4 ms·

Microsoft acquired GitHub for $7.5 billion[1]. If Kubernetes were proprietary, could one value it at $7.5 billion? I think GitHub was acquired for the same reas

Microsoft acquired GitHub for $7.5 billion[1]. If Kubernetes were proprietary, could one value it at $7.5 billion? I think GitHub was acquired for the same reason Kubernetes was open sourced - to gain market share against AWS. Microsoft has a similar service to GitHub called Azure DevOps[2]. It has been rebranded over the years. My guess is GitHub's brand will absorb Azure DevOps, even as far to rebrand everything in Azure to "GitHub Cloud". The new war is in the cloud. Microsoft, Google, Oracle, and IBM have to pay a premium for a chance to catch AWS. [1] https://news.microsoft.com/2018/06/04/microsoft-to-acquire-github-for-7-5-billion/ https://news.microsoft.com/2018/06/04/microsoft-to-acquire-g... [2] https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-rebrands-repositions-visual-studio-team-services-as-azure-devops/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-rebrands-repositions...

tracker1 7y ago
I don't think that Azure DevOps (AZDO) will be rebranded again anytime soon, but I agree that it will get a bit more muddled with GitHub. I still think "VSTS" is easier to say than "Azure DevOps". AZDO is a path towards CI/CD with Github, and can include private repos. I do think that GH's path for CI/CD is more interesting though. I'm not sure where Circle-CI and Travis-CI will end up against the stacked competition though. I think they'll be the biggest losers from GH's acquisition in the end, which would be true regardless of who acquired them. I feel that MS was probably the best option. Specifically because of the increased skepticism that MS draws despite it's recent moves in the developer community towards more open software. I spent over half my career in an MS-centric world, and the other half outside of it. I'm both appreciative and skeptical of everything that is out there that developers have to make use of.

tracker1 7y ago

I don't think that Azure DevOps (AZDO) will be rebranded again anytime soon, but I agree that it will get a bit more muddled with GitHub. I still think "VSTS" is easier to say than "Azure DevOps". AZDO is a path towards CI/CD with Github, and can include private repos. I do think that GH's path for CI/CD is more interesting though. I'm not sure where Circle-CI and Travis-CI will end up against the stacked competition though. I think they'll be the biggest losers from GH's acquisition in the end, which would be true regardless of who acquired them. I feel that MS was probably the best option. Specifically because of the increased skepticism that MS draws despite it's recent moves in the developer community towards more open software. I spent over half my career in an MS-centric world, and the other half outside of it. I'm both appreciative and skeptical of everything that is out there that developers have to make use of.