Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft acquires Github

blogs.microsoft.com

381–390 of 840 posts

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I really dont understand why there are Microsoft fans. Like I understand if you bought an Xbox, but I dont understand if you are a programmer. Microsoft has always been a headache. Recently its been a tiny bit better, but they still are a for-profit company that needs to continue to make a profit. This was to make Microsoft money, nothing to 'help programmers'.

As a developer Microsoft has treated my far better than any other corporation pushing an agenda. Amazon seems kind of apathetic towards any one developer or group, Google and Apple can be down-right hostile in their policies or support. Microsoft has by far hosted the most events that I have access to, ranging from global developer conferences to user-group meetings.Their tooling and developer support has always been…

I appreciate that Aws is apathetic a bit. The other way to put it would be unintereste or removed or unbiased. They aren’t that helpful, fine. That’s what we get paid the big bucks for. I’ve worjed in the Msft ecosystem...never again, no thanks.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#382
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is one of the most valuable companies on the planet because it is destructive? What’s that even mean?

Microsoft makes all of it's money from PC sales and software licensing. Meanwhile, they basically invented the "buy your competitor and tank their business" strategy. That's probably what this person is referring to.

If Microsoft makes all their money from PC sales and software licensing, how is Github a competitor?

How does tanking Github allow Microsoft to sell more copies of Office?

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#383
post #92

If you're wondering why they bought GitHub, it's here: > Second, we will accelerate enterprise developers’ use of GitHub, with our direct sales and partner channels and access to Microsoft’s global cloud infrastructure and services. This is it. At one time Microsoft used to dominate enterprise software development in certain areas (most of the east coast in the U.S.) to such a degree that it was almost impossible to…

Or they lock down the Enterprise version to Azure...

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#384
Wow $7.5 Billion, a nice juicy sum for a company that has influence yes, but very limited profit potential, considering that developers (despite earning well) seem to be v reluctant to part with their cash - juding by anecdotal evidence of numerous comments here, expecting everything to be free and moaning about piddling costs such as Sublime Text licence. Wonder how Linus Torvalds feel? The sellors should send him a small percentage in gratitude for making them billionaires.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#385
post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I really dont understand why there are Microsoft fans. Like I understand if you bought an Xbox, but I dont understand if you are a programmer. Microsoft has always been a headache. Recently its been a tiny bit better, but they still are a for-profit company that needs to continue to make a profit. This was to make Microsoft money, nothing to 'help programmers'.

I don't know what the term "Microsoft Fan" means, but count me a proud C#, VSCode, Visual Studio, and even VBScript fan.

You lost me with VBScript. But before I am with you:)

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#386

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…

Yep, I really dont understand why there are Microsoft fans. Like I understand if you bought an Xbox, but I dont understand if you are a programmer. Microsoft has always been a headache. Recently its been a tiny bit better, but they still are a for-profit company that needs to continue to make a profit. This was to make Microsoft money, nothing to 'help programmers'.

> Yep, I really dont understand why there are Microsoft fans.

I definitely agree. Anything Microsoft-related, or even Google-related, is a no from me. Just from a product standpoint, most of there products inherently aren’t that great. And you get that feeling when using their products, a feeling of “oh, this must be a Microsoft product because it feels very corporate.” Plus, there approach to design is subpar — it’s like there’s people out there that actually like Google’s Material Design?

> Like I understand if you bought an Xbox

I have an Xbox, and I just noticed advertisements on the dashboard that are non-gaming related. I also think I saw this when using a friend’s Windows-computer, they have advertisements within their operating system. It’s just bad.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft hasn't changed at all. Here is one recent incident I read: https://twitter.com/jamiebuilds/status/1002696910266773505

What exactly is Microsoft alleged to have done wrong here? It starts by saying "stole my code", but then discusses an MIT licensed piece of code. Furthermore, I'd see Microsoft's reply: > I'm not aware of any deliberate copying of the Lerna code, but let me dig into it now and call all the devs on the team to be sure. If there is, we should definitely give correct attribution, so I want to investigate. [...] I checke…

> It starts by saying "stole my code", but then discusses an MIT licensed piece of code

Unrelated to the rest of the discussion, I just want to clarify that MIT License != 'Do Whatever You Want' License. MIT requires attribution and maintaining the copyright license on existing code. Yes, if you don't adhere to the license's terms when copying code, it is stealing.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#389
post #10

"When it comes to our commitment to open source, judge us by the actions we have taken in the recent past, our actions today, and in the future." How is that patent extortion going then? Still earning you money? Any plans to stop in "the near future"? Didn't think so. I'm sure Microsoft will improve github. Just like it improved skype.

So which company would you rather buy Github? GitHub wasn't profitable. Would you rather it just disappear?

Honestly? Google.

For me, it's not about whose the bigger scarier influence, or who does more evil. It's just based on how practically I see either turning out.

=Microsoft Acquisition=

For a few months to a year, everything is mostly the same, until new features start happening. It starts with something like annotations on particular regions of code, with say all the annotations for the codebase stored in an extra file "git_annotations.tla", which is some zip file collecting together a bunch of random undocumented xml that changes constantly. These annotations are tracked semi-competently by VS Code and MS team enterprise tools, being updated to deal with source changes with each commit, but ultimately just showing up automagically in either the web view, VS Code, or associated enterprise tools. These annotations will start out as minor unimportant things, not even really worth porting to other editors, but will increasingly be abused for code review in enterprisey contexts. People who try to just edit things from the command line or their editor of choice will be constantly breaking other people's annotations at random times since they don't update that file, so file renamings, moving, etc won't be tracked properly. MS provides some xcode/sublime/atom plugins to provide partial support for some other editors, which prompts web developers to adopt them in droves so they can add gif tooltips to comments. At no point is there a great enough reason for anyone still using github to switch, so slowly the remaining open source projects there start making use of these features, and so contributers need to start using the appropriate MS tooling to ensure their commit doesn't break the annotations (or just use one of the supported editors).

=Google Acquisition=

Github user profiles are now linked to a google account. The webclient works better in chrome than other browsers. The webclient is renamed, rebranded and redesigned every 2-4 years by someone looking for a promotion, but ultimately in a way that doesn't affect people just using git from the command line. Github possibly gets a few additional features to support internal usage with Google weird mono-repo lifestyle. Google tries unsuccessfully multiple times to integrate Github into yet another failed team messaging platform or whatever, but again in ways that only affect the webclient. Google more successfully does some data analytics stuff based on searching and indexing all of that code now sitting on servers they own, and this is almost but not quite profitable, but close enough for them to leave it alone and get distracted by something else that's shiny.

To me, neither seems ideal, but all of the annoyance of the google stuff seems avoidable by just using separate accounts for separate things, as usual.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#390

Friendly reminder: this is the same Microsoft that "empowered" skype and once called open source a cancer. Its the same Microsoft that ruined open document standards and started the browser wars. I wouldnt be surprised to see next years release of "Github Pro Platinum with Minecraft 3D and Windows Store integration" For those looking to move, https://gitlab.com is an excellent open source alternative that can easily…

Also the company that was responsible for killing the Limux project[0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux

Wow, I had no idea. That seemed so big for OSS, and the killing blow was relatively recent.

It doesn't seem as if MSFT has entirely changed.

Post reply on HN