I'm struggling to understand how Github's new pricing has gotten so untethered from the value curve. Curse of the Monopolist?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
but that's based on traditional customers that are companies. Harder to reconcile with FOSS orgs, loose communities, etc.
-
I added the Rust core team to
@skylight so they could look at it and help me. I wouldn't do that with the new model. -
and I think that makes GitHub a worse service, full stop.
-
it also means that people will be looking for other services for these cases ("let's use gitlab for casual users")
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think github is struggling with serving different usage models with one payment structure. Always hard.
-
something like "per commit" works well for a lot of different patterns, but isn't so easy to pitch.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
on the customer side, there is a direct correlation between num users => size of org => has money to spend on github.
-
"number of users" will be different based on different pricing models. This disincentivizes adding casual users.
-
and I don't think that is a good thing for the overall value of their service.
-
One only has to look at Bitbucket to see the ramifications of per user. Lots of vast private silos.
-
-
-
true, the fact that I want a commit hook to keep both systems in sync really shows how broken it is
-
I've used both for years, too. All GH now but this pricing change seems tone deaf.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I've been using gitlab more and more. Free free free
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.