10 ms·

This is getting terrifyingly close to my prediction that Microsoft should/would/will buy GitHub. When I first started predicting this two or so years ago, it w

This is getting terrifyingly close to my prediction that Microsoft should/would/will buy GitHub. When I first started predicting this two or so years ago, it was mainly for its comedic value (it always got laughs, followed by "yeah, they should!" followed by nervous laughter followed by "wait, do you think they would actually do that?!"), but after the open sourcing of .NET I honestly think anything is possible. Especially because the counter to MSFT buying GitHub was always "but... CodePlex!", and here they are explicitly moving a high-profile project from CodePlex to GitHub. Scary!

deanclatworthy 12y ago
It'd be a smart buy for a large software company, hedging their bets on moving into open source. I don't think it's out of the realms of possibility either.
- weego 12y ago
  It would be a horrible buy for any polarising brand. Microsoft is about as marmite as you get in software (along with Oracle perhaps) regardless of their recent attitude to being open. We have to be past the point where anyone with purchasibg power believes you can aquire credibility.
  - Stratoscope 12y ago
    > Microsoft is about as marmite as you get in software (along with Oracle perhaps)... Sure, I have fond memories of the days when trendy developers would see me using a ThinkPad instead of a MacBook and ask, "Mike, when are you going to move away from the dark side?" Not so much any more. People I talk with seem reasonably impressed with the way Microsoft has been open sourcing .NET and other projects, making Visual Studio Professional free (as in beer), etc. Now Oracle, that's a different story. We all still love to hate them!
    - icantthinkofone 12y ago
      I find this to be true of younger people who aren't aware of Microsoft's past and don't look at them with the sideways glance the rest of us do. In fact, I find it amazing how many younger people never even heard of their dark side and all the anti-trust movements on two continents.
      - lmm 12y ago
        Remember the dark side of IBM, ten years before Microsoft? And look at how open-source folk treated IBM, even ten years ago. Companies can be rehabilitated.
      - aianus 12y ago
        Apple is more antitrust than Microsoft ever was. Bundling a browser with your OS (while still allowing users to install an alternative) is nothing compared to the restrictions in the iOS app store.
        xnull2guest 12y ago
        Right: - Limiting what compeditor apps are 'up to the standard' for their app store - Giving their own code and apps special access and APIs that no competitors can have - Charging competitors for the use of their store - Ranking of store apps in the favor of Apple code More importantly the controlling of the ecosystem allows networking effects and developer effects to win Apple money and market share.
        icantthinkofone 12y ago
        That's not an "anti-trust" action by itself and bundling the browser was only part of the issue against Microsoft in the US and more of an issue in the EU.
      - pluma 12y ago
        I'm painfully aware of Microsoft's past, but it's not like Apple can (still) be considered the good guys either. It seems that some of the Apple crowd are learning this the hard way over the recent drama surrounding App Store policies. My gut reaction to a ThinkPad will likely be better than to an MBP, simply because there's a higher chance it runs something other than OSX and Windows.
SwellJoe 12y ago
They'd have to bid against Google, by this logic, since Go also moved to Github recently.
- tankenmate 12y ago
  Sorry I didn't mean to vote you down, my baby daughter hit my hand while I was holding the mouse. I can't seem to find a way change my vote; is there one?
  - bborud 12y ago
    I voted him up for you. :-)
  - sunir 12y ago
    Teach your daughter to hack so she can up and down vote on her own Hacker News account.
tdicola 12y ago
What does MS gain? Is online source code storage really going to be a million or billion dollar business for them? It seems like it's just a race to the bottom with costs, just like Dropbox, Box, etc. etc.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  Hipster value. All the cool kids are now using Github.
  - josteink 12y ago
    In a non-sarcastic world it's called "community" and it increases the chance of getting collaborators contributing to your project. You know, the point of open-source being that everyone should be able to contribute and all that.
    - sfk 12y ago
      In a naive world it's called community. These days open source is a vehicle for multinationals to get suckers to write and test their software for free. Microsoft has caught on to that, hence the move.
      - sfk 12y ago
        The downvoters should educate themselves: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html
      - josteink 12y ago
        > These days open source is a vehicle for multinationals to get suckers to write and test their software for free. Lets for arguments sake accept your statement as fact. If that is a fact, is that inherently a bad thing? If I use a piece of software, open-source or not, will I or will I not benefit from that software somehow obtaining better test-coverage? Ofcourse I will. If that software is important to me, being able to contribute with tests or other "boring" or "light" material means that the core team can focus on further development. And I honestly don't have a problem with that.
