Name: GitHub sharply slashes plan pricing, offers core features for free to all
Brand: arstechnica.com
SKU: arstechnica-com-159
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

GitHub sharply slashes plan pricing, offers core features for free to all

preview

Software hosting, version-control, and open-source collaboration platform GitHub has made some sweeping to its plans and offerings, extending free service to far more teams and users than before while slashing prices for access to some key features by half.Arguably the most important change is that unlimited repositories and collaborators are now offered as part of the free tier, even if the project is private. Previously, GitHub offered unlimited repositories for free only to public projects or with a small number of users, which precluded use of the free tier by several different types of teams, organizations, and companies. Now the key differences between the free tier and the lowest-cost paid tier are the latter's addition of code owners and required reviewers—admittedly still critical for many organizations. (It also expands the available storage and number of actions per month.)Further, that entry-level paid tier just $4 per user per month instead of $9 previously. GitHub still offers a more expensive tier ($21) with SAML sign-on and greatly expanded storage and actions, as well as the specialized GitHub One service with prices privately and individually negotiated by account managers with high-value customers., GitHub CEO&nbsp;Nat Friedman said this heralds a shift from a "pay-for-privacy" model to a "pay-for-features" one—a process that has been in the works for some time, seemingly triggered after Microsoft acquired the company for $7.5 billion in 2018. He also told TechCrunch that GitHub seeks to expand from 40 million developers to 100 million by 2025—an ambitious goal, given that GitHub has stronger competition than ever lately.And while it might be reasonable guess that this change was in some way triggered by workers' increased needs at a time when many teams that normally collaborate locally in an office are working remotely, Friedman said that's not the case:This is something we planned to do and have wanted to do for a long time—since essentially we did the acquisition—and getting to this point to do it took until now, when it became a high priority... But it’s definitely something that we wanted to do and, I mean, this is a big flippin' deal.This makes sense, anyway; the features offered by GitHub are often needed by development teams that are working in person just as much as by those that are working remotely. GitHub says that the pricing changes have gone into effect for all paying users effective today.You must to comment.

Software hosting, version-control, and open-source collaboration platform GitHub has made some sweeping to its plans and offerings, extending free service to far more teams and users than before while slashing prices for access to some key features by half.Arguably the most important change is that unlimited repositories and collaborators are now offered as part of the free tier, even if the project is private. Previously, GitHub offered unlimited repositories for free only to public projects or with a small number of users, which precluded use of the free tier by several different types of...

public

Samuel Axon

Ars Technica is a website covering news and opinions in technology, science, politics, and society, created by Ken Fisher and Jon Stokes in 1998. It publishes news, reviews, and guides on issues such as computer hardware and software, science, technology policy, and video games. Many of the site's writers are postgraduates and some work for research institutions. Articles on the website are written in a less-formal tone than those in traditional journals. Ars Technica was privately owned until May 2008, when it was sold to Condé Nast Digital, the online division of Condé Nast Publications.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ars_Technica

arstechnica.com

Credible

Speculation

Anecdotal Evidence

Generalization

Stacking the Deck

Appeal to Authority

Straw Man

Slippery Slope

Emotional Appeal

Red Herring

False Dilemma

Illogical

Moral Equivalency

Ad Hominem

Correlation w/o Causation

Semantics

Begging the Question

Faulty Analogy

Non Sequitur

Bandwagon

Dogmatism

Failing Occam's Razor

Biased

Pure Opinion

Hit Piece

Racial Bias

National Bias

Religious Bias

Financial Incentive

Political Agenda

Gender Bias

Misused Image/Video

Study Misinterpreted

Mistake

Misused Term

Science Misrepresented

Factual Error

Satire

Surface Level

Lack of Reliable Sources

Sensational

Not Credible

Investigative

Balanced

Well Sourced

Great Context

sports

entertainment

U.S.

international

business

technology

science

culture

politics

media

health

GitHub sharply slashes plan pricing, offers core features for free to all

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS