Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matt is mad that WP Engine is profiting without contributing much back. This "it's not WordPress" seems like a fig leaf on top of that concern.
But the wording makes it like it's about revisions.
And the title
WP Engine is not WordPress
121–130 of 175 posts
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#122A more accurate and even more confusing statement would be “Wordpress is not Wordpress” which is a reality that I’ve had to explain to clients (in a former life) countless times. “But when I go to Wordpress.com…” SORRY, forget everything you saw there, that’s not Wordpress. Same logo? Yes. Branding? Yes. Company? Yes. But it’s not Wordpress. This one setting that WP Engine disables is a shame, but it’s nothing compar…
I maintain that the Wordpress.com confusion has done more harm than good for Wordpress as a platform over the years. I really wish Automattic had chosen any other branding.
And leave huge chunk of brand recognition money on the table while having to spend copious amounts of it to build another brand?
If me or you were in the same position we would do the exact same.
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#123I would agree if revisions were enabled by default just for posts and pages. Here’s a common example: you have a blog with 20 pages and 20 custom plugins (quite a standard these days). In a year of hosting that one, you’ll end up with millions of revisions in the database, which is really resource and speed issue for MySQL servers as the developers of WordPress never considered sharding; everything is stuffed into on…
> I would agree if revisions were enabled by default just for posts and pages.
And if you could say "Keep revisions for 30 days" and/or "Keep the last 10 revisions for every post". Why that hasn't been implemented...
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the market is stupid. Worse is better, planned obsolescence, clickbait, fast fashion; the free market is full of failures. It's not good enough for a competitor to Google's search engine to be 30% better, it needs to be 10x better in order to compete.
> "It's not good enough for a competitor to Google's search engine to be 30% better, it needs to be 10x better in order to compete." This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. Competition may win on some non-functional requirements, such as privacy (hardly), or UI controls (e.g., silencing certain domains), but that pales in comparison with Google's local search results. And most…
Better in what way? Better at not abusing your identity and private information to make bank arbitraging a monopolized ad market they own both sides of?
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's his right to feel like that, but it's also WP Engine's right under the WordPress source's license to do what they're doing.
As a devil's advocate sort of thing... For no reason I can give you the finger, scream obscenities at you, and there are no legal ramifications. Was I wrong? The legal side is not the end all. Otherwise, why is anyone complaining about Meta's data mining? About the cost of epipens?
The cost of epipens affects someone's ability to not die. Whether WP Engine contributes back to WordPress enough does not.
In fact, Mullenweg says WP Engine does contribute back, but not enough, and tries to justify it by saying they've "hacked up" WordPress. The latter statement has no legs to stand on (at least without real evidence). How much is enough? Should WP Engine be fixing bugs that don't affect their customers? Exerting influence by throwing contributors at wordpress to make upstream improvements that benefit WP Engine customers? I suspect if WP Engine did what Mullenweg is indirectly demanding, we'd get a "no not like that!" post.
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#126Am I missing something? This feels like such a bizarre hill to die on. He's upset that a company offers hosting of his software with a default setting changed. I guess, don't have that setting then? There's no mention of the source code being changed or custom patches being applied. So the allegation that it's "something that they’ve chopped up, hacked, butchered to look like WordPress" is maximally overblown. Unless…
He owns a competitor, Wordpress.com. That said, his point is valid. WPEngine is one of the most expensive hosts in the industry yet they meddle with the behavior of WP as well as the underlying PHP and web server and disable a lot of things. Anyone who would like to build a website on WPEngine is advised to read: https://wpengine.com/support/platform-settings/ And that's just the stuff they admit to. The revisions be…
He also owns WP VIP, which is much more expensive (and exclusive) than WP Engine.
WP Engine is popular because they hit a sweet spot of automation, capability, and price. That means some things are turned off or tuned. In my experience, WP Engine generally has made good choices there.
That said, they are choices that won’t be perfect for everyone.
> we've had enterprise customers who had to fight tooth and nail to get this turned back on and paid an arm and a leg for it, this would not have been a problem on any other WP host I'm aware of.
Then just move those sites to another host? Why would you bother fighting and paying for this? I have 3 Wordpress sites that are too complex for WP Engine and they are hosted elsewhere. And yes, it’s more expensive than WP Engine, but if a site is truly “enterprise” then the difference is not material.
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "It's not good enough for a competitor to Google's search engine to be 30% better, it needs to be 10x better in order to compete." This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. Competition may win on some non-functional requirements, such as privacy (hardly), or UI controls (e.g., silencing certain domains), but that pales in comparison with Google's local search results. And most…
> This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. It's been more than a decade since google results were distinguishable from bing results. Both spam you with commercial crap. > This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. Kagi is much better than google. I have no clue what their baseline search quality is like, but I don't care because I can customi…
We must live in a different world because for me, Bing's results have always been completely unusable. As a consequence, DuckDuckGo's results as well, although I understand that it must work for certain types of users located in certain countries; otherwise I can't understand how anyone would use it.
I just logged into Kagi, and searched for “restaurants”. Kagi can see my country because their UI says so, yet it gave me “top 10 restaurants in Groningen Province” (Netherlands), as the first result and the second result was “top 10 restaurants in Barcelona”. And I don't live in the Netherlands or Spain.
I also searched for a programming question, an issue I recently had, with the query “slick breaks binary compatibility”. Google gave me fresh discussions describing the issue, whereas Kagi gave me a GitHub issue from 2021 that described issues with the previous major version.
I did not cherry-pick these searches.
---
Speaking of, Kagi doesn't have their own index, they just use Bing's API, enhanced with results from other sources, much like what DuckDuckGo does; and like DDG they tend to be disingenuous about it.
https://help.kagi.com/kagi/search-details/search-sources.htm...
What in the world are people paying for is a complete mystery to me, but YMMV.
---
So, again, I'm asking for that one competitor that's 30% better than Google.
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#128Using .org blog to attack an Automattic rival is unacceptable. Matt must resign from WP leadership and focus on his business — and post this nonsense over there.
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#129I would agree if revisions were enabled by default just for posts and pages. Here’s a common example: you have a blog with 20 pages and 20 custom plugins (quite a standard these days). In a year of hosting that one, you’ll end up with millions of revisions in the database, which is really resource and speed issue for MySQL servers as the developers of WordPress never considered sharding; everything is stuffed into on…
> I would agree if revisions were enabled by default just for posts and pages. And if you could say "Keep revisions for 30 days" and/or "Keep the last 10 revisions for every post". Why that hasn't been implemented...
Indeed :)! It's not well thought feature. Also WordPress.com limits to 25 revisions, for exactly the same issue. https://wordpress.com/support/page-post-revisions/
Re: WP Engine is not WordPress
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "It's not good enough for a competitor to Google's search engine to be 30% better, it needs to be 10x better in order to compete." This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. Competition may win on some non-functional requirements, such as privacy (hardly), or UI controls (e.g., silencing certain domains), but that pales in comparison with Google's local search results. And most…
> This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. It's been more than a decade since google results were distinguishable from bing results. Both spam you with commercial crap. > This may be so, but there is no competition that's even 10% better than Google. Kagi is much better than google. I have no clue what their baseline search quality is like, but I don't care because I can customi…
Kagi is better at searching internationally or maybe nationally, but local search is still dominated by Google. Looking for bars, restaurants, corner shops, grocerers and such is Google territory in my experience.