brudgers 12y ago
I've been listening my way through the archive of Scott Hanselman's hanselminutes podcasts. Microsoft has been striving to be on the right side of history in regard to open source for five or six years. It's all out in the open. Moving to Github is simply developer friendly. Don't misunderstand me. Microsoft's products compete with open source software in the marketplace for developer mindshare and I am not suggesting that this is not a business decision. Being on Github helps the company iterate quickly rather than on the multiyear cycles that were standard when software came in a box. Will Microsoft buy Github? Only if Github is selling. And there was value for Microsoft. There isn't amazing technology, there. There's a huge liability for litigation hosting just anyone's content that comes with Microsoft size pockets, and Git, being distributed would allow an angry community to set up their own Son of Github if Microsoft took control and acted improperly. Incidentally, WiX has been on SourceForge since 2006. There's been nary a rumor of a deal there.
- grandalf 12y ago
  It's great to see MS making smart choices!
- finenad 12y ago
  Even though Microsoft have embraced open source, they are not happy about the GPL license, and have actively replaced GPL code in their previous takeovers.
  - brudgers 12y ago
    [IANAL] My impression is that GPL (or another copyleft style licence) would create incompatibilities with the business models of many of their customers. Taking contributions would also be problematic since Microsoft may wish to dogfood their opensource for proprietary products. For better or worse many of their products incorporate licensed technology from other companies under terms incompatible with GPL. So GPL's strong terms don't seem a viable and reasoned alternative. GPL might be seen as a strong option for companies whose business is built around dual licensing their technology and when all that technology was built in house or licenced under different less stringent terms.
Joeboy 12y ago
Microsoft or otherwise, I don't think the idea that GitHub is going to be run like a public utility forever is a smart bet.
- davidgerard 12y ago
  It's reasonably easy to pick up your repo and leave. How easy is it to pick up your bugs and leave?
  - audreyt 12y ago
    Reasonably easy: https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlab-recipes/blob/master/import/github/import_all.rb https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlab-recipes/blob/master/impor...
    - sytse 12y ago
      GitLab B.V. CEO here, on the 22th of this month (January) we'll come out with GitLab 7.7 that includes a GitHub.com importer for both repo's and issues. It will have a simple web interface where you can select the projects to import.
  - spork1 12y ago
    Pretty easy; https://developer.github.com/v3/issues/#list-issues-for-a-repository https://developer.github.com/v3/issues/#list-issues-for-a-re...
  - josteink 12y ago
    It seems it's pretty easy with Github wikis too: http://stackoverflow.com/a/22002422 http://stackoverflow.com/a/22002422
- pistle 12y ago
  Private repos cost and there is, and will be, a sufficient demand for such a purpose. Between nuget for package mgmt and github (instead of TFS, etc) you are looking at having important, common pieces available. This makes it extremely comfortable to be in the MS dev camp and still feel that you can interface with others and be sharpening the sword in ways that enable you to build cross platform and potentially jump platforms as necessary. People have seen experienced .net devs picking up in a wide assortment of communities. Some interpret this as mind flight, or it might just be that the .net ecosystem has made some wise choices that enable devs raised in the ecosystem to not feel their world has silo walls. It's less "no, this" and more "yes, and."
CmonDev 12y ago
That would be great! Next time don't use one provider "cuz' everyone is on GH, dood". Bitbucket is pretty awesome too.
josephcooney 12y ago
I don't think MS buying github is such a scary thing. There are a few ex-MSFT-ies working at Github (Phil Haack, Paul Betts), and a few other people from the wider MS community there. I guess that is inevitable when Github has 250-ish staff.
kalleboo 12y ago
Also after them buying HockeyApp it wouldn't be the least bit surprising.
jrs235 12y ago
Wait wait wait! Why would Microsoft, or any company, increase the value of a company before buying it (thus increasing the amount they have to payout to existing shareholders)? Wouldn't you think Microsoft or some other company would buy first, then make the company worth more? For example, let's say Chevy is [seriously] thinking about buying [BatteryCompany]. Would Chevy put in an order for millions of dollars worth of batteries and then buy, requiring Chevy to pay more to existing shareholders? Or would Chevy try buying the company then placing the orders to its subsidiary?
- mschwaig 12y ago
  I think this is more like Chevy stopping to produce all the parts on their own and instead starting to use trusted parts provided by third parties which the rest of the industry already agrees on using. Buying the manufacturer of one such part really makes less sense if your company follows a completely different production philosophy.
exadeci 12y ago
Google is moving code to github too !! :)

deanclatworthy 12y ago

It'd be a smart buy for a large software company, hedging their bets on moving into open source. I don't think it's out of the realms of possibility either.

