Valve: Linux Better Than Windows 8 for Gaming 768
dartttt writes "In a presentation at Ubuntu Developer Summit currently going on in Denmark, Drew Bliss from Valve said that Linux is more viable than Windows 8 for gaming. Windows 8 ships with its own app store and it is not an open platform anymore and Linux has everything they need: good OpenGL, pulseaudio, OpenAL and input support."
no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Funny)
He's just angry that Windows Marketplace is going to cut into his donut funds.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Informative)
There could be technical reasons too - porting their games to Linux showed a massive performance increase over the Windows version. And that's without having spent the months/years tuning the Linux version that had been done on the Windows one.
http://games.slashdot.org/story/12/08/02/1738229/is-it-time-for-an-opengl-gaming-revolution
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Interesting)
If a 3.8% advantage is "massive", what words do you reserve for things that have advantages/improvements on the order of 50%+?
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Informative)
If a 3.8% advantage is "massive", what words do you reserve for things that have advantages/improvements on the order of 50%+?
That's 3.8% after Valve improved the OpenGL version using what they'd learned from Linux. It's 20% going from DirectX Windows to OpenGL Linux. That's pretty close to massive, considering the vast amounts of work and money MS has poured into developing DirectX and Windows in general.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This says little about linux being better then windows.
It says a lot about valve optimizing it's graphics engine.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Informative)
Not really. Most games that are a decade old or less almost always show improvements over framerate using OGL/OAL vs DX, this included the experimental OGL APIs for these engines.
This is because D3D is CPU-bound whereas OGL is GPU-bound (and only barely CPU bound since the CPU sends all the stuff to the GPU.)
This has been demonstrated with various wrappers/native implementations from PC-primary games to emulators. Starting from Unreal Tournament GOTY '99 through most iDTech engines and the latest Unreal engines, and also Torque3D.
Plain and simple, direct to hardware (Open*L) is faster than CPU-to-hardware (DirectX)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Insightful)
No surprise there. The same applies to many different areas where Linux is way more efficient than Windows is. Everybody knows Windows is bloated beyond comprehension. I use Linux for my primary machine, and also use Windows machines daily and in comparison the Linux desktop smokes Windows. Everything from data processing, running virtual machines, LAN performance, you name it. Windows has a monopoly and since it has close to 90% of the market, software companies will continue to develop for it. If Linux had more market share, more companies would develop commercial software for it. So, even though Windows has a majority of the market share, it is definitely not the best OS. It's simply the most popular OS, for now.
Until Linux stops all their internal bickering and decides on one native standard for all gaming they will never been seen as better. The reason Microsoft dominates is because they standardized the market on Directx. Write once, work on all. For Linux it's not that easy yet and 3% performance doesn't outweigh the headaches.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Interesting)
No surprise there. The same applies to many different areas where Linux is way more efficient than Windows is. Everybody knows Windows is bloated beyond comprehension. I use Linux for my primary machine, and also use Windows machines daily and in comparison the Linux desktop smokes Windows. Everything from data processing, running virtual machines, LAN performance, you name it. Windows has a monopoly and since it has close to 90% of the market, software companies will continue to develop for it. If Linux had more market share, more companies would develop commercial software for it. So, even though Windows has a majority of the market share, it is definitely not the best OS. It's simply the most popular OS, for now.
Until Linux stops all their internal bickering and decides on one native standard for all gaming they will never been seen as better. The reason Microsoft dominates is because they standardized the market on Directx. Write once, work on all. For Linux it's not that easy yet and 3% performance doesn't outweigh the headaches.
Agree with both, but once Valve decides to bring Steam to the Linux party and get most of the games library working then two things happen:
1: one of the major reasons (if not *the* major reason) for using Windows at home disappears: gaming.
2: the Linux development community can go on bickering all they want, but unless their proposed solutions are compatible with what Valve are building Steam on they'll be irrelevant as no-one will use them. Steam will effectively create the standard.
Linux is simply better code and a better architecture than Windows, as it should be; it's had developers calling the shots not commercial managers. So it's not at all surprising that it will run stuff faster than Windows. I suspect a LOT faster once there's been a few iterations.
Interesting times :)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pragmatism is unpragmatic in the long term. It seems I need to remind you how many times people have dissmissed free software and its ideals or have declared RMS alunatic paranoid just to be proven wrong again and again. I remind you that 20 years ago people were declaring free software imposible, 15 years ago, free software was dying, 10 years ago it was never going mainstream, 5 years ago it was a fad, now it's not going to last. Please, stop.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? there is one input model for Linux (plenty of libraries to access it), OpenAL (which is now recommended by Microsoft), OpenGL (which has been there forever), standard networking etc.
