Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a metaphor...it's a joke
Or maybe a prediction.
GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
321–330 of 907 posts
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried Zulip with the rust community and it completely ruined slacks “threads” for me. Its the equivalent between a pot noodle and a steak dinner. Zulip has a lot of other issues though, the app and on-boarding… but I really struggle to enjoy slack now. teams, however, is a total dumpster fire for serious communication outside of video meetings and some minor ad-hoc 1:1 interactions.
Crashing constantly and being a resource hog killed Slack for me. That and DMs being visible to whoever pays.
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#323The worst part of this is that everyone at GitHub is now forced to use Microsoft Teams.
Really should have seen that when Atom fell to the sidelines in favor of VS Code.
Admittedly though, I don't see myself using Gitlab anytime soon, if not indefinitely. What makes Github special, arguably, is that it looks less "businessy" and more fun and social.
Another reason why I think the ruination of Github will happen over a longer timescale. Any competitors will likely try to focus on trying to be different (i.e. Gitlab's focus on open source and dev ops) rather than try to focus on on what made Github special and do it better than Microsoft could ever hope to do.
EDIT: just to clarify, this comment relates because forcing teams to use products developed in-house erodes team culture. It's an attempt at assimilation.
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see where is that a problem? People who will be using Teams are people using Office 365 daily. Having a cohesive ecosystem makes complete sense. From a UX too.
The problem is that its very top heavy and is not well done, has lots of UI bugs and really is a pain to work with
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#325The worst part of this is that everyone at GitHub is now forced to use Microsoft Teams.
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#326I really liked Shopify's remote model of not closing offices, but turning them into "ports" for teams in major cities to get together throughout the year for planning, team building, and retreats. You had an official place to get together, enjoy the perks of tech company offices, but with the intention of deep short bursts of interaction rather than focused work.
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this GitHub acting independently or is it Microsoft informing them that they needed to lose 10% but they could do it on their own time frame?
Looking at the CEO's statement it seems the final layoffs aren't even finalized yet. > Unfortunately, this will include changes that will result in a reduction of GitHub’s workforce by up to 10% through the end of FY23. A number of Hubbers will receive notifications today, others will follow as we are re-aligning the business through the end of FY23.
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#328The worst part of this is that everyone at GitHub is now forced to use Microsoft Teams.
I know I'm in the minority here, but I choose Teams over Slack any day. I much prefer thread-based chat than message based chat. Teams forces people to use top message as a topic, then respond to messages under that topic. Slack message is just a message. You want to search something on Teams, you get full threads, chat is part of documentation. You want to find something on Slack, you need to click on date of the re…
Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#329Re: GitHub to lay off 10% and close all offices
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
most of them haven't even stopped hiring. pay close attention to the layoff announcements to see which ones also announce a hiring freeze - most of them haven't. and i've heard of a few people getting offers from companies that have done mass layoffs in recent months.
I wouldn't be surprised if they layed off "bottom 10%" in hopes of replacing them with better when the market for IT workforce is cheaper..
if they were really laying off the bottom 10% there wouldn't be so many stories of managers complaining about their direct reports being laid off without any advance warning. it's hard to pick out low performers in any sort of sane way if you're not even asking managers who their low performers are.