The pros and cons of SteamOS (1 Viewer)

[Mycroft]

By now, many of you console and PC gamers have heard about the upcoming "SteamOS". This is Valve's attempt to break the stranglehold that MS has on gaming.

While I never have...and never will...game on a console and have no interest in anything to do with Linux, I'm all for competition. If it creates more innovation and lower prices.

The following article lists some pros and cons. I've quoted one of each that I consider most important.

Pro: It’s free. If you have a living room PC, or plan to build one, you can ditch Windows for free. That feels really good to say, but the adoption rate hinges on SteamOS launching with native support for everything we want in a media and gaming center. Streaming games from a secondary PC is neat, but we’d rather run them natively on the machine we paid to put in our living room. It also needs native Netflix and Hulu apps, and all the other media services offered by the consoles.

Valve says it’s got this covered, announcing that it’s “working with many of the media services you know and love,” and that “hundreds of great games are already running natively on SteamOS,” with native “AAA titles” to be announced in the coming weeks.

Con: It could further fragment games and smother certain genres. If SteamOS eclipses the popularity of desktop gaming, developers will have less incentive to develop desktop games. Just as developers rushed into mobile and Facebook development, we could see a flood of controller-based Steam games that push niche and classic-style PC games into the slums.

It’s a scary thought, but when we un-jerk our knees and really consider this scenario, it’s a very minor concern. Crowdfunding has proven without a doubt that there’s still a huge appetite for old fashioned mouse and keyboard PC games. The positive—and more likely—angle is that we’ll see just greater diversity in the Steam library.
The pros and cons of SteamOS | Editorial, News | PC Gamer

The majority of my gaming is online MMORPG stuff. I'm don't know if this SteamOS will be able to deal with that stuff. If it does, then I might take a second look.

What do you think?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I'm really looking forward to it. It could mean an era where console gamers and desktop gamers can finally play together. Consoles are just computers now so microsoft is the only reason they're not working together already.

 

[digsbe]

I mainly play MMORPGs as well so I'm not sure how this would benefit me. If they want to do it that's fine with me, but to me it only seems feasible if someone was only wanting to use their computer for gaming considering support for other programs would take a while.

 

[PeteEU]

By now, many of you console and PC gamers have heard about the upcoming "SteamOS".

It is stupid. It is Value being childish and panicky over Microsoft Store. The store is a threat to Value and its Steam brand, because it comes bundled with WIndows and is easier to access for users than Steam. And I bet that it could also be cheaper for users since Microsoft most likely wont charge the same prices as Value for being on their system.

This is Valve's attempt to break the stranglehold that MS has on gaming.

1) What strangle hold? Other than running the OS that some games run on.. Windows and XBox.. how can you account for iOS/Android games, PS4, Nintendo games and so on? Hardly a strangle hold.
2) By what.. creating one where they get the money for games bought on it?

While I never have...and never will...game on a console and have no interest in anything to do with Linux, I'm all for competition. If it creates more innovation and lower prices.

Doubt it. Prices are not exactly "cheap" on Steam and have in fact driven up prices. For example, one of my favourite games Football Manager series. Each year a new version and 2 years ago it was linked to Steam and the price went from 20 Euros to 40 Euros.

The majority of my gaming is online MMORPG stuff. I'm don't know if this SteamOS will be able to deal with that stuff. If it does, then I might take a second look.

What do you think

Most MMORPG games needs a keyboard, hence any console gaming system would need one.. and well why buy a console with limitations when you can get a PC with no limitations?

 

[Mycroft]

I see this as encouraging news: No secrets here: Nvidia outs itself as SteamOS collaborator | News | TechRadar

I expect AMD will jump in as well.

 

[obvious Child]

1) What strangle hold? Other than running the OS that some games run on.. Windows and XBox.. how can you account for iOS/Android games, PS4, Nintendo games and so on? Hardly a strangle hold

Because Gaben is predicting that Microsoft will go the way of iTunes. The only way to get software on to future Windows machines will be through the Windows Store. And that is a HUGE threat to Steam. He's not wrong. Itunes is a 2 billion dollar a year business. It's not that farfetched to think that Windows and OS are going that way seeing the success of mobile app stores.

