4 ms·
With the risk of sounding overly critical, I really can't understand why people get so emotional about software. Github isn't a public utility company and so is
by ThePhysicist 11y ago
With the risk of sounding overly critical, I really can't understand why people get so emotional about software. Github isn't a public utility company and so isn't obliged to provide free services to anyone or cater specifically to the needs of one group of users, if they do so it is by their own choice and because it helps them to fulfill their monetary goals (making money is the main purpose of a for-profit company). Also, I can't see any significant lock-in effects at work here.
Personally, I have several dozens software projects: Some of them are on Github, some on Bitbucket, some run on a custom Gitlab instance and some are plain git repositories on some Linux server. I think we have more choices for hosting code projects today than we had ever before, it's just that like in many other markets there is a power law at work which makes that one player has 90 % market share, this doesn't automatically mean that the largest player has a monopoly on source code hosting though.
As the author says, the fact that the software Github provides is affordable, convenient and works very well is probably the only lock-in there is, and this kind of quality-based lock-in is actually desirable in my opinion. What would not be acceptable to me is a lock-in based on the fact that your data is stored somewhere from where it's very hard/impossible to get out (SAP comes to mind), this isn't the case for Github though.