Gabe Newell: "Linux is the future of gaming", announcements forthcoming

[mmntech]

Gabe's hatred of Windows 8 and the Windows Store might be jumping the gun a bit. However, I don't see why people are getting their panties in a bunch over his Linux plan.

If Valve can develop and push out a stable, user friendly, gaming centric distro more power to them. It's very doable. The real problem is getting decent driver support from hardware developers. That's always been the biggest problem with Linux. The ones from AMD and nVidia are complete garbage.

The other problem with Linux is it's difficult to monetize. There's little incentive for corporations to develop for it full time. Valve could change that since they're basically just expanding on their free platform. The money is made on software and hardware sales. Google has done a good job with this. Though by the same token, others have tried and failed.

 

[Skel]

Aside from gaming, I can do everything else I need on a simple Chromebook, heck even a Nexus 7 if I wanted. Gaming is 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.

To me the argument that I should buy 2-3 devices to do what one does really doesn't work for me. I shouldn't need another device like a Chromebook or Nexus to do what I already do with Windows. I don't disagree with Valve's approach of attempting to pull themselves out what the dependency on MS. I just don't see how as a consumer that does anything for me other than give me a way out of MS.

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.

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.

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.

The sad truth is unless other devs start programing for whatever it is Valve is putting out (is it a console, is it a PC OS, is it just pure awesomeness put in code form???) it's just going to be yet another gaming thing out there that has a audience of die hard Valve fans that'll buy whatever Valve puts out.

Microsoft has been failing so badly lately, and has so been anti-Windows gaming since the Xbox came out that I think Gabe may pull it off. It already has the MS worshipers scared and foaming at the mouth in their blind Linux hate.

I think you have it backwards.. It's the Anti-MS crowd that's pumping this thing up even though it's still unclear what the end product will be.

 

[Skel]

Gabe's hatred of Windows 8 and the Windows Store might be jumping the gun a bit. However, I don't see why people are getting their panties in a bunch over his Linux plan.

If Valve can develop and push out a stable, user friendly, gaming centric distro more power to them. It's very doable. The real problem is getting decent driver support from hardware developers. That's always been the biggest problem with Linux. The ones from AMD and nVidia are complete garbage.

The other problem with Linux is it's difficult to monetize. There's little incentive for corporations to develop for it full time. Valve could change that since they're basically just expanding on their free platform. The money is made on software and hardware sales. Google has done a good job with this. Though by the same token, others have tried and failed.

What free platform does Valve have? The Steam marketplace? I wouldn't consider that free as it's pretty pointless unless you buy games from it...

 

[HeXen]

If this ends up being limited to only their Steambox hardware and customized distro then might as well get a console. The point of PC gaming is gaming at it's best potential and playing again later with upgraded hardware, not buy a box and play at 720p medium/low settings. Likely the other distro's for actual PC's gets left up to the community to port Steambox's stuff to it with little to no official support when it comes to getting drivers..etc to work in say Debian or whatever assuming Valve gets NV/ATI support, it would likely be just for Steambox. However no matter how it goes, most users in general do not want to learn a new OS nor break away from the world of commercial software.

What free platform does Valve have? The Steam marketplace? I wouldn't consider that free as it's pretty pointless unless you buy games from it...

There are a lot of free games on there.

 

[Genx87]

Does Android count in his vision of the future for Linux\unix?

 

[Bateluer]

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.

No love for OpenGL?

Seriously though, Valve doesn't have to develop their own Linux distro. They've already made a Steam client for Linux, giving visibility to the platform and overcoming one of the major hurdles in Linux gaming. Next step will be to get OEMs to take their Linux drivers seriously, and not just AMD/Nvidia.

 

[Jodell88]

If this ends up being limited to only their Steambox hardware and customized distro then might as well get a console. The point of PC gaming is gaming at it's best potential and playing again later with upgraded hardware, not buy a box and play at 720p medium/low settings. Likely the other distro's for actual PC's gets left up to the community to port Steambox's stuff to it with little to no official support when it comes to getting drivers..etc to work in say Debian or whatever assuming Valve gets NV/ATI support, it would likely be just for Steambox. However no matter how it goes, most users in general do not want to learn a new OS nor break away from the world of commercial software.

I'm a bit unsure about what you're trying to say here. Nvidia and AMD have been supporting Linux for years.

 

[Jodell88]

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.

Logitech has no official Linux support but the community handles that for you (I'll check to make sure). There's Skype for Linux (buggiest software I've ever used), mumble, Teamspeak3. There isn't client version Ventrillo (server only ). Clementine has spotify support AFAIK (there's a Windows version if you'll like to try it). Pulse Audio should enable you to seperate your USB headphones from your PC speakers.

