I think the major problem here is just poor branding.
npm can refer to any number of things. It can refer to the client, the server, the hosting provider, the public package registry, and now npm Inc. They all sound like the same thing but they're all actually different.
Contrast this to Github. Github is a service that provides hosting, a public registry, and tools for git. Nobody complains about Github controlling git, because they're obviously separate things. Most people don't know that npm the registry is different from npm the software and that you can even host your own server.
I think they'll mostly be a consulting company for enterprise solutions to companies with hundreds of node.js projects going on that need a complex package management solution that npm inc. can provide.
npm can refer to any number of things. It can refer to the client, the server, the hosting provider, the public package registry, and now npm Inc. They all sound like the same thing but they're all actually different.
Contrast this to Github. Github is a service that provides hosting, a public registry, and tools for git. Nobody complains about Github controlling git, because they're obviously separate things. Most people don't know that npm the registry is different from npm the software and that you can even host your own server.
I think they'll mostly be a consulting company for enterprise solutions to companies with hundreds of node.js projects going on that need a complex package management solution that npm inc. can provide.