Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel acquires Linutronix

community.intel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 139 posts

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#31

Post by hansendc »

zmk5 wrote: post #4

Hopefully this results in even better drivers for Linux. I wonder if the graphics cards they have planned will have good Linux drivers too. I've always had a good experience with their Linux integrated graphics drivers so far.

I hope so too! But, I was trying to think of if I've ever seen the Linutronix folks working on the Intel graphics code. I don't think I have:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...

For very selfish reasons, I'm hoping that this acquisition will give the Linutronix folks even more of an opportunity to contribute to the core kernel and especially arch/x86.

Disclaimer: I work on Linux at Intel.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#32

Post by svnt »

belval wrote: post #15
pinewurst wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Name a single successful Intel acquisition, especially open source.

I read your statement and I thought "should be easy to find at least one"! Turns out it isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel#Acquisitions_and_investm... Not only does none of these ring a bell, all the software ones seem to be legitimate garbage. Why did intel buy a cloud gaming startup?

The non-chip business at intel is a sideshow of uncommitted grasping.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#34

Post by svnt »

taffronaut wrote: post #24

As Thomas Gleixner has been the x86 maintainer since 2008, what do they gain from this? It seems a pretty close relationship already. It's not as if they're acquiring IP. Conversely if they'll allow Linutronix to continue "to operate as an independent business" and e.g. work on other architectures like RISC-V, then that dilutes their access to the talent they're acquiring.

Maybe he was going to go do something else and they purchased some golden handcuffs and a smooth transition?

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#35

Post by missedthecue »

dannyw wrote: post #16
bestouff wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their current CPU-features-as-a-service marketing push doesn't look like a right move to me.

Like it or not, that's probably where the industry will be in 5 years. You might not like it, but X-as-a-service make way more money for the company, and shareholders. It'll probably look like this: buy a 'cheap' Intel CPU for $99 (say, 4P, 12E cores clocked at 2 GHz), with "Turbo" to 4.5 GHz being a $79/year subscription and "Extreme Turbo Max" to 5.1 GHz being an additional $35/year. First year free, of course, to…

That's just leasing, which unlike SaaS, is not a new business model. It's been around for thousands of years, and there are a lot of problems with it. How do you repo from a non-paying account for instance? With a SaaS, their account is automatically turned off. This isn't the case when leasing out an actual physical product.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#36

Post by svnt »

imglorp wrote: post #28
dannyw wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like it or not, that's probably where the industry will be in 5 years. You might not like it, but X-as-a-service make way more money for the company, and shareholders. It'll probably look like this: buy a 'cheap' Intel CPU for $99 (say, 4P, 12E cores clocked at 2 GHz), with "Turbo" to 4.5 GHz being a $79/year subscription and "Extreme Turbo Max" to 5.1 GHz being an additional $35/year. First year free, of course, to…

That trick might work for home desktop due to the short sight bug in human consumers (mostly gamers?), but does it make sense for server? It seems like a bunch of potential liabilities for a cloud host or data center operator. This is basically DRM for CPU and as such, its primary function is to stop working when all the business rules don't line up right.

It will be interesting to see how it transfers from the consumer to the B2B arena but it gives them more latitude with price, which can only help them if they use it properly.

It wouldn’t surprise me if it flips the other way in B2B and they sell contracts for X years of Y teraflops instead of individual chips with fragile DRM on extra pieces.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#37

Post by missedthecue »

cinntaile wrote: post #5
colinmhayes wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel is currently worth less than AMD even though Intel's profit is quite a bit higher than AMDs entire revenue. I recognize that Intel has huge problems to solve but they absolutely seem undervalued currently.

AMD is way more nimble than Intel though, since they're fabless.

This seems like a strategic drawback.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#38

Post by hansendc »

taffronaut wrote: post #24

As Thomas Gleixner has been the x86 maintainer since 2008, what do they gain from this? It seems a pretty close relationship already. It's not as if they're acquiring IP. Conversely if they'll allow Linutronix to continue "to operate as an independent business" and e.g. work on other architectures like RISC-V, then that dilutes their access to the talent they're acquiring.

Yes, it's been a pretty close relationship for a long, long time.

What does Intel get out of this? I'm really hoping that Intel gets help improving the kernel from a talented bunch of kernel developers who have experience working closely with paying customers. Intel has tons of kernel developers, but few of us are very directly customer-facing.

I also hope the Linutronix folks can spend less time on "castle maintenance" and more time on kernel maintenance. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=PREEMPT_...

(BTW, I work on Intel at Linux).

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#39

Post by tyrfing »

dannyw wrote: post #16
bestouff wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their current CPU-features-as-a-service marketing push doesn't look like a right move to me.

Like it or not, that's probably where the industry will be in 5 years. You might not like it, but X-as-a-service make way more money for the company, and shareholders. It'll probably look like this: buy a 'cheap' Intel CPU for $99 (say, 4P, 12E cores clocked at 2 GHz), with "Turbo" to 4.5 GHz being a $79/year subscription and "Extreme Turbo Max" to 5.1 GHz being an additional $35/year. First year free, of course, to…

Much less likely than just selling enterprise features, which is particularly common for networking companies selling stuff like ports "on demand". The trend is towards a lot more accelerators and specialty features (AXV512, AMX, HBM-related), which aren't going to have universal demand, charging for them separately might allow for fewer SKUs (lower unit costs) without charging everyone for features they don't want.

Considering the consumer market at a CPU level makes very little sense, almost everyone just buys a device manufactured by an intermediate company.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#40

Post by bastardoperator »

caleb-allen wrote: post #2

Intel seems to be making all the right moves. I'm excited to see what Pat Gelsinger can do over the next 5 years (I'm long INTC).

After working directly with Intel and AMD engineers, my money is on AMD. The amount of planning they're doing is nothing short of incredible.
Post reply on HN