This is a great piece, but I read all the way to the end waiting for an explanation of what The Great Big Lie is, apart from “that people should attack ideas and not people,” which is how it was explained in the third paragraph. An explanation, or even a sentence tying The Great Big Lie to the thrust of the article, never came.
It’s hard to infer what you mean by calling this The Great Big Lie. Do you mean that people who say this don’t actually believe it, or do you mean that it’s not true, and we need to attack people and not ideas? I would like to think you mean the former but it’s not explained at all, not even as subtext.
That aside, I have a tiny bone to pick, although it’s not with the main thrust of the article with which I vehemently agree. The tiny bone is that Marco is an idiot.
Arment’s insistence that “anyone can do this” while technically true, (anyone can in fact, implement this pricing model), also implies that “anyone” can have the kind of success that a developer with Marco’s history, financial status, and deep ties to the Apple News Web is expected to have. This is silly.
I’m a regular listener of ATP and occasional reader of Marco’s blog. I can tell you from experience that inferring this meaning is folly. The guy is completely clueless. He doesn’t understand implications or subtext. He doesn’t think at all before he talks and I’m not sure he even reads his blog posts after he’s written them. He actually said this on yesterday’s ATP:
If you also blog for ten years, and podcast for five years, and make a bunch of apps along the way, then you have a better chance
in the context of “anyone can do this”. Which is why I’m convinced that when he says “anyone can do this” he means almost the exact opposite. You can do it with ten years of work, outreach and more than a little luck. You can’t do it today. Nobody could except him, and a select few of his mates.
The hilarious thing is he seems to think this invalidates the “that’s fine for Marco” argument, instead of strengthening it. Like I said: clueless.