Github about to be Miscrosofted?

[TechyBen]

No. It cannot be killed. Does not stop MS seeing Github, liking what they see, and taking it. As they did with Minecraft.

I would expect zero development into anything not Visual Basic... Ahem, MS coding path, MS Azure hosting, and MS integration.

 

It could go the Linkdln or it could go the Skype... perhaps neither, and a more, just Youtube (more advertising, algorithms and data harvesting).

 

That's why, as much as Google takes and harvests all the data, they are open about it. It's their job.  My Windows OS though... I don't want it doing that... and if MS can make that shift on OS, I'd not put it past them shifting GitHub, to anything else they wish (which I admit, I would not know right now other than data harvesting).

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

No. It cannot be killed. Does not stop MS seeing Github, liking what they see, and taking it. As they did with Minecraft.

I would expect zero development into anything not Visual Basic... Ahem, MS coding path, MS Azure hosting, and MS integration.

 

It could go the Linkdln or it could go the Skype... perhaps neither, and a more, just Youtube (more advertising, algorithms and data harvesting).

 

That's why, as much as Google takes and harvests all the data, they are open about it. It's their job.  My Windows OS though... I don't want it doing that... and if MS can make that shift on OS, I'd not put it past them shifting GitHub, to anything else they wish (which I admit, I would not know right now other than data harvesting).

MS acquire for many different reasons. sometimes they just want the IP, other times  the user base is already established and sometimes the company they are acquiring is just a good long term investment.    Github was apparently having some issues with money and replacing their CEO. Now neither are a problem.  They are also a company that MS has heavily used, it is not uncommon for a company to buy another company when they like the service but it is struggling.  I have personally seen it first hand with a larger company I used to work for,  the CEO didn't like the prices the waste disposal company was charging and they were struggling as a business, so he bought them outright, fixed the productivity issues and now enjoys making money cleaning his own factories as well as others.   Message I am trying to communicate here is that MS can make serious money from OSS if they get in at the same level as other developers.  Otherwise they face the same future as kodak (industry is changing and they have to adapt to survive).

 

[PocketNerd]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

But you don't change what isn't broken.  Github had financial issues, not technical ones.

The financial part is what worries me the most, cause if GitHub was losing money, then you can be guaranteed that M$ is going to take away features in order to make a profit.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, PocketNerd said:

The financial part is what worries me the most, cause if GitHub was losing money, then you can be guaranteed that M$ is going to take away features in order to make a profit.

How does Github having financial issue guarantee that MS is going to take away features?  We have no idea why they were in the position they were.  It literally could be anything from investors pulling out or inefficient management.  Both of which can be solved without reducing the features or services offered.

[PocketNerd]

17 minutes ago, mr moose said:

How does Github having financial issue guarantee that MS is going to take away features?  We have no idea why they were in the position they were.  It literally could be anything from investors pulling out or inefficient management.  Both of which can be solved without reducing the features or services offered.

Sure, I don't know the full picture. You seem so sure that you do, though.
 

And yes, that means features are at risk. Because you can cut away at management or get as much investment as you can. But if in the end it's still not enough then guess what's left?

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, PocketNerd said:

Sure, I don't know the full picture. You seem so sure that you do, though.

No. I think he’s just not pre-judging the situation like everyone else seems to be doing. 

 

Microsoft might well change things. Or reduce features. Or charge fees/more. Or literally burn the site down. 

 

Or maybe they really like the site and will not drastically change it. 

 

Why don't we wait and see? If Microsoft ruins it, I give you permission to say “I told you so”. 

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

Microsoft please. 

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, PocketNerd said:

Sure, I don't know the full picture. You seem so sure that you do, though.
 

And yes, that means features are at risk. Because you can cut away at management or get as much investment as you can. But if in the end it's still not enough then guess what's left?

No, I am saying we know nothing, making absolute claims about the outcome is stabbing in the dark.  You can no more say features will be cut than I can say MS will add features and make OSS the best thing in the world. 

 

Like @dalekphalm said, we'll have to wait and see rather than pre-judge.

[warrenr]

On 6/4/2018 at 12:16 PM, LAwLz said:

I don't want you to link marketing material from Microsoft. I want you to post examples with your own words, which of their core products they have open sourced and how it has helped the FOSS community (not just Microsoft themselves).

I can do that:  Typescript.

