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

561–570 of 671 posts

Re: Hello, GitHub

#561

Post by raywu »

johannes1234321 wrote: post #100
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…

> Will Facebook/Google/Apple start pulling their code from GitHub? For these companies who owned GitHub hardly plays a role. They want to attract developers and go wherever the crowds go. If there is mass migration to mercurial-superhost.com they will follow. It's just an outlet. The question is more relevant for companies and communities who built their infrastructure on it and might worry for good or not so good re…

I thought they already have their own version control systems?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#562

Post by wpietri »

scarface74 wrote: post #502
wpietri wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once bitten, twice shy. Moreover, although I agree Microsoft is making efforts to change [1], pro-Microsoft partisans make it clear much of this is due to the new CEO. What one CEO does, another can undo. GitHub's bus factor is now 1. I would much rather have seen them go public. They were losing money, but not, last I saw, at a rate that was absurd for building a SaaS business. Is there some reason to think they cou…

GitHub's success as an ongoing concern was based on their investors willing to keep giving them more money or alternatively the public market giving them more money until they could become profitable.

We don't know how far they were from being profitable. But even unprofitability is not a big problem these days. E.g., Okta IPOed in the red with explicit plans to keep losing money for the foreseeable future.

Github was making over $200m/year, and was poised for strong growth in enterprises as they got with the times. I expect they could have gotten to GAAP profitability whenever they needed to. But they should have kept spending on growth to maximize market share.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#563

Post by ponyfleisch »

fosco wrote: post #158
aldanor wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember Skype? That wasn’t in 80-90s...

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 for Business is really, really bad on MacOS. Half of the time i'm trying to use it, messages don't get sent with an error message. Sometimes they do get sent but i still get an error message.

Skype on MacOS tends to get stuck in some loop that eats my CPU. So does MS Excel. MS Excel also had other, very annoying issues in the not so distant past.

Sure, as a MacOS user i'm maybe not that important to MSFT, but the quality of some of their products is surprisingly low.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#566

Post by exmsft_throw32 »

sdesol wrote: post #315
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…

> I think Microsoft is handling this really well. What is baffling for me, is how worried some people seem to be. If you understand the Git hosting space, you would know Microsoft tried to compete with GitHub and failed miserably. It is quite clear the value that GitHub provides is data and there is ABSOLUTELY no way Microsoft would want to disturb this. In fact, Bitbucket, GitLab and others should be concerned that…

There's no way a company would pay $7.5B for an acquisition and then let it run "independently". That's just not how it works. See e.g. Skype.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#567

Post by rendaw »

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…

Contrarily, all I've seen is people making quantified statements of support.

What I haven't seen is a moralistic rejection. Microsoft tried to kill Windows gaming, they tried to kill Linux, they tried to kill Firefox, and countless other things. Their operating system design is nearly abusive and even their open source development (tracking, licensing) has been lined with traps. I want nothing more than for them to disappear, and if them buying a $7B company which ends up with 0 users is one step on that path then I absolutely support it.

It has nothing to do with whether they promise they won't do bad things _this_ time, or whether they claim they'll be independent (they're clearly not independent - Microsoft now owns Github).

Re: Hello, GitHub

#568

Post by sjellis »

Klathmon wrote: post #64
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…

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…

> 1. What is happening to Atom?

Funnily enough, this was my immediate concern, followed by Electron generally. It actually prompted me to go all-in on Vim: I've used Vim in terminals for a very long time, but never found a graphical Vim that I liked. Happily, I've now found Oni, which provides a VS Code-like interface around Neovim: https://www.onivim.io

Git hosting and the associated tools are replaceable, the strength of GitHub is the network effect, so we'll have to see what happens. Regardless of what happens, we've progressed a long way from Subversion and BugZilla, so I don't mind if projects move to a more diverse set of modern hosting. Personally, I'll put my own public repositories whereever the community goes.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#569

Post by themusicgod1 »

grkvlt wrote: post #483
themusicgod1 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...look into / lock / delete them. This gives microsoft the ability to all but stop work at companies who use private repos who compete with them, and/or delete critical repositories. Hope those companies have backups.

What? You really imagine that they would delete private repositories belonging to competitors, to attempt to gain an advantage? If Microsoft did that they would be sued so quickly, and for so much it would be unreal. Additionally, there would probably be criminal charges. I just can't imagine a world where this is a possibility...

I can. Microsoft has been spying on anyone willing to hold them accountable, and have plenty of blackmail material at this point. They are huge, politically connected, global in reach and have 0 scruples. I can't imagine that they wouldn't somehow use their position of power over its competitors, as it has in the past, to thwart them and force them further into the Microsoft system.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#570

Post by heyoni »

ponyfleisch wrote: post #563
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 for Business is really, really bad on MacOS. Half of the time i'm trying to use it, messages don't get sent with an error message. Sometimes they do get sent but i still get an error message. Skype on MacOS tends to get stuck in some loop that eats my CPU. So does MS Excel. MS Excel also had other, very annoying issues in the not so distant past. Sure, as a MacOS user i'm maybe not that important to MSFT, but t…

The excel bit is likely because multi core support isn’t on Mac just yet. If you opt into their latest beta channel for updates, it gets way better.
Post reply on HN