 

[PeteEU]

Because Gaben is predicting that Microsoft will go the way of iTunes. The only way to get software on to future Windows machines will be through the Windows Store. And that is a HUGE threat to Steam. He's not wrong. Itunes is a 2 billion dollar a year business. It's not that farfetched to think that Windows and OS are going that way seeing the success of mobile app stores.

No doubt, but the difference is that Windows has always been open relative to OSX, which means Microsoft cant cut off competition, both legally but also practically. That will mean that Steam has a big head start and if they fail it will not be because of Microsoft, but their own incompetence.. which is ripe in the company.

 

[douglas]

I would consider it to be a good dual-boot option for my windows pc. I'm very curious as to whether or not it will even half way run non-steam games that might otherwise be made compatible with it's flavor of linux. I'd be all for it if it could also run windows games through some sort of steam-wine, but that would probably be alot worse than just running it through windows.

 

[PeteEU]

I would consider it to be a good dual-boot option for my windows pc. I'm very curious as to whether or not it will even half way run non-steam games that might otherwise be made compatible with it's flavor of linux. I'd be all for it if it could also run windows games through some sort of steam-wine, but that would probably be alot worse than just running it through windows.

So you would consider a closed OS a good thing? This might be based on linux, but it is utterly closed system as far as I can see. Valve want to corner the market pure and simple.

 

[douglas]

So you would consider a closed OS a good thing? This might be based on linux, but it is utterly closed system as far as I can see. Valve want to corner the market pure and simple.

The way I'm understanding it, they've already promised to keep it opensource. I like windows, it does everything I need, and I've never even thought of digging around in it's source code, even if it was available. If steamOS doesn't perform well, people won't use it. If it performs well, it shouldn't matter whether it's closed or not. I'm not certain how this would "corner the market", since there's dozens of DLC services now. It also isn't a physical service, so if a startup could serve us better, it wouldn't really require a massive amount of capital before they could start competing with steam. It's inherently difficult to corner any digital market, since it's digital.

 

[PeteEU]

The way I'm understanding it, they've already promised to keep it opensource. I like windows, it does everything I need, and I've never even thought of digging around in it's source code, even if it was available. If steamOS doesn't perform well, people won't use it. If it performs well, it shouldn't matter whether it's closed or not. I'm not certain how this would "corner the market", since there's dozens of DLC services now. It also isn't a physical service, so if a startup could serve us better, it wouldn't really require a massive amount of capital before they could start competing with steam. It's inherently difficult to corner any digital market, since it's digital.

First off about the open source thing.. I dont believe it for a minute. Valve has been all about proprietary software since day one.

Secondly, Steam is big because it was pretty much the first one and all the other DLC services are either shady or limited to the gaming company that owns them (Origin for example).

Thirdly, Steam has been able to maintain its dominance despite it being a borderline malware software and poorly programmed at that. It took them years to fix a basic function as "offline mode" and even that does not work every time.

And lastly, the whole Steam idea is good, but it wont work as long as the titles are limited which they still are on Steam, and the prices skyrocket when on Steam. One of my favourite games went from 20 euros a year to 50 because it came on steam and steam is now required.. I mean wtf?

 

[douglas]

First off about the open source thing.. I dont believe it for a minute. Valve has been all about proprietary software since day one.

Rumors are just rumors, but it's been heavily implied that this will be an opensource deal. They're acting like this is going to be completely free, and it's based on open source code, so I don't really see why they wouldn't bow to pressure if it even had to come to us demanding Open Source. This really just sounds like linux with a steam skin and some startup apps, so I don't really think it's like they have a lot of money invested in it.

Secondly, Steam is big because it was pretty much the first one and all the other DLC services are either shady or limited to the gaming company that owns them (Origin for example).

Unless it can be shown that they are underhandedly stopping the competition, It's simply a lack of competition. I can't fault them for being the only ones that try.

Thirdly, Steam has been able to maintain its dominance despite it being a borderline malware software and poorly programmed at that. It took them years to fix a basic function as "offline mode" and even that does not work every time.