I'm writing a modern jet combat flight simulator and use Java, JInput, JoGL etc etc and find I can run on Windows, Linux and Mac with vary little customization for each platform required (just a little for the GLSL implementation differences for Nvidia vs ATI on each platform). Linux is less hassle than Windows in many respects and I get better performance too (just like Valve) do. Java 1.6 U10 and later also kick ass for performance (I sit there with the JDK's JVisualVM and watch what goes on in real-time; this is an awesome [free!] tool).
We cross-platform devs have been trying to tell the DirectX guys for ages that it is completely possible to write cross-platform games for *less* effort than it is to write around the MS APIs (due to their cruft and version churn). However, the MS devs don't listen, won't listen and when they do finally listen they resist for ages.
So, even though Windows has a majority of the market share, it is definitely not the best OS. It's simply the most popular OS, for now.
Windows is the most popular *desktop* OS, this is true. However, it is not dominant on the server (eg enterprise and web serving spaces), consoles (PS3 and XBox are fairly even) or mobile devices (where the revenue growth is; Android [which is a customized Java+Linux]) has installs of 1.3 million new devices *each day*.
So, it makes economic sense to develop for Windows if you could only develop for one platform exclusively. However, if you are smart you can develop cross-platform applications that work on Windows *and* Linux *and* Mac *and* Android *and* PS3 without too much hassle (Xbox and iOS are kinda in siloes). The economics has been against developing for Windows only. The smart money has always been using the right tools to do cross-platform work. That way, when the IT landscape changes (eg. the advent of mobile, and one day whatever becomes the new hotness) your code will be able to quickly ported to the new platform. All because you chose the strategic (cross-platform) over the tactical (eg. DirectX ease of use but Windows-only).
Here's a case study I like to quote of someone who chose cross-platform technologies which allowed him to personally make $US 3.5 million dollars when the IPad and iPhone came out. He says if he had put himself in the Microsoft straightjacket with DirectX then he couldn't have done this (and this is why DirectX was invented, to keep you on Windows, and that has been a very successful strategy so far for MS, but it about to marginalize them in the coming heterogenous computing world):
http://techhaze.com/2010/03/interview-with-x-plane-creator-austin-meyer/ [techhaze.com]
Hopefully this is a bit informative for you, and why the "develop for Windows only" mentality is wrong (and in fact has always been wrong; it suits Microsoft's purposes to keep you on the desktop, not the game developers who needs to adapt to future trends). Now here I have to give credit to the *new* Microsoft, they finally seemed to have grokked that there are other platforms out there and are starting to play nicely. This is very very good, but there is still a lot of MS stuff from the bad old days to be overcome (including indoctrination of its users, such as your mistaking Windows desktop popularity as a reason to develop using Windows-only technology :) ).
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Informative)
If people would stop referring to "Linux" as if it could have "internal bickering" like it were a single, homogenous company we'd be better off.
The reason Microsoft dominates gaming on the PC is because they dominate PC operating systems as a whole and pushed their proprietary DirectX down everyone's throat.
That's why they're exclusively targeting an Ubuntu LTS release. Most popular Linux platform with the least amount of pain, and 4 years of stability.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone remembers Kylix (Borland Delphi for Linux)?
It was a great project but almost no one obtained or used it. It cost perhaps millions for Borland to develop and the cost (along with the unsuccessful Borland Java Builder) made Borland almost bankrupt.
I had the pleasure of using Kylix, but who else cares?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
did Delphi do better on Windows ?
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Informative)
It was quite successfull till Microsoft bought Anders Hejlsberg from Borland to develop .Net. Delphi never recovered from that loss.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Insightful)
And Kylix was Borland's Hail Mary shot as Delphi was spiralling down the drain. What's worse, it wasn't native linux, but a kludge of QT and Wine, and yet still didn't provide backwards compatability to Delphi.
Kylix didn't fail because it was for linux. Kylix was doomed from the start because it was a hastily put together lifeboat from the sinking ship of Delphi.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He's just angry that Windows Marketplace is going to cut into his donut funds.
Sure, but he's also saying the truth.
Microsoft will obsolete sooner or later the win32 api and then the only way to install software will be through Microsoft's app store (onle Metro apps for you suckers).
