[stefco_]

A lot of people love working on more esoteric technical things and get more satisfaction from the intellectual component than its direct utility (I certainly feel this way about some things, though trans-architectural portability is not one of them). I would imagine this type of person is better-represented in this sort of field.

In addition, this kind of work does indirectly help keep Intel competitors viable, which helps keep Intel in check for everyone. Stuff like that is pretty exciting in its own way.

[erikpukinskis]

It’s an interesting concept to me. I do have a lot of “hobby work”, which is still meant to be used eventually. I just don’t apply a timeline, which enables me to focus on correctness.

Then I have my professional work, where the timeline is the primary focus, and correctness can only be pursued where it moves the timeline forward.

These projects you’re talking about are an interesting mixture. There is still a timeline that must be hit, because you need to do your demos, and you need to be ready to shift to a production timeline if negotiations go south. But since there are no customers the business model isn’t changing. And you don’t need to do any polish. So you can stay focused on the raw architectural problems.

It’s like my hobby projects in that you can focus on readiness over completeness, but there still is some timeline pressure.

Interesting to think about. Strange for me, but I guess it’s every day for others!