That's bad on them, and I suffered through those years. Still, unless someone else comes up with a better service, it's sort of a sellers market. We need someone to just come out of the woodworks with a new idea. Since we're talking about the internet, I really can't see how anyone could monopolize a service. If a new company could do it better, they would.

And lastly, the whole Steam idea is good, but it wont work as long as the titles are limited which they still are on Steam, and the prices skyrocket when on Steam. One of my favourite games went from 20 euros a year to 50 because it came on steam and steam is now required.. I mean wtf?

It's a mixed bag, I've gotten quite a few deals off of their service. They also offer several free to play games, which I appreciate.

 

[PeteEU]

Rumors are just rumors, but it's been heavily implied that this will be an opensource deal. They're acting like this is going to be completely free, and it's based on open source code, so I don't really see why they wouldn't bow to pressure if it even had to come to us demanding Open Source. This really just sounds like linux with a steam skin and some startup apps, so I don't really think it's like they have a lot of money invested in it.

Regardless it will fail. Why? Because of the gaming industry it self. The big gaming companies make their own system, which puts Steam at a massive disadvantage since they dont get the new games first if at all. It is a similar problem Netflix has in many countries and even in the US.

Unless it can be shown that they are underhandedly stopping the competition, It's simply a lack of competition. I can't fault them for being the only ones that try.

Well to be honest, Steam aint the problem per say, it is the gaming industry. Steam is "crap" on games because the big gaming companies dont want to use Steam but their own systems. Fair enough. That is why that Steams childish hissyfit over Windows Store is even more sad and funny. The are worried about loosing their low end business to Microsoft, not their high end.

That's bad on them, and I suffered through those years. Still, unless someone else comes up with a better service, it's sort of a sellers market. We need someone to just come out of the woodworks with a new idea. Since we're talking about the internet, I really can't see how anyone could monopolize a service. If a new company could do it better, they would.

Not without the participation of the gaming companies and that is the crux of the problem. The rights holders refusing to play ball. Now in the movie/TV/music business it is especially bad but the gaming industry are doing more and more draconian methods to secure their digital rights. Simcity 5 comes to mind.. a single player game made "online" (and badly) to secure a revenue stream and prevent piracy. This basically kills off any Steam like system if it is required to be online to play.

It's a mixed bag, I've gotten quite a few deals off of their service. They also offer several free to play games, which I appreciate.

Yea there are a few, of old games or crap games. Else it is premium pricing mostly.

 

[obvious Child]

No doubt, but the difference is that Windows has always been open relative to OSX, which means Microsoft cant cut off competition, both legally but also practically.

If you look at how Microsoft is running with the RT, it's all through Windows App Store. Financially, it's hard to argue that there isn't large incentive for them not to go this way in the future.

That will mean that Steam has a big head start and if they fail it will not be because of Microsoft, but their own incompetence.. which is ripe in the company.

What makes you think the Valve right now is incompetent?

 

[PeteEU]

If you look at how Microsoft is running with the RT, it's all through Windows App Store. Financially, it's hard to argue that there isn't large incentive for them not to go this way in the future.

Yea but RT is a totally new OS... no way would Microsoft be able to do that with regular Windows. Plus RT was a bonehead idea by Microsoft and should be allowed to die.

What makes you think the Valve right now is incompetent?

They have never shown competence, so...

 

[obvious Child]

Yea but RT is a totally new OS... no way would Microsoft be able to do that with regular Windows. Plus RT was a bonehead idea by Microsoft and should be allowed to die.

Why do you think that Microsoft would never be able to do a Windows App store for regular windows?

They have never shown competence, so...

Methinks you haven't used Steam in over 6 years.

 

[Mycroft]

Yea but RT is a totally new OS... no way would Microsoft be able to do that with regular Windows. Plus RT was a bonehead idea by Microsoft and should be allowed to die.

Windows RT isn't a totally new OS. It's a derivative of Win8 that is designed for tablets...more capable than iOS or Android, but less capable than Win8...and many of the same apps that work on Win8 will work on RT. RT is actually a very good idea that got marketed badly and suffered by association from the unreasonable and irrational hatred for Win8.

