4 ms·

So you tell that people trust private company which was loosing money since the creation better than Microsoft with all of its reputation at stake?

by zulrah 8y ago

phamilton 8y ago
It would seem Github had $7.5B at stake.
TuringNYC 8y ago
Is it unfair that I keep thinking of the SCO–Linux dispute at the moment? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes#Microsoft_funding_of_SCO_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes#Mic...
- CodeCube 8y ago
  yes :)
- gardnr 8y ago
  That's the overarching style of business that I associate with the Microsoft brand
- baldfat 8y ago
  That's comparing oranges with a monkey. How do they relate?
wpietri 8y ago
Yes. 100% yes. Microsoft didn't care about their reputation for a long time. They currently do, at least a little, but that could change back. Github was losing money, but that's pretty typical for SaaS businesses. I have no reason to think they couldn't have gotten to break-even. And if the can't get to break even, I have no reason to think Microsoft will subsidize them indefinitely.
- baldfat 8y ago
  I still think Microsoft had the lion share of the programmers mind with Virtual Studio? I am guessing it really has more to do with emotional response to the name MS then anything MS has done in the past 5 years. I use Bit Bucket because I knew they were making money and were solvent and I knew GitHub was just waiting for a big pay day. BOY was I wrong with the timing and the amount. > And if the can't get to break even, I have no reason to think Microsoft will subsidize them indefinitely. This fits perfectly with their developer system with Virtual Studio, VS Code and Azure. I can't see how this isn't a great buy for them and their ecco-system.
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  That's not just a scummy breach of trust though, that's a blatantly illegal breach of trust. Source code is a trade secret. Copying it without permission is corporate espionage. People would go to jail if they tried. You are asserting that Microsoft's intentions are criminal.
  - dorfsmay 8y ago
    I'm 100% sure that this is not their intention... But can you guarantee that this is not going to happen in the future? All it takes is one rogue employee, and it could have devastating irreversible effects on a small startup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_Kerviel#Unauthorized_trading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_Kerviel#Unaut... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Leeson#Downfall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Leeson#Downfall
    - Marysville 8y ago
      What's stopping a Github or Gitlab or Atlassian employee from going rogue? That's not an MS specific problem.
  - wpietri 8y ago
    Did you reply to the wrong comment? Because I don't think I am asserting anything like that. Of course, Microsoft was famous for their dirty pool tactics in the past, so it's not irrational to worry that they'd return to them. E.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation#Private https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation#Private
flud 8y ago
În a word, YES. Profitability <> quality. I would argue that the case here is quite the opposite. Github is loved for a variety of reasons, small & large decisions that are influenced by how profit-oriented the company is. And how willing they are to annoy their users to squeeze some more "profit" and/or data out of them.
dorfsmay 8y ago
Yes. Financial stability and conflict of interest are two orthogonal issues. The worst case scenario with Github closing the door, assuming no heads up, is that you'd lose your issues and PR. You have your git history on a bunch of machines (your devs + you should really have a dedicated backup). The worst case scenario with Microsoft having visibility of your "closed" source code is that they take a peek at it and implement a better faster more integrated version of them in their own product competing with you, or heck even copy/paste your code. What can you do about it? How could you prove it? Remember, they can afford orders of magnitude more number of lawyer hours than you.
civilitty 8y ago
What's the evidence that Github was loosing money? Their first (and only, AFAIK) round was with Andreesen Horowitz for $100 million, many years after they had already become the go-to host for open source projects. Before that round the company was bootstrapped with personal funds.

So you tell that people trust private company which was loosing money since the creation better than Microsoft with all of its reputation at stake?

by zulrah 8y ago

So you tell that people trust private company which was loosing money since the creation better than Microsoft with all of its reputation at stake?

phamilton 8y ago

It would seem Github had $7.5B at stake.

TuringNYC 8y ago

Is it unfair that I keep thinking of the SCO–Linux dispute at the moment? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes#Microsoft_funding_of_SCO_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes#Mic...

CodeCube 8y ago
yes :)
gardnr 8y ago
That's the overarching style of business that I associate with the Microsoft brand
baldfat 8y ago
That's comparing oranges with a monkey. How do they relate?

wpietri 8y ago

Yes. 100% yes. Microsoft didn't care about their reputation for a long time. They currently do, at least a little, but that could change back. Github was losing money, but that's pretty typical for SaaS businesses. I have no reason to think they couldn't have gotten to break-even. And if the can't get to break even, I have no reason to think Microsoft will subsidize them indefinitely.

baldfat 8y ago
I still think Microsoft had the lion share of the programmers mind with Virtual Studio? I am guessing it really has more to do with emotional response to the name MS then anything MS has done in the past 5 years. I use Bit Bucket because I knew they were making money and were solvent and I knew GitHub was just waiting for a big pay day. BOY was I wrong with the timing and the amount. > And if the can't get to break even, I have no reason to think Microsoft will subsidize them indefinitely. This fits perfectly with their developer system with Virtual Studio, VS Code and Azure. I can't see how this isn't a great buy for them and their ecco-system.
hannasanarion 8y ago
That's not just a scummy breach of trust though, that's a blatantly illegal breach of trust. Source code is a trade secret. Copying it without permission is corporate espionage. People would go to jail if they tried. You are asserting that Microsoft's intentions are criminal.
- dorfsmay 8y ago
  I'm 100% sure that this is not their intention... But can you guarantee that this is not going to happen in the future? All it takes is one rogue employee, and it could have devastating irreversible effects on a small startup. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_Kerviel#Unauthorized_trading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_Kerviel#Unaut... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Leeson#Downfall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Leeson#Downfall
  - Marysville 8y ago
    What's stopping a Github or Gitlab or Atlassian employee from going rogue? That's not an MS specific problem.
- wpietri 8y ago
  Did you reply to the wrong comment? Because I don't think I am asserting anything like that. Of course, Microsoft was famous for their dirty pool tactics in the past, so it's not irrational to worry that they'd return to them. E.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation#Private https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation#Private

flud 8y ago

În a word, YES. Profitability <> quality. I would argue that the case here is quite the opposite. Github is loved for a variety of reasons, small & large decisions that are influenced by how profit-oriented the company is. And how willing they are to annoy their users to squeeze some more "profit" and/or data out of them.

dorfsmay 8y ago

Yes. Financial stability and conflict of interest are two orthogonal issues. The worst case scenario with Github closing the door, assuming no heads up, is that you'd lose your issues and PR. You have your git history on a bunch of machines (your devs + you should really have a dedicated backup). The worst case scenario with Microsoft having visibility of your "closed" source code is that they take a peek at it and implement a better faster more integrated version of them in their own product competing with you, or heck even copy/paste your code. What can you do about it? How could you prove it? Remember, they can afford orders of magnitude more number of lawyer hours than you.

civilitty 8y ago

What's the evidence that Github was loosing money? Their first (and only, AFAIK) round was with Andreesen Horowitz for $100 million, many years after they had already become the go-to host for open source projects. Before that round the company was bootstrapped with personal funds.