4 ms·
Right. Intel controls silicon design, and a compiler hardly anyone uses. To get the same level as access as Apple, Intel would have to cut a deal with Microsof
by danielheath 5y ago
Right. Intel controls silicon design, and a compiler hardly anyone uses.
To get the same level as access as Apple, Intel would have to cut a deal with Microsoft for access to their most sensitive telemetry data (and - likely - also to modify windows to collect more).
I think it's quite unlikely that MS would agree to that readily, if at all.
- adrianN 5y agoIntel is free to improve GCC or Clang for their processor. They instead choose to sell an expensive compiler of their own.
- simondotau 5y agoBut because Intel (mostly) sells commodity parts, any effort improving compilers has a limited ability to benefit Intel without also benefiting competitors (i.e. AMD Ryzen/Epyc). Compiler improvements also benefit owners of existing devices, which reduces the pressure for customers to trigger a hardware upgrade cycle. However you cut it, improving x86 compilers doesn't improve Intel's profitability in a competitive x86-dominant market. Apple doesn't have any such conflicting motivations because they sell the product rather than commodity parts. For Apple, improving the compiler as a unified part of the Apple Silicon development process means they can sell a better product with the same unit cost, with only residual benefit to competitors that don't have access to Apple Silicon hardware.
- jcelerier 5y ago?? https://github.com/intel/llvm https://github.com/intel/llvm
- gpderetta 5y agoIntel is a significant contributor to GCC. Don't know about clang.
- zvr 5y agoAll the Intel development tools have been freely available to everyone for a while now... A large part of them are based on Open Source components like gcc or llvm, and most modifications have been contributed upstream. It's the packaging of all tools and libraries that Intel provides, extending to much more than "a compiler".