9 ms·

Yeah, the open source dev community may very well see Microsoft quite differently in upcoming years if they keep playing their cards this way.

ozim 8y ago
I think that this is real "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS" and they know it will bring them good times.
mixmastamyk 8y ago
Can't speak for everyone but that won't happen personally until they start respecting privacy.
- tjes 8y ago
  And my update settings. I understand the need for security, but updates shouldn't break my computer either.
- int0x80 8y ago
  I think it is a long term goal. "Old" schoolers have and will likely have for ever that evil 90s vision of MS. However it is changing a bit in that people too. They still may be evil, but at least the look more modern (opensource, new technology, using/contributing to Linux etc). However the important thing (for MS) here is new people. If you come into the scene now or in a few years you only get to know the "new" masked MS image. Yes, they are still doing dubious stuff but is all under the hoods, buried by layers of hype, cloud, linux and fireworks. Rebranding some big stablished company with that kind of history is something that takes a long long time.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    Or even more old school that remembers the original MS that put BASIC on my Commodore.
    - recursive 8y ago
      Or bundling GW-BASIC with MS-DOS. That might be the reason I got into software.
      - Luyt 8y ago
        Remember QBASIC.EXE, too?
  - guitarbill 8y ago
    Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of it's heart, they want something of value from it. What is that, and is it compatible with what made Github useful? I won't stick around to find out, my time is too valuable and the competition is strong. For me, Github doesn't really have any distinctive features except that is was the biggest, and so most convenient. I suspect most people and organizations will be in the same situation.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      >I suspect most people and organizations will be in the same situation. I suspect the vast majority of people won't be bothered to move their stuff unless MS pulls a Skype.
      - colonelpopcorn 8y ago
        I think that's right, and I don't think it will be a problem to move since Git is distributed by nature.
    - vezycash 8y ago
      >Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of its heart, they want something of value from it. What is that If they bundle the pro version of github with office 365 - just like with Teams, the 365 bundle becomes even more compelling for organizations.
      - ethbro 8y ago
        And hopefully kill SharePoint?
        FuckOffNeemo 8y ago
        We can only hope.
    - wadkar 8y ago
      > Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of it's heart, they want something of value from it. What is that, and is it compatible with what made Github useful? What is that? I think its ownership of the huge amount of computer programs (and not to mention the associated metadata of authors and their professional network). The editor and the client provide a continuous stream of samples ready to be drawn from the world. I believe its in the owners best interest to keep this golden goose of continuously increasing source of computer programs in good health. The thing that I didn’t understand at first was why did MS gave up codehub (Google had Code, FB never pushed phabricator that hard) only to acquire GitHub later?
  - RaleyField 8y ago
    > you only get to know You know wikipedia exists. Or people like me who will harp on on how privacy standards that are somehow acceptable now would be something inconceivable in 90's.
  - zer00eyz 8y ago
    As one of those "old schoolers" I don't view MS as any less evil than they used to be. But they aren't the only 800 pound gorilla in the room - open source, google, apple, amazon have all taken a big chunk out of what MS was. What prevents MS (or any one who acquires GitHub) from pulling a sourceforge? Well nothing prevents them, and I can't name someone who wouldn't want to monetize it -- that latter fact is going to be what kills the product/project.
    - wbillingsley 8y ago
      This is a furphy. GitHub is already monetized -- it is highly profitable, selling fee-paying plans to corporations. MS's major customer is corporations. Of course they're not going to do a SourceForge because this is a traditional acquisition where the purchaser has recognised that GitHub's current monetization ties in well with their existing business model, and they gain value in the acquisition from it building their reputation with business as the go-to place for corporate cloud. They have no interest in damaging the corporate value they gain by fiddling with the consumer and open source side.
      - kayoone 8y ago
        Sources for highly profitable ? According to the linked article they were not and lost >60M in 2016. They could probably still optimise to make a profit, but seems like they were struggling a bit with making money.
        wbillingsley 8y ago
        Hmm, looks like that's changed. Back in 2012, they were reported as "profitable nearly the entire way" in their history. https://gigaom.com/2012/07/09/github-finally-raises-funding-100m-from-andreessen-horowitz/ https://gigaom.com/2012/07/09/github-finally-raises-funding-... and more recently there've been articles on their revenues hitting 100m. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/github-has-a-110-million-run-rate-from-business-products.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/github-has-a-110-million-run... but it sounds like their costs have outgrown their earnings. I stand corrected.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Some old schoolers did not have any issue using Windows and related Microsoft tech.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  The Silicon Valley hipster development ecosystem does not have a problem with how Google respects privacy.
  - TheForumTroll 8y ago
    Please, don't talk as you are spokesperson for anyone but yourself.
  - dirkgently 8y ago
    Stop bashing Google without any proofs. They do respect privacy and don't share data you elect not to. In fact, their take out tool was released in 2009 or something, way before GRPR made others do it too.
    - Nuzzerino 8y ago
      So they don't share data with the government? Tell us more.
    - zer00eyz 8y ago
      Uhhhh your doing this backwards. Prove that google is protecting my privacy not the other way around. The default state for people needs to be DISTRUST of corporations (and governments) that they do not have a direct financial relationship with (when you aren't giving them cash). I don't think that much of this holds water but it exists and the picture isn't one of "were standing up to defend your privacy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_regarding_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_regarding_Goo...
    - bryanrasmussen 8y ago
      I believe that Google's theory is what mine would be in similar circumstances, why sell the data to a business when you can use that data to build a competing business.
    - untog 8y ago
