back to article Google Cloud CEO admits: Yeah, we wanted GitHub too. Whatevs

So it's official – Google was also keen on acquiring GitHub before Microsoft swooped in with its $7.5bn purchase. Speaking at an event in San Francisco, Diane Greene, CEO of Google Cloud, said ruefully: "I wouldn't have minded buying them, but it's OK." There was no word on what offer Google was thinking about. There had been …

  1. Multivac

    Microsoft buy GitHub and everyone moves to GitLab.

    Google or Amazon will buy GitLab or make a hostile takeover of GitLab in 2020 when it's IPO is targeted.

    I will create GitVac ready for 2020 and then sell it to whichever of Google or AWS lost out on the GitLab takeover while having MultiGit ready as a startup for all the non commercial developers looking for a home.

    Then my friends, all you code are belong to me mwahahaha!

  2. RyokuMas Silver badge
    Facepalm

    "Completely neutral"

    So, all you commentards who made so much noise about jumping ship due to Microsoft being all about "slurping" these days - care to comment?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Completely neutral"

      Dunno, but I certainly dumped StinkedIn when they bought it.

    2. JohnFen

      Re: "Completely neutral"

      Sure, I'll comment. I jumped ship, and I have no reason to think that was the wrong thing to do. What Google planned, says, or thinks isn't relevant. If Google had bought them, I'd have jumped ship as well.

    3. ibmalone Silver badge

      Re: "Completely neutral"

      Did you read the story? A google executive is talking about a company microsoft have bought and saying, "I hope they keep it completely neutral". That's hardly a binding promise on microsoft is it?

      Wouldn't have thought slurping was exactly the issue for github though, it's meant to be slurped.

      1. JohnFen

        Re: "Completely neutral"

        "it's meant to be slurped."

        What is? While the public code repositories are, Github also holds code that is not intended for public distribution, and holds account information and usage data for members. Neither of those things are meant to be slurped.

    4. Jason Hindle Silver badge

      Re: Sure they’ll be Complely neutral

      Now all your code are belong to us.

  3. iron Silver badge

    It's probably an unpopular opinion but I think MS buying GitHub is more likely to make me store code there and it definitely would make my current and past employers more likely to do the same. Changing the name so it doesn't sound like a hangout for old codgers might help too.

    1. ibmalone Silver badge

      I'd consider a rebranding to be a bad sign. The GitHub name is well known and has a 'does what it says on the tin' aspect. For academics and researchers at least it's currently where you put stuff to show you're working openly. Re-branding to 'sell' it to people who don't understand the technology and think it's a hangout for old codgers would not inspire confidence.

      We use Office 365 and GitHub (to be fair, one is connected to more frequently than the other), I've found GitHub more reliable.

    2. JohnFen

      " it definitely would make my current and past employers more likely to do the same"

      I have no doubt that the fact the Github will be a Microsoft operation will make it more attractive for business use. However, that's pretty much beside the point, in my opinion.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        GitStore

        Just click this button and your code will be available in the Microsoft store. All free of course, and we have handy dandy tools just click to publish. You just need to use this special API and your code will be signed as well.

        Frog (Tick)

        Pot of water (Tick)

        Heat (Later)

        Works every time!

    3. Nick Kew

      I see the acquisition *as such* as neither good nor bad. I'll reserve judgement until and unless MS do something that affects me and/or my projects, such as change the T&Cs or push me towards their choice of dev tools/environment.

      I'd say exactly the same if it had been borged by Google, or A N Other bigco.

      Certainly wouldn't change the name. Despite being very disappointed by the only other "git" I've encountered in recent times: namely a wine branded as "Old Git" which I bought on the strength of the name and a "try anything once" principle.

    4. phuzz Silver badge
      Alert

      "Changing the name so it doesn't sound like a hangout for old codgers"

      Not enough people are talking about this important issue. Although I'd have phrased it as 'a dating site for old codgers'.

      1. CRConrad

        "Dating site for old codgers"

        Codgerettes. To "git a hubby".

  4. marekt77

    "Following its acquisition of the social-media-for-suits platform in 2016, Microsoft has slurped data for its own purposes, which is, er, exactly what developers are concerned about."

    As opposed to Google slurping the data had they bought them? Not sure I trust Google more than MS in this case.

    1. Orv

      I'd argue one big difference is the projects GitHub hosts aren't a threat to Google's profit model in quite the same way they are to Microsoft's. But neither really has interests aligned with current GitHub users.

  5. Orv

    Google had a GitHub type service. It was called Google Code. They let it die of neglect.

    1. tekHedd

      Exactly. Microsoft buying an OSS repository is questionable because of their open hostility to openness. Google buying an OSS repository is questionable because their track record suggest they'll forget they own it and shut it down completely.

      But at least Google is not yet openly and actively hostile to all open source projects, and does not have a track record of infiltrating standards bodies and sabotaging standards. Not yet, anyway.

      1. JohnFen

        "Google buying an OSS repository is questionable because their track record suggest they'll forget they own it and shut it down completely."

        I think it's questionable because of Google's fetish for collecting All The Data.

      2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Microsoft buying an OSS repository is questionable because of their open hostility to openness.

        Microsoft of 10years ago would buy it to shut down the open source cancer.

        But Microsoft of 10years in the future isn't a software company - it's a services company.

        They are charging / month for Office, Visual Studio and Azure - they aren't selling shrink wrapped copies of software.

        Github model is perfect, you use the free version of VS + Git = your code is public.

        If you want to keep it private = you pay $X/month. No arguing about licensing, student versions, introductory offers etc

        1. JohnFen

          " you use the free version of VS + Git = your code is public."

          What if you don't want to use VS?

          1. CRConrad

            "What if you don't want to use VS?"

            Delphi Community Edition

  6. Camilla Smythe

    WTAFeh?

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/26/gitlab_moving_platform_to_google_cloud/

    To further distance itself from suspicions that this is a reaction to the GitHub furore, GitLab pointed out in its announcement that it has maintained a secondary GitLab.com site, containing some 200TB of Git data, on the Google Cloud Platform using GitLab's own Geo mirroring technology for a "few months".

    I appear to have acquired 4TB of local spinning storage as a result of a DWP error in my favour. I have fuck all idea what to do with it but, for the moment, I appear to have 3TB of unpartitioned space spare. OK it's sitting on the end of an ADSL line plus I switch the computer off when I go to bed.

    It should not be beyond the classical stupidity of the Idiots involved to fuck up some script in Ruby, Twat or Python such that I can donate some storage. Stick some BlockChain on it as well for brownie points...

    Don't forget "Cloud is Someone Else's Computer".

    Try not to Wank It Up.

  7. FlamingDeath Silver badge

    GIThub

    I think I know all I need to know about its userbase

    Git definition

    Pop quiz, how many ASPD's do they have as members?

    According to some statistics, these people make up 3% of the population

    I think that statistic needs to be revised for the 21st century... it's way under compared to today, in 2018

  8. GrahamsTenPenneth

    We know what they are up to

    So has it missed anyone that GIT was authored by Mr Linux himself?

    MS are just slowly trying to buy into the whole Linux thing and, yes probably shut it down.

    Microsoft Linux anyone?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021