 

Typescript is widely used outside of Microsoft circles.  Angular, Ionic and NativeScript front-end frameworks are all built with it, for instance, and it's one of the fastest-growing programming languages on GitHub in terms of # of pull requests.

 

You'll also find on StackOverflow's most recent developer survey that Typescript is more widely used than Swift, Ruby, Go, or other currently popular boutique languages.... and if you leave out HTML, CSS and shell scripting, it's the 8th most popular programming language in use.  It's also ranked as the 4th most loved language, after Rust, Kotlin and Python. 

 

Hey, we can talk about Visual Studio Code, too.  The same StackOverflow developer survey has VS Code as the #1 most popular development environment.  This doesn't indicate that it's been widely adopted by FOSS developers, but it is one of only a couple of fully free, cross-platform code editors.  It's winning people over from Atom and Brackets, even people who wouldn't normally use Microsoft tools.

 

On 6/4/2018 at 1:01 PM, Cheezdoodlez said:

Gitlab also have a better bug tracking and who does what system than github to be fair. Not to mention integrated CI/CD 

VSTS also has better bug tracking than Github, with full integration into Visual Studio.  It also has a pretty complete CI/CD system with access to Windows and Linux build agents.  $40/month for unlimited builds.

Edited June 5, 2018 by warrenr
speling

[Lent]

I do not understand all the hate Microsoft gets in the recent years, especially by developers. Sure, they've had a troubled past and have done some not so stellar things, but the same thing can be said about almost all tech giants such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple. It's to be expected by companies that employ thousands of people in hundreds of locations with dozens of teams doing different things for different motives. I personally think that Microsoft has been on a fantastic upswing ever since Satya Nadella joined in 2014. With Windows 10's Ubuntu Subsystem, vscode, TypeScript, ASP.NET, .NET Core, Roslyn, SQL Server on Linux, Visual Studio on Mac, and CosmoDB just to name a few big accomplishments that are truly making a difference in the industry. 

As a developer I find myself excited to use their projects since they tend to be very well polished and very well maintained. From scalability, to tooling, to feature set. And guess what, I can use a lot of Micro$oft's software for the low low price of FREE. I can stay completely open source, too. Pick up vscode, C#/F#, .NET Core, ASP.NET Core, TypeScript, and Kestrel and I've almost got full stack with one editor to use for both languages. Just need a database like PostgreSQL or MySql(preferably not) which will have a nice EntityFramework integration if you're into ORMs, and maybe some containers through Docker and Kubernetes.

And yes, it's true. There are tons of other stacks like this that you can use for free that are also open source. The difference is that Microsoft's ecosystem has a huge community already, is proven to be very scalable(and getting better), and is run by people's whose day job it is to make these technologies better and interact with the community. They aren't a team that is donating their time on the weekends or after work, they aren't a team that will disappear because they can't get enough donations and funding to work on these projects full time. It is their salary paid job. Further more, the ecosystem has been more open forever! Gone are the days where you need to use all of Microsoft's software and services just to have a stream lined process in one service.

[LAwLz]

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

Lots of theories.  I judge every case on it's own merits. If you want to assume this is the end of github and that MS are willing to spend $7.5B to shutdown what essentially can't be killed (Linux and OSS are here to stay and MS know it) then you have rocks in your head.

Theories based on past behavior, yes.

I can't see the future so I have to look at the past to make judgement.

 

I never said I think Microsoft will shut Github down. If anything, I said the opposite. That they will push Github really hard, along with their own extensions to the Git protocol, so that they can then kill off the standard Git clients. Not sure if that is their plan but it would suit their style, and they already have two of the steps completed.

 

 

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

I have been saying it over and over, OSS cannot be killed, it is the future of software.  Anyone who thinks MS is just trying to kill OSS is ignoring fact they have bought and invested in many things without the intention of sabotage.  And it is quite illogical to ignore that and the fact MS can make serious money from the OSS system. 

I don't think Microsoft are trying to kill the entire OSS community. That would be silly to think.

However, it is also illogical to ignore all the times they have sabotaged or just mismanaged things.

 

 

8 hours ago, Sierra Fox said:

No no no have you not been reading LAWLZ posts? Microsoft destroy everything they touch to remove competition. They will destroy OSS because he believes they will! Therefore it will happen

Microsoft = devil in every aspect of their stuff

 

GitHub =ded because Microsoft.