weego 12y ago
It would be a horrible buy for any polarising brand. Microsoft is about as marmite as you get in software (along with Oracle perhaps) regardless of their recent attitude to being open. We have to be past the point where anyone with purchasibg power believes you can aquire credibility.
- Stratoscope 12y ago
  > Microsoft is about as marmite as you get in software (along with Oracle perhaps)... Sure, I have fond memories of the days when trendy developers would see me using a ThinkPad instead of a MacBook and ask, "Mike, when are you going to move away from the dark side?" Not so much any more. People I talk with seem reasonably impressed with the way Microsoft has been open sourcing .NET and other projects, making Visual Studio Professional free (as in beer), etc. Now Oracle, that's a different story. We all still love to hate them!
  - icantthinkofone 12y ago
    I find this to be true of younger people who aren't aware of Microsoft's past and don't look at them with the sideways glance the rest of us do. In fact, I find it amazing how many younger people never even heard of their dark side and all the anti-trust movements on two continents.
    - lmm 12y ago
      Remember the dark side of IBM, ten years before Microsoft? And look at how open-source folk treated IBM, even ten years ago. Companies can be rehabilitated.
    - aianus 12y ago
      Apple is more antitrust than Microsoft ever was. Bundling a browser with your OS (while still allowing users to install an alternative) is nothing compared to the restrictions in the iOS app store.
      - xnull2guest 12y ago
        Right: - Limiting what compeditor apps are 'up to the standard' for their app store - Giving their own code and apps special access and APIs that no competitors can have - Charging competitors for the use of their store - Ranking of store apps in the favor of Apple code More importantly the controlling of the ecosystem allows networking effects and developer effects to win Apple money and market share.
      - icantthinkofone 12y ago
        That's not an "anti-trust" action by itself and bundling the browser was only part of the issue against Microsoft in the US and more of an issue in the EU.
    - pluma 12y ago
      I'm painfully aware of Microsoft's past, but it's not like Apple can (still) be considered the good guys either. It seems that some of the Apple crowd are learning this the hard way over the recent drama surrounding App Store policies. My gut reaction to a ThinkPad will likely be better than to an MBP, simply because there's a higher chance it runs something other than OSX and Windows.

SwellJoe 12y ago

They'd have to bid against Google, by this logic, since Go also moved to Github recently.

tankenmate 12y ago
Sorry I didn't mean to vote you down, my baby daughter hit my hand while I was holding the mouse. I can't seem to find a way change my vote; is there one?
- bborud 12y ago
  I voted him up for you. :-)
- sunir 12y ago
  Teach your daughter to hack so she can up and down vote on her own Hacker News account.

tdicola 12y ago

What does MS gain? Is online source code storage really going to be a million or billion dollar business for them? It seems like it's just a race to the bottom with costs, just like Dropbox, Box, etc. etc.

pjmlp 12y ago
Hipster value. All the cool kids are now using Github.
- josteink 12y ago
  In a non-sarcastic world it's called "community" and it increases the chance of getting collaborators contributing to your project. You know, the point of open-source being that everyone should be able to contribute and all that.
  - sfk 12y ago
    In a naive world it's called community. These days open source is a vehicle for multinationals to get suckers to write and test their software for free. Microsoft has caught on to that, hence the move.
    - sfk 12y ago
      The downvoters should educate themselves: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html
    - josteink 12y ago
      > These days open source is a vehicle for multinationals to get suckers to write and test their software for free. Lets for arguments sake accept your statement as fact. If that is a fact, is that inherently a bad thing? If I use a piece of software, open-source or not, will I or will I not benefit from that software somehow obtaining better test-coverage? Ofcourse I will. If that software is important to me, being able to contribute with tests or other "boring" or "light" material means that the core team can focus on further development. And I honestly don't have a problem with that.