EDIT: There's an official Spotify app for linux.

 

[HeXen]

I'm a bit unsure about what you're trying to say here. Nvidia and AMD have been supporting Linux for years.

Not very well. I'm saying if Valve got both companies to issue specific support for steambox outside of just what they give Linux.
Everyone is aware that their Linux support is not the same as their support for Windows.

 

[mmntech]

What free platform does Valve have? The Steam marketplace? I wouldn't consider that free as it's pretty pointless unless you buy games from it...

Steam itself is a free platform and there is more to it than just buying stuff. Not like XBL where you have to pay for the privilege just to use the web browser.

 

[BrightCandle]

Linux isn't really viable as a gaming platform because of its driver model. The requirement from the Kernel developers to have the driver source code embedded into the Kernel or GTFO largely means that AMD and Nvidia don't put massive amounts of investment towards the platform. They don't want to share how their drivers do things and they intend to keep those a secret. Conversely the Kernel developers don't want to be getting bug reports in the kernel due to buggy drivers that they have no control over.

Ultimately a customised version of Linux with good drivers designed for gaming might actually be very good in the future. But a lot of things need to change to make it a reality.

 

[Skel]

Steam itself is a free platform and there is more to it than just buying stuff. Not like XBL where you have to pay for the privilege just to use the web browser.

Such as? I'm the first person to tell you that I don't really use Steam outside of booting up games, so I'm honestly wondering what more there is to it. Outside of being a digital marketplace that has low bothersome DRM I don't see what else it does that's so amazing. HeXen mentioned free games but are those Valve's games or just games that it's pushing via it's marketplace that happens to be free because the devs wanted it that way?

As for the XBL stuff, I'm not interested in a blow by blow on why Steam is better than XBL. I could give two shits on what MS is doing on a console when I'm talking about PC operating systems.

 

[TheSlamma]

You seem to be missing the point - I would expect that's exactly what a Steam Box would be - a standardized set of hardware. People aren't going to stand for a standardized piece of hardware that can play games? Quick, someone contact the millions of game console owners.

I'm not saying it's guaranteed to succeed - far from it. But this objection doesn't make sense to me.

Those millions of game console owners are not going to be interested unless it says PlayStation or Xbox, especially for the rumored price points they have talked about for the Steam box. Valves best bet is to stay as the main vehicle for today's PC gamer.

These companies that want to get their hands into everything always spread themselves too thin and then the product becomes junk. Stick to what you do best and try to be the best at it.

 

[gorobei]

Linux isn't really viable as a gaming platform because of its driver model. The requirement from the Kernel developers to have the driver source code embedded into the Kernel or GTFO largely means that AMD and Nvidia don't put massive amounts of investment towards the platform. They don't want to share how their drivers do things and they intend to keep those a secret. Conversely the Kernel developers don't want to be getting bug reports in the kernel due to buggy drivers that they have no control over.

Ultimately a customised version of Linux with good drivers designed for gaming might actually be very good in the future. But a lot of things need to change to make it a reality.

has intel been any more open about their video drivers? they tend to not to have that much invested in their graphic IP.

 

[werepossum]

No love for OpenGL?

Seriously though, Valve doesn't have to develop their own Linux distro. They've already made a Steam client for Linux, giving visibility to the platform and overcoming one of the major hurdles in Linux gaming. Next step will be to get OEMs to take their Linux drivers seriously, and not just AMD/Nvidia.

Nope. As for the drivers, I think BrightCandle has nailed that issue. It isn't a matter of visibility or client, but a matter of basic architecture. The bleeding edge is and always will be proprietary. Linux does not do proprietary well. Casual gaming, sure. Hard core gaming to compete with Windows, no, not without huge restructuring.

I don't have hard numbers but I'm guessing that those for whom a $100 OS is a deal breaker don't fund a lot of game development.

 

[Blitzvogel]

While I would hope that Valve always supports Windows, OSX, and Linux, the best way for Valve to truly customize their software environment on open hardware is with a Linux distro of their own. If devs get on the OpenGL and Linux bandwagon that Valve so desperately desires, then a Steam Linux would make complete sense and further encourage OpenGL/Linux development across the Linux world. Theoretically, the default shell should be directly modeled off of Steam big picture mode but with a secondary "power user" interface for navigating specific files, modding, etc.

My main concern is Valve actively controlling the bloat that comes with add-ons and secondary apps to support the OS (chat, internet browsing, media). I can totally see different reasons for different PCs having Windows or Steam Linux or both. The preference of choice is nice, and the added performance gains that might come with a Steam Linux would be a big plus.

 

[sweenish]

It's all very funny, open gaming, open system, linux, linux, linux.

