So long GitHub and thanks for all the fish | Hacker News Reader

So long GitHub and thanks for all the fish

blog.onyxbits.de

27 pointssomeeguy23 comments

I disagree. "it will probably take Microsoft at least a year before they can start squeezing" you could squeeze Github with a streamroller and still never see over seven and a half billion dollars of profit out of it. If you think Microsoft bought this because they want Github alone to make this money back in any sane time frame then you utterly deluded.

> Microsoft never was and never will be trustworthy. Replacing a loud (“Linux is a cancer”) with a charismatic CEO (“We love developers, and we love open source developers”) does not magically change a corporate culture that has been cultivated for years.

For decades but yes a corporate culture can and does change. I am willing to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. Seriously, after bringing SQL Server to Linux, Linux to Windows, open sourcing Chakra Core and so much more ... what would they need to do before you believe them?

> what would they need to do before you believe them?

The reason people trust other companies (Google and Facebook) more when it comes to open source is because these companies actively use open source products in their core products, and would be affected significantly if open source degrades in any way. Although Microsoft contributes to open source (vscode, dotnetcore, etc.), in no way are they reliant in open source, and in a lot of ways their core products (windows) compete with open source.

So short of changing their business model and core competency completely, microsoft can't do anything to gain the trust of serious open source developers in a matter like this.

Their core product is increasingly Azure.

boggles If you think I trust Facebook more than Microsoft...

(And that's saying something.)

I think MS finds FOSS as the cancer not just Linux.

How can a software exist free to use/modify/share and hit them hard on their own turf. It is the anti-thesis of MS. How will they allow it to exist?

I think you have mistaken the 90s Windows - Office alliance reliant Microsoft with the Azure - Office 365 reliant Microsoft of today.

> I am willing to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. Seriously, after bringing SQL Server to Linux, Linux to Windows, open sourcing Chakra Core and so much more ... what would they need to do before you believe them?

EEE

(Embrace, Extend, Extinguish)

You point out their tried and tested setup, but still expect them to play the game differently this time.

Stop spying on their users and stop the patent extortion against Linux. They only love open source when it benefits them, they don't love it so much when it is able to benefit others or might lead them away from the Windows ecosystem.

I'd say you're utterly deluded if you think MS did this out of the goodness of their heart. They expect to get their money back somehow.

Microsoft made seven billion dollars by issuing new stocks prior to the purchase. Github was basically free for them.

I don’t get the Microsoft hate, it feels immature, like teenage rage.

Life’s pretty good if all you have to get really mad about is Microsoft buying github.

Someone's got to bring the rage. These teenagers today have been made docile by the software and devices created by the likes of MS, so us Gen X curmudgeons need to pick up the slack, just like we do for everything else they should be responsible for.

*I originally typed that jokingly playing the role of a stereotypical Gen Xer. When I took off my stage costume, I realized I was wearing the same outfit underneath. ./midlifecrisis.sh

I think the part of the M$ rage that feels reactionary and knee jerky is simply that it's so trivial to leave github behind for any of the 2-3 comparable competitors. It takes what, 5 minutes?

What's really at stake here for anyone but actual enterprise customers?

PS - > When I took off my stage costume, I realized I was wearing the same outfit underneath.

That's a beautiful sentence. It deservers to be the last sentence in the kind of book they make you read in high school.

Most of negative comments I read come from senior devs, those who remember the company in the 90s. It was a ruthless fight back then.

It seems pretty appropriate, really, given Microsoft's long and sordid track record.

If they manage not to wreck the place for, say, 5 years, I'll be tempted to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Tempted.

Site is down. Should have hosted on github pages.

Or Microsoft Azure.

Boy, I just can't get enough of these stories. Thanks for posting.

It's amazing how people can't just take yes for an answer. Open Source won. It's over. Open Source won. "We" won over "them". Yay! Right?

That's not enough though? What if we take one MS employee per week and change their name to "Microsoft" and then force them to stand in stocks in a town square where you can throw things at them? How about also forcing them to dress up as clippy? What would it take for you to get over it and just accept that our system of business demands that a company behave the way they did in the 90's or shareholders would sue them?

I'm not even saying it wasn't bad. It was. It also is how any company in that position will act. See every example from modern history. Now they aren't in that position and they are doing some good work. To the extent that it's good, use it. To the extent that it isn't, don't. That's it.

If you want the world to change, then you need to look into something beyond open source. Business has been using open source as a means to solidify their positions against competitors since it became popular. All of that freedom BS is great, but it mainly helps Google not have to pay a Unix license per server. Or IBM to drive down the cost of tech service delivery, or Oracle to remain relevant, or...I'm just saying. Those guys only participate to the extent that it serves their interest but that's OK because no one ever said anything bad about Linux in a memo?

This is more tribal than anything else. People decided that MS was an enemy a long time ago and literally nothing will change that and now that everyone's opinion is important we all get to here about how you specifically haven't forgiven them and you are moving your project source to somewhere else that gives you something for free. Whooopdeeee dooooo.

cached: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:/...

Wha, so the exchange format is already open. So how would they ever lock everything in. Second I feel that Microsoft will be a much better guardian than google in this respect. Google doesn't have too many OS projects, and their most valuable software is closed source, with closed formats, with little room for data-exchange... How come we don't have proper calender sync yet, f.i. Microsoft has in recent years been much better in their OS efforts. And they haven't killed any promising projects as opposed to G

How is it "customer lock-in"? Git != GitHub, Microsoft doesn't have a say over git.

Think bigger:

* You have backlinks that point to your github repos, that need to be updated (not all of them are under your control).

* If you were foolish enough to also host your blog/project website/whatever on Github Pages, moving means starting somewhere else from scratch (again: you need to update all your backlinks, not all of them under your control).

* You have to update your build servers when your repos move elsewhere.

* Your issue tracker is stuck on Github

* Your discussions are stuck on Github

* Your (developer) social network is stuck on Github.

* Your statistics tracker is stuck on Github.

There are a lot of lock-in features hidden in plain sight.

Grounds for flagging? Genuinely curious to know. @dang

Nothing particularly interesting or new in the article, flamewarly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com