I'm also not to sure whether any actual company have thus far come out to support a specific 'software' implementation. I know many are supporting larger blocks but so do most of us.
Who doesn't? I don't favour BIP 101 or XT, but I've been in favour of bigger blocks since before this issue. I've heard it said that everyone at Blockstream wants to stick to 1 MB. But the reality is that their ideas are more complicated than BIP 101, and so it makes it difficult to present the information in terms of which blocksize limit the various parties favour. It's easier to stick "1 MB" in a table than it is to insert a paragraph of description, or a diagram.
I'm not saying that the 'developers' are not taking this seriously but it's maybe time that all are given a wakeup call as to how serious this matter truly is.
I don't know, I think Hearn and Andresen are forcing the issue slightly earlier than when it would have caused problems naturally. It's only serious because of the threat to the system, not because of the technical issue that's the ostensible point of contention.