4 ms·

We Didn't Sell GitHub to Google

132 points by bundie 3y ago

robnado 3y ago
At its core, Microsoft is a business software company: they live and die by big businesses being willing to pay for their software and services. Meanwhile, google lives and dies by advertising. They’ve attempted to diversify into other revenue streams, but nothing else can compete.
iudqnolq 3y ago
The title poorly conveys the tweet. "And people ask me why we didn't sell GitHub to Google. Seriously?" would be a little better.
- ksec 3y ago
  I think the title likely have Why in the headline but HN automatically removes that. Normally the submitter would have to manually edit and add it back.
  - iudqnolq 3y ago
    I hate that feature. I don't think it's possible to usefully solve clickbait with a trivial algorithm. HN already has robust tools for using human judgement to fix issues.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- bundie 3y ago
  Hacker news edited the title.
ksec 3y ago
> Not one high level person I spoke to during negotiations is still at Google today. The whole Google culture and value has always been the same since Day one. And yet they somehow managed to convince majority of the public about how good they are for at least 10 - 15 years. >Anecdotally, I'm not a huge fan of MS products (but no hater either), but Microsoft devs seem to love their work way more than Google devs, in my network. That pretty much summarise the different between Microsoft and Google. The story is like Google's value and culture was founded upon the hatred of Microsoft. When Microsoft was supposed to be evil.
- mjan22640 3y ago
  In the years Google rose, Microsoft was no longer evil. It did not last tho.
  - artichokeheart 3y ago
    Microsoft was never evil, well not any more evil than any other company. Microsoft was a monopoly. Given what they get away with with Windows 10 and 11 one could argue they still are or at least still act like they are.
    - fatfingerd 3y ago
      Evil is malintent*capability so a company with monopoly over your entire hobby, profession and/or economy is going to score higher on evil even if a baby has more malintent.
    - sneak 3y ago
      Microsoft supplies software and services to organizations that run torture centers and concentration camps. There is little wiggle room debate here.
    - kobalsky 3y ago
      Microsoft is beyond evil. The stuff they do in third world countries is like cold war CIA lite. In Argentina, Microsoft bribed their way into having power of police. If you are a company here, any day you can get a email from Microsoft compelling you to provide them an inventory of your software under the pain of being raided by the police to get audited if you don’t comply, or you just may get raided if they suspect you are using illegitimate copies of their software. Yes, Microsoft can kick down your door and check your computers. We are a software shop in a small city in Argentina and at some point we made a blip in their radar because we won a technology exporter award of our city. Our prize was an email from Microsoft like I described before. They didn’t get a dime because all our desktops and servers were Linux, but they did try. They had the gall of pitching Microsoft Teams in their threatening emails. It was surreal.
    - 3y ago
elbowjack65 3y ago
I remember reading that Diane Greene, then CEO of GCP ,was keen to buy GitHub, but Sundar didn't see the point of owning it. Sundar's argument was supposedly, owning GitHub wouldn't improve the market share of GCP. Yes, Google was part of the negotiations to purchase GitHub, but there wasn't full commitment for the alphabet CEO.
- az226 3y ago
  Sundar wasn’t even aware the deal was live. Greene had an infra background and didn’t understand GitHub or what made it special. If I had to guess, Google never formally made a Board-approved offer.
  - sitkack 3y ago
    > Sundar wasn’t even aware the deal was live. Because Sundar is a substitute teacher who is baby sitting Alphabet while the adults are away. Defunkt makes it sound like it was a choice and they were a steward ... bs. If Google had a better offer, it would have been done. Google not buying GH was a horribly foolish mistake. Mistake is the wrong word. Blunder? It has zero to do with the tech and everything to do with access to developers. I know how it played out, the Google folks were like, this is just hosted git, we could build that in a year if we wanted to. Completely ignoring that something like 20% of developers have an account there. Almost nothing is a technology play, at acquisition time you are selling markets and audiences. I am amazed that GH hasn't capitalized more on the conveyor belt between GH and Azure.
    - irfn 3y ago
      >Defunkt makes it sound like it was a choice and they were a steward ... bs. If Google had a better offer, it would have been done. Exactly! Total BS! There are however some things that would motivate many founders to turn down their(Google) offers. - Biggest issue with Google Acquisitions. They want the business and not the tech. They want to rewrite the tech riding their high horse. - They often wont offer full time roles to employees of acquired companies and would keep them on contract positions pending "interview" for full time.
kgbcia 3y ago
Makes me nervous to dive into the Google ecosystem
CommanderData 3y ago
This reputation can't be good and coming from someone like him is quite damning. Google's rep for short lived projects and it's ecosystem. Are they even wanting to shake this perception or maybe it's a none issue for them?
lakomen 3y ago
[flagged]