brudgers 12y ago

I've been listening my way through the archive of Scott Hanselman's hanselminutes podcasts. Microsoft has been striving to be on the right side of history in regard to open source for five or six years. It's all out in the open. Moving to Github is simply developer friendly. Don't misunderstand me. Microsoft's products compete with open source software in the marketplace for developer mindshare and I am not suggesting that this is not a business decision. Being on Github helps the company iterate quickly rather than on the multiyear cycles that were standard when software came in a box. Will Microsoft buy Github? Only if Github is selling. And there was value for Microsoft. There isn't amazing technology, there. There's a huge liability for litigation hosting just anyone's content that comes with Microsoft size pockets, and Git, being distributed would allow an angry community to set up their own Son of Github if Microsoft took control and acted improperly. Incidentally, WiX has been on SourceForge since 2006. There's been nary a rumor of a deal there.

grandalf 12y ago
It's great to see MS making smart choices!
finenad 12y ago
Even though Microsoft have embraced open source, they are not happy about the GPL license, and have actively replaced GPL code in their previous takeovers.
- brudgers 12y ago
  [IANAL] My impression is that GPL (or another copyleft style licence) would create incompatibilities with the business models of many of their customers. Taking contributions would also be problematic since Microsoft may wish to dogfood their opensource for proprietary products. For better or worse many of their products incorporate licensed technology from other companies under terms incompatible with GPL. So GPL's strong terms don't seem a viable and reasoned alternative. GPL might be seen as a strong option for companies whose business is built around dual licensing their technology and when all that technology was built in house or licenced under different less stringent terms.

Joeboy 12y ago

Microsoft or otherwise, I don't think the idea that GitHub is going to be run like a public utility forever is a smart bet.

davidgerard 12y ago
It's reasonably easy to pick up your repo and leave. How easy is it to pick up your bugs and leave?
- audreyt 12y ago
  Reasonably easy: https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlab-recipes/blob/master/import/github/import_all.rb https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlab-recipes/blob/master/impor...
  - sytse 12y ago
    GitLab B.V. CEO here, on the 22th of this month (January) we'll come out with GitLab 7.7 that includes a GitHub.com importer for both repo's and issues. It will have a simple web interface where you can select the projects to import.
- spork1 12y ago
  Pretty easy; https://developer.github.com/v3/issues/#list-issues-for-a-repository https://developer.github.com/v3/issues/#list-issues-for-a-re...
- josteink 12y ago
  It seems it's pretty easy with Github wikis too: http://stackoverflow.com/a/22002422 http://stackoverflow.com/a/22002422
pistle 12y ago
Private repos cost and there is, and will be, a sufficient demand for such a purpose. Between nuget for package mgmt and github (instead of TFS, etc) you are looking at having important, common pieces available. This makes it extremely comfortable to be in the MS dev camp and still feel that you can interface with others and be sharpening the sword in ways that enable you to build cross platform and potentially jump platforms as necessary. People have seen experienced .net devs picking up in a wide assortment of communities. Some interpret this as mind flight, or it might just be that the .net ecosystem has made some wise choices that enable devs raised in the ecosystem to not feel their world has silo walls. It's less "no, this" and more "yes, and."

CmonDev 12y ago

That would be great! Next time don't use one provider "cuz' everyone is on GH, dood". Bitbucket is pretty awesome too.

josephcooney 12y ago

I don't think MS buying github is such a scary thing. There are a few ex-MSFT-ies working at Github (Phil Haack, Paul Betts), and a few other people from the wider MS community there. I guess that is inevitable when Github has 250-ish staff.

kalleboo 12y ago

Also after them buying HockeyApp it wouldn't be the least bit surprising.

jrs235 12y ago

Wait wait wait! Why would Microsoft, or any company, increase the value of a company before buying it (thus increasing the amount they have to payout to existing shareholders)? Wouldn't you think Microsoft or some other company would buy first, then make the company worth more? For example, let's say Chevy is [seriously] thinking about buying [BatteryCompany]. Would Chevy put in an order for millions of dollars worth of batteries and then buy, requiring Chevy to pay more to existing shareholders? Or would Chevy try buying the company then placing the orders to its subsidiary?

mschwaig 12y ago
I think this is more like Chevy stopping to produce all the parts on their own and instead starting to use trusted parts provided by third parties which the rest of the industry already agrees on using. Buying the manufacturer of one such part really makes less sense if your company follows a completely different production philosophy.

exadeci 12y ago

Google is moving code to github too !! :)