True, at least for modern kernel development. But I'm also not really arguing against that, I'm arguing against the notion that this model of development (open source combined with corporate sponsorship) is responsible for a lack of resources which causes our tools to suck. Or even that our tools suck in the first place, taking into account the complexity and non-linearity of the systems we build. Our tools work really well, considering, and it might even be the reason why software eats the world right now.
Wouldn't it actually be a good example of "whatever big companies see fit to subsidize in their open source programs"?