      That's part of the problem: we have no idea what Google is doing with our data, so we have no idea if they are respecting privacy - assuming there is even a definition for such a thing. The only answer is to simply gather less data, or be more explicit about when you do. And Google isn't great at either.
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  This is in regards to one Microsoft product: Windows. Reality is, they're not focused on Windows anymore, but I do agree it would be nice if they took away all that telemetry nonsense and allowed people to have better control over updates. To be completely fair under Linux I get updates weekly more or less, but they're just not forced upon me to install them.
  - Silhouette 8y ago
    To be completely fair under Linux I get updates weekly more or less, but they're just not forced upon me to install them. Also, in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. The same cannot be said of Windows updates. I'm still hoping Microsoft see the light on all the telemetry and forced update nonsense before the Windows 7 cut-off in a couple of years. The trouble is, I can't see it happening as long as Nadella is at the top, and I can't see that changing as long as the big enterprise customers who aren't subject to that kind of nonsense are propping up the share price.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - mchahn 8y ago
      > in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. The same cannot be said of Windows updates. A few years ago I turned on my windows machine to see the dreaded upgrade. Being in a rush I went to another machine and the exact thing happened. I blew my top and replaced all windows with Ubuntu. I would have preferred Macs but I couldn't afford the Apple tax (high prices and not working on my existing HW).
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
      > Also, in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. That's nice for you, but if you use any non-open software or software not covered by the package repo then there's a fairly good chance you'll see downtime after an upgrade of your linux distro.
- Silhouette 8y ago
  Indeed. I'm always a little surprised at how readily developers recommend VS Code, given the lack of privacy guarantees and Microsoft's recent track record on both telemetry and quietly overriding past user settings with updates.
- TACIXAT 8y ago
  This was absolutely my first thought too. I've developed for work over the last year on Windows. It's dark patterns to suck up data and ads now. There are ads on the login screen!
- tozeur 8y ago
  MS heavily respects privacy and mandates that every employee go through privacy and GDPR training every year. And remember, MS’s business is not rooted in exploiting user data to sell them ads. Replacing “they” in your sentence with Google or Facebook would be much more appropriate.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    Uninformed post of the year, with a side order of whataboutism, congrats. Who said i trust G or FB?
kitsunesoba 8y ago
The web dev part, anyway. Microsoft still has a long hill to climb to be in the graces of nearly any kind of native dev.
- taakd 8y ago
  While partially true, there are a ton of small and medium size companies out there that are just starting to rewrite their legacy stacks, with many choosing .Net with MSSQL. Worst part is, these shops keep turning up at my local LinuxFest yearly, looking for new dev talent.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  What mirror universe do you live in where Windows doesn't have a huge amount of 3rd party native applications?
marssaxman 8y ago
Microsoft had their chance, and they worked hard to show us what they're made of. We learned the lesson, and they don't get another chance.
eksemplar 8y ago
I doubt it, I think they are doing it because they’ve seen more and more of their enterprise migrate from TFS to git. This is my opinion, but I think Microsoft tech is fairly terrible for open source and smaller projects, because .Net is a lot of complicated tooling you’ll never use outside of enterprise. At the same time they are rapidly becoming the “only” enterprise option rather quickly, and with that comes the question of why you’d chose AWS over Azure. Sure visual studio has a free version, Windows now does Linux and .net Core is open but I see those moves as a way to make c# replace JAVA in schools not as a way to make open source love Microsoft.
- btown 8y ago
  Game development has used C# for quite a while, and with official support for Mono, and adoption of .NET in Unity [0], it's a viable choice. The language is constantly improving [1], and is doing so in the open, on GitHub no less [2]! From what I saw as an intern at Microsoft a while back, there's way more of an engineering-led culture at Microsoft than people give it credit for, and to the extent there's a push to promote their own language and tooling, it's largely driven by a wholehearted belief (and challenge) that Microsoft tools are the right ones for the job, with initiatives being chosen to fulfill and expand that promise. And, more recently, what I hear is that Nadella's initiatives are genuinely promoting that ethos across the entire leadership structure. In that context, they make a lot of sense as a partner for Github. [0] https://blogs.unity3d.com/2018/03/28/updated-scripting-runtime-in-unity-2018-1-what-does-the-future-hold/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2018/03/28/updated-scripting-runti... [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csharp-7 https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csh... [2] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vbteam/2015/01/10/were-moving-to-github/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vbteam/2015/01/10/were-movi...
  - skreutzer 8y ago
    No, they're totally reactive to everything. Why re-invent the wheel with NuGet if there's already software package repositories in the libre-free world for decades, but then not make it the main software distribution mechanism while allowing independent package signing and repository providers (to prevent Microsoft from gatekeeping the distribution channel), effectively eliminating viruses and the attached antivirus industry from the Windows OS? Why give out Internet Explorer gratis, but not the OS if it's that important for human communication? Why does Notepad only in 2018 get support for GNU/Linux line break \n and not in the many, many years before? Why can't Word export a valid XHTML file from a document in 2018, but VS never fails to generate valid XML? There are just thousands of examples like this that speak against the company having to do with engineering, it's more a law firm in my opinion. Let's not forget that it was their idea to claim that software is copyrightable in the same way like a novel is, with laws that are from the print era, and it made them an unbelievable amount of money and prevented the software field to enter a truly digital future. Humanity just lost several decades of progress because of this, and now GitHub, one of the few major innovations in the field, will go down the drain, too.
pferde 8y ago
I don't think Microsoft even uses the same deck of cards as FOSS people.

