sqren

They do not need to make any technical changes. They could make the change overnight: $1 per repo per month (or whatever). This would stop the aggressive growth that they clearly cannot handle anyway.

The question is: are they willing to compromise growth for QoS. So far the answer is a resounding: "no". They are deliberately sacrificing the experience of existing users to gain new ones.

> Did I misread history about Bill Gates sleeping in his office or did he run MS from his kitchen table?

Yes, Bill Gates worked like a maniac and didn't see his family. His wife took care of the kids. I think that's a terrible example to set (I wouldn't want to do it) but each to their own.

@kwanbix: do you have kids? I feel that's one of the primary deciding factors for working from home. People without kids are much more flexible with their time, whereas people with (small) kids are severely more limited. Freeing up commute time and being able to do small chores like starting the washing machine creates significant happiness, which totally offsets the downsides of not seeing your co-workers (that) often.

Before kids I would also become depressed if I worked remotely full time. But today my "alone time" is already pretty much gone outside work hours so I don't mind being by myself during the day.

Whether Google wanted to win or not: Don't kid yourself into believing they _could_ have won even if they had tried. Google has a history of being terribly at executing on product ideas and Google Code never had the same "feel" that Github did. There's a reason Microsoft paid billions for Github. If Google could have created that in-house themselves they would have done it.

Not saying Google tried and failed - they may just have realised that actually winning this was never an option.

Why make this about Google Code? It reads a little like Main Character Syndrome.

Github beat basically every Code hosting platform out there. Probably dusins of Github-like startups tried and failed because Github did so well.

So whether Google Code "wanted to win" or not doesn't really take away anything from the posts argument that Github won due to timing and taste.

You make it sound like it's a bad thing that it aligns with their business goals. I'd turn this around: if it didn't align with their business goals I would be worried that they would course correct very soon.

This is a five year old book. Am I missing something?

Agree! And those QR codes actually worked for me.