 

Where's my reactions? Am I a cool anti-microsoft now?

I would appreciate it if you could not strawman me since this is a pretty serious situation.

Microsoft does not destroy everything, but they destroy a lot. If you don't think they do then chances are you have not looked at their history closely enough.

[Arika]

3 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

this is a pretty serious situation.

it's really not.

 

how does them buying github mean anything other than them buying github? people are making assumptions and jumping ship because "aaahhhh Microsoft"

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, warrenr said:

I can do that:  Typescript.

 

Typescript is widely used outside of Microsoft circles.  Angular, Ionic and NativeScript front-end frameworks are all built with it, for instance, and it's one of the fastest-growing programming languages on GitHub in terms of # of pull requests.

 

You'll also find on StackOverflow's most recent developer survey that Typescript is more widely used than Swift, Ruby, Go, or other currently popular boutique languages.... and if you leave out HTML, CSS and shell scripting, it's the 8th most popular programming language in use.  It's also ranked as the 4th most loved language, after Rust, Kotlin and Python. 

 

Hey, we can talk about Visual Studio Code, too.  The same StackOverflow developer survey has VS Code as the #1 most popular development environment.  This doesn't indicate that it's been widely adopted by FOSS developers, but it is one of only a couple of fully free, cross-platform code editors.  It's winning people over from Atom and Brackets, even people who wouldn't normally use Microsoft tools.

OK I'll give you Typescript. Seems like they have no ill intentions with that.

But with that being said, you spent quite a bit of effort into making it sound better than it is. You can't just take a survey, then remove some of the answers and go "it's the 8th most popular language!". It's not. The survey said it was the 12th most popular.

 

 

5 hours ago, Lent said:

I do not understand all the hate Microsoft gets in the recent years, especially by developers. Sure, they've had a troubled past and have done some not so stellar things, but the same thing can be said about almost all tech giants such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple.

When a company has spent decades harming a community, that community usually don't just forgive everything because a handful of good years.

Trust takes a long time to build up.

Also, pointing to others and going "they did bad things too!" is not an argument for why you should trust Microsoft.

 

 

5 hours ago, Lent said:

I personally think that Microsoft has been on a fantastic upswing ever since Satya Nadella joined in 2014. With Windows 10's Ubuntu Subsystem, vscode, TypeScript, ASP.NET, .NET Core, Roslyn, SQL Server on Linux, Visual Studio on Mac, and CosmoDB just to name a few big accomplishments that are truly making a difference in the industry. 

I would argue that Microsoft has gone downward since Satya took over. They are currently extremely focused on data harvesting and XaaS, which might be good for their profits but not for me as a user.

 

1 hour ago, Sierra Fox said:

it's really not.

 

how does them buying github mean anything other than them buying github? people are making assumptions and jumping ship because "aaahhhh Microsoft"

There are two ways you can look at this.

1) You can either just look at Microsoft buying Github and then not allow any speculation, assumption or guessing. Because at the end of the day, that's all we know about the deal so far.

Or

2) You can try and make guesses on what will happen next, based on historical evidence, financial reports, corporate culture and other factors. Again, these are guesses because nobody has a time-machine and can with 100% confidence say what will happen.

However, Microsoft has a really awful reputation, and it is very well deserved because of the decades of abuse they have engaged in. They seem to have changed, but a bad reputation is hard to get rid of. If a man has physically abused his wife for 20 years, would you suddenly go "he is a new man, give him a chance" if he had started being kind of nice in the last 3 or so years? I wouldn't. I would still look at him as a wife beater.

 

 

So right now I'd say there are three different ways this can go.

1) Github gets better. 

2) Github stays the same.

3) Github gets worse.

 

Considering that Github is currently losing a ton of money (66 million dollars in 9 months, in 2016, the only financial record I could find), I doubt that Microsoft will leave it alone.

So the options left are either improve it or make it worse.

 

Considering Microsoft's history, my guess is that they will try and monetize it though integration of their other services. For example integrate and sell Azure credit through it. Or like I mentioned earlier, attempt to do EEE on the Git protocol through GVFS.

As someone who likes how GitHub is now, I can't say I am excited for either. The former would probably be quite annoying to a lot of users, and the latter would be flat out dangerous to the FOSS community (potentially very profitable for Microsoft though).