ozim 8y ago

I think that this is real "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS" and they know it will bring them good times.

mixmastamyk 8y ago

Can't speak for everyone but that won't happen personally until they start respecting privacy.

tjes 8y ago
And my update settings. I understand the need for security, but updates shouldn't break my computer either.
int0x80 8y ago
I think it is a long term goal. "Old" schoolers have and will likely have for ever that evil 90s vision of MS. However it is changing a bit in that people too. They still may be evil, but at least the look more modern (opensource, new technology, using/contributing to Linux etc). However the important thing (for MS) here is new people. If you come into the scene now or in a few years you only get to know the "new" masked MS image. Yes, they are still doing dubious stuff but is all under the hoods, buried by layers of hype, cloud, linux and fireworks. Rebranding some big stablished company with that kind of history is something that takes a long long time.
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  Or even more old school that remembers the original MS that put BASIC on my Commodore.
  - recursive 8y ago
    Or bundling GW-BASIC with MS-DOS. That might be the reason I got into software.
    - Luyt 8y ago
      Remember QBASIC.EXE, too?
- guitarbill 8y ago
  Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of it's heart, they want something of value from it. What is that, and is it compatible with what made Github useful? I won't stick around to find out, my time is too valuable and the competition is strong. For me, Github doesn't really have any distinctive features except that is was the biggest, and so most convenient. I suspect most people and organizations will be in the same situation.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    >I suspect most people and organizations will be in the same situation. I suspect the vast majority of people won't be bothered to move their stuff unless MS pulls a Skype.
    - colonelpopcorn 8y ago
      I think that's right, and I don't think it will be a problem to move since Git is distributed by nature.
  - vezycash 8y ago
    >Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of its heart, they want something of value from it. What is that If they bundle the pro version of github with office 365 - just like with Teams, the 365 bundle becomes even more compelling for organizations.
    - ethbro 8y ago
      And hopefully kill SharePoint?
      - FuckOffNeemo 8y ago
        We can only hope.
  - wadkar 8y ago
    > Microsoft isn't acquiring Github out of the goodness of it's heart, they want something of value from it. What is that, and is it compatible with what made Github useful? What is that? I think its ownership of the huge amount of computer programs (and not to mention the associated metadata of authors and their professional network). The editor and the client provide a continuous stream of samples ready to be drawn from the world. I believe its in the owners best interest to keep this golden goose of continuously increasing source of computer programs in good health. The thing that I didn’t understand at first was why did MS gave up codehub (Google had Code, FB never pushed phabricator that hard) only to acquire GitHub later?
- RaleyField 8y ago
  > you only get to know You know wikipedia exists. Or people like me who will harp on on how privacy standards that are somehow acceptable now would be something inconceivable in 90's.
- zer00eyz 8y ago
  As one of those "old schoolers" I don't view MS as any less evil than they used to be. But they aren't the only 800 pound gorilla in the room - open source, google, apple, amazon have all taken a big chunk out of what MS was. What prevents MS (or any one who acquires GitHub) from pulling a sourceforge? Well nothing prevents them, and I can't name someone who wouldn't want to monetize it -- that latter fact is going to be what kills the product/project.
  - wbillingsley 8y ago
    This is a furphy. GitHub is already monetized -- it is highly profitable, selling fee-paying plans to corporations. MS's major customer is corporations. Of course they're not going to do a SourceForge because this is a traditional acquisition where the purchaser has recognised that GitHub's current monetization ties in well with their existing business model, and they gain value in the acquisition from it building their reputation with business as the go-to place for corporate cloud. They have no interest in damaging the corporate value they gain by fiddling with the consumer and open source side.
    - kayoone 8y ago
      Sources for highly profitable ? According to the linked article they were not and lost >60M in 2016. They could probably still optimise to make a profit, but seems like they were struggling a bit with making money.
      - wbillingsley 8y ago
