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

Microsoft acquires Github

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 840 posts

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#331

Post by scrollaway »

neves wrote: post #214
pjmlp wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nokia is pretty much alive. As for what Elop did, in case you missed the news, he only did what the Nokia board themselves asked him to do, and even gave him a bonus for achieving it.

What's is Nokia up to? I'd love to know they are doing interesting things.

Well, they just split up their Health division back into Withings. https://health.nokia.com/event/nokia-withings

I only know that because I have one of their awesome scales (https://health.nokia.com/gr/en/scales). I was shocked they were Nokia when I found out about them. They're absolutely awesome, highly recommend them.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#333

Post by madeofpalk »

bad_user wrote: post #32

People keep mentioning how "Microsoft changed" due to VS Code, the Linux subsystem, .NET Core. I say that they are the same company, only with different cash cows. Haven't they spied on Windows 10 users? Do they not engage in patents racketeering? Haven't they killed Nokia and ruined Skype? " But Mom, some of the other companies are doing it too ", well yeah, but some of us don't have double standards, in spite of wh…

> Haven't they killed Nokia

To be fair, Nokia was already dead when Microsoft bought them. MS just pulled the plug.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#334

Post by adtac »

guardian5x wrote: post #241
netsec_burn wrote: post #111

I still see Microsoft's predictable behavior in 2018. I have a friend who owns a Surface, and I was thinking it would be useful to put Linux on it (it was older ARM hardware). Well you can't, it's a Surface RT and Microsoft not only locks the bootloader but it also only runs Microsoft approved apps. That's their endgame whenever possible. Apparently people didn't like having fully locked down computers and they disco…

Maybe he should've bought a Surface Pro, which was never locked down.

Surface Pro was also released a while after RT.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#335

Post by marricks »

I think what I said yesterday stil has relevance:

—-

Can anything exist anymore without

A) Getting acquired by a multinational

B) Becoming one

Sure, MS visual code is open but as a few players get more and more power we all become subject to their whims and not them to ours.

MS is pushing their ads within their own OS more and more, will GitHub get the same treatment, or will it’s data be useful to MS for those ads? What sort of integrations can we expect to see with other MS products that encourage a more closed ecosystem?

This may all seem alarmist but with so many companies having so much power this sort of behavior get through unchecked. *For example, MS hasn’t changed all that much: they still force device makers to sell Linux at a higher or equal price to Windows so people won’t jump ship.

The only recourse people suggest is “well then don’t use it” but what options do employees have when higher ups mandate technologies? What about most users who just go with the wind and just let these snowballing large companies skate by? It all makes me very sad...

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#336

Post by um_ya »

If Microsoft wants to make Github better, it needs to improve the search functionality and maybe add a "related libraries" section when you're looking at a particular library.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#337

Post by ChicagoDave »

This feels like Slashdot from 10 years ago. I thought the anti-Microsoft sentiment had dissipated, but clearly that’s not the case.

I was a Microsoft focused developer through the bad years and even I thought they acted horribly against Netscape. They ended up paying a billion dollars for it and we’re forced to change.

I wasn’t a fan of Ballmer either and thought MS had lost its way. Windows Phone started off nice but they just couldn’t get enough developer interested.

Maybe that was the wake up call. If you don’t have the devs and you’re a dev-centric company, you’re doomed.

In comes Satya Nadella, along with Scott Guthrie and other internal proponents of open development and the company has very demonstrably changed its stripes in the last five years.

I judge companies on current behavior and Microsoft seems to be doing far more right than wrong.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#338

Post by Ajedi32 »

ptx wrote: post #297
shubhamjain wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not let things play out a little before predicting chaos? Github doesn't have the vendor lock-in that other companies have. It starts to go downhill? Just push your repo to another Git host. Yes, you'll need to figure out how to port some of your workflows, but it won't be an insurmountable pain.

That's why the "extend" phase is there in the embrace/extend/extinguish strategy - to make it an insurmountable pain to migrate elsewhere, after first having lured the users in with the "embrace" phase. Letting it play out is just what they need to move from phase 1 to phase 2.

But "extend" hasn't happened yet. There's no need to cry foul until it does, because until it does there's no evidence of anything nefarious going on. "Embrace" on its own is perfectly normal and acceptable behavior.

Vendor lock-in is an important concern regardless of who owns the platform you're being locked into.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#339

Post by [deleted] »

Const-me wrote: post #312
SSLy wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nokia engineers wanted to move to Android, but the M̶S̶ ̶M̶o̶l̶e̶ then current CEO made a prikaz to go with Windows Phone.

> Nokia engineers wanted to move to Android I don’t believe the engineers spent thousands man-years developing in-house Symbian, then significant time working on (mostly) in-house Maemo, then some day they said “screw that, let’s throw away everything we’ve developed and move to Android”.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#340

Post by bmuon »

mwcampbell wrote: post #186
bobwaycott wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but my understanding is they are not profitable (they were, but have been trying to work back toward profitability).

Why did GitHub become unprofitable? Did they spend too much money hosting open-source projects, compared to what they made on private repos? Maybe the lesson is that free hosting never works.

If I learned anything working at large companies is that hardware is never close to being as expensive as headcount.
Post reply on HN