132 points by bundie 3y ago

At its core, Microsoft is a business software company: they live and die by big businesses being willing to pay for their software and services. Meanwhile, google lives and dies by advertising. They’ve attempted to diversify into other revenue streams, but nothing else can compete.

iudqnolq 3y ago

The title poorly conveys the tweet. "And people ask me why we didn't sell GitHub to Google. Seriously?" would be a little better.

ksec 3y ago
I think the title likely have Why in the headline but HN automatically removes that. Normally the submitter would have to manually edit and add it back.
- iudqnolq 3y ago
  I hate that feature. I don't think it's possible to usefully solve clickbait with a trivial algorithm. HN already has robust tools for using human judgement to fix issues.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bundie 3y ago
Hacker news edited the title.

ksec 3y ago

> Not one high level person I spoke to during negotiations is still at Google today. The whole Google culture and value has always been the same since Day one. And yet they somehow managed to convince majority of the public about how good they are for at least 10 - 15 years. >Anecdotally, I'm not a huge fan of MS products (but no hater either), but Microsoft devs seem to love their work way more than Google devs, in my network. That pretty much summarise the different between Microsoft and Google. The story is like Google's value and culture was founded upon the hatred of Microsoft. When Microsoft was supposed to be evil.

mjan22640 3y ago
In the years Google rose, Microsoft was no longer evil. It did not last tho.
- artichokeheart 3y ago
  Microsoft was never evil, well not any more evil than any other company. Microsoft was a monopoly. Given what they get away with with Windows 10 and 11 one could argue they still are or at least still act like they are.
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    Evil is malintent*capability so a company with monopoly over your entire hobby, profession and/or economy is going to score higher on evil even if a baby has more malintent.
  - sneak 3y ago
    Microsoft supplies software and services to organizations that run torture centers and concentration camps. There is little wiggle room debate here.
  - kobalsky 3y ago
    Microsoft is beyond evil. The stuff they do in third world countries is like cold war CIA lite. In Argentina, Microsoft bribed their way into having power of police. If you are a company here, any day you can get a email from Microsoft compelling you to provide them an inventory of your software under the pain of being raided by the police to get audited if you don’t comply, or you just may get raided if they suspect you are using illegitimate copies of their software. Yes, Microsoft can kick down your door and check your computers. We are a software shop in a small city in Argentina and at some point we made a blip in their radar because we won a technology exporter award of our city. Our prize was an email from Microsoft like I described before. They didn’t get a dime because all our desktops and servers were Linux, but they did try. They had the gall of pitching Microsoft Teams in their threatening emails. It was surreal.
  - 3y ago

elbowjack65 3y ago

I remember reading that Diane Greene, then CEO of GCP ,was keen to buy GitHub, but Sundar didn't see the point of owning it. Sundar's argument was supposedly, owning GitHub wouldn't improve the market share of GCP. Yes, Google was part of the negotiations to purchase GitHub, but there wasn't full commitment for the alphabet CEO.

az226 3y ago
Sundar wasn’t even aware the deal was live. Greene had an infra background and didn’t understand GitHub or what made it special. If I had to guess, Google never formally made a Board-approved offer.
- sitkack 3y ago
  > Sundar wasn’t even aware the deal was live. Because Sundar is a substitute teacher who is baby sitting Alphabet while the adults are away. Defunkt makes it sound like it was a choice and they were a steward ... bs. If Google had a better offer, it would have been done. Google not buying GH was a horribly foolish mistake. Mistake is the wrong word. Blunder? It has zero to do with the tech and everything to do with access to developers. I know how it played out, the Google folks were like, this is just hosted git, we could build that in a year if we wanted to. Completely ignoring that something like 20% of developers have an account there. Almost nothing is a technology play, at acquisition time you are selling markets and audiences. I am amazed that GH hasn't capitalized more on the conveyor belt between GH and Azure.
  - irfn 3y ago
    >Defunkt makes it sound like it was a choice and they were a steward ... bs. If Google had a better offer, it would have been done. Exactly! Total BS! There are however some things that would motivate many founders to turn down their(Google) offers. - Biggest issue with Google Acquisitions. They want the business and not the tech. They want to rewrite the tech riding their high horse. - They often wont offer full time roles to employees of acquired companies and would keep them on contract positions pending "interview" for full time.

kgbcia 3y ago

Makes me nervous to dive into the Google ecosystem

CommanderData 3y ago

This reputation can't be good and coming from someone like him is quite damning. Google's rep for short lived projects and it's ecosystem. Are they even wanting to shake this perception or maybe it's a none issue for them?

lakomen 3y ago

[flagged]