 

There is room for improvement on GitHub, and integration with some Microsoft services could be good, but my guess is that it will come at the expense of usability with other solutions. That's something a lot of pro-Microsoft people often miss. They see an improvement because they are already deeply invested into Microsoft's ecosystem, but they miss how it can be harmful to people who aren't in that ecosystem. If Github becomes easier to use with Microsoft's own products, at the expense of usability with other non-Microsoft products then that is bad for the non-Microsoft people (and I'd say the industry as a whole too).

[Arika]

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

-snip-

Number 1

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Theories based on past behavior, yes.

I can't see the future so I have to look at the past to make judgement.

nothing wrong with being skeptical about it, but some people have outright jumped into the paranoia bin  on little more information than MS (like all fucking companies) have not been entirely kosher.   And to be honest MS have made well over 200 acquisitions with only a handful falling foul on the ethical side if intentions. So if your bar for deciding it's bad is so low then I can only assume you panic with every acquisition by any company.

 

Quote

I never said I think Microsoft will shut Github down. If anything, I said the opposite. That they will push Github really hard, along with their own extensions to the Git protocol, so that they can then kill off the standard Git clients. Not sure if that is their plan but it would suit their style, and they already have two of the steps completed.

 

You said:
 

Quote

 

They have tried to control FOSS several times in the past. You should not, under any circumstance, give them the benefit of a doubt.

 

One theory right now is that they might try and use EEE. They already have their own "git virtual file system" which uses Microsoft's own extensions to the git protocol. It would be a pretty simple plan.

 

 

 

If claiming they are going to use EEE (the last E represents extermination) then you are claiming exactly that they are trying to shut it down.    Not only that but your are so adamant that there are "NO" circumstances where they deserve the benefit of the doubt.   If that isn't a preconceived judgment then there is no such thing.

 

 

 

Quote

 

I don't think Microsoft are trying to kill the entire OSS community. That would be silly to think.

However, it is also illogical to ignore all the times they have sabotaged or just mismanaged things.

 

 

 

who is ignoring that?  I don't see anyone saying that is irrelevant or moot or didn't happen.

[warrenr]

5 hours ago, LAwLz said:

OK I'll give you Typescript. Seems like they have no ill intentions with that.

But with that being said, you spent quite a bit of effort into making it sound better than it is. You can't just take a survey, then remove some of the answers and go "it's the 8th most popular language!". It's not. The survey said it was the 12th most popular.

 

 

Sure I can, I just did it.
If you're doing web development, you can't actually choose to -not- use HTML, CSS or Javascript, so using them isn't really a choice. Same with shell scripting; you MUST use bash + gnu tools on Unix and Mac systems.  It's not a choice.  HTML, CSS and Javascript aren't even equivalents to each-other.  What's next, a popularity contest between Meshuggah, ice cream, and water-soluble paint?

 

Typescript, Java, C++, Ruby, Python, C#, etc... those are choices.  People are choosing Typescript, not being forced into it because it's the only available language in a modern web browser.....

 

Anyways, I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post because it's pretty clear you're the sort of person that needs Microsoft to be evil in order for the rest of your worldview to make any sense.  Maybe you'll mature out of it someday, maybe not, but it's not especially healthy. 

 

[Mira Yurizaki]

Ran across this on Ars Technica: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/06/everyone-complaining-about-microsoft-buying-github-needs-to-offer-a-better-solution/

 

The points are basically:

• Microsoft has had a lot of high profile open source projects, including Visual Studio Code, the Chakra JavaScript engine used in Edge, .NET (though from what I recall, Microsoft still has a proprietary extension on top of it), among other things.
• Critics of Microsoft in the past try to say they've been trying to control standards they don't, but Microsoft hasn't really been able to do that successfully. If there was any success on Microsoft's part, it was because of something other than trying to control the standard.
• GitHub is in a financial mess, and they've been without a CEO for several years. If they wanted to secure more funding, the author suggested that  they could obtain venture capital, go public, or be bought out. The first two wouldn't really solve the problem:
   

  Quote

  ... any putative investors will look at the books, and if the books are an endless sea of red ink with no profitability in sight, those investors might be scared off. Existing backers with doubts about the business might have wanted out, pushing things toward an IPO or sale rather than another funding round. IPOs take time, and that may have been a luxury GitHub didn't have.