How do you know this? You're talking about Microsoft strategy that isn't in their best interest. The only point to using Windows is that it has that several-decade compatibility. Why would they remove the last compelling reason to use Windows? And even if you think they're ok with shooting themselves in the foot, why do you think computer manufacturers will stand for letting Microsoft removing functionality which would in turn kill sales. They'd sooner create custom Linux distributions built heavily around
Re: (Score:3)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Interesting)
install software will be through Microsoft's app store
I've been hearing people say this, but it just makes no sense in any way whatsoever. Windows still has a desktop job to do, and it's a big enough market that there's no way they'll ignore it. Where is data to back up with mythical beast of a rumor?
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:4, Informative)
As far as I can tell, non-metro apps (that is, regular old programs) will still be available by whatever means you prefer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've heard this "year of the Linux desktop" used quite a bit, but never really from actual Linux users boasting. Normally I hear it from people looking to mock Linux users. I have to say since I gave up using windows in 2010 and moved to Ubuntu and Linux Mint, I've notice a lot more people using variations of Linux. I mean since I've made the switch, my Wife and in-laws have made the switch at my suggestion over buying brand new computers. My father and several cousins and friends I can think of have also made the switch, but I had nothing to do with them switching.
Maybe there won't be defined "This year is the year of the Linux desktop.", but I think it is and will continue to catch on.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Interesting)
Originally I bought a Windows XP laptop that came with a free Vista upgrade, I should have stuck with XP. After the upgrade I started having all kinds of issues with drivers and blue screens, despite the fact that my laptop had a "Vista Ready" sticker on it. So I duel booted with Ubuntu 9.xx for a while, then eventually put the Windows 7 developers preview on. After the preview ran out and MS locked the OS I switched to Linux Mint and just forced myself to use it. After a few months I really felt I had a handle on it and Linux Mint was working way better than windows ever had for me. Then my brother and sister convinced me to start a Minecraft server and I found I could run the server or actually use the machine, but not both. The laptop was going on five years old at that point so I bought a new laptop from System 76 that came preloaded Ubuntu 12.04. So now my old Linux Mint laptop is a Mincraft/Meda server and my new laptop is for work and games.
What I found was when I was conformable doing things a certain way it was difficult to get away from Windows because I ended up having to relearn a bunch of stuff or just boot windows and get it done. Once I finally said, "Ok, no more Windows period" it was darker for awhile, but then everything got a lot easier. Now I use Linux for everything and find that windows doesn't have the tools in place to get things done.
Re:no more donuts for Gabe... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you can't figure Linux out, you are probably not a Windows power user.
I've never been trained in using Linux, and I would probably not consider myself a Windows "power user" (insofar as I define it as someone who knows more than how to navigate menus and a little bit of CLI stuff). Yet when I installed Linux for the first time a few years ago (Ubuntu, probably around 2006), I picked it up no problem. Since then, I've experienced a hand full of the usual Linux gripes around hardware and drivers, but it's basically been no more painful than my life running Windows (which I still do- this is posted from a Win7 machine).
I mean, what the hell is stopping you? Assuming you don't have a huge problem with hardware compatibility (which can always ruin your day, but then it did with Vista too), what else is different? The file system structure is arranged differently, but it's not that confusing, and especially not if you intend to make liberal use of search instead of finding everything by hand (I always use the Win7 search facility these days- I can't remember the last time I descended into the file tree to search for something by hand). Installing programmes is easier than in Windows (just go to the Software Centre, use apt-get, or download the package from a website and double click it). If you use the CLI then you'll need to learn a new set of commands, but all you really need to know is "man" and "man -k", and the rest is at your finger tips- surely not that hard for a "power user"?
Maybe you need to use programmes that are only available in Windows (games are the main reason I keep Win7 boxes around at the moment), or you've bought hardware that won't play nice with Linux. They're both valid reasons not to switch. But general usability? Get real.
Re: (Score:3)
The difficulty of installing and using Linux has been vastly overstated for 7-8 years now. The biggest hurdles have been Office software (solved), IE lock in (solved), games and the fact th
If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Interesting)
My TI82 is better for games than my typewriter.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
It's quite likely that Steam could make Linux (Ubuntu, at least) viable for games. There's nothing inherently "good" about Windows for games other than the monopoly that Microsoft rides on.
Re: (Score:3)
It's quite likely that Steam could make Linux (Ubuntu, at least) viable for games. There's nothing inherently "good" about Windows for games other than the monopoly that Microsoft rides on.