All this hyperbole to get people to embrace his closed system on the open systems.

It'll be interesting to see this play out, and I'm waiting for the "big" announcement so I can let people know that the Xbox One wasn't any different.

 

[imaheadcase]

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.

If EA, MS, Ubisoft, Activision, Bank of America, etc comes out and says something: nobody listens because we know they are full of crap. However, if Lord Gabe says something, all the moron Valve fanboys froth at the mouth to anyone who sees just how full of crap he is.

No win 8 sucks because it does not offer anything over win 7 but GUI improvements. Win 8 might as well been called Win 7 Themes.

Yah but anyways Linux won't be anything for gaming, it has nothing to offer gamers.

 

[RandomFool]

I believe the end goal is you have a server that has all your games installed on it, and you will be able to stream those games to any device on your LAN. So any machine in your house can be your gaming rig be it the big desktop, the sleek ultrabook or your mobile phone.



The UI is important. In Windows 7 I can search for a program or file without having my entire screen taken away to a phone UI. I understand why that's needed on a tiny 4 inch screen, but it is absolutely not needed on a 24 inch monitor. That may be one thing, but it's something I use every single day on Windows multiple times so for me Metro is always popping up reminding me how awful it is on a standard keyboard and mouse computer.

The metro environment is more of a tablet/desktop hybrid UI than phone.

That said, I could see steambox with Big picture being nice for media PCs but it totally depends on price and game support. It's not going to replace my current Win8 PC anytime soon.

 

[RandomFool]

No win 8 sucks because it does not offer anything over win 7 but GUI improvements. Win 8 might as well been called Win 7 Themes.

Yah but anyways Linux won't be anything for gaming, it has nothing to offer gamers.

Did you blank out on the part that said "The better memory management? The more secure kernel? The better performance?"?

 

[Texashiker]

No win 8 sucks because it does not offer anything over win 7 but GUI improvements. Win 8 might as well been called Win 7 Themes.

For that matter, what has microsoft introduced new since windows 98?

XP and windows 7 has an improved memory manager, movie maker live, NTFS support, 64 bit operating system,,,, but it is not like microsoft has done anything revolutionary in the past decade.

64 bit os, so what? Linux had that years before microsoft.

NTFS support, NT had that in the mid-late 1990s.

There is no reason to buy a new interface every few years. As a user I was features, not a new gui.

~ EDIT ~

I am using windows 7 for the same thing I used windows 95 for - check my email, browse the web and play games. But for some reason windows 7 takes a gig of memory while windows 95 took 16 megs of memory.

 

[Arkaign]

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.

Brilliant post. Pretty much my experience, I put Win8 on my old SSDs, but use it only for testing for my ONE Win8 business client, who has since given up and moved back to Win7Pro.

No matter what anyone can try to say, Win8 is as big a flop as anything MS has done related to OS since Bob. And yes, I remember Bob.

 

[Arkaign]

No win 8 sucks because it does not offer anything over win 7 but GUI improvements. Win 8 might as well been called Win 7 Themes.

Yah but anyways Linux won't be anything for gaming, it has nothing to offer gamers.

It actually has some degradations in UI/GUI that were chosen because the hardware load is lower. For some reason, instead of letting you CHOOOSE Aero or No Aero (or just disabling the option on crappy tablets), they stripped it out entirely.

That's why it looks like Windows 3.1, and why they call that horrendous metro side 'modern' and shove you towards it at every opportunity. They're jealous of Apple and Google's app revenue, and are willing to sacrifice their desktop reputation to get it. Sadly for them, it's not happening. Something like 1:10000 apps purchased are on Win8/WP, the tablet/mobile market is locked up completely by the existing duopoly.

 

[imaheadcase]

Did you blank out on the part that said "The better memory management? The more secure kernel? The better performance?"?

None of that is really true though. In fact lots of "features" that win 8 offers is available 3rd party software for free.

 

[imaheadcase]

For that matter, what has microsoft introduced new since windows 98?

XP and windows 7 has an improved memory manager, movie maker live, NTFS support, 64 bit operating system,,,, but it is not like microsoft has done anything revolutionary in the past decade.

64 bit os, so what? Linux had that years before microsoft.

NTFS support, NT had that in the mid-late 1990s.

There is no reason to buy a new interface every few years. As a user I was features, not a new gui.

~ EDIT ~

I am using windows 7 for the same thing I used windows 95 for - check my email, browse the web and play games. But for some reason windows 7 takes a gig of memory while windows 95 took 16 megs of memory.

Don't forget how MS "forces" gamers to upgrade just because of DirectX. Conveniently a new DX version comes out when a big game is going to use it exclusively.