  So that just leaves being bought out the last viable option.

• GitHub has a large enterprise presence and is likely where most of its money is coming from these days.

• It was likely some major tech company would purchase GitHub because of its prominence in the developer community. The author listed the contenders as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle.
  • If Oracle bought it, that would definitely spell the death of GitHub considering Oracle's history after acquiring Sun (suing Google for using Java, killing Solaris, among others).
  • IBM is sort of just fizzling out and hasn't had any real interest in the open source community.
  • Facebook doesn't really have much of an enterprise presence and it uses a competing source control utility (Mercurial). Plus Facebook doesn't engage much in the developer community, among trust issues.
  • Apple has a tendency to push development towards their own things, paying lip service to the open source community.
• Amazon, Google, and Microsoft were left as the likely buyers, due to having a strong enterprise presence and developer community support. Though the sticking point between which one would seem the "best fit" was their engagement in the open source community. Amazon apparently has a poor reputation and Google's is mixed (plus they don't use Git anyway).
• So at the end, they figured Microsoft was the best fit to buy GitHub:

  Quote

  The company has had to modify Git to handle the scale it needs, but it is working with the Git developers to get these modifications accepted into the main Git codebase, with the intent being that, eventually, stock-standard Git will do everything the company needs. Microsoft and GitHub have also collaborated to bring support for these extensions to GitHub and non-Windows platforms.

   

  This is valuable because those modifications that Microsoft has made aren't just of interest to Microsoft. GitHub adopted the extensions to better meet the demands of enterprise customers. Most enterprises won't have repositories quite as big as Microsoft's 300GB Windows repository, but they will still have needs that are beyond those that are currently comfortable with standard Git. GitHub needs to meet the demands of enterprise customers to achieve profitability, and Microsoft is unique in that it has already been developing Git to meet those very same needs.

   

  As such, Microsoft's ability to give GitHub what it needs—more paying corporate customers—in order to keep the open-source lights on is the best available. Microsoft has the sales channels, it has the vested interest in making Git's (and hence, GitHub's) enterprise support better, and it has the wide developer audience. Critics of this deal shouldn't be upset; they should be glad that GitHub has found the best possible new home.

   

This is just a summary of the article, so if you want to debate anything said there, I can't really respond to it because well, I didn't write it.

[LAwLz]

5 hours ago, Sierra Fox said:

Number 1

Well if you don't want to speculate then go ahead. I however, will because I find it interesting.

I don't think you have the right to mock others who speculate though (and who speculates based on past behavior rather than paranoia I might add).

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

nothing wrong with being skeptical about it, but some people have outright jumped into the paranoia bin  on little more information than MS (like all fucking companies) have not been entirely kosher.   And to be honest MS have made well over 200 acquisitions with only a handful falling foul on the ethical side if intentions. So if your bar for deciding it's bad is so low then I can only assume you panic with every acquisition by any company.

Paranoia is defined as irrational fear. There is nothing paranoid to suspect the worst from Microsoft in this situation, considering their history.

You wouldn't leave your baby with a convicted child molester, right? It's the same here. The trust that people might have had for Microsoft is long gone, and they only have themselves to blame for that. You don't abuse a community for decades and then expect them to blindly trust you.

And no, it is not at all low. Again, I recommend you do a bit of reading if you honestly think that Microsoft has only done a few bad things towards the FOSS community. 

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

If claiming they are going to use EEE (the last E represents extermination) then you are claiming exactly that they are trying to shut it down.    Not only that but your are so adamant that there are "NO" circumstances where they deserve the benefit of the doubt.   If that isn't a preconceived judgment then there is no such thing.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Extermination in this case does not refer to Github itself. It refers to the open and standardized Git protocol. Microsoft already has a non-standard extension to the Git protocol. If they make that the standard for interacting with GitHub, they are in a position where they have a fair chance of killing standard Git in favor of their own implementation (which they control).

 

So to clarify. I do not think they will kill Github. I don't even necessarily think they will kill Git. This is what they would do if they had that intention though, and I think a lot of people feel the same way. You don't really lose anything from migrating to another service like GitLab, so it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

who is ignoring that?  I don't see anyone saying that is irrelevant or moot or didn't happen.

Well, you keep calling people paranoid so I'd say that's ignoring all the shady things they have done.

Paranoia is irrational fear. Fears of things based on historical evidence is not irrational. 