Who knows, in a few years it could happen. It'll take some other big names getting onboard. Right now it's just valve and maybe some small fries. EA comes to mind. But they won't use steam because they have their own competing product. Valve will have to attract some other big companies to distribute games via steam to make this really work.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but the problem as I see it is to get the game publishing companies on board. If Valve can make it easier for them to port games over and perhaps kick off some sweet deals on some popular titles it would bring people over. I only run windows for games. No other reason I would ditch windows in a heartbeat for a good alternative.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Informative)
The mere fact that Valve has a slot on the Ubuntu Developer Summit should have been a clue that they are actually working on supporting Linux. While rumours about this have existed for years we our now beyond the rumour stage. Valve does not try to hide it. In fact you can register for their beta-program right now.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
They know that microsoft know how important gaming is long term.
they also know how much more leverage they have if they ever need to negotiate with microsoft if there's alternative systems.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
In the long-term they will be better suited for fixes bugs and providing better hardware support.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:5, Informative)
Thank you for mentioning this without actually linking to the survey [valvesoftware.com]. I don't want a flood of Slashdotters lowering my chances of getting in the beta early.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It's all fluff. Developers still have no reason to migrate to Linux. It's not going to be as if, "OMG Win 8 is the new Windows platform so we need to Linux!" No, there's going to be plenty of gamers who are still running Win 7 (and possibly even Win XP) machines that are running perfectly fine for them. Developers won't alienate the base so it's fully a matter of if they're going to commit resources to make the game viable on Linux.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:4, Informative)
Uh, Linux hasn't been bad at sound for at least like 3 years now. I haven't even had any problems with high-end creative cards.
Even before that it was just some configuration was needed. Now its just plug and play.
Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts (Score:4, Funny)
Your rants are a bit... dated. Come back when you've found your time machine.
Setting up a dual boot environment has, for the last 5 years at least, just been to tick the box in the installer. Sound just works since years back. The most popular Linux distribution has removed pretty much all options with regards to "tweaking". In fact, that's their whole point, and why they are the most popular.
Re: (Score:3)
You can already participate to the open beta, isn't that real enough for you?
http://www.valvesoftware.com/linuxsurvey.php [valvesoftware.com]
Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Finally (Score:5, Interesting)
The only reason I can see for hating Metro (besides the "walled garden" thing, which is a MAJOR turn-off) is that you're still navigating the start menu folders with your mouse. After about 5 minutes, I thought I'd try hitting the Start key and typing a program name, as you can in Win7; It worked exactly as I expected; List of apps with the same name, then other shortcuts in other areas, then files.
If your biggest issue with Windows 8 is the UI, then at least have a good go at using it. It took me around an hour to get used to it, and I've been a point-and-click Windows user since MSDOS 4. I reserve judgement about the rest of the "features".
Re:Finally (Score:5, Interesting)
The only thing tying a lot of people (myself included) to Windows is gaming.
A lot? According to this interview with Ubisoft representatives, only 7% of Ubi's 2011 revenue was generated on PC and 5% of Activision's revenue:
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/09/05/ubisoft-drm-piracy-interview/ [rockpapershotgun.com]
That means that >90% of gaming happens on other platforms anyway (consoles, smartphones) and for those users gaming is not what's keeping them on Windows.
From my experience with Windows users, many have a completely irrational attachment to Windows. They use it because they "know" it and they don't want Linux because they "don't know" it, even though their Windows installations are full of crapware and they could be fooled by any random Linux distribution with a Windows-themed splash screen.
Re:Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Finally (Score:5, Interesting)
Admittedly, I am not a lot of people, but more than 90+% of my gaming happens on a PC, and I game *a lot*. I don't so much refuse to buy a console as much as I really just don't like them and have never bothered with one since the original Nintendo. It may have something to do with how much I like FPS games. I do have some games on my tablet or phone, but those get played only when I'm bored or I can't get to my PC.
I'm also a System Engineer who works 95% of the time in Linux. I don't have any irrational need to stick to Windows. I cannot play the games I want to play on Linux, and I refuse to bother with WINE just to make a point. I'm happy Valve is looking into this, but until there is some serious traction on Linux gaming and a few other areas on the desktop, I'm sticking with Windows for everything that doesn't require me to code or run a server on it. It's not great, but it's sufficient, whereas desktop Linux isn't even sufficient for my needs.
And the applications... I swear, I must keep downloading The GIMP or Open/Libre/Whatever Office every six months or so hoping that trying to use it doesn't make me claw my eyes out. I get that I'm used to a lot of the Windows crap, so that's part of it, but I've been using office and image tools since I bought a toaster Mac, and I still don't understand why I can go from Mac to Windows seamlessly, but for some reason, the Linux version of everything needs to be different. And it's not that I just use MS or Adobe apps either.
Anyway, still waiting anxiously for someone to figure out games and to a lesser extent, applications, so I can switch my Windows box to be a VM under my Linux box, instead of vice-versa.
You are kidding right? (Score:3)
Given that I need pixel perfect precision, why won't I just zoom with the scroll wheel on the mouse and keep my hand comfortably rested on the desk, instead of lifting it all the way up (and I got 3 30inch monitors) to touch my screen, then wipe it off finger marks and rest it again on the mouse?
As for rotating... you might be amazed at how often I have felt no need or desire to rotate anything whatsoever on a computer screen. I have however felt the need to hit small links, select text quickly and easily a
Re: (Score:3)
Fear... (Score:5, Interesting)
What I fear is that Valve will dive deep into Linux, and then suddenly realize that supporting software like steam and games on Linux may be a bit more challenging than they thought it would.
The myriad hardware types out there with myriad sets of less-than-optimal drivers might present myriad problems, even if Valve does master the video-card/opengl end of things. I know I get vastly different experiences with Ubuntu depending on if I install it on one desktop versus another versus my laptop. They all have their own sets of issues, and none of them are remotely perfect.
This whole affair with valve just reminds me of some computer user adopting a new platform with vim and vigor...and then realizing it's not all it's cracked up to be a few weeks or months later. I myself did this with mac, but it took a couple years for me to come to my senses, unfortunately.
There are MANY legitimate reasons why Linux on the desktop has not taken off. I fear that Valve just hasn't encountered the right set of those reasons yet.
Re:Fear... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Fear... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Fear... (Score:4, Interesting)
This may work if the real plan of Valve is to release a Linux based console having Steam. From there supporting Linux is a no brainer.
Re: (Score:3)
And this is somehow worse than Windows?
Seriously, I've seen an install on Windows 7 behave very differently between systems as well. Rock solid on one and willing to puke at the drop of a hat on another.
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously, I've seen an install on Windows 7 behave very differently between systems as well. Rock solid on one and willing to puke at the drop of a hat on another.
Plug a power supply tester into that badboy and run memtest86+ while you're at it...
Re:Fear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fear... (Score:4, Insightful)
They also know that it's likely the community will help support other distros if they can just get one working.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What I fear is that Valve will dive deep into Linux, and then suddenly realize that supporting software like steam and games on Linux may be a bit more challenging than they thought it would.
The myriad hardware types out there with myriad sets of less-than-optimal drivers might present myriad problems, even if Valve does master the video-card/opengl end of things. I know I get vastly different experiences with Ubuntu depending on if I install it on one desktop versus another versus my laptop. They all have their own sets of issues, and none of them are remotely perfect.
Linux has achieved feature-parity with Windows at last!
Longer, slightly less snarky explanation follows: if you seriously think this differentiates Linux from Windows in any way, you are completely mistaken. The situation with hardware and drivers on Windows is so dire that it is often necessary to install an older version of a driver just to play a game without it crapping. This has come up time and again even with nVidia hardware on Windows. They "fix" something so a new, important game works and your old
Re:Fear... (Score:4, Insightful)
I honestly don't understand this argument. Valve is perfectly within their rights to say "we intend to ONLY support certain hardware and software profiles for certain Steam-for-Linux profiles".
We all know they have limited resources, and gamers are already perfectly willing to shell out tons of money on specific hardware. If my webserver can't play L4D, I don't think I'll particularly care. Nor if my Android device isn't able to play all Steam games.
Being forced to install Pulseaudio or buy from a certain range of video cards might seem distasteful, but what are the alternatives? No Steam, or use another supported platform. I think I'll take the less expensive option, thank you.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The myriad hardware types out there with myriad sets of less-than-optimal drivers might present myriad problems
So you're saying the PC/Windows platform is a bitch. But what do you think about Linux?
Re:Fear... (Score:5, Interesting)
What I hope is that Valve expects this, and is taking a chance at martyrdom for the greater good of gamers.
While forking and customization is the heart and soul of Linux, the fragmentation is also its weakness. With a target market of "only people who think like I do", each new standard sees only minimal adoption and leads to having whole branches of inheritance that are incompatible with each other. Consider, for example, the schism between RPM and dpkg packages. Effectively, a new project must be packaged twice, placing extra burden on the developer, or as (one format and) source, placing the extra burden on (some) users.