        Hmm, looks like that's changed. Back in 2012, they were reported as "profitable nearly the entire way" in their history. https://gigaom.com/2012/07/09/github-finally-raises-funding-100m-from-andreessen-horowitz/ https://gigaom.com/2012/07/09/github-finally-raises-funding-... and more recently there've been articles on their revenues hitting 100m. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/github-has-a-110-million-run-rate-from-business-products.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/github-has-a-110-million-run... but it sounds like their costs have outgrown their earnings. I stand corrected.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Some old schoolers did not have any issue using Windows and related Microsoft tech.
pjmlp 8y ago
The Silicon Valley hipster development ecosystem does not have a problem with how Google respects privacy.
- TheForumTroll 8y ago
  Please, don't talk as you are spokesperson for anyone but yourself.
- dirkgently 8y ago
  Stop bashing Google without any proofs. They do respect privacy and don't share data you elect not to. In fact, their take out tool was released in 2009 or something, way before GRPR made others do it too.
  - Nuzzerino 8y ago
    So they don't share data with the government? Tell us more.
  - zer00eyz 8y ago
    Uhhhh your doing this backwards. Prove that google is protecting my privacy not the other way around. The default state for people needs to be DISTRUST of corporations (and governments) that they do not have a direct financial relationship with (when you aren't giving them cash). I don't think that much of this holds water but it exists and the picture isn't one of "were standing up to defend your privacy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_regarding_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_regarding_Goo...
  - bryanrasmussen 8y ago
    I believe that Google's theory is what mine would be in similar circumstances, why sell the data to a business when you can use that data to build a competing business.
  - untog 8y ago
    That's part of the problem: we have no idea what Google is doing with our data, so we have no idea if they are respecting privacy - assuming there is even a definition for such a thing. The only answer is to simply gather less data, or be more explicit about when you do. And Google isn't great at either.
giancarlostoro 8y ago
This is in regards to one Microsoft product: Windows. Reality is, they're not focused on Windows anymore, but I do agree it would be nice if they took away all that telemetry nonsense and allowed people to have better control over updates. To be completely fair under Linux I get updates weekly more or less, but they're just not forced upon me to install them.
- Silhouette 8y ago
  To be completely fair under Linux I get updates weekly more or less, but they're just not forced upon me to install them. Also, in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. The same cannot be said of Windows updates. I'm still hoping Microsoft see the light on all the telemetry and forced update nonsense before the Windows 7 cut-off in a couple of years. The trouble is, I can't see it happening as long as Nadella is at the top, and I can't see that changing as long as the big enterprise customers who aren't subject to that kind of nonsense are propping up the share price.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - mchahn 8y ago
    > in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. The same cannot be said of Windows updates. A few years ago I turned on my windows machine to see the dreaded upgrade. Being in a rush I went to another machine and the exact thing happened. I blew my top and replaced all windows with Ubuntu. I would have preferred Macs but I couldn't afford the Apple tax (high prices and not working on my existing HW).
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    > Also, in many years my amount of downtime due to Debian's unattended-upgrades is exactly 0. That's nice for you, but if you use any non-open software or software not covered by the package repo then there's a fairly good chance you'll see downtime after an upgrade of your linux distro.
Silhouette 8y ago
Indeed. I'm always a little surprised at how readily developers recommend VS Code, given the lack of privacy guarantees and Microsoft's recent track record on both telemetry and quietly overriding past user settings with updates.
TACIXAT 8y ago
This was absolutely my first thought too. I've developed for work over the last year on Windows. It's dark patterns to suck up data and ads now. There are ads on the login screen!
tozeur 8y ago
MS heavily respects privacy and mandates that every employee go through privacy and GDPR training every year. And remember, MS’s business is not rooted in exploiting user data to sell them ads. Replacing “they” in your sentence with Google or Facebook would be much more appropriate.
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  Uninformed post of the year, with a side order of whataboutism, congrats. Who said i trust G or FB?

