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

Hello, GitHub

natfriedman.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 671 posts

Re: Hello, GitHub

#341

Post by Stranger43 »

Fnoord wrote: post #285
ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

> Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. Nat Friedman is a legend in the open source community. He founded Ximian in '99 with Miguel de Icaza, who both meant a lot for the Gnome community (e.g. via products such as Ximian Evolution) and Mono (FOSS .NET for *NIX). They got bought by Novell where he also got a top position. Nat has been busy with F…

He is the perfect transition guy, who is likely going to be replaced in a few years time when MS decide they want to capitalize on the money they spend on a un-profitable but popular service.

Which is a pattern we have seen from their takeover of hotmail and more recently with skype, where they also waited a few years before starting the transition from independent brand to a sub brand under one of Microsoft estates.

What you are going to see when MS is done integrating the leadership of github into MSFT and Nat have been replaced by a next phase CEO, is that githubs CI hooks will become more and more symbiotic with azure, and the a lot of the documentation tools offered will hook directly into office365 tools, which will require a synchronization of accounts with MS other SaaS offerings.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#342

Post by swayvil »

zer00eyz wrote: post #333
CodeSheikh wrote: post #288

"I’ve been a developer since I was six". I would love to learn what sort of projects were kids working on this early back in the 80s.

I'll second this. I often tell the story about the first program I wrote (at 8) and how I got beaten by good old flesh and blood. I don't tell people I was a developer at six... I wrote a program... semantics matter here. The photo got me... The fake over done smile, the "I had a professional take this" pose. The Hoodie. It just smacks of being over produced to try to fit in. > I’m not asking for your trust, but I’m…

Agreed.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#344

Post by sdhgaiojfsa »

ggregoire wrote: post #42
ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

Yes same here. I’m really surprised by all the Microsoft hate as if we were still in the 80-90’s. MS is one of the biggest open source contributors nowadays. It's also really weird how people idealize GitHub. Did they forget GitHub was not a non-profit association, they were losing money, they deleted users repositories on their own, they had management issues, and people have been waiting some features for very long…

> MS is one of the biggest open source contributors nowadays.

Really? For its size? It seems like Google, Apple, and Facebook are all much more productive in OSS. The only open source Microsoft product I'm aware of using is VS Code. To my understanding, they haven't open sourced Edge, their JS engine, their compiler, their word processors, or really anything else of note. I guess I can give them a little credit for .NET Core, but would that even have happened of Mono hadn't existed?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#345

Post by crazypyro »

thomasthomas wrote: post #257
vxNsr wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He made it pretty clear that there wasn't a moat that he needed to forge but rather the missing the community, that's not really something that anyone could build a tool to transfer...

communities are moats too

Maybe even one of the strongest moats that exists because it doesn't feel like a cage... until it does.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#347

Post by HelloNurse »

adrianmalacoda wrote: post #255
Klathmon wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, my biggest concerns are: 1. What is happening to Atom? I have tried VS code and don't really like it due to the difference in how the 2 systems are designed to work (Atom being more "plugins are king", VSCode being more "kitchen sink included by first-party"). I'd hate to see my favorite editor lose it's major backing. If MS makes a commitment to continue to develop Atom, or they work with someone else to "t…

Fellow Atom user here. According to Lee Dohm, Open Source Community Manager at GitHub, "Atom remains key to GitHub. Our product roadmap is set, and the team will continue all of their work." [0] [0] https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/17454#issuecomment-39442...

A product roadmap is set until it changes. "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further".

Besides, Microsoft has enough PR skills to avoid unpleasant announcements about redundant products for a while after an acquisition they know to be worrying.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#348

Post by dest »

debaserab2 wrote: post #191
fosco wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

personally, I really like the performance of 'skype for business' but maybe I am in the minority there. all of the tools and integration with outlook is pretty smooth...

Skype and performance are two words that don't ever belong in the same sentence.

You just gave a counter example ;)

Re: Hello, GitHub

#349

Post by swayvil »

aculver wrote: post #56

Honestly, can you think of a smarter move on the part of Microsoft than making Nat Friedman (a veteran of the Open Source community) CEO of Github? I completely trust this guy to do as good a job as can be done of guiding Github forward as a product and a platform, now that the venture capitalists are no longer in the picture.

Hi, we'd like to use your reputation to sell our product. Here's a bunch of money.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#350

Post by prewett »

RussianCow wrote: post #83
craftyguy wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those are meaningful contributions to existing platforms/projects that MS does not own outright. They're throwing code of the wall. MS's contributions to git are very light. Edit: clarify my point.

> But one could argue that those contributions to git are just to further MS's interests. Of course they are! Everything a corporation does is to further its own interests. Most (large) companies don't contribute to open source out of the goodness of their hearts.

But someone that acts only in their own interests is not trustable. You give trust to people as they demonstrate that they are concerned about your interests. Thus far, I've seen zero evidence that Microsoft has genuine concern for anyone else's interests. And they've had a history of acting against other's interest in a stifling and illegal way. I don't trust them.
Post reply on HN