What I see as being immensely useful to Linux overall is having a major altruistic push toward compatibility, and Valve appears to be positioning itself to help. Tongue-in-cheek, I'll call it the One True Platform. Certainly not the only option, but rather a lofty goal of certain compatibility standards to be met. Rather than having to support Linux in general, with the myriad variations, a developer can just offer support for "Steam on Linux", work through Steam (and, conveniently/profitably, Valve's engines) as a compatibility layer, and trust that everything will be fine.
In large part, this process has already been begun by Ubuntu making a simple distro that usually just works (in some fashion), so it can be the baseline recommendation for users, reducing the burden on new users. With Steam as a baseline for game development, the burden on developers is also reduced. All together, that makes a single market for hardware vendors to target, with a fairly low support burden, hopefully leading to more cooperation from vendors in the long run.
It's a tricky game for Valve, with only a few long-shot chances at major profits, but if it works, the benefit to the Linux community is enormous. In the mean time, Valve gets to play the knight in shining armor, saving FOSS-loving gamers from the tyranny of Microsoft, which also distracts from Steam's inherent nature as DRM.
Re:Fear... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure there will be some initial problems. Such as some drivers not being very good.
But with GPUs in particular, I guess Valve can get away with a few "recommended configurations". Such as NVidia cards with binary drivers. While those are not exactly in the spirit of FOSS, they may be a pragmatic way to get things started.
I'll be optimistic and say that some good things may come from Steam games running well on a few selected graphics cards. It would increase the pressure on other vendors to put some more effort in upgrading their Linux drivers.
Yeah, windows just works... (Score:3)
That is why when I installed steam recently for the first time, I encountered two errors, both with extensive user provided workarounds involving rebooting in special mode to get around rights issues. On perfectly normal PC with perfectly normal Windows 7 64 bit.
Companies like Valve maintain expensive banks of PC's just to test all the countless configurations possible and STILL fail to deal with all of them as the extensive work arounds available to deal with a INSTALLER show.
Compared with that, Linux is F
Just greed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 8 isn't had for gaming, it's just bad for Valve. Vale has wanted Steam to be a general App Store for a long while, and if regular plebes start using the Windows Marketplace, they'll lose that battle before they even begin. Valve's just concerned with their potential market being at risk.
Perhaps, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case, Valve's agenda is the lesser of two evils. Either MS gets their way and Linux desktops continue with the relatively sparse gaming library compared to Windows systems, or Valve gets their way and at least Linux gets a lot of the titles that were formerly Windows-only.
I'd rather a viable company scheme be one that operates within the structure of the general structure of Linux based desktops than requiring Windows or wine. Purists can still run their desktop with the same (or even better) selection of truly free software, and the rest of us can use a free desktop without compromising or dual boot to get at a few titles we really would enjoy.
Re:Just greed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't you be concerned if the vendor of the OS you're dependent on suddenly comes along and decides to push their own store with it? You end up like IE6, one dominant platform for the OS. And given that Microsoft has very obvious goals of deprecating Win32 in favor of WinRT, which requires software using it come from the store, yes Valve has every reason to be worried. As does every other software vendor out there, because this gives Microsoft an overwhelming amount of power, over both them and you.
Pushing to make Linux a viable platform is good for everyone.
Re: (Score:3)
Pushing to make Linux a viable platform is good for everyone.
I agree, but I cannot help but think it is a long shot:
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't you be concerned if the vendor of the OS you're dependent on suddenly comes along and decides to push their own store with it?
Ahem. [wikipedia.org] And Ubuntu seems to be the preferred target by Valve. So why does it matter that Windows 8 has an app store if Ubuntu has one too?
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't you be concerned if the vendor of the OS you're dependent on suddenly comes along and decides to push their own store with it?
Ahem. [wikipedia.org] And Ubuntu seems to be the preferred target by Valve. So why does it matter that Windows 8 has an app store if Ubuntu has one too?
Because on Ubuntu it's trivial to add a new app store -- and in fact it's easy to integrate your store into the Ubuntu store, at least from the user's perspective. Or you can put your own UI on it. Whatever. Running a system with multiple apt repositories has worked just fine for almost 20 years.
