Valve says Linux is the future of Gaming

[Medius]

[exploited]

[Medius]

[Mr.Bill]

I use Linux every single day.. My laptop has Ubuntu 12.04 on it.. Desktop has 13.04.. I've used Linux off and on(mostly on) since 2007 or so.. Linux had it's chance to make noise when MS came out with Vista, Vista was a failure and unpopular the 1st day it was released.. But Linux/Ubuntu never made an inroad, mostly because of what was mentioned here earlier, hardware driver problems.

Too many headaches, too many problems, too much confusion with hardware drivers.. There's no way the general public will ever embraced an OS that they have to constantly 'tweak'.. It's better now.. 12.04 and 13.04 give me no problems.. But now? It's too late.

I also have a Chromebook.. Very lite, very fast, it's a slimmed down OS. Most gaming is done on-line.. .Actually it's probably Linux, or based on Linux.. The smaller, less top heavy OS's are probably the future.

[eric]

[exploited]

[Medius]

[exploited]

What makes you think you wouldn't be able to use Windows and a mouse/keyboard? Even if it ships with Linux, it can still run Windows. Even if it ships with Windows, it can still run Linux. The overlay function for playing games is fully capable of running on either OS, and there is no reason why gamers won't be able to choose a model with a particular OS and a particular level of sophistication.

You aren't getting the concept. You could do both of those things - Gabe had already said as much. The point of the product is to destroy the console market by stealing the concepts that make them great (size, ease of use, universality of games) while preserving all the things that make PC's great.

The actual functionality of consoles is playing games, watching media, accessing the internet and various apps. All of which can be done better with a PC.

The only differences you've pointed out prove the inferiority of the market division. It makes no sense to spend $399-499 on a PC you can't upgrade, with weaker functionality, and a crappy OS that cannot be changed, with a preselected control interface. A Steambox will provide all those capabilities, while preserving the universality of games, ease of use, etc.

At this point, you are arguing against the concept based on not wanting to be forced to use particular things despite the fact that you won't be forced to use them. Again, that makes no sense.

[Medius]

[exploited]

Oh I dunno. An OS built on Linux specifically for Steambox would be no different than an OS built for a PS4, other than being infinitely better and more customizable. And if you can't figure out how to use a keyboard and mouse on your couch, and wouldn't, that destroys your original point vis a vis controller interfaces.

Your prediction could be right, but frankly, it doesn't seem to be based on anything other than "I had a hard time with Linux, therefore it can't work." Which the success of Android seems to refute.

Nonetheless, time will tell. Done right, Steamboxes could destroy the console market. I'm personally hoping that is what happens, as consoles make no sense. I might also add that PS4 OS is simply a modified version of FreeBSD, another open source project very similar to Linux.

So yeah, not getting your argument at all.