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

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#131

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

echelon wrote: post #104
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Android makes it sufficiently difficult that only 0.01% of users can do it, That's BS. My mom installed f-droid by herself and can install apps from APKs without any help. It's not like you gotta root your phone, use ADB, or break out the CLI for that. All you have to do is tap Install when prompted, that's it. OMG, so complex, only 0.01% of users can tap Install in F-droid. /s

Purely anecdotal. It sounds like your mom is pretty tech savvy, though. F-droid is less popular than Unix on the desktop. They don't publish any stats, but as a proxy, their Twitter account only has 10k followers and their forums receive fewer than ten posts a day. Google trends shows "Ubuntu vs f-droid" dwarfing the latter term to the point there's no signal at all. Perhaps that's an unfair comparison, but I was exp…

Yes, but you were talking about difficulty, not popularity. Those are not even remotely the same things. Just because something is not popular does not automatically make it difficult.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#133

Post by gpapilion »

danuker wrote: post #65
phkahler wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Their current CPU-features-as-a-service marketing push doesn't look like a right move to me. That was bothering me a bit too, but then I realized it may have a use that most of us don't care about. Sure they could charge more for AVX512 or whatever, and they might try to charge rent for such options which I'm not a fan of. But what if they are being asked by 3-letter agencies for chips with custom circuitry that w…

How does it bother you less, assuming that 3-letter agencies can access parts of CPUs that you can't? If anything, it bothers me more! Why would they get special treatment, and why would I have to subsidize its features paying for my CPU to have it, but disabled?

I think they had a whole set of chipset based products that are beginning to move of package. Turning these off and on via software makes sense(think quick assist for compression acceleration). These require integration effort, and aren’t something like a compiler flag.

I would also argue you aren’t subsidizing the feature, they are subsidizing your budget chip.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#134

Post by Matthias247 »

hansendc wrote: post #31
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.

They don't necessarily have to directly do it. As far as I remember Linutronix is rather invested in training (I enjoyed a Linux training from them around 2010), and so they might just help out other intel engineers in landing those patches.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#135

Post by teekert »

rbanffy wrote: post #116
teekert wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a fun company to work for :) Sure one can whine about an RPi and "industrial reliability" (and all I can think of is that damned SD card...), but hey, it's just a cool movie, and it communicates in a nice way what they do. Also, it sounds like they should have been involved in the Mars helicopter (Ingenuity), which runs Linux and need these types of techniques. Cool podcast on the subject: [0] [0]: h…

> and all I can think of is that damned SD card... I'm having some better experiences with SD cards marketed as "high endurance". Another trick I've been doing is to mount /var/log as tmpfs. If they crash when they run out of space, I let them restart themselves.

To be honest I don't have that much issues (used to have much more with older SD card, pre-micro), but still, imagine a Raspberry Pi 4, 8 GB ram, and an nvme (m.2) hard drive. It would be soooo nice. I know there are compute module based products that do something like this, but imaging a 65 dollar pi with this slot.

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#136

Post by xadhominemx »

dmead wrote: post #119
xadhominemx wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has nothing to do with Intel’s problems

it was an intel product when it was shut down because of the wrist expositions.

I know what it is, but does that have to do with Intel’s problems? Sohail and Dadi probably did not think about Basis Peak for more than 10 minutes over the entire period Intel operated the brand

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#137

Post by dmead »

xadhominemx wrote: post #136
dmead wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it was an intel product when it was shut down because of the wrist expositions.

I know what it is, but does that have to do with Intel’s problems? Sohail and Dadi probably did not think about Basis Peak for more than 10 minutes over the entire period Intel operated the brand

I just mention that as a way to illustrate they they were not reinvesting their capital into verification/quality and R&D or focusing on their core competency.

this was during the period when intel was riding the IOT hype train and made some dumb purchases.

see here for more

https://www.businessinsider.com/intel-is-probably-the-worst-...

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#138

Post by xadhominemx »

dmead wrote: post #137
xadhominemx wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what it is, but does that have to do with Intel’s problems? Sohail and Dadi probably did not think about Basis Peak for more than 10 minutes over the entire period Intel operated the brand

I just mention that as a way to illustrate they they were not reinvesting their capital into verification/quality and R&D or focusing on their core competency. this was during the period when intel was riding the IOT hype train and made some dumb purchases. see here for more https://www.businessinsider.com/intel-is-probably-the-worst-...

I am very well aware of the history here. Again, Intels misadventures in IOT have absolutely nothing to do with their challenges today, which are rooted in a handful of poor engineering decisions

Re: Intel acquires Linutronix

#139

Post by BizarroLand »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #124
exikyut wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, IIUC the binning process that designates chips as Core, Xeon, Pentium etc series ultimately sources parts from a common set of conveyor belts, identifying final designations using QC processes that further subclassify against what parts of a chip do not work correctly. So if say the AVX512 unit in a single core doesn't pass muster an entire die might go in the "doesn't have AVX512" bin and then get marketed app…

I don't think anybody object to binning CPUs based on what the chip can actually do. It's when Intel decides to sell chips with features fused off even though the silicon is fully functional that people start to get annoyed.

Also selling chips at a set MSRP and then offering to unlock the "full" potential of the chip for a low monthly fee.

It would be like buying a car and having to pay $20/month to have the 65mph speed limiter turned off.

Post reply on HN