Not an open platform? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not an open platform? (Score:5, Insightful)
WinRT is not open at all, and Microsoft intends on deprecating Win32 in favor of it. I imagine it won't happen until Windows 9, but eventually the newest version of DirectX will require use of WinRT (probably WinRT 2.0 when they iron out the last of the Win32 dependencies) at which point Microsoft will move to close off the openness of the PC completely, reserving Win32 access and whatnot to "legacy VMs" and "Enterprise" platforms.
And it's not really fair to call it "competition" when the store is pushed by the company whose OS holds a monopoly in the market it'll be pushed on.
Re: (Score:3)
>(probably WinRT 2.0 when they iron out the last of the Win32 dependencies)
Will that even happen? Right now, WinRT seems to be built 100% on top of Win32...
Re: (Score:3)
LOL, MS trying to push everyone to WinRT will have the same result as Intel trying to push everyone to Itanic, they'll spend billions into trying to develop a market for a product nobody wants and end up eating crow. The only reason the market puts up with Intel and Microsoft is that they have the ubiquitous platform that supports a several decade long legacy train, without support for all that legacy software you're suddenly opened up to alternatives and the Wintel rent seekers are not at the top of anyone
Re:Not an open platform? (Score:5, Interesting)
I didn't say Windows RT, I said WinRT. If you're confused, it's because Microsoft is masterful at making stupidly confusing names for things.
WinRT is the new API introduced with Windows 8 and Windows RT. It is available on both, and on Windows RT it is the only API available for 3rd party developers. It is locked down on both Windows 8 and Windows RT.
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed, I had no issue with Steam in Windows 8. Valve simply doesn't want competition; they seemed to have no issue using MacOS with its app store.
Apps in the Mac App Store are not given access to APIs that applications loaded from the internet or from disks are not. With the Windows store, it is a requirement to pay MS if your application is going to have access to the APIs necessary to use the touchscreen interface, etc. with the native functionality. Additionally, Apple does not have any sort of undue influence on the desktop OS application market so vendors selling applications are not beholden to Apple. They can just say, "Apple, you make the OS
If Valve says so many will listen (Score:5, Insightful)
Valve is one of the most influential companies in the gaming world. If they speak people will listen.
This single statement will cause thousands of gamers to check out Linux.
This is a market that is willing to spend hundreds of dollars and hours of tweaking to gain a few percent more performance. Any rumour about a better system will cause a flood of gamers that want to be the first to get the advantage.
Re:If Valve says so many will listen (Score:5, Informative)
This is a market that is willing to spend hundreds of dollars and hours of tweaking to gain a few percent more performance.
Umm, no. Check out Steam's hardware survey sometime. The most common CPU speed is ~2.5ghz and the most common number of cores is 2. There is definitely an enthusiast gaming market, but Valve isnt really serving it. Valve is serving what is essentially everyone (at the moment.)
Re: (Score:3)
Last time I checked graphics performance was more dependent on the discrete graphics card performance than on cpu power.
If you bothered to look at their hardware survey, you would have noticed that the most common GPU isnt in a discrete graphics card either. The most common GPU is the Intel HD 3000.
So much for Valve serving the performance enthusiasts.
Trivial! (Score:3)
Maybe Unless specifically designed to be the other way around.
better than Windows 8 for (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem with Windows 8 is that it isn't the best choice for anything anymore. Want to run old Windows apps? Want to run old games? Want to develop new games (as in TFA)? Want to run current Windows apps? Want a tested, stable Windows platform? Want a minimal hardware Windows platform? Whatever your question, there are better alternatives than Windows 8. Microsoft has really dug themselves into a deep hole at the moment...and the implications for the future are breathtaking.
Re: (Score:3)
GP didn't even mention Linux. Many of the questions in his post are answered by "Perhaps a Windows, but not Windows 8," as he apparently too subtly implied.
The point seems to be that Windows 8 is never the best solution, whatever your problem is. Even you are ranting about how wonderful Windows 7 is. Why the hell would anybody want Windows 8 then?
Please Clarify (Score:3)
Valve wants to be the Linux App Store (Score:4, Informative)
Steam is already an effective and popular app store on Windows. And they hope to become the proprietary app store on Linux. That's why Valve is so dead against Windows 8 - Microsoft could take away their status as the app store.
Hmmm... ValveOS? SteamOS? (Score:5, Interesting)
Roll another Debian-a-like, tailor it to games, market it through Steam to Windows users and say "Why update to Windows 8? Here's a free OS. Live boot it and see if you like it."
Disclaimer: the author is tired of keeping a creaking XP partition going just for Steam, and would bite their hand off to get in on a beta and help out.
