Valve Software Joins the Linux Foundation

[exfileme]

Valve Software is now finally part of the Linux Foundation collective.

Valve Software Joins the Linux Foundation : Read more

 

[Jgriff]

there has been no viable pc gaming alternative other than windows, until now...finally someone did something about it, cant wait to leave windows...ever since bill gates stepped down as chaiman microsoft has went to sheet

 

[onedos]

I hope linux explodes and is one everyone's desktop.

 

[southernshark]

This is pretty exciting. I was a bit pessimistic about Steam OS at first, but if it develops into a full blown Linux OS with all of the options that brings with it, then it is quite exciting. Microsoft has been firing on three cylinders the past few years so the timing of this is quite fortunate.

 

[vmem]

hmm, this is VERY interesting. Microsoft has some major work to do or more and more software developers are going to jump on the Linux boat.

Will definately be keeping an eye on it

 

[vmem]

This is pretty exciting. I was a bit pessimistic about Steam OS at first, but if it develops into a full blown Linux OS with all of the options that brings with it, then it is quite exciting. Microsoft has been firing on three cylinders the past few years so the timing of this is quite fortunate.

I have to partially disagree with this. I think Steam OS should be a gaming only highly optimized platform, and Steam should exist alternatively as a part of a large Linux based OS developed by the Foundation.

This is because there are a lot of professional software out there that still lack proper Linux support (or a linux version at all). examples would be autodesk and Adobe. until proper alternatives can be found, professional gamers like myself will keep AT LEAST ONE high-powered PC for content creation etc. dual-booting into Steam OS would only be attractive as a highly optimized gaming platform, as I can't get that much work done on Linux atm...

 

[jhansonxi]

This is because there are a lot of professional software out there that still lack proper Linux support (or a linux version at all). examples would be autodesk and Adobe. until proper alternatives can be found, professional gamers like myself will keep AT LEAST ONE high-powered PC for content creation etc. dual-booting into Steam OS would only be attractive as a highly optimized gaming platform, as I can't get that much work done on Linux atm...

If by "AutoDesk" you mean AutoCAD, try DraftSight from Dassault Systèmes, the same developer as Solidworks and Catia.

 

[vmem]

This is because there are a lot of professional software out there that still lack proper Linux support (or a linux version at all). examples would be autodesk and Adobe. until proper alternatives can be found, professional gamers like myself will keep AT LEAST ONE high-powered PC for content creation etc. dual-booting into Steam OS would only be attractive as a highly optimized gaming platform, as I can't get that much work done on Linux atm...

If by "AutoDesk" you mean AutoCAD, try DraftSight from Dassault Systèmes, the same developer as Solidworks and Catia.

I meant Maya. and I guess I should specify that the problem isn't that I can't personally find an alternative, but rather Windows is very much entrenched in the enterprise and will easily take a decade or more to remove. until then, anyone working for one of these enterprises will do well to keep at least one Windows based system. which leaves Linux only for 'side jobs' (read running that NAS), 'personal tasks', or entertainment.

 

[southernshark]

This is pretty exciting. I was a bit pessimistic about Steam OS at first, but if it develops into a full blown Linux OS with all of the options that brings with it, then it is quite exciting. Microsoft has been firing on three cylinders the past few years so the timing of this is quite fortunate.

I have to partially disagree with this. I think Steam OS should be a gaming only highly optimized platform, and Steam should exist alternatively as a part of a large Linux based OS developed by the Foundation.

This is because there are a lot of professional software out there that still lack proper Linux support (or a linux version at all). examples would be autodesk and Adobe. until proper alternatives can be found, professional gamers like myself will keep AT LEAST ONE high-powered PC for content creation etc. dual-booting into Steam OS would only be attractive as a highly optimized gaming platform, as I can't get that much work done on Linux atm...

I just don't see the downside in putting a full OS on it. Obviously Linux is on there or you couldn't game on it. So they might as well open up the other uses for it. Personally, I wouldn't want to devote a computer to just gaming and don't really want to dual boot either. It seems dumb to me to dual boot, with one version of linux being gaming only and then to switch to a full linux.... I don't see how that would make sense.

