3 ms·

Sympathy? It's a Microsoft company that is being ran with a consistency of a startup in early seed rounds. Their downtime is abhorrent and unacceptable as far a

by gogobio 1mo ago

Sympathy? It's a Microsoft company that is being ran with a consistency of a startup in early seed rounds. Their downtime is abhorrent and unacceptable as far as enterprise goes. Their engineers look like absolute amateurs allowing for such low class work it results in their customers experiencing industry leading downtime.

__MatrixMan__ 1mo ago
Sympathy negated by their 2026 Pwnie award: "Lamest Vendor" https://this.weekinsecurity.com/microsoft-wins-lamest-vendor-at-pwnie-awards-2026-for-threatening-security-researchers-with-legal-action/ https://this.weekinsecurity.com/microsoft-wins-lamest-vendor...
javier2 1mo ago
and it has been so damn slow for a number of years now, it drives me insane.
zvmaz 1mo ago
> Their engineers look like absolute amateurs allowing for such low class work it results in their customers experiencing industry leading downtime. I gather that you have intimate and deep knowledge on the teams and the problems they try to solve there.
- californical 1mo ago
  If I own a restaurant and buy bread from a supplier — BreadHub. And 99% of the bread that I get is good but 1% of the loaves, they forgot to add flour. Consistently, for years, they always have loaves missing a key ingredient that I still end up paying for. I can be pretty sure that BreadHub have a pretty major internal issue, and should probably be questioning their competence, regardless of their “scale”, and without any knowledge of the “problems they’re solving”
  - tyre 1mo ago
    I’m not saying users don’t have a right to be pissed or aren’t justified in looking at other options. I’m saying that GH is operating at a huge scale with (probably) lots of technical debt and a forced migration to new infrastructure. I would be (and am) highly critical of leadership. I’m not going to make strong assertions about ICs without knowing their context. I’ve worked at a company with a sterling reputation for engineering excellence where brilliant ICs were kneecapped by poor leadership. I think a lot of us, at one point or another in our careers, have worked with potato leadership that can be short-sighted or political. It isn’t a comment on the engineers.
    - selfhoster1312 1mo ago
      I mean, the leadership brought it on themselves. For a few years they encouraged sloperating Copilot. Before that, they were encouraging Github Actions usage. Now the scale problems they're facing is because of those 2 actions of theirs. They didn't have to encourage such growth to turn a profit, and they still don't have to provide gratis services to slopware bots providing 0 value for society.
  - tryauuum 1mo ago
    Please don't do it. Now somebody will come and will try to improve your bread analogy. We will be discussing bread for eons
    - CoastalCoder 1mo ago
      Okay, let's use a car analogy...
    - collingreen 1mo ago
      So a monad is a lot like a burrito...
  - kayfox 1mo ago
    I see you haven't experienced USFoods and Sysco.
  - 1mo ago
tyre 1mo ago
This is uncharitable, rude, and pretty baseless. Unless you have a lot of direct, personal information about GitHub engineers, they’re dealing with a huge spike in traffic. Is their uptime acceptable? No. But personal attacks aren’t necessary or constructive.
- logicchains 1mo ago
  How low would uptime have to get before you'd consider holding the engineers personally responsible for it?
  - vrosas 1mo ago
    Agreed. At some point to have to stop hugging your ops team and start firing them.
    - ksenzee 1mo ago
      No, you hire more of them, you give them what they need to do their jobs, and you actually listen to their recommendations. It's not even complicated. It just takes time and money, neither of which companies want to spend on reliability until their customers scream very loud en masse.
    - Freedom2 1mo ago
      Agreed. In fact, keep firing ops until someone gets it done. There's no way your company will build a reputation for not supporting their teams.
  - pixelatedindex 1mo ago
    Why are we holding the engineers accountable and not the CEO? The company isn’t one department. Responsibility should bubble up to the top.
    - pydry 1mo ago
      They dont have a CEO ever since their last CEO said that human programming "wasn't going anywhere".
majormajor 1mo ago
Their engineers almost certainly are not the ones making the decision to let all the new traffic degrade their service for their existing paid customers.
grumple 1mo ago
Typically when a company gets acquired, they get thrown a bunch of terrible initiatives like “change your cloud provider” that distract from their mission, executives saying “more AI!” and they definitely don’t hear anyone in management say “prioritize technical debt”.
cr125rider 1mo ago
That seems a bit crass but the underlying sentiment stands. Microsoft has more money than God. 4T valuation. When you say you’re worth that much, no excuses. Figure it out.
- chris_money202 1mo ago
  So your proposal is for Microsoft to invest their free cash in helping support a bunch of AI coders maintain their pet projects? Sounds like you should be a CEO!
  - robcohen 1mo ago
    Start charging more, cut down on CI, figure it out. You don't NEED to give away so much if it means your service is going down.
    - chris_money202 1mo ago
      There isn’t mission critical work being done on GH. You start charging more and the people in charge of finance at companies paying for GH will actually start paying attention. Those finance people don’t care rn because GH is affordable and helps get stuff done. There’s a threshold that exist at every company and once it’s crossed the people who can make money decisions start asking questions
      - queenkjuul 1mo ago
        There is absolutely mission critical work being done on GitHub... There are enterprises paying them for their CI and deployment pipelines
  - flohofwoe 1mo ago
    You don't need to be a CEO to come to the conclusion that throttling to discourage excessive usage is probably a good idea.
    - 1mo ago
jeremyjh 1mo ago
If you haven't read this, you really have no idea what they are dealing with. https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale
- flohofwoe 1mo ago
  They could throttle git operations to a level which isn't noticeable by normal 'human' usage but seriously slows down automated usage. These are basically DDOS attacks.