Argument from fallacy: Win 8 IS an open platform. (Score:3)
What the fuck are you talking about? I'm running windows 8 right now with with your piece of shit bloatware steam running constantly in the background. If that's not an open platform maybe I don't understand what an open platform is. Just because MS has a program exactly like your program, but not as intrusive, you have to go around name calling? I'm not a fan of the Win8 market program, and I'll most likely never use it, but that doesn't "close" the OS. The OS works just like every other windows OS. You can install still anything you like on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Last time I checked, IE6 was the reason people stopped using IE. It's was never a monopoly, and it should have never been even accused of being one. I'm curious, without IEx how you would even go about getting another browser? Thank goodness it's on there or how would you ever even replace it!
Re: (Score:3)
WinRT is the new API that was introduced with Windows 8 and Windows RT. WinRT is locked down on all platforms. I have to keep reiterating this to enraged Microsoft fanboys because they miss it every time.
Why does everyone keep harping on Windows8 gaming? (Score:4, Informative)
It is pretty much identical to Windows 7's gaming performance, with some minor exceptions (which will likely be fixed with driver updates or game patches over time). Don't just take my word for it either, check out the conclusion to this article from TomsHardware:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-gaming-performance,3331-13.html [tomshardware.com]
Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Now, Microsoft is focussing on providing a strongly-preferred application distribution system for Windows and extracting a share of the revenues that go to application distributors (on top of what it already gets from them by charging for dev tools, and from the fact that application distributors who target Windows preferentially are what drives demand for Windows and enables Microsoft to sell it at the prices it d
Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? (Score:5, Informative)
I was there for the talk. He didn't really say that "Linux is better for gaming." Given the current user base, state of drivers and various flux in the stack, nobody in their right mind would say such a thing.
What he did say is that Ubuntu is an "open platform." Not really the same thing as "better," unless you're a writer at an Ubuntu fanboy site.
Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except the fact that getting bluetooth mouse/keyboard to work is a huge pain unless you buy one of the specifically linux supported bluetooth sets, but I pick my hardware based on quality/price, not OS support because I shouldn't have to (and don't with windows).
Yes, open is great, but until every hardware company is ensuring a simple fully functional driver for their devices on it and there is a common interface for software to all of those drivers ala directX/directSound, windows will be a better gaming platform even for linux enthusiasts. Unfortunate, as all the software stacks that do exist for linux tend to outperform windows by a fair margin, because of significantly better OS architecture.
Simply put, it's a problem of robustness and consistency. When I want to shoot zombies I don't want to have to restart my sound system or HID system and re-enter pin codes and set defaults again, nor do I want to spend weeks configuring and scripting auto-configuration setup for such a thing. So it's a waste of game developers time to try and target linux when they live a crunch-mode life as it is with huge risk of flop resulting in practically no money-back for the effort even when they're focussed on only one OS.
Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? (Score:5, Funny)
Come on, don't you miss the good ol' days of DOS gaming?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Guess they don't want to succeed (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, therefore they should not ever try to support Linux.
Good, they don't have to. They can continue to run Windows 7 or install and use Steam on Windows 8. But we'll probably be forced to make a decision in Windows 9.
Good to see people are still wholly ignorant about what Valve is doing.
permanently adding third-party PPAs (Score:3)
And as long as you don't need HD full screen video cutscenes.
For one thing, since when does 1080p video not work on a PC? I thought even YouTube got that to work. For another, a lot of games especially from Valve do cut scenes with the game engine, so if the game works in 1080p, so do the cut scenes.
Ubuntu has an app store too
Unlike Windows RT and the WinRT environment of Windows 8, Ubuntu does not prohibit home users from permanently adding third-party PPAs.
Re:But the APIs? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's no good gaming APIs to use. Where is the DirectX equivalent?
Developers have had no trouble with OpenGL on iOS and Android. Why would PCs be different? Direct3D benefits Microsoft due to lock-in, but I have a hard time seeing how its use benefits developers. And even Microsoft's usual advantage of legacy compatibility isn't really an issue here, since the market for Doom clones and WoW clones (the only PC games that the gamer crowd cares about as far as I can tell) moves so fast that everything is being rewritten every year anyway.
Linux does have other problems with its graphic subsystem: the lack of open drivers for nVidia, the lack of any decent drivers for AMD/ATI, and most of all the 20 layers of legacy crap that the typical Linux desktop staggers beneath. But this has nothing to do with the underlying API for 3D games, which is clean and simple OpenGL.