I get that a lot of people will still have a Windows machine. But a lot of people won't. Take me for example, I only use my computer for gaming, writing, surfing the net, watching videos, preparing presentations etc.... I don't actually need Windows to do that. About the only MS program that I would miss is Power Point, but there are viable alternatives to it out there.

 

[itchyisvegeta]

All because Windows 8 sucks!

 

[ZolaIII]

Maya is present on Linux & IBMs software is present to!

What ever Valve stripe down from mainline Linux you will be able to put back in because its open source OS & even more than that! Just like it's done on Android (with costume kernels) .

 

[General Techniq]

Why Steam Box Failed:
(by General Techniq, 2016)


1. Too expensive for console gamers, too restrictive for hardcore PC gamers.

2. Performance issues. If console gamers can be annoyed by underperforming, buggy, game systems... If PC gamers can go ballistic when their games crash or are too demanding for their systems to run successfully.... then Steam Box users go lynch mob or stake burning when their Steam Boxes have issues with "steam" games.

3. The shameless suggestion of infinite upgradability. Lies such as these only work once on a consumer collective. Afterwards, the only hope for continued success on the same front for a particular goods provider would be to launch a "new and improved" model with the promise (suggested only) that it will be everything that the previous model was not.

4. Linux.

5. Logistics, consumer support, quality, presence, promotion, reception....... Welcome to the world of electronic hardware entertainment, Valve. Feel free to take your freshman spanking with a grain of salt. (By the way, if you're looking for a recent example of how bad this can get for you, go research "original xbox - japan"

6. Games. No matter what, if your system can't sell games that were specifically developed/ported just for it (Linux), the developers won't be able to humor your aspirations of global dominance for long before the top execs start having to answer to the shareholders. (see; Wii, Wii-U)

7. Sure, it plays games....... but what else can it do? Does it does anything better than it's competitors? Anything? Why buy steam box instead of PC?

 

[Jordan Nwokolo]

So, Who is MS Windows Replacement ?? Ubuntu,Steam OS or Mint ??

 

[vir_cotto]

Awesome I've been waiting for an alternative to Windows for a long time XD, hope this works out!

 

[frelled]

Lots of Windows/MS fans downgrading the pro Linux comments. Anyone else notice that?

 

[JD88]

Lots of Windows/MS fans downgrading the pro Linux comments. Anyone else notice that?

Toms has a very pro-Microsoft audiance, probably because a lot of it's readers work in IT with Windows based machines and that's where their knowledge (and job skills) are. Also, Windows is what most people use NOW so naturally they defend what they have and the products they use etc.

Rarely do you get any sort of discussion on the actual advantages/disadvantages of Windows vs Linux because all anyone ever cites is software compatibility which has nothing to do with the effectiveness and design of the OS itself, but everything to do with Microsoft's near monopoly on the PC sector for decades.

Additionally, most people have never tried Linux or if they have don't look at it with any sort of open mind.

 

[Lee-m]

People tend to go where the software is. In the case of games thats always going to be the big AAA games. A good indie catalog is a nice bonus.

As JD88 just pointed out, most folks on toms are mainly windows users, my self included. I also quite like Linux, but I just don't see it as a platform that will ever overcome its dependency on config file editing and use of a shell/terminal interface. Its cool if your a power user, but not for the average joe.

I hope valve have a good game plan and can challenge windows and even the consoles. I think even most of the hardcore windows users want to see some alternative to that god awful windows 8/metro UI microsoft seem to think forcing on the desktop user is some how a good idea.

 

[stevejnb]

It still utterly amazes me. In one breath, Toms bashes anything that operates on a "walled garden" type format. In the next breath, they are rushing in, eyes closed and wallets open, to embrace an OS that is being built around the one-company-controlled software distributor Steam.

 

[clonazepam]

This is not an alternative to anything. It's an add-on, at best. You just have to look at the money to see it won't go anywhere. It costs money to make games run in Linux. If you don't have enough people buying it, you won't make your money back, or so little profit, that it was never worth doing. Look at it this way, if you have a team of people, you can commit their time to making dimes on a linux platform, or have them use that time to make dollars elsewhere. Given the choice, which would you choose?

Look at all those big names in the Foundation. The Foundation's been around since 2000. What have they done so far? Why would you think the inclusion of Valve / Steam OS would suddenly make some huge impact?