 

Here is a quote essentially saying that the claims that Microsoft have sabotaged for FOSS in the past is "alternative history":

On 2018-06-04 at 2:33 PM, Drak3 said:

Because outside observers declair Microsoft as Devil incarnate based on the outsider looking in version of history they're familiar with.

 

Here is someone saying that it's just "some people" who sees it as sabotage, while others will see it as "maintaining a competitive advantage":

22 hours ago, schwellmo92 said:

There's a fine line between sabotage and maintaining a competitive advantage, some people see it one way and others see it the other way.

 

Here is another quote where someone says Microsoft has never "killed competitors" because it has all been "mercy kills", which is quite possibly the biggest load of dog shit I have read all year.

21 hours ago, Drak3 said:

And the whole "killing competitors" thing is a load. They were groups and companies that couldn't cut it. Microsoft cut the throats of those already bleeding to death and they salvaged what they could.

 

 

So if you haven't seen any comments like that then you either have selective vision, or you haven't read the thread that carefully.

 

 

Edit:

I find it interesting that so many pro-Microsoft users are attacking people who are moving their repos, calling them paranoid among other things. Yet they immediately jump to "you can just migrate to somewhere else" as an argument for why people should remain calm and stay on Github.

Sorry but you can't have it both ways. You can't attack people moving while at the same time saying moving is perfectly fine. Makes me wonder why some members are so adamant to make people stay on Github and their motives for posting about it...

[LAwLz]

22 minutes ago, warrenr said:

Sure I can, I just did it.

OK, then I will claim Haskell is the most popular one, if you remove everything that is ranked higher on the list.

Hey, did you know that Haskell is Stackoverflow's favorite language? Amazing, right?

Oh the other languages which are actually above it on the list? Yeah, they don't count because they are not compiled pure functional languages with non-strict semantics.

 

See, you can do that, but it's moronic and shows a clear bias.

 

 

25 minutes ago, warrenr said:

Anyways, I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post because it's pretty clear you're the sort of person that needs Microsoft to be evil in order for the rest of your worldview to make any sense.  Maybe you'll mature out of it someday, maybe not, but it's not especially healthy. 

No, I am the type of person who is not gullible and naive. I look at facts and historical evidence, not RP statements or someone twisting facts to suit their agenda.

[schwellmo92]

I’m tapping out, I don’t have the time for this crap.

[TechyBen]

19 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

No. I think he’s just not pre-judging the situation like everyone else seems to be doing. 

 

Microsoft might well change things. Or reduce features. Or charge fees/more. Or literally burn the site down. 

 

Or maybe they really like the site and will not drastically change it. 

 

Why don't we wait and see? If Microsoft ruins it, I give you permission to say “I told you so”. 

House is on fire? Let's not prejudge things...it may be a *nice* fire.

 

But anyhow. Let's let time tell.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

House is on fire? Let's not prejudge things...it may be a *nice* fire.

 

But anyhow. Let's let time tell.

*sigh* way to use a logical fallacy.

 

No, this is like you claiming the house is on fire because Jimmy walked down the street.

 

People are welcome to speculate all they want, however, to blindly just accept that Microsoft is going to destroy GitHub is no better than those who are adamant that Microsoft is a saint.

[Mira Yurizaki]

19 hours ago, mr moose said:

Like @dalekphalm said, we'll have to wait and see rather than pre-judge.

I see where they're coming from, but at the same time, how long are people going to hold grudges? Especially when said things probably happened before they even understood that downloading RAM wasn't really a thing.

 

And then there are some things people like to assert with their only proof being "past shady company practices" without any other evidence that would strongly support the claim.

[TechyBen]

3 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

*sigh* way to use a logical fallacy.

 

No, this is like you claiming the house is on fire because Jimmy walked down the street.

 

People are welcome to speculate all they want, however, to blindly just accept that Microsoft is going to destroy GitHub is no better than those who are adamant that Microsoft is a saint.

Not quite. Github is on fire. It is losing money.

 

MS have to do something to change that. Else they just lost 7 billion.

 

Honest question. Do you expect MS to sit there and let it lose all that money? What do you expect Github to do now, that they could not do before, now MS have given them a ton of cash?

[Teddy07]

I wanted to share my first small self-written program there because a friend said employers like if you have programs on GitHub. I honestly have no idea tho.