[kingosticks]

Why would they acquire github just to turn on it and run it into the ground? You can do that if your users are locked-in or maybe you have a competing service but neither are the case here; there are numerous alternatives and it's pretty easy to switch, as we are already seeing. If they have anything but good intentions this would be just a giant waste of time/money.

[setquk]

I’m personally worried that they might do it unintentionally. They seem to be very good at mismanaging and fucking up all their mainstream products.

[petre]

They did it with Skype. They don't have good but rather business minded intentions or how to make money from a product. This can change the product for the worse or at least for another audience (business users).

[peterhi]

Lets rephrase that shall we "Why would they acquire Nokia just to turn on it and run it into the ground?"

It doesn't need malice but Microsoft have a talent for this kind of thing

[kingosticks]

The mobile hardware division of Nokia had been heading this way for a long time - I have no idea why they went through with that. Is it fair to say all Microsoft's attempts at hardware (except XBOX) have failed?

[peterhi]

The other example would be the Kin phone. A feature complete working phone that Microsoft decided needed to be rewritten from scratch to use the Windows Mobile / Phone stack

It took 18 months and nearly $1B to rewrite only to find the market had moved on. Canned and written off

I can imagine a situation where Microsoft thinks that GitHub would benefit from being re-implemented using Microsoft tech. Rewriting in APS.net, using Microsoft Login, integration with Office 365. The whole enchilada :)

It would take years, cost billions and, at best, deliver exactly the same experience as GitHub today

Worse case would be that GitHub stagnates during the rewrite as the alternatives spend their time and money developing new features