Computer Old Farts Forum
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: joe mcguckin <joe@via.net>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Computer Old Farts Followers <coff@tuhs.org>,
	TUHS main list <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>,
	Douglas McIlroy <douglas.mcilroy@dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: [COFF] [TUHS]   386BSD released
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 16:02:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <36A1FADC-560D-47D2-9F0C-401A1B4E1655@via.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YPCNnL4TLkLWqmFa@mit.edu>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3956 bytes --]

I remember going to one of those cattle-call hiring events. I wanted to speak with the Intel compiler guy and when I got up to him, all he said 
was “Ganapathi”.

I actually knew who/what hw was talking about.

So, has Intel killed their own compiler toolset?

Joe McGuckin
ViaNet Communications

joe@via.net
650-207-0372 cell
650-213-1302 office
650-969-2124 fax



> On Jul 15, 2021, at 12:33 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:07:10AM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
>> In fact, [I can not say I personally know this - but have read internal
>> memos that make the claim], Intel pays for more Linux developers and now
>> LLVM developers than any firm.  What's interesting is that Intel does not
>> really directly sell its HW product to end-users.  We sell to others than
>> use our chips to make their products.   We have finally moved to the
>> support model for the compilers (I've personally been fighting that battle
>> for 15 years).
> 
> That claim is probably from the data collected from the Linux
> Foundation, which publishes these stats every year or two.  The most
> recent one is here:
> 
> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020_kernel_history_report_082720.pdf
> 
> The top ten organizations responsible for commits from 2007 -- 2019:
> 
> (None)		11.95%
> Intel		10.01%
> Red Hat		 8.90%
> (Unknown)	 4.09%
> IBM		 3.79%
> SuSE		 3.49%
> Linaro		 3.17%
> (Consultant)	 2.96%
> Google		 2.79%
> Samsung		 2.58%
> 
> "None" means no organizational affiliation (e.g., hobbyists, students,
> etc.)  "Unknown" means the organization affiliation couldn't be
> determined.
> 
> For more recent data, if you look at the commits for the 5.10 release
> (end of 2020), the top ten list by organizations looks like this:
> 
> Huawei	     8.9%
> Intel	     8.0%
> (Unknown)    6.6%
> (None)	     4.9%
> Red Hat	     5.7%
> Google	     5.2%
> AMD	     4.3%
> Linaro	     4.1%
> Samsung	     3.5%
> IBM	     3.2%
> 
> For the full list and more stats, see: https://lwn.net/Articles/839772/
> 
>> So back to my basic point ... while giving the *behavior* a name, the *idea
>> *of "Open Source" is really not anything new.
> 
> I do think there is something which is radically new --- which is that
> it's not a single company publishing all of the source code for a
> particular OS, whether it's System/360 or the PDP-8 Disk Operating
> System, or whatever.
> 
> In other words, it's the shared nature of the collaboration, which
> partially solves the question of "who pays" --- the answer is, "lots
> of companies, and they do so when it makes business sense for them to
> do so".  Intel may have had the largest number of contributions to
> Linux historically --- but that was still 10%, and it was eclipsed by
> people with no organizational affliation, and in the 5.10 kernel
> Huawei slightly edged out Intel with 8.9% vs 8.0% contributions.
> 
> I completely agree with you that one of the key questions is the
> business case issue.  Not only who pays, but how do they justify the
> software investment to the bean counters?  Of course, the "Stone Soup"
> story predates computers, so this certainly isn't a new business
> model.  And arguably the X Window Systems and the Open Software
> Foundation also had a similar model where multiple companies
> contributed to a common codebase, with perhaps mixed levels of
> success.
> 
> The thing which Linux has managed to achieve, however, is the fact
> that there is a large and diverse base of corporate contributions.
> That to me is what makes the Linux model so interesting, and has been
> a reason for its long-term sustainability.
> 
> Other companies may have been making their source code availble, but
> the underlying business model behind their "source available" practices
> was quite different.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 					- Ted


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 8933 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 141 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
COFF mailing list
COFF@minnie.tuhs.org
https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/coff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-07-18  6:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <7wtukxtgag.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>
     [not found] ` <CAKH6PiVCjo3YnTZUVYOCDeffQ6POVwGAQA1QMR9UinkfGn+AmQ@mail.gmail.com>
2021-07-15  6:33   ` Michael Kjörling
2021-07-15 20:44     ` Derek Fawcus
2021-07-15 15:07   ` Clem Cole
2021-07-15 19:33     ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-15 20:30       ` Clem Cole
2021-07-16  1:58         ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-16  2:14           ` George Michaelson
2021-07-16 18:02           ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2021-07-17  4:09             ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-17  6:30               ` [COFF] " Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via COFF
2021-07-17 12:37                 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-17 13:30                   ` Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via COFF
2021-07-18  3:29               ` [COFF] [TUHS] " Grant Taylor via COFF
2021-07-18  3:42                 ` David Arnold
2021-07-18  4:01                   ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2021-07-19 13:41                     ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-19 14:50                       ` Clem Cole
2021-07-19 17:38                         ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-19 19:33                           ` John P. Linderman
2021-07-19 20:21                             ` Clem Cole
2021-07-20  1:05                             ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2021-07-19 20:08                           ` Clem Cole
2021-07-20  0:55                             ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-18  6:44                   ` Andy Kosela
2021-07-16 16:11         ` Jonathan Corbet
2021-07-15 23:02       ` joe mcguckin [this message]
     [not found] <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.2107140824460.15723@aneurin.horsfall.org>
     [not found] ` <213a4c11-3ab2-4b4a-8d6b-b52105a19711@localhost>
     [not found]   ` <CAE49LGn-gY9eikkwUgS+i3p=ZQV+gk_3BJ5V4_6B4HPbdyRuZw@mail.gmail.com>
2021-07-14 15:01     ` Clem Cole
2021-07-14 17:40       ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2021-07-14 17:50         ` Larry McVoy
2021-07-14 18:28         ` Clem Cole
2021-07-14 20:03         ` John Cowan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=36A1FADC-560D-47D2-9F0C-401A1B4E1655@via.net \
    --to=joe@via.net \
    --cc=coff@tuhs.org \
    --cc=douglas.mcilroy@dartmouth.edu \
    --cc=tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --subject='Re: [COFF] [TUHS]   386BSD released' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).