Who's dumping real money into open source compilers, making them competitive?

At the end of the day, the 'suits' will see market share and say 'nah'. Who's going to put up the marketing dollars? It's too expensive and the guarantee of a return on that investment? There isn't one.

I'd love to see Microsoft see some real competition. There's so many layers to this onion, and the OS is just one. It costs too much to peel every layer, make brand new layers, and then piece it all back together. You're literally counting on a bunch of companies, from all angles, to throw a ton of money into a pit, and make a wish. I'm sorry.

 

[JD88]

It still utterly amazes me. In one breath, Toms bashes anything that operates on a "walled garden" type format. In the next breath, they are rushing in, eyes closed and wallets open, to embrace an OS that is being built around the one-company-controlled software distributor Steam.

Steam OS is open source and much more open than something like the Xbox.

According to Tweaktown:

"Steam is not a one-way content broadcast channel, it's a collaborative many-to-many entertainment platform, in which each participant is a multiplier of the experience for everyone else," Valve stated. "With SteamOS, 'openness' means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they've been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want. Gamers are empowered to join in the creation of the games they love. SteamOS will continue to evolve, but will remain an environment designed to foster these kinds of innovation."

Read more at http://www.tweaktown.com/news/33081/valve-unveils-steamos-an-open-source-free-os-for-the-living-room/index.html#UaCmG8XWgAM3PdIH.99

 

[JD88]

This is not an alternative to anything. It's an add-on, at best. You just have to look at the money to see it won't go anywhere. It costs money to make games run in Linux. If you don't have enough people buying it, you won't make your money back, or so little profit, that it was never worth doing. Look at it this way, if you have a team of people, you can commit their time to making dimes on a linux platform, or have them use that time to make dollars elsewhere. Given the choice, which would you choose?

Look at all those big names in the Foundation. The Foundation's been around since 2000. What have they done so far? Why would you think the inclusion of Valve / Steam OS would suddenly make some huge impact?

Who's dumping real money into open source compilers, making them competitive?

At the end of the day, the 'suits' will see market share and say 'nah'. Who's going to put up the marketing dollars? It's too expensive and the guarantee of a return on that investment? There isn't one.

I'd love to see Microsoft see some real competition. There's so many layers to this onion, and the OS is just one. It costs too much to peel every layer, make brand new layers, and then piece it all back together. You're literally counting on a bunch of companies, from all angles, to throw a ton of money into a pit, and make a wish. I'm sorry.

The same could have been said for the release of any console or even something like Android and look where it is. The costs of porting games to Linux really isn't that great, especially now that everything is architecturally similar.

 

[stevejnb]

JD, read that carefully and explain to me where any of it makes it clear that this OS won't be intimately, to the point of being crippled without it, tied to Steam the service. You can't, because they haven't said it. I doubt we'll hear it, because I doubt that's the type of openness they want.

XBOX, PS3, your regular console is a closed system - fine and dandy, you know what you're getting into when you buy it. The problem with Steam OS - and I very much hope this isn't true - is that it, by all accounts, seems built to be a delivery system for the Steam service. To Valve's credit, they are open with who works on the Steam service, and make it to work with gads of hardware varieties. The thing is, if a program is available on Steam, Valve has it DRM'd up and they get a cut.

My post is not meant to say "oh, Steam is closed, SteamOS will probably not be as open as we might hope - buy an XBOX instead!" No, that's counterintuitive to say the least. What I'm saying is... Steam, as a service, controls everything on it. What's to make you think they won't take measure to prevent other software from running on SteamOS? All it takes is a set of update parameters that will prevent Steam the service from operating on a modified SteamOS and you've got an "open" OS that they will advertise as such that will, functionally

If there is one thing that is true of Valve with Steam since day one - they control the software that goes on it. Period. Why does everyone assume that SteamOS is going to be some wonderfully open flavour of Linux when a company like that is running it?

And keep in mind, Linux is great. Valve, with Steam the service, has previously adopted an *extremely* controlled policy concerning how software is distributed on their platform. Nothing in your quote suggests that they're going to let anything happen on SteamOS that they don't give a green light to - and, let's face it, that is *exactly* what Linux is all about.

Here's the question that I want answered which will alleviate 95% of my concerns over SteamOS... If some upstart company wants to make a game for SteamOS that will run without being involved with the Steam service, will that be possible? Or will Valve take measures to make it so that SteamOS is inherently hostile to software for SteamOS that doesn't run through Steam? I haven't seen evidence of that not being the case and, with Valve's "we are big brother - but a friendly one" approach to software distribution previously, I do not trust them to have all of gaming under their watch. Everything your quote says is all within the realm of the Steam service, which Valve controls. Currently, even Windows doesn't lay that kind of draconian one-ring-to-rule-them-all standardization, as there is no overarching service or DRM required to make games for Windows. Will SteamOS offer the same? And more specifically, what about Valve's history with the Steam service makes you think they won't be hostile to "free" programs running loose on their OS which is named after their service in which *everything* is controlled by them?

 

[Lee-m]

Its just an OS to run steam (big picture). Linux is free, and they can use it. That's all there is to it really.

 

[back_by_demand]

Jgriff, it will only be a viable alternative as an operating system when it can do more than just run games and basic allowed apps. Furthermore it won't even be a viable gaming only platform until it can play a higher proportion of the Steam catalogue than its current 10%. Sure it has potential, but I think your "until now" statement is very premature. Ok maybe supporting the whole back catalogue may be difficult if not impossible, but if they can at least ensure all new releases from Steam can work it is a great advancement. If however new games continue to be developed and released in a 9/1 ratio in favour of Windows then regardless of the promise and potential nobody will use it because it is a means to an end and if paying extra for Windows means you can play the games then people will pay whatever it costs. People don't want free, they want something that works.

 

[JD88]

JD, read that carefully and explain to me where any of it makes it clear that this OS won't be intimately, to the point of being crippled without it, tied to Steam the service. You can't, because they haven't said it. I doubt we'll hear it, because I doubt that's the type of openness they want.

XBOX, PS3, your regular console is a closed system - fine and dandy, you know what you're getting into when you buy it. The problem with Steam OS - and I very much hope this isn't true - is that it, by all accounts, seems built to be a delivery system for the Steam service. To Valve's credit, they are open with who works on the Steam service, and make it to work with gads of hardware varieties. The thing is, if a program is available on Steam, Valve has it DRM'd up and they get a cut.

My post is not meant to say "oh, Steam is closed, SteamOS will probably not be as open as we might hope - buy an XBOX instead!" No, that's counterintuitive to say the least. What I'm saying is... Steam, as a service, controls everything on it. What's to make you think they won't take measure to prevent other software from running on SteamOS? All it takes is a set of update parameters that will prevent Steam the service from operating on a modified SteamOS and you've got an "open" OS that they will advertise as such that will, functionally

If there is one thing that is true of Valve with Steam since day one - they control the software that goes on it. Period. Why does everyone assume that SteamOS is going to be some wonderfully open flavour of Linux when a company like that is running it?

And keep in mind, Linux is great. Valve, with Steam the service, has previously adopted an *extremely* controlled policy concerning how software is distributed on their platform. Nothing in your quote suggests that they're going to let anything happen on SteamOS that they don't give a green light to - and, let's face it, that is *exactly* what Linux is all about.

Here's the question that I want answered which will alleviate 95% of my concerns over SteamOS... If some upstart company wants to make a game for SteamOS that will run without being involved with the Steam service, will that be possible? Or will Valve take measures to make it so that SteamOS is inherently hostile to software for SteamOS that doesn't run through Steam? I haven't seen evidence of that not being the case and, with Valve's "we are big brother - but a friendly one" approach to software distribution previously, I do not trust them to have all of gaming under their watch. Everything your quote says is all within the realm of the Steam service, which Valve controls. Currently, even Windows doesn't lay that kind of draconian one-ring-to-rule-them-all standardization, as there is no overarching service or DRM required to make games for Windows. Will SteamOS offer the same? And more specifically, what about Valve's history with the Steam service makes you think they won't be hostile to "free" programs running loose on their OS which is named after their service in which *everything* is controlled by them?

Think of it just like Android where the Google play store is the primary means of getting apps, but that doesn't stop anyone from side loading whatever they like or modifying the software anyway they like.

This is likely to be just a very lightweight distro with Steam's UI so theoretically any game or software for Linux should work with a little doing.