7 ms·

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 botto

by 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.
InclinedPlane 12y ago
pjmlp has it right, but I'll add some further clarifications. One of the most important aspects of Microsoft's success is network effect. People use Windows and Office because other people use Windows and Office. But network effect also works on the development/platform side. Devs write apps in the technologies they know and are comfortable with, and those tend to be the technologies they've used for personal or work projects. Today, far fewer of the top tier (even the top 50% really) of developers are using Microsoft technologies, or are even familiar with them. The "cool kids" code in Ruby or Python or Scala or Golang, or mobile specific languages. If they want to get things done to pay the bills they might fall back on java or PHP. But the idea of using C#, .NET, or coding Windows Apps? Far fewer devs under 30 are doing that than they were 10 or 20 years ago. With fewer devs coding on your platform that means there will be fewer apps, especially the most desired ones, and eventually that will impact the user base as well and weaken the entire business. The era where nobody cares whether a computer runs windows is on the horizon today, even though it may be many years away. If you look at the big apps and systems from the last 5 years you see that a lot of them are either web based or mobile (specifically android/iOS as well). Microsoft used to understand this and it was a major reason why they invested in Visual Studio for all those years when it was unprofitable. But they've had a period of unrivaled market dominance which has only recently been challenged, so they lost their way for a while. Catering to devs is how you maintain market relevancy with your platform, which is something Microsoft desperately needs. Additionally, improving the relationship with the dev community and attracting more devs to your platform makes hiring easier (especially hiring talented folks). It's almost impossible to objectively quantify the benefit of that but it's an enormous factor. Microsoft has been bleeding talent for years and has been starved of a lot of talent for a long time because they were perceived as being old and boring and requiring a completely different set of proficiencies to work there. If Microsoft wanted to they could turn that around and start paving a road back to relevancy in the dev community again.
- pron 12y ago
  > But the idea of using C#, .NET, or coding Windows Apps? Far fewer devs under 30 are doing that than they were 10 or 20 years ago. Except I'm not sure MS is still betting on Windows apps, and they're not making money off of .NET either. Of course, it's very prestigious to have your own dev tools/platform/language and all the big kids have them, but none of them are making money.
rbanffy 12y ago
> What does MS gain? Image. Microsoft's message has been it's a one-stop-shop for your IT needs, as opposed to the general open-source ecosystem where everything has a different vendor (if at all). This, and the difficulty of moving to other platforms/vendors/tools was the core of its vendor lock-in power. In the 80's and most of the 90's, I went full Microsoft, from runtime to database to developer tools, because everything worked so well together. Microsoft has been changing, of course, but if not even Microsoft uses Microsoft products, why should companies use them? With this, again, we see the tacit admission a product or service built on top of free software is somehow better than the technologies Microsoft sells.
- hueving 12y ago
  You can't just buy image. If anything it would just dilute the image of github. It's like the rich kid trying to make friends by buying the basketball court.
  - rbanffy 12y ago
    We know they can't but interesting things happen when you are both desperate and rich.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    >It's like the rich kid trying to make friends by buying the basketball court. You'd be surprised how effective that can be...
  - VLM 12y ago
    And yet, they bought Minecraft, which seems to be exactly that strategy.
    - hueving 12y ago
      Well I would argue that it didn't work. I didn't even know that Microsoft was involved with Minecraft until you mentioned it.
    - untog 12y ago
higherpurpose 12y ago
Microsoft does lots of money-losing acquires. Think Skype. They'll recover their money in 20 years (unless they account the contracts they're getting from the government for giving them Skype access as amortization).
- hueving 12y ago
  You don't get a contract for being forced to comply with a secret court order for information.
  - DonHopkins 12y ago
    Of course you are correct. The NSA never gives money to companies to weaken security. That would be unethical and un-American. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-usa-security-rsa-idUSBRE9BJ1C220131220 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-usa-security-rs... And it's also true that James Clapper didn't lie, he simply misspoke. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-clapper-says-he-misspoke-didnt-lie-about-nsa-surveillance/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-clapper-says-he-misspoke-d... "It has been very disappointing to have my integrity questioned because of a mistake," Did it hurt your feelings as much as mine that they questioned his integrity in such an insulting and unpatriotic way? People who would do such a thing are the real terrorists.
cmdrfred 12y ago
"My father taught me many things here — he taught me in this room. He taught me — keep your friends close but your enemies closer." - Michael Corleone

by tdicola 12y ago

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.

