From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article <10cpc9g$191j$2@dont-email.me>,   
   Arne Vajhøj   wrote:   
   >On 10/15/2025 8:16 AM, Dan Cross wrote:   
   >> In article <10cmovf$3a740$1@dont-email.me>,   
   >> Arne Vajhøj   wrote:   
   >>> On 10/13/2025 10:03 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:   
   >>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2025 21:20:43 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:   
   >>>>> Few/no CIO's want to support the hundreds of millions of lines   
   >>>>> of open source code their business rely on themselves.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The whole point of having all that code is that they didn’t need to   
   write   
   >>>> it themselves.   
   >>>   
   >>> Yes. But they want free beer more than free speech.   
   >>>   
   >>>> You have to take responsibility for your own business, don’t you?   
   >>>   
   >>> They don't want to write or maintain their own OS.   
   >>>   
   >>> They don't want to write or maintain their own platform   
   >>> software (web/app servers, database servers, message queue   
   >>> servers, cache servers etc.).   
   >>>   
   >>> They don't want to write or maintain their own tools   
   >>> (compilers, build tools, IDE's, source control, unit   
   >>> test frameworks etc.).   
   >>>   
   >>> None of that stuff is their business.   
   >>>   
   >>> They want to focus on their business the applications   
   >>> that help them produce and sell whatever products   
   >>> or services.   
   >>   
   >> Every single one of the FAANG companies do all of those things.   
   >> At Google, we used to joke that, "not only does Google reinvent   
   >> the wheel, we vulcanize the rubber for the tires."  Spanner,   
   >> Piper/Fig/Jujutsu, Prodkernel/ChromeOS/Android, CitC, gunit, Go   
   >> (not to mention the work on LLVM/Clang), Blaze/Bazel/Skylark,   
   >> etc, are all examples of the things you mentioned above.  And   
   >> that's not even to mention all the custom hardware.   
   >>   
   >> For organizations working at hyperscale, there comes a point   
   >> where the off-the-shelf solutions simply cannot scale to meet   
   >> the load you're putting on them.   
   >>   
   >> At that point, you have no choice but to do it yourself.   
   >   
   >Few companies are like Google.   
      
   Yup.   
      
   >For a few reasons:   
   >[snip]   
   >   
   >3) Google is not just a company using IT to produce   
   >    products/services - Google is also a company doing   
   >    IT for other.   
   >   
   >    Google Search is an IT user where it is not a given   
   >    that they want their own distro.   
      
   Actually, a disproportionate amount of kernel effort was put   
   into place specifically for search, but there is a dedicated   
   team that does kernel work for production specifically.   
      
   Internal Google IT, i.e. the people who staff the helpdesk and   
   manage desktop workstations, provision laptops, and so on, had   
   their own Linux distro that was based on Debian, and (mostly)   
   unrelated to the production OS.  They did almost no kernel work,   
   however.   
      
   >    But Android and ChromeOS is Google delivering an   
   >    OS to other. The OS is their business in that case.   
   >   
   >    And one facet of GCP is that Google is taking   
   >    over OS support from Redhat/Canonical/SUSE when   
   >    companies moves their workload from on-prem to   
   >    GCP managed services. Linux support is their   
   >    business.   
      
   Do you mean ContainerOS?  That's just a distro.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)