read it, is that it would be horrible if Apple kicked out an app for not paying them money. And the piece leaves out that indeed Apple does kick out apps for not paying money, AND if one was to consider the amounts it makes the ask from Automattic seem even less of an issue comparatively, AND if one was to consider the amount of stuff Automattic does that enhances the product it's even more puzzling that it's left out or not considered. This is without getting into open source and all sorts of other things that make the parallel hilariously bad.