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

Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 567 posts

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#241

Post by cup-of-tea »

tomnipotent wrote: post #134
shmerl wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is enough just criticism of Microsoft's bad practices that remain damaging to this day. So no, MS is clearly a bad steward for GitHub.

Yeah, let's evaluate corporations for decisions made decades ago by people no longer at the company. At least spend 15 minutes reading about the progress MS has made in recent years before throwing around shade.

The progress they've made? Baking in more spyware into Windows and other products than ever before? Taking more control away from computer users than ever before?

What planet are you people on?

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#242

Post by ChicagoDave »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #97

This has me wondering, what Microsoft wants GitHub for? It's not like they can't use it without owning it, and I doubt they want to improve it as it is. Probably they want control before integrating it with their products.

DevOps and IaaS is growing so fast, I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet. This is absolutely about Azure DevOps.

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#243

Post by Roboprog »

Zekio wrote: post #198
bgorman wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen any good .NET code in the wild. A typical story IMO is to come into a workplace where they are trying to dump legacy .NET systems as soon as possible because they are incredibly brittle. .NET seems to be one of the biggest software scams of all time. Great vendor lock-in though. Visual Studio, MS-SQL, LINQ, Entity framework etc... the only solution is to rewrite everything.

I would say StackOverflow is a pretty good example

Stack Overflow works pretty well.

But perhaps not without some pain for those involved making it: https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-ruby/

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#244

Post by throwaway5752 »

tomtheelder wrote: post #215
giancarlostoro wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair they haven't screwed up LinkedIn. I think they will let GitHub grow with their resources.

IMO that's because LinkedIn wasn't a great product to begin with. It's just the stickiest app of all time. Something something network effects.

How many projects are there out there that repositories hosted in GH, run in GH, and have package manifests that directly reference other GH repos. I'm sure there are a lot.

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#245

Post by scjr »

sker wrote: post #212
giancarlostoro wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair they haven't screwed up LinkedIn. I think they will let GitHub grow with their resources.

Plus I'm sure under Microsoft they will have some sort of free private repos like GitLab, Bitbucket and Visual Studio Team Services already do. Lack of free private repos is the main (only) reason why I don't use GitHub.

What do you base this on?

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#246

Post by orf »

lev99 wrote: post #193
gsich wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telemetry is bad, forced updates is not.

Forced updates are bad. 1. Updates can introduce breaking changes. 2. Windows will restart the computer to update, potentially interrupting processes. 3. Users should have freedom to use software in the way that they choose, and not have actions forced on them by the software. I understand that many windows users are far from power users and the forced updates provide security updates. My point of view is anyone will…

There are literally billions of Windows users. Less than 5% understand why keeping your computer up to date is important.

Forced updates may suck for you, but understand that it is you they suck for, not the vast, vast majority.

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#247

Post by katpas »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #185
AgentK20 wrote: post #6

Really hope these talks fall through and nothing comes of it. Too many bad experiences with Microsoft buying something out, mismanaging it, and it goes down the drain. As much as I love GitHub, I won't be using a Microsoft-owned GitHub for any of my company's work.

To be fair they haven't screwed up LinkedIn. I think they will let GitHub grow with their resources.

LinkedIn was so screwed up I don't know what they could have done to make it worse.

Re: Microsoft and GitHub have held acquisition talks

#248

Post by [deleted] »

dawnerd wrote: post #66
aphextron wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google is notorious for killing products too, though. For me, much of the same rationale would apply Agreed. The best possible solution for making GitHub long term sustainable would be following the Mozilla model.

I mean the other option is to just not sell and if money is a problem adjust pricing. I find their plans to be incredibly cheap for what they offer so they definitely could have room to grow in that regard.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN