Indeed. They must not have looked at what's available on the Windows Store.
It cracks me up that Valve is so angry and concerned about the Windows Store that they are trying to make Linux their main target platform.
While I'm all for choices when it comes to... well just about everything, it's still an uphill battle. I get why he's doing it, just not sure it'll work. The most interesting thing I see is everyone seems to believe this will be free. Just because the kernel is free doesn't mean the rest of what makes it work for gaming will be. You may be in the place of paying for an OS that does less than the Windows you were attempting to run away from.
Aside from gaming, I can do everything else I need on a simple Chromebook. It's the one and only resource intensive task.
It makes perfect sense for Valve to look for other alternatives than Windows. Why would you chain your multi-billion dollar business to Microsoft's whims? Wouldn't you prefer to be more in control of where your company is headed? Valve was not the only popular dev company to talk about not being so heavily tied to Windows.
I do like the idea of some gaming based linux, the thing is why do gamers need a free OS? If they can pay for expensive video card, buy games, pay subcriptions to online servers, gaming cases, mobos, gear etc, I don't think it's any problem to add $100 for windows license.It's not going to happen with the flick of a switch, we need companies like Valve to try and make a push towards Linux use for it to become a reality. The potential upside is we get a free OS for gaming, no more needing to buy Windows. The potential downside is that nothing happens and we keep on gaming as we have been. What is there to lose? Nothing, so I don't understand the people who are bitching about Valve. They aren't taking away your Windows games so why are you complaining? We're PC gamers, more options, more competition is always better for us.
The only reason valve exists is delaying episode three and HL3 so not sure if it will ever show up.THey just need to release half-life 3 exclusively for the steam box
I do like the idea of some gaming based linux, the thing is why do gamers need a free OS? If they can pay for expensive video card, buy games, pay subcriptions to online servers, gaming cases, mobos, gear etc, I don't think it's any problem to add $100 for windows license.
And even, if you don't want to pay, you can still download cracked copy.
THey just need to release half-life 3 exclusively for the steam box
I get why they don't want to be tied to Windows. A Steam OS would sell to the Valve fanboys and if they could get developers on board, porting it to the a Steam console would probably also sell. The problem is they aren't the ones holding the keys to this castle; they have to rely on other developers to port their games and gamers to adopt a new OS that doesn't have the features the current status quo does. Does Skype / Vent / Mumble / RaidCall / whatever VOIP program run on Linux?
While I agree, the common user could easily switch to Linux, Chrome, OSX, whatever and be just fine checking email, Facebooking, and doing some office stuff. But, PC gamers don't just play the games. They use a lot of other programs to go along with it. Does Linux support all of this? Is there a <insert peripheral comany> program available? Does Spotify have a Linux client?
Linux has a long way to go to gather any steam (lol pun totally intended!).
This reads like someone who last used Linux 15 years ago. Its a very different animal today, and there's easily available equivalent versions for every non-gaming program you need.
It makes perfect sense for Valve to look for other alternatives than Windows. Why would you chain your multi-billion dollar business to Microsoft's whims? Wouldn't you prefer to be more in control of where your company is headed? Valve was not the only popular dev company to talk about not being so heavily tied to Windows.
With exception to not like the Metro UI (which you can get to the original desktop mode anyway), what exactly about Windows 8 sucks? The better memory management? The more secure kernel? The better performance? Yeah... Exactly. More blind hate, which is the problem with Gabe saying anything.
I like the part where Intel tests their new Atom in a beta Android system vs Windows 8, and in the Android system same CPU is 20% faster. Has Linux the potential to be faster than Windows?
I'm with you on this, but I think Valve is taking the wrong approach. The only benefit to developing for Linux is that it's an open platform, but the negatives are that you are developing for an open platform that relies on charity drivers and a coalition of brainy people to keep it all from falling apart. When we talk about the types of people Gabe wants to attrack to Linux, we are talking about the same people who think Windows 8 Metro is the hardest thing they've had to learn in years. Linux as a mainstream OS is a pipedream. The idealist would say it's completely viable, but mom and pop in Oklahoma ain't swithing to Linux and those are the types of people you have to convince in order to main it mainstream.
If Gabe/Valve wanted impress the hell out of me they would take a chunk of that couple billion dollars they have in the bank and come up with their own OS...call it VOS (Valve Operation System). They already have a top notch digital distribution system ready to go. As for APIs they just need to use OpenGL and the other open source APIs already out there. Considering Steam is a one stop shop for selling games, they can offer developers financially incentives to supporting open source APIs versus Directx and basically start a war with Microsoft. People talk crap about MS but the only reason they hold us is because DirectX as a standard is actually pretty damn good in total. I'm not talking about OpenGL versus Direct3D or whatever but as a package.
Apple could have done this with OSX but Jobs was more interested in making pretty Iphones than grabbing the computer industry by the balls and selling OSX standalone to run on PC.
Valve is in a position to completely revolutionize how we use computers and Steam Box isn't it. Nor is it this wish that we'll all install Ubuntu tomorrow and start gaming within it.
I can't say I would be hurt if Windows went away for gaming (which it won't, Direct X alone still leads game development, yeah thanks MS). The problem is you then fracture the PC community.
The real problem is microsoft has developed dx10 and dx11, and all but a few developers are not using it.
Some of the newest and latest games are still using Dx9, which is going on a decade old.
Direct x can not be a factor in staying with windows. Simply because if Direct x was truly relevant, developers would be using dx11, rather than a version that is a decade old.
If there is anyone who can bring linux to the forefront, it is gabe and his endless wad of cash.
If Gabe/Valve wanted impress the hell out of me they would take a chunk of that couple billion dollars they have in the bank and come up with their own OS...call it VOS (Valve Operation System). They already have a top notch digital distribution system ready to go. As for APIs they just need to use OpenGL and the other open source APIs already out there. Considering Steam is a one stop shop for selling games, they can offer developers financially incentives to supporting open source APIs versus Directx and basically start a war with Microsoft. People talk crap about MS but the only reason they hold us is because DirectX as a standard is actually pretty damn good in total. I'm not talking about OpenGL versus Direct3D or whatever but as a package.
And the reason DX9 was / is still used was DX 10 was Vista only and fractured the community, which gamers shouldn't have been a part of.
Vista was a better OS and the initial problems were higher than average requirements to run it (MS's fault) and a complete rewriting of the driver model leading to problems with devices (3rd parties fault). That gave the OS a bad image.
Eh, that first fault isn't really Microsoft's problem. It was the cheap OEMs pumping out computers with 512MB of RAM that had a hell of a time running the OS. Microsoft's fault was that they didn't give NVIDIA and ATi enough time to develop drivers around the new WDDM model. Vista was not that pleasant for me with my GeForce 8800GTX.
Agreed, Windows 8 was a collection of bad ideas, but that doesn't make Linux a viable alternative for gaming. Someone will have to develop the equivalent of DirectX. Someone will have to develop and/or test the drivers needed by a plethora of new hardware each month, and coordinate them with the hardware manufacturers and . And developers certainly aren't going to start distributing their games to be compiled for each possible version of Linux. It's possible that Valve is going to do all this coding, AND give it away for free, but unless Valve also establishes a hard set of specs then gamers would still be limited to just Valve's flavor or be faced with a lot of work to run serious games. And even Valve can't afford to give it away forever, so logic dictates that eventually Valvux (Steamux?) won't be a free alternative, merely another paid alternative.I used Windows 8 for about three months, and ended up switching back to Windows 7. The only things that I miss are the prettier task manager (you can get this on Windows 7) and the nicer file copy dialog (I l liked the graph). Oh, and the machine boots about 2-3 seconds faster. Other than that, I felt like I had to keep making exceptions for things that Microsoft changed in Windows 8 that didn't really need to be changed. Why does an Administrator have to have User Account Control turned on? I use an Administrator account because I'm not (usually) an idiot when it comes to using my machine, and I don't need to be pestered for every flippin' change that I make. Note that it is possible to turn UAC off through registry edits, but that also disables the (fairly worthless) Microsoft Store.
Also, why is it that Windows 8 Professional, which includes a bunch of workstation-oriented additions, is required for Media Center? You can't even play files recorded from Windows Media Center on another PC on vanilla Windows 8 because you don't have the codecs! The work-around? Use VLC.
Why do I have to pay $3 for StartIsBack just to bring the Start Menu back, turn off charms and effectively remove the silly Metro UI? StartIsBack doesn't do any crazy under-the-hood modifications -- everything is still lurking within Windows 8!
Why do I have to install a separate program to bring back the Windows Update notification? You know -- that little yellow shield at the bottom telling you that you have updates. The only place where Windows will notify you of new updates is on the login screen, but I prefer installing updates at my leisure. The problem with the separate program is that it warns you about any Windows Defender update, which happens potentially multiple times a day. You pretty much need to enable automatic installation for all Windows Defender updates, which is possible.
Honestly, when it comes down to it, unless you're using a touch-based device, there's no point to getting Windows 8 if Windows 7 is an option. I think that may be especially true for people buying computers for older family members that may not be technically savvy. Although, the upcoming Windows 8.1 release (free) is supposed to be including tutorials to help introduce people to the newer aspects of the OS.
EDIT:
Check the encoding benchmark thread in the CPU forum. All of the Linux users post higher scores than the Windows users that have the same hardware.
That's what OpenGL, OpenAL, and OpenCL is for. Or you can do it the easy way and use SDL. Then you have Windows, Linux Mac OSX support in one fell swoop.Agreed, Windows 8 was a collection of bad ideas, but that doesn't make Linux a viable alternative for gaming. Someone will have to develop the equivalent of DirectX.
Same support as Windows when it comes to gaming hardware from the big players.Someone will have to develop and/or test the drivers needed by a plethora of new hardware each month, and coordinate them with the hardware manufacturers and.
Not true. The game is compiled once by the developer the same way it is done in windows.And developers certainly aren't going to start distributing their games to be compiled for each possible version of Linux.
Valve isn't going to do any coding.It's possible that Valve is going to do all this coding, AND give it away for free, but unless Valve also establishes a hard set of specs then gamers would still be limited to just Valve's flavor or be faced with a lot of work to run serious games. And even Valve can't afford to give it away forever, so logic dictates that eventually Valvux (Steamux?) won't be a free alternative, merely another paid alternative.
You obviously have not paid attention to all the humble bundles with Linux support.Then there's the Linux mindset. People who insist that their OS should be free and their productivity software should be free probably aren't going to be copacetic with paying $50 - $60 for a game.
Seeing that if Java disappears tomorrow the world will cease to function, it's not a bad place to be.If Valve can make this work, more power to them. Personally I don't see Linux being "the" future of gaming any more than was Java.
All the apps listed are Linux versions? I can download my Logitech keyboard program? Does Linux have Skype, vent, and mumble? Does Linux have Spotify? I use those programs daily, and more so when I game. I also need audio drivers that allow me to separate my USB headphones from my PC speakers.
You're right though, I haven't used Linux in awhile. It was a mess when I did and the community was the most abrasive group of neckbeards I'd met outside of UO.
Eh, that first fault isn't really Microsoft's problem. It was the cheap OEMs pumping out computers with 512MB of RAM that had a hell of a time running the OS. Microsoft's fault was that they didn't give NVIDIA and ATi enough time to develop drivers around the new WDDM model. Vista was not that pleasant for me with my GeForce 8800GTX.