They didn’t “lose” anything. The guy just slept through a series of important prompts and stubbornly banged on the keyboard in the manner of “I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING DAMN IT!” when he, in fact, didn’t know what he was doing.
He admits it himself in the article: he thought he was changing the settings of another repo. Well, sucks to be him but it’s not very hard to pay half-attention to these things.
Which describes Microsoft’s culture. Facebook has the culture of make lots of changes fast, which does keep it moving forward, but it also causes a lot of breakages the way they do it too, lol. There’s some good middle ground no doubt.
Good for someone but probably not for most of us. I think a huge amount of these two different cultures can be understood by the markets they operate in as their primary means of growth. If your main objective is to consume enterprise level and let it trickle down then you need to deal with dinosaurs that are scared of things moving faster than a snail you go about things one way, if you are competing for attention in an ADHD landscape you go another. In both cases they don’t exist to build great products that people buy on their merits, they exist to conquer the space in which they operate systematically (they are not the only ones, Apple, Google, Amazon, whatever). I don’t see how a good middle ground can be found here for the rest of us… the companies absorbed don’t become lazy or reckless, they have new objectives and strategies instead of making good products to survive.