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

GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 366 posts

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#161

Post by wnsire »

sixothree wrote: post #9
yurishimo wrote: post #7

I think the author nailed it. This is Microsoft's chance to reach out to developers and prove that they've had a change of heart regarding open source. We've seen this over the years with previous code hosting platforms. If the platforms betrays it's users, developers are not scared to mass migrate to something else. The onus is now on Microsoft to keep developers happy or risk losing their $7.5B investment.

That to me is what DotNet Core is, along with Asp.Net, Entity Framework many years ago, and everything developer related becoming open source. GitHub is just a signal to people who have been out of the loop, bloomberg and many linux developers. When I start dropping my apps on their systems, they might be surprised how well they run. https://github.com/dotnet https://github.com/aspnet

> That to me is what DotNet Core

DotNet Core debugger is proprietary . You can only debug apps within Microsoft environment according to their license.

Same thing for most of the azure tools , you are only allowed to use them within Visual Studio.

I don't really called that "all in open source" .

It's gimmick to give C# devs the illusion of a choice.

Try to build , run & deploy a C# app on AWS with Atom. You're gonna have a bad time.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#162

Post by gaius »

flukus wrote: post #121
gaius wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft practically forced us to use Windows stack for anything and everything This is called “dogfooding” and all companies should do it. How can you sell to customers or understand customers if you’re not using the product yourself? One day I’d love to visit SAP and see how they do their own vacations and expenses. It can’t be with their own software.

I wish they dogfooded on spinning rust and limited RAM.

It’s always been the case that developers have better hardware than end users, I don’t see that changing anytime soon!

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#163

Post by YouAreGreat »

arthurfm wrote: post #90

With Google recently investing $20 million in GitLab [1] and helping them migrate from Azure to Google Cloud Platform [2][3], what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? Move their repositories back to GitHub, switch to BitBucket or something else entirely? [1] https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/09/gitlab-raises-20m-series-c... [2] https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/06/why-and-how-gitlab-abando..…

> what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab?

There are downsides to MS owning Github, but Google is in a whole separate universe of Evil.

So the answer is: Move out, don't hesitate, and if there's no other viable choice, yes, move back to Gitgub.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#164

Post by gaius »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #141
gaius wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft practically forced us to use Windows stack for anything and everything This is called “dogfooding” and all companies should do it. How can you sell to customers or understand customers if you’re not using the product yourself? One day I’d love to visit SAP and see how they do their own vacations and expenses. It can’t be with their own software.

Customers and potential customers also use competing products, so you also need to use those to sell to, understand, and grow your customers. Maybe SAP uses their own software internally and they've all become power users that aren't bothered by the issues that you're having. Perhaps if they used competing products they'd have a better understanding of where theirs is lacking.

You can always spot software that is or isn’t used by the people writing it

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#165

Post by wnsire »

badminton1 wrote: post #122

The difference between "the old Microsoft" (monopolistic, openly insulting/abusive) and "the new Microsoft" is like the difference between colonialism and neocolonialism. - Colonialism consisted in annexing territory, forcing them to use your flag, sing your anthem, and work for you under penalty of violence. - Neocolonialism consists into forcibly indebt countries, so they direct all their productive efforts into pa…

Pretty convince within the next 5 years or so github will be packaged with other awful MS products like team foundation services or azure CI etc...

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#166

Post by herbst »

nikofeyn wrote: post #69
iamnotlarry wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that Google is high on my list of trust, either. But TypeScript and VS Code do not jump you into a #2 ranking. Go and Chrome easily trump them for starters. Then you get things like node that ride off V8, and Atom that rides off Chrome. The Google ecosystem of community building blocks is still much, much more significant than MS. After all, Google actually dogfoods OSS. FWIW, I don't and wouldn't use…

wait, how does go and chrome trump open source c#, f#, vb.net, .net core, typescript, asp.net, visual studio code, monaco, powershell core, mono, and the many, many other things they have open sourced? they’ve gone insane. https://opensource.microsoft.com https://github.com/Microsoft and all of these are active and well managed with microsoft employees engaged in communication.

Nothing which a normal 'non microsoft' developer would profit from. Even their contributions to Linux were mostly about running Windows on Linux and the other way around. Nothing a non Microsoft dev would even care about.

Google however maintains a few products that can easily be considered standard, or at least will find their way in any other developer stack.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#167

Post by sleepychu »

amelius wrote: post #159
some_account wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. Also it's quite possible that github will add CI stuff directly into Azure and if you start using that, there may be no other product to move to with the same functionality. Vendor lock-in is a strategy that works even if you know its there. I'm building my code with the excelle…

> You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. I find it hard to believe that an audience of developers can't point their browser to a different url, or search for your project using Google.

Right but because they're otherwise decentralised it would take co-ordinated effort and ultimately it fragments the community. What we need, if we want to solve this issue, is a federated network of servers which provide the functionality of github today.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#168

Post by herbst »

etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #97
taakd wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only OpenStack is fully open source and fairly feature complete, with a few dozen providers using the OpenStack platform. OVH, who owns the largest datacenter in North America uses OpenStack, they're actually one of the largest contributors. Red Hat & IBM both seem to be really pushing private deployments as of late for their larger clients that already own large DCs.

Knowing that OVH uses a piece of software makes me want to never use that piece of software. They are the worst quality cloud provider, IMO.

Definitly not the worst, but very far from the actually good ones for sure.

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#169

Post by badminton1 »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #147
badminton1 wrote: post #122

The difference between "the old Microsoft" (monopolistic, openly insulting/abusive) and "the new Microsoft" is like the difference between colonialism and neocolonialism. - Colonialism consisted in annexing territory, forcing them to use your flag, sing your anthem, and work for you under penalty of violence. - Neocolonialism consists into forcibly indebt countries, so they direct all their productive efforts into pa…

This is an insightful comment and should be read by anyone getting starry eyed over "the new Microsoft". Integrating "Linux" as a subsystem is very likely a hostile act in the same direction.

Most anti-Microsoft comments on HN end up having -4 karma, which is the minimum possible karma. Usually with no explanation/reply.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a Microsoft HN voting ring. If that's not the case I wonder why would HN users act in their own best interest? (having all software controlled by a corporation)

Re: GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button

#170

Post by cthalupa »

reacharavindh wrote: post #125
fetbaffe wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Redhat? Company that is currently infiltrating every Linux distro with systemd bloatware? No, thanks.

I never understood the Systemd argument in the Linux ecosystem. Sure, it may not be what everybody wants in the Linux ecosystem. But, that's the point of having so many independent distributions right? Red hat is not secretly pushing anything on anybody. If something is better than Systemd, clearly other distributions will go that route and try to outcompete Redhat... No? I see Redhat as the enterprise seller of Linu…

> Just trying to ask why Redhat is always blamed for Systemd

Probably because Lennart Poettering is a Red Hat employee and wrote systemd while working for them?

Not a comment on whether systemd is good or not, but... the author being paid to write it as an employee of the company is a reasonable reason to believe they are responsible for it's creation.

Post reply on HN