InclinedPlane 12y ago

pjmlp has it right, but I'll add some further clarifications. One of the most important aspects of Microsoft's success is network effect. People use Windows and Office because other people use Windows and Office. But network effect also works on the development/platform side. Devs write apps in the technologies they know and are comfortable with, and those tend to be the technologies they've used for personal or work projects. Today, far fewer of the top tier (even the top 50% really) of developers are using Microsoft technologies, or are even familiar with them. The "cool kids" code in Ruby or Python or Scala or Golang, or mobile specific languages. If they want to get things done to pay the bills they might fall back on java or PHP. But the idea of using C#, .NET, or coding Windows Apps? Far fewer devs under 30 are doing that than they were 10 or 20 years ago. With fewer devs coding on your platform that means there will be fewer apps, especially the most desired ones, and eventually that will impact the user base as well and weaken the entire business. The era where nobody cares whether a computer runs windows is on the horizon today, even though it may be many years away. If you look at the big apps and systems from the last 5 years you see that a lot of them are either web based or mobile (specifically android/iOS as well). Microsoft used to understand this and it was a major reason why they invested in Visual Studio for all those years when it was unprofitable. But they've had a period of unrivaled market dominance which has only recently been challenged, so they lost their way for a while. Catering to devs is how you maintain market relevancy with your platform, which is something Microsoft desperately needs. Additionally, improving the relationship with the dev community and attracting more devs to your platform makes hiring easier (especially hiring talented folks). It's almost impossible to objectively quantify the benefit of that but it's an enormous factor. Microsoft has been bleeding talent for years and has been starved of a lot of talent for a long time because they were perceived as being old and boring and requiring a completely different set of proficiencies to work there. If Microsoft wanted to they could turn that around and start paving a road back to relevancy in the dev community again.

pron 12y ago
> But the idea of using C#, .NET, or coding Windows Apps? Far fewer devs under 30 are doing that than they were 10 or 20 years ago. Except I'm not sure MS is still betting on Windows apps, and they're not making money off of .NET either. Of course, it's very prestigious to have your own dev tools/platform/language and all the big kids have them, but none of them are making money.

rbanffy 12y ago

> What does MS gain? Image. Microsoft's message has been it's a one-stop-shop for your IT needs, as opposed to the general open-source ecosystem where everything has a different vendor (if at all). This, and the difficulty of moving to other platforms/vendors/tools was the core of its vendor lock-in power. In the 80's and most of the 90's, I went full Microsoft, from runtime to database to developer tools, because everything worked so well together. Microsoft has been changing, of course, but if not even Microsoft uses Microsoft products, why should companies use them? With this, again, we see the tacit admission a product or service built on top of free software is somehow better than the technologies Microsoft sells.

hueving 12y ago
You can't just buy image. If anything it would just dilute the image of github. It's like the rich kid trying to make friends by buying the basketball court.
- rbanffy 12y ago
  We know they can't but interesting things happen when you are both desperate and rich.
- coldtea 12y ago
  >It's like the rich kid trying to make friends by buying the basketball court. You'd be surprised how effective that can be...
- VLM 12y ago
  And yet, they bought Minecraft, which seems to be exactly that strategy.
  - hueving 12y ago
    Well I would argue that it didn't work. I didn't even know that Microsoft was involved with Minecraft until you mentioned it.
  - untog 12y ago

higherpurpose 12y ago

Microsoft does lots of money-losing acquires. Think Skype. They'll recover their money in 20 years (unless they account the contracts they're getting from the government for giving them Skype access as amortization).

hueving 12y ago
You don't get a contract for being forced to comply with a secret court order for information.
- DonHopkins 12y ago
  Of course you are correct. The NSA never gives money to companies to weaken security. That would be unethical and un-American. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-usa-security-rsa-idUSBRE9BJ1C220131220 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-usa-security-rs... And it's also true that James Clapper didn't lie, he simply misspoke. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-clapper-says-he-misspoke-didnt-lie-about-nsa-surveillance/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-clapper-says-he-misspoke-d... "It has been very disappointing to have my integrity questioned because of a mistake," Did it hurt your feelings as much as mine that they questioned his integrity in such an insulting and unpatriotic way? People who would do such a thing are the real terrorists.

cmdrfred 12y ago

"My father taught me many things here — he taught me in this room. He taught me — keep your friends close but your enemies closer." - Michael Corleone