> 2. Bitbucket has a reputation for being a cheap knock off of GitHub for some reason.
The reason for this is very simple: We launched within months of each other, and we look very much alike (how many ways can you skin a DVCS hosting cat?) And then of course there was the whole pointing fingers/attempt to drag through the mud article, that was since removed.
Re:Ask HN:Why Github and not Bitbucket
by stonemetal on Monday July 18, 2011 @07:08PM
(#2778778)
I never followed it that closely, I just remember that there was an article or two posted here that made the claim. To me both look like as straight a translation of the command line to the web UI as was possible.
Re:Ask HN:Why Github and not Bitbucket
by retrofit_brain on Monday July 18, 2011 @01:57PM
(#2777321)
agreed that there are more costlier things to worry, but spending the money should be justified. Just the buzz is not a good enough reason, there has to be better reasons. I have personally not experienced downtimes which might justify a better price for one.
1. Git, because of its source and momentum, is the more popular of the two. So when you are looking for code hosting that supports your tool bit bucket doesn't.
2. GitHub was first and seems to be better. Bit bucket has a reputation for being a cheap knock off of Git Hub for some reason.
3. I don't think you will find to many startup founders who really see a difference between the two price points, 10 bucks a month just isn't enough to worry about when bigger things like hardware costs and employee salaries dominate the list of costs.