Inside Microsoft's decision to buy GitHub, which now has 36M registered developers, and how Microsoft is winning back developers with its open source focus
Dina Bass / Bloomberg : Tweets: @dinabass , @drlmaruping , @hkanji , @sr_mcdowell , @wtcm3 , and @peggyj Tweets: Dina Bass / @dinabass : In 2014, Microsoft's Scott Guthrie drafted a plan to buy GitHub. And then did nothing about it because Microsoft wasn't ready and open source developers CERTAINLY weren't. 5 years later here's what Microsoft did to embrace developers that were not its own https://www.bloomberg.com/... Likoebe Maruping / @drlmaruping : I remember when doing this research back in 2004-2005. For-profit companies struggled to attract the participation of #opensource developers. How things have changed https://www.bloomberg.com/... via @technology Hussein Kanji / @hkanji : Microsoft is one of the biggest contributors to open source. This is what happens when you get a tech CEO vs a sales CEO https://www.bloomberg.com/... Steve McDowell / @sr_mcdowell : The transition of @Microsoft over the past half decade has been nothing short of amazing (especially for us old-timers, for whom MSFT was often an obstacle to innovation). I've enjoyed watching @satyanadella lead them forward. Nice write-up from Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/... @wtcm3 : great piece on $MSFT's transition to embrace open-source software and the surprisingly drama-free GitHub deal: “Some people were upset, but few, because Microsoft had spent years building up goodwill with the open-source community” https://www.bloomberg.com/... Peggy Johnson / @peggyj : A hidden gem here: how @jeffsand builds great teams. “Sandquist aimed to create a diverse team in several respects: expertise, gender, race and location - unlike many other technical teams, much of it is based outside the company's headquarters in Redmond” https://www.bloomberg.com/...
Context & Ripple Effects
The Bloomberg feature closes a loop that started when Scott Guthrie drafted a GitHub purchase plan in 2014 and shelved it because neither Microsoft nor open source developers were ready. What changed in between was Satya Nadella's rebuild of the company around big technology bets rather than legacy cash cows, capped by Microsoft surpassing Facebook and Google as GitHub's top open source contributor by 2016.
That track record is what made the acquisition credible to the 36M registered developers whose trust the deal now depends on — the same audience SiliconANGLE flagged as a flight risk toward GitLab and BitBucket when Microsoft took control. The later absorption of GitHub into Microsoft's CoreAI organization after CEO Thomas Dohmke's exit shows how fully the once-skeptical asset has been pulled inside Redmond.
First-order effects
- GitHub's 36M registered developers become a Microsoft-controlled community overnight, testing whether the open source credibility built since 2014 survives actual ownership.
- Jeff Sandquist's mandate to build a diverse team spanning expertise, gender, race and location signals Microsoft is staffing GitHub as an engagement operation, not just a code host.
Second-order effects
- GitLab and BitBucket get their clearest opening yet to court developers wary of Microsoft stewardship, making dev-exit friction and export tooling competitive weapons (rival hosting services were already named as the main hurdle).
- Winning back developers who were not Microsoft customers converts GitHub's community into a top-of-funnel for Microsoft's broader developer platform, validating the Nadella playbook of favoring new bets over protecting legacy revenue.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds, large platform companies stop trying to out-build communities they distrust and instead acquire them — with the acquirer's pre-purchase behavior, not the deal terms, determining whether the community stays.
- GitHub's eventual fold into Microsoft's CoreAI organization points toward developer hubs being run as strategic infrastructure inside corporate AI organizations rather than standalone businesses.
The trend: Microsoft's multi-year open source conversion — from a shelved 2014 plan to owning the world's largest developer hub — marks big tech shifting from fighting developer communities to acquiring them as strategic assets.