The value and Kernel Development

Did you know how the kernel development work. I know it very hard to make the kernel working. Most are developers working together. Not like Carnonical aka Ubuntu… They take but never return said by Greg Kroah-Hartman. This one already explained by him on my previous post

You all can view the picture how the kernel development process.

Source: Thanks to Linux Foundation for their statistic
Milestones in Linux Kernel Development History
Linux Foundation

Development Cost Milestones

Production Kernel Version

Actual Estimated Development Cost (2008 dollars)

$100 million

Linux 2.0.37


$200 million

Linux 2.2.7


$400 million

Linux 2.4.2


$600 million

Linux 2.4.22


$800 million

Linux 2.6.11


$1.0 billion

Linux 2.6.19


$1.2 billion

Linux 2.6.26


SLOC Milestones

Production Kernel Version

Actual Source Lines of Code

1 million

Linux 2.2.1


2 million

Linux 2.4.0


3 million

Linux 2.4.20


4 million

Linux 2.6.6


5 million

Linux 2.6.19


6 million

Linux 2.6.26



72 thoughts on “The value and Kernel Development”

  1. Früher war ich sehr erfreut sehr glücklich zu suchen dieser net -site.I gesucht in Ihre dieses hervorragenden Sprachreisen! I definitiv genießen jedes kleine bisschen und es habe Zum einen Blick at neue Slideshows Sie weblog schreiben.

  2. Interesting… but where would a band like Tool be established. I’ve heard idiots listen to the music just for the feelings they get, but a well-rounded mind can find solace in the composition…

  3. Well you obviously didn’t get my point, because I was explaining that the music DOESN’T make you more intelligent, but that some artists require more thought to appreciate, and therefore more intelligent people are on average going to enjoy it. An artist being on the ‘lower end’ doesn’t denote that its listener is less intelligent, it’s just an average. Hence you’ll find the most accessible music closer to the middle. This just means its listener could be anywhere on the scale, but that an average sampling of Switchfoot fans will put their intelligence around 1076. Nevertheless, this study was not very thorough obviously. For example, Jazz is nothing but introspection and thought, and fans of say Miles Davis or Clifford Brown would definitely not be on the lower end of the spectrum. Rather than taking it at face value, you could look at the chart deduce that people with lower scores are more likely to name a genre than list their favorite artists. And of course just listing a genre doesn’t actually mean you know anything about it… so those examples really tell us little about the genre itself.

  4. Speaking of intelligence tests… does the author of this study not realize that “Beethoven” is actually “Classical” music? The results given here are akin to saying that people who enjoy watermelon are much brighter than the people who enjoy large green fruit.

  5. Hrmm that was weird, my comment got eaten. Anyway I wanted to say that it’s decent to realize that somebody else furthermore mentioned that as I had trouble finding the same info elsewhere. That was the first place that told me the answer. Thanks.

  6. well this test isn’t about “bustin a cap” it is about intelligence. it takes little to know intelligence to shoot someone. but in my opinion, it is not the music that makes people dumb but the listeners, being dumb, decide to listen to whatever music is most easily accessible instead of developing a taste for fine music or developed music because they do not have developed ears that can truly develop opinions. and the music will become more about “bustin a cap”.

Leave a Comment