by gogobio 1mo ago

__MatrixMan__ 1mo ago

Sympathy negated by their 2026 Pwnie award: "Lamest Vendor" https://this.weekinsecurity.com/microsoft-wins-lamest-vendor-at-pwnie-awards-2026-for-threatening-security-researchers-with-legal-action/ https://this.weekinsecurity.com/microsoft-wins-lamest-vendor...

javier2 1mo ago

and it has been so damn slow for a number of years now, it drives me insane.

zvmaz 1mo ago

> Their engineers look like absolute amateurs allowing for such low class work it results in their customers experiencing industry leading downtime. I gather that you have intimate and deep knowledge on the teams and the problems they try to solve there.

californical 1mo ago
If I own a restaurant and buy bread from a supplier — BreadHub. And 99% of the bread that I get is good but 1% of the loaves, they forgot to add flour. Consistently, for years, they always have loaves missing a key ingredient that I still end up paying for. I can be pretty sure that BreadHub have a pretty major internal issue, and should probably be questioning their competence, regardless of their “scale”, and without any knowledge of the “problems they’re solving”
- tyre 1mo ago
  I’m not saying users don’t have a right to be pissed or aren’t justified in looking at other options. I’m saying that GH is operating at a huge scale with (probably) lots of technical debt and a forced migration to new infrastructure. I would be (and am) highly critical of leadership. I’m not going to make strong assertions about ICs without knowing their context. I’ve worked at a company with a sterling reputation for engineering excellence where brilliant ICs were kneecapped by poor leadership. I think a lot of us, at one point or another in our careers, have worked with potato leadership that can be short-sighted or political. It isn’t a comment on the engineers.
  - selfhoster1312 1mo ago
    I mean, the leadership brought it on themselves. For a few years they encouraged sloperating Copilot. Before that, they were encouraging Github Actions usage. Now the scale problems they're facing is because of those 2 actions of theirs. They didn't have to encourage such growth to turn a profit, and they still don't have to provide gratis services to slopware bots providing 0 value for society.
- tryauuum 1mo ago
  Please don't do it. Now somebody will come and will try to improve your bread analogy. We will be discussing bread for eons
  - CoastalCoder 1mo ago
    Okay, let's use a car analogy...
  - collingreen 1mo ago
    So a monad is a lot like a burrito...
- kayfox 1mo ago
  I see you haven't experienced USFoods and Sysco.
- 1mo ago

tyre 1mo ago

This is uncharitable, rude, and pretty baseless. Unless you have a lot of direct, personal information about GitHub engineers, they’re dealing with a huge spike in traffic. Is their uptime acceptable? No. But personal attacks aren’t necessary or constructive.

logicchains 1mo ago
How low would uptime have to get before you'd consider holding the engineers personally responsible for it?
- vrosas 1mo ago
  Agreed. At some point to have to stop hugging your ops team and start firing them.
  - ksenzee 1mo ago
    No, you hire more of them, you give them what they need to do their jobs, and you actually listen to their recommendations. It's not even complicated. It just takes time and money, neither of which companies want to spend on reliability until their customers scream very loud en masse.
  - Freedom2 1mo ago
    Agreed. In fact, keep firing ops until someone gets it done. There's no way your company will build a reputation for not supporting their teams.
- pixelatedindex 1mo ago
  Why are we holding the engineers accountable and not the CEO? The company isn’t one department. Responsibility should bubble up to the top.
  - pydry 1mo ago
    They dont have a CEO ever since their last CEO said that human programming "wasn't going anywhere".

majormajor 1mo ago

Their engineers almost certainly are not the ones making the decision to let all the new traffic degrade their service for their existing paid customers.

grumple 1mo ago

Typically when a company gets acquired, they get thrown a bunch of terrible initiatives like “change your cloud provider” that distract from their mission, executives saying “more AI!” and they definitely don’t hear anyone in management say “prioritize technical debt”.

cr125rider 1mo ago

That seems a bit crass but the underlying sentiment stands. Microsoft has more money than God. 4T valuation. When you say you’re worth that much, no excuses. Figure it out.

chris_money202 1mo ago
So your proposal is for Microsoft to invest their free cash in helping support a bunch of AI coders maintain their pet projects? Sounds like you should be a CEO!
- robcohen 1mo ago
  Start charging more, cut down on CI, figure it out. You don't NEED to give away so much if it means your service is going down.
  - chris_money202 1mo ago
    There isn’t mission critical work being done on GH. You start charging more and the people in charge of finance at companies paying for GH will actually start paying attention. Those finance people don’t care rn because GH is affordable and helps get stuff done. There’s a threshold that exist at every company and once it’s crossed the people who can make money decisions start asking questions
    - queenkjuul 1mo ago
      There is absolutely mission critical work being done on GitHub... There are enterprises paying them for their CI and deployment pipelines
- flohofwoe 1mo ago
  You don't need to be a CEO to come to the conclusion that throttling to discourage excessive usage is probably a good idea.
  - 1mo ago

jeremyjh 1mo ago

If you haven't read this, you really have no idea what they are dealing with. https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale

flohofwoe 1mo ago
They could throttle git operations to a level which isn't noticeable by normal 'human' usage but seriously slows down automated usage. These are basically DDOS attacks.