4 ms·

Sourceforge was complete garbage though. I hated, hated when projects were hosted on it. It was slow, full of ads, impossible to find what you need to download

• silisili 2y ago
  That comparison is pretty harsh and really underemphasizes how awful sourceforge was. Myspace was mostly fine, death by feature creep. Sourceforge was a flaming pile of garbage that was poorly designed, ad laden, AND silently bundled in ad/spyware to normal downloads. A more apt comparison would be comparing Facebook to a hypothetical social media site that when you click on a thumbnail of a user's image, you get a fullsize image of something like goatse...which thankfully doesn't exist(yet).
  • medstrom 2y ago
    You mean the comparison is too mild? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harsh https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harsh
    • silisili 2y ago
      Oh, meant harsh to Myspace, which wasn't that bad really.
    • phatskat 2y ago
      I read it as harsh to MySpace, because that was very unfair to MySpace imo
• darkwater 2y ago
  SF started to be filled with ads only in a second phase. By memory I would say around 2010, and checking Wikipedia it says it changes ownership in 2012. But when it was the de facto "central repository" for Linux softwares codebases, I don't remember it being full of ads.
• CRConrad 2y ago
  You're kind of disproving the point you're trying to make, IMO: Saying "GitHub made git the standard!" is kind of like saying "Facebook invented social media!" Nope, MySpace did. Or blogs, for that matter. Facebook just co-opted the phenomenon, and has for many become synonymous with it. Just like GitHub has managed to do with git.