Not true.
The new Team plan will be a downgrade in specs from the old teams plan. For example it only includes 3000 Github Action minutes. The old plan included 10000. The next plan up would be > 2 * old price.
Source: https://github.com/pricing vs http://web.archive.org/web/20200406010552/https://github.com...
It’s probably great news for the vast majority of teams.
https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-bi...
I'm not complaining; MS should point GH at where the money is and there is competition you can switch to. I'm just not excited to save a few bucks a month given what will likely change.
IMO Microsoft views GitHub's user base as potential Azure leads and Cloud computing as the current & future lucrative computing utilization business model who has been pulling out all stops to grow Azure as fast as possible.
They're fortunately rich & big enough that they don't need every one of their business to maximize their profits and are more than happy to leverage the synergies in their different assets to funnel more business into Azure.
And it was should have been rather obvious when GitHub released the beta of Actions a few years ago. Actions remains the most important thing GitHub has done, ever, in my opinion. It might take a few more years for people to fully realize what this could be. Hope GitHub doesn't screw it up!
I don't see what paying Github would do for AWS or GCP. They both have their own code repos, build pipelines, container registries, and more. Even Azure has its own DevOps product.
The most important bit is workflow automation. It can be triggered on most (all?) events github emits
https://help.github.com/en/actions/reference/events-that-tri...
It was super obvious the value prop when it was HCL based. YAML based it kind of looks more like 'another CI'. It's still insanely powerful, just not as developer friendly anymore.
But I do wonder if AWS will try to buy gitlab.
Even GitHub was never in a position to go public, that seems to be mere postering to drive valuation or attract M&A offers.
I don't know how much control their external board members have, but if an offer came in, the board may be able to force acceptance instead of going public.
Maybe when Microsoft would have opened up some years earlier, Codeplex would not share the fate of Google Cloud.
When did Amazon give up?
I've studied the question closely on HN and looked at data for years. There have been occasional cases where we've banned accounts for the kind of thing you're complaining about, but we have to go by evidence. Well over 99.9% of the time, users are just making shit up. Please don't trash talk like that here.
If you want more explanation, see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....
Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on. If you're genuinely worried about astroturfing, you're welcome to email links to [email protected] and we'll look into it.
I'd be super careful about thoughts like this:
> and it is impossible to be an accident
Internet users are overwhelmingly, like a million times too likely to generate sinister explanations for phenomena like this, which are typically just artifacts of a large population size plus randomness. There's something in how human nature meets the internet which makes us vulnerable to this bias. Probably it's just that we're not wired to interact with very large populations of people. Cognitive bias plus randomness equals narrative.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Quick edit: I definitely appreciate the "red car effect" you are referencing.
But I agree with the statement. The presence of Product Managers, Senior Devs and high ranking managers here on HN is pretty well orchestrated. I mean makes sense.
I think the person who solves project discovery across all these services is going to make a killing.
Seems like every generation re-invents this idea, and every time it fails for the same fatal flaw: Illusions are just that, and you'll wind up hacking around the illusion if you want to do something not envisioned (or run into a bug in the secret sauce).
And before someone replies "it is nothing like Web Forms!!!" here's a direct quote from Blazor's homepage:
> Blazor can run your client logic on the server. Client UI events are sent back to the server using SignalR - a real-time messaging framework. Once execution completes, the required UI changes are sent to the client and merged into the DOM.
That's literally how Web Forms worked.
I'm also not sure why you are conflating Silverlight with Web Forms - it was never competing with Web Forms, it was client-side only, a replacement to Flash - a better UI and API (at the time) than HTML/CSS/JS.
Blazor is OSS, and doesn't work like Web Forms.
As in your own quote, Blazor uses SignalR - which uses push-based comms, such as Web Sockets; Web Forms was standard HTTP.
I was a Web Forms developers, I've earned at least that. Blazor absolutely does work like Web Forms, in terms of client<->server integration, just because it uses WebAssembly & SignalR instead of JavaScript & Ajax doesn't really change that but rather obfuscates it. Essentially it is just another set of abstractions attempting to paper over a real boundary.
> As in your own quote, Blazor uses SignalR - which uses push-based comms, such as Web Sockets; Web Forms was standard HTTP.
Which makes it even worse, if the client/server boundary wasn't muddied enough with with the unidirectional magic Web Forms used, now we have omnidirectional instead. As if that will make it less complicated and buggy.
Definitely put me in the "nay" category with Blazor. I've danced this exact tango with Microsoft twice before, and their obsession with making browsers desktop-like applications. WebAssembly is cool tech for one day, they're just abusing it for something that is an inherently bad idea.
I started my dev career a long time ago in Web Forms. I went so long without understanding HTTP POST/GET/etc that it harmed me.
Anyone remember UpdatePanel? AjaxControlToolkit? Blazor gives me the same feelings.
Blazor is the next evolution in client-side and offers an alternative to building component UI with C# running through WebAssembly instead of Javascript. Again it's much more productive and lets backend teams reuse much of the same code, similar to JS/node projects today.
Blazor's server-side runtime is a optional model where all the component logic can run on the server and be delivered over a SignalR connection to further increase productivity and efficiency where it makes sense (highly constrained devices, local intranet apps, etc. There's even experimental projects to bring Blazor for mobile apps.
From the side-lines it looks like they're slowly becoming an unstoppable dominant force, what's surprising to me is AWS's / GCP's inaction, they're either asleep at the wheel or they don't see Microsoft's dev mindshare grab as a threat.