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

The Cost of Developers

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 238 posts

Re: The Cost of Developers

#11

Post by JshWright »

apapli wrote: post #6
future1979 wrote: post #2

The purchase of github doesn't make immediate financial sense to me. This article posted a reason - to stave off Windows decline. While it is plausible, I still don't see it.

The reason? Simple. Developer mindshare. Microsoft lost it with Ballmer, and is getting it back under Satya. Ultimately Microsoft's success has always stemmed from providing platforms that support developers, and in turn they build great products people will pay for. And that drives Microsoft revenues, be it the OS, or nowadays, SaaS PaaS and IaaS (and OS).

> Developer mindshare. Microsoft lost it with Ballmer

When I think of Ballmer, the first word that comes mind is "developers" (it's also the second... and the third...)

Re: The Cost of Developers

#12

Post by martin_drapeau »

The author talks about leverage an OS provides to the vendor: iOS for Apple (and its App Store) and Windows for Microsoft. It is only logical that when your leverage fades, you should find an alternative means for growth.

Microsoft has been betting on the cloud for some time now. Part of that strategy is shifting enterprise from premise to Azure. In parallel investing in developers. VS Code, .NET Core and now GitHub are good examples of those investments.

What I haven't seen are non-enterprise developers, even hobbyists, using Azure as their cloud. When I talk to fellow devs, they have experience with AWS not Azure. My impression is that the Linux/CLI environment is much more familiar that Azure cloud portal with buttons à la Windows. Less black box. Curious to know if my impression is right.

Re: The Cost of Developers

#13

Post by rsp1984 »

There are times when I really like the thoughtful analysis on Stratechery and there are other times when I think it's a complete pile of detached-from-reality horsesh!t. Today is of the 2nd kind.

What it also has is a potentially fatal weakness: no platform with user-based leverage.

Sorry, what? Windows still has > 90% market share on desktop. If that isn't "user-based leverage" I don't know what is.

This, by the way, is precisely why Microsoft is the best possible acquirer for GitHub, a company that, having raised $350 million in venture capital, was not going to make it as an independent entity.

Seriously? GitHub could have easily gone out for more VC. They could have IPOed. "Not going to make it as an independent entity" is so far detached from reality, what was he thinking when writing that?

Re: The Cost of Developers

#14

Post by [deleted] »

nathankunicki wrote: post #7
future1979 wrote: post #2

The purchase of github doesn't make immediate financial sense to me. This article posted a reason - to stave off Windows decline. While it is plausible, I still don't see it.

In my view it's a longer term proposition to gain more customers for Azure/Microsoft Cloud. Google, Microsoft, and Amazon all see the future of computing as being in the cloud. If Microsoft can integrate Azure and GitHub to make it easier for developers to deploy and run their code in the cloud, then that means more Azure customers. This likely means that GCP and AWS integrations will take second place.

[deleted]

Re: The Cost of Developers

#15

Post by chrisweekly »

JshWright wrote: post #11
apapli wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason? Simple. Developer mindshare. Microsoft lost it with Ballmer, and is getting it back under Satya. Ultimately Microsoft's success has always stemmed from providing platforms that support developers, and in turn they build great products people will pay for. And that drives Microsoft revenues, be it the OS, or nowadays, SaaS PaaS and IaaS (and OS).

> Developer mindshare. Microsoft lost it with Ballmer When I think of Ballmer, the first word that comes mind is "developers" (it's also the second... and the third...)

LOL Ditto. But. Being memorable for ridiculous antics doesn't quite translate into winning hearts and minds.

Re: The Cost of Developers

#16

Post by martin_drapeau »

rsp1984 wrote: post #13

There are times when I really like the thoughtful analysis on Stratechery and there are other times when I think it's a complete pile of detached-from-reality horsesh!t. Today is of the 2nd kind. What it also has is a potentially fatal weakness: no platform with user-based leverage. Sorry, what? Windows still has > 90% market share on desktop. If that isn't "user-based leverage" I don't know what is. This, by the way…

Keep in mind that Windows as a platform is fading away. The Web with SaaS and is taking a lot of that. Even if they keep 90% of the desktop market, revenues are migrating to cloud and apps. MS doesn't want to end up with just an OS running a browser to access other things.

Re: The Cost of Developers

#17

Post by heavenlyblue »

martin_drapeau wrote: post #16
rsp1984 wrote: post #13

There are times when I really like the thoughtful analysis on Stratechery and there are other times when I think it's a complete pile of detached-from-reality horsesh!t. Today is of the 2nd kind. What it also has is a potentially fatal weakness: no platform with user-based leverage. Sorry, what? Windows still has > 90% market share on desktop. If that isn't "user-based leverage" I don't know what is. This, by the way…

Keep in mind that Windows as a platform is fading away. The Web with SaaS and is taking a lot of that. Even if they keep 90% of the desktop market, revenues are migrating to cloud and apps. MS doesn't want to end up with just an OS running a browser to access other things.

Does MS not actually want it or is it your thinking?

Re: The Cost of Developers

#19

Post by zaat »

rsp1984 wrote: post #13

There are times when I really like the thoughtful analysis on Stratechery and there are other times when I think it's a complete pile of detached-from-reality horsesh!t. Today is of the 2nd kind. What it also has is a potentially fatal weakness: no platform with user-based leverage. Sorry, what? Windows still has > 90% market share on desktop. If that isn't "user-based leverage" I don't know what is. This, by the way…

> Sorry, what? Windows still has > 90% market share on desktop. If that isn't "user-based leverage" I don't know what is.

At first I thought the same way, but then I started wondering if those users are really meaningful users. Isn't most of the new developer products are either mobile apps or SaaS solutions, leaving aside monsters like adobe? If so, does it really matters that so many users are using windows if they consume apps mainly with their (probably, chrome) browser?

Re: The Cost of Developers

#20

Post by cavisne »

martin_drapeau wrote: post #12

The author talks about leverage an OS provides to the vendor: iOS for Apple (and its App Store) and Windows for Microsoft. It is only logical that when your leverage fades, you should find an alternative means for growth. Microsoft has been betting on the cloud for some time now. Part of that strategy is shifting enterprise from premise to Azure. In parallel investing in developers. VS Code, .NET Core and now GitHub…

The hobbyiest/ side project angle of this is the most interesting to me.

Most side projects end up in github at some point (especially if Microsoft makes private repos free - very likely). Azure’s PaaS offering is actually pretty good so having a simple deploy to azure button when creating the project could be a huge boost.

Post reply on HN