kitsunesoba 8y ago

The web dev part, anyway. Microsoft still has a long hill to climb to be in the graces of nearly any kind of native dev.

taakd 8y ago
While partially true, there are a ton of small and medium size companies out there that are just starting to rewrite their legacy stacks, with many choosing .Net with MSSQL. Worst part is, these shops keep turning up at my local LinuxFest yearly, looking for new dev talent.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
What mirror universe do you live in where Windows doesn't have a huge amount of 3rd party native applications?

marssaxman 8y ago

Microsoft had their chance, and they worked hard to show us what they're made of. We learned the lesson, and they don't get another chance.

eksemplar 8y ago

I doubt it, I think they are doing it because they’ve seen more and more of their enterprise migrate from TFS to git. This is my opinion, but I think Microsoft tech is fairly terrible for open source and smaller projects, because .Net is a lot of complicated tooling you’ll never use outside of enterprise. At the same time they are rapidly becoming the “only” enterprise option rather quickly, and with that comes the question of why you’d chose AWS over Azure. Sure visual studio has a free version, Windows now does Linux and .net Core is open but I see those moves as a way to make c# replace JAVA in schools not as a way to make open source love Microsoft.

btown 8y ago
Game development has used C# for quite a while, and with official support for Mono, and adoption of .NET in Unity [0], it's a viable choice. The language is constantly improving [1], and is doing so in the open, on GitHub no less [2]! From what I saw as an intern at Microsoft a while back, there's way more of an engineering-led culture at Microsoft than people give it credit for, and to the extent there's a push to promote their own language and tooling, it's largely driven by a wholehearted belief (and challenge) that Microsoft tools are the right ones for the job, with initiatives being chosen to fulfill and expand that promise. And, more recently, what I hear is that Nadella's initiatives are genuinely promoting that ethos across the entire leadership structure. In that context, they make a lot of sense as a partner for Github. [0] https://blogs.unity3d.com/2018/03/28/updated-scripting-runtime-in-unity-2018-1-what-does-the-future-hold/ https://blogs.unity3d.com/2018/03/28/updated-scripting-runti... [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csharp-7 https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csh... [2] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vbteam/2015/01/10/were-moving-to-github/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vbteam/2015/01/10/were-movi...
- skreutzer 8y ago
  No, they're totally reactive to everything. Why re-invent the wheel with NuGet if there's already software package repositories in the libre-free world for decades, but then not make it the main software distribution mechanism while allowing independent package signing and repository providers (to prevent Microsoft from gatekeeping the distribution channel), effectively eliminating viruses and the attached antivirus industry from the Windows OS? Why give out Internet Explorer gratis, but not the OS if it's that important for human communication? Why does Notepad only in 2018 get support for GNU/Linux line break \n and not in the many, many years before? Why can't Word export a valid XHTML file from a document in 2018, but VS never fails to generate valid XML? There are just thousands of examples like this that speak against the company having to do with engineering, it's more a law firm in my opinion. Let's not forget that it was their idea to claim that software is copyrightable in the same way like a novel is, with laws that are from the print era, and it made them an unbelievable amount of money and prevented the software field to enter a truly digital future. Humanity just lost several decades of progress because of this, and now GitHub, one of the few major innovations in the field, will go down the drain, too.

pferde 8y ago

I don't think Microsoft even uses the same deck of cards as FOSS people.