Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

strongloop.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 136 posts

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#121

Post by anseljh »

DannyBee wrote: post #118
granos wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem was their justification. It went something along the lines of "Employees are often thinking about their personal lives while at work, so they should also be thinking about their work life while at home." I'm sure the intentions were good, but the presentation was terrible. Also, it was only one of many factors, but its a catchy line so I chose to call that one out. Other include: * Far worse benefits pack…

" * The IP agreement was Draconian (and we aren't in a state with nice moonlighting laws) " None of these exist in the US (particularly when you work for someone like IBM). Employees who think otherwise are simply misunderstanding the law :)

Not sure why you think that. Here's California's moonlighting law:

"Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information..."

http://www.weblaws.org/california/codes/ca_lab_section_2870

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#122

Post by EncaitarUK »

beginpanic wrote: post #115
jsalit wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBM still uses Notes for email, and a lot of legacy database-like applications. There's Notes-based webmail, but it's still Notes.

The new Notes-based webmail is Verse. It's not horrible. It's not great. It's just bad in different ways than Notes was.

Actually there are two. A web based notes, and the new 'verse'.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#123

Post by EncaitarUK »

rilut wrote: post #113
rynop wrote: post #29

former IBM dev here (6 years in different areas). I hope they let you work on an island and don't force you to use their tooling/approve listed of open source software. IBM has long embraced the OSS community (I loved LTC), but the process to release/use anything OSS was not good (to put it nicely) and was one of the many reasons I left. I worked on a project that was on an island, and while it was more efficient tha…

Sorry, what is work on an island?

A euphemism for being left to do things the way you used to do things before you were bought.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#124

Post by coldtea »

anseljh wrote: post #121
DannyBee wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" * The IP agreement was Draconian (and we aren't in a state with nice moonlighting laws) " None of these exist in the US (particularly when you work for someone like IBM). Employees who think otherwise are simply misunderstanding the law :)

Not sure why you think that. Here's California's moonlighting law: "Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information…

>without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information

Good luck trying to prove that against IBM's lawyers and patent portfolio.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#125

Post by rekshaw »

idibidiart wrote: post #76
iyn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing wrong with a little bit of humor, imo. It's not like a thread is full of puns.

make it then-able... like so: doSomeAsync() .andThen(doSomeOtherAsync1) .andThen(doSomeOtherAsync2) ... .andThen(SomeOtherAsync10) .noAndThen(finalize)

callback hell

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#126

Post by wpietri »

funkysquid wrote: post #89
granos wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem was their justification. It went something along the lines of "Employees are often thinking about their personal lives while at work, so they should also be thinking about their work life while at home." I'm sure the intentions were good, but the presentation was terrible. Also, it was only one of many factors, but its a catchy line so I chose to call that one out. Other include: * Far worse benefits pack…

I find it strange that large companies envy the things smaller shops are able to do, and they'll spend the money to buy them up, but they won't spend the time to understand the culture that let them build what they built. Put employees first and you'll find they can do some pretty amazing things.

The only way I have been able to explain this is that the expressed purpose of management hierarchies, which is generally about running successful businesses, is almost entirely different than their actual purpose.

As to the actual purpose, I think it's a similar deal to feudalism. Whatever waffle kings and nobles said, looking back it was pretty clearly about self-aggrandizement, filling one's pockets, taking revenge upon one's enemies, et cetera, ad nauseam.

I guess this shouldn't be surprising; primates gonna prime.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#127

Post by wpietri »

coldtea wrote: post #124
anseljh wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you think that. Here's California's moonlighting law: "Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information…

> without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information Good luck trying to prove that against IBM's lawyers and patent portfolio.

Do you have some examples of IBM torpedoing companies in California on this basis?

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#128

Post by benjarrell »

mbubb wrote: post #109

From the customer side - I dealt with Netezza and Softlayer before and after IBM acquisition. In both cases an almost palpable drain in support and intelligence. I hate to say it like that as i know that there are brilliant folks in IBM (Watson, etc) Softlayer and Netezza in different ways were smart, nimble and fearless companies. You had real relationships with the engineers. I got to know Netezza folks in Massachu…

I completely agree and add that I always find support saying, "Oh, I only support 'X', you need to call for support on 'Y'."

It is a race to pass the buck.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#129

Post by azth »

granos wrote: post #83
colordrops wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick google search seems to indicate that IBM wanted to allow their employees more flexibility with their schedules and ability to take leaves. I don't understand how this is a bad thing.

The problem was their justification. It went something along the lines of "Employees are often thinking about their personal lives while at work, so they should also be thinking about their work life while at home." I'm sure the intentions were good, but the presentation was terrible. Also, it was only one of many factors, but its a catchy line so I chose to call that one out. Other include: * Far worse benefits pack…

> About half the team was told they would no longer be eligible for raises because their salaries were above the top of their IBM pay band

IBM most likely spent (speculating here) several millions of dollars on the acquisition, and they can't afford to pay the devs? This is completely messed up.

Re: What the IBM Acquisition of StrongLoop Means for the Node.js Community

#130

Post by coldtea »

wpietri wrote: post #127
coldtea wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without using the employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information Good luck trying to prove that against IBM's lawyers and patent portfolio.

Do you have some examples of IBM torpedoing companies in California on this basis?

This is about individuals (ex-IBM employees), not companies.

This might be an example: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/26551.wss

Post reply on HN