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

Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#671

Post by habitue »

jabits wrote: post #655
PascLeRasc wrote: post #34

This is sad news. Partially because I don't care for Microsoft, but mostly because Github was a neutral third-party without any priorities. I hope they don't discontinue Atom or apply their UX styling to the site/desktop app. Like Spotify, I felt safer that a company was just doing hosting in their domain (of music or code projects) and wouldn't try to shovel some other tech into it like Apple making Apple Music terr…

"because Github was a neutral third-party without any priorities"...what are you talking about? They are a company with a purpose to make money. And when I think about some of the other possible buyers, I am fine with Microsoft.

The GP means they were neutral with respect to the tech giants' ecosystems. They didn't favor Amazon or Microsoft or Google's tech. Consider that Apple, Google, and Microsoft all had GitHub organizations and hosted code there. That's what they're talking about

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#672

Post by jacques_chester »

manigandham wrote: post #643
guitarbill wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "synergy" seems to be pretty one-sided. Which of these synergies is useful for existing GitHub users? That's kind of the problem with this acquisition, which is why few Github users are excited for it. It also doesn't feel like Microsoft understands developers or even end users consistently. VSCode is a nice editor, but not the only one. The MSDN docs and site is awful. Azure is okay, but Windows 10 is somehow m…

You answered it yourself. Github gets money to stay alive, and resources and leadership to actually start building again.

Is Github actually hurting for money? It has to be sitting athwart one of the most reliable rivers of gold amongst the independents.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#673

Post by slig »

digianarchist wrote: post #507
snthd wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Can anything exist anymore without... See the recent post about ghost (it has a structure that can't be sold) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17082228

Not really the same. The Ghost foundation exists purely to fund John O Nolan’s digital nomad lifestyle. Product hasn’t changed a lot since launch.

Is there too much to change on a blog engine? Besides rewriting it every couple of years.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#674

Post by lapinot »

Hop, that's one thing less to do tomorrow! ... of course it was just a matter of time before it happened, github have stood on the other side of the mirror for a long time now, they just happend to have kept that not-for-profit/garage-built-startup image for some time, kinda like twitter. Or reddit and even y combinator. And yet people comment stuff like "let's switch to {gitlab,bitbucket,gogs}". We need to understand that making a self-hostable floss clone of a service that has been designed for a monopoly captive market is not gonna change anything durably. Build something based on small friend-to-friend networks. Something that doesn't need to be big to suceed. That will slowly change the way people think about collaborative tools and get people out of the "giant ad-based ex-startup owned; `free' (as in beer) to use; hosted service" mental model. Please stop building services and start sharing collaborative tools with your peers.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#676

Post by dcbadacd »

Yhippa wrote: post #599
LeanderK wrote: post #45

I am worried that a company as important to the open-source community as github is now owned by one of the major players. I think it really impacts the neutrality of github. If I would compete with microsoft in a certain space, I would really think twice about relying on github. Also, this monopolization is driving me mad.

Why did the F/OSS community put all their eggs in one basket? Hell a lot of big companies did also. I wonder how they're going to react to this?

Simple answer: GitHub is good to use

I'm all for FOSS (Git webgui) solutions, but they were absolutely not competitive until recently. Even now, with less trust, the social effect and the lack of need of maintenance and setup is attractive.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#678

Post by rvshchwl »

LeanderK wrote: post #45

I am worried that a company as important to the open-source community as github is now owned by one of the major players. I think it really impacts the neutrality of github. If I would compete with microsoft in a certain space, I would really think twice about relying on github. Also, this monopolization is driving me mad.

Well, Google recently also purchased Kaggle, another major open-source repository for code. It hasn't really changed anything for now, but Microsoft's purchase will be in the same vein. I think that Microsoft's contribution to the open-source community in the last few years kind of makes sense for why they are purchasing it, just like Google purchased Kaggle because of their contribution to ML.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#679

Post by jschrf »

I hope this deal results in Visual Studio Team Services somehow getting support for public projects. It is amazing for private ones.

Also, paid tiers of GitHub moving to (or on top of) VSTS would not be a bad thing IMHO.

I hope both GH and VSTS benefit from this and I'm inclined to think they will.

Post reply on HN