 

[PeteEU]

Why do you think that Microsoft would never be able to do a Windows App store for regular windows?

Because unlike Mac OS, it is a relatively open system and you cant just lock it down without massive consequences. The Windows Program store will exist and it will be popular (long overdue imo) but it will never be the only place to get programs.

Methinks you haven't used Steam in over 6 years.

I use it almost daily.

 

[PeteEU]

Windows RT isn't a totally new OS. It's a derivative of Win8 that is designed for tablets...more capable than iOS or Android, but less capable than Win8...and many of the same apps that work on Win8 will work on RT. RT is actually a very good idea that got marketed badly and suffered by association from the unreasonable and irrational hatred for Win8.

What? No... so wrong. Windows RT is new, since it runs on ARM chips only. Programs from regular Windows 8 will NOT run on Windows RT, simply because they are made for totally different chip designs.

RT is pathetic, and people did not want another mobile operating system with next to no eco-system. No they wanted their usual programs for Windows to be able to be used on an ultra portable machine PC that also could be used as a tablet. That is the Surface Pro or systems like it. That is the future. With the Haswell chip and soon the new Atom chip, the battery limitations of Intel chips has been all but conquered.

 

[Mycroft]

Programs from regular Windows 8 will NOT run on Windows RT, simply because they are made for totally different chip designs.

If you have access to the Windows Store, check out this app: "The ESPN App". In the details tab, under supported processors: "x86, x64, ARM".

The same app runs on 3 different processors...one of which is used by WinRT. Almost all of the apps in the Windows Store are like that. In fact, there is no separate section of the Windows Store for RT devices...just as there is no separate store for RT devices. There is, however, a totally different store for Windows Phone devices. That tells me that Windows Phone is a totally different OS that works on ARM processors.

Windows RT, as I said, is a derivative of Win8. Not a separate OS.

 

[PeteEU]

If you have access to the Windows Store, check out this app: "The ESPN App". In the details tab, under supported processors: "x86, x64, ARM".

The same app runs on 3 different processors...one of which is used by WinRT. Almost all of the apps in the Windows Store are like that. In fact, there is no separate section of the Windows Store for RT devices...just as there is no separate store for RT devices. There is, however, a totally different store for Windows Phone devices. That tells me that Windows Phone is a totally different OS that works on ARM processors.

Windows RT, as I said, is a derivative of Win8. Not a separate OS.

No no no.. what they have done is make 2 versions of the apps and the OS requests the correct one. You can not run an ARM based program on an Intel chip and visa versa. That is why there is a special version of Office for RT.

Windows RT is a separate OS compared to normal Windows.

 

[beerftw]

No no no.. what they have done is make 2 versions of the apps and the OS requests the correct one. You can not run an ARM based program on an Intel chip and visa versa. That is why there is a special version of Office for RT.

Windows RT is a separate OS compared to normal Windows.

well in a sense two versions,but technically alot of the apps that work on both are cross compiled to run on arm and intel/amd.alot of windows 8 programs from microsoft are cross compiled to hndle windws rt and windows phone 8.

you are 100% correct that a program from intel cannot run on arm,well atleast if its not cross compiled for multiple processor types,as arm's floating point process style is fully incompatible with intels x86 and amd64 processing.and cros compiled software wont extend far beyong software directly from microsoft,as software is expensive enough to make,making it work on multiple processors is rediculous,and no company would do so unless a justifiable amount of profit could be made.

its the same reason most games never went to mac pre intel move except blizzard,not only did they need to reqrite it for a new os,they had to rewrite it for the ppc architecture over the common x86 arch.

 

[obvious Child]

I'm really looking forward to it. It could mean an era where console gamers and desktop gamers can finally play together. Consoles are just computers now so microsoft is the only reason they're not working together already.

Poor console players. They're going to get their butts handed to them.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Poor console players. They're going to get their butts handed to them.

They absolutely will. I will crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and revel in the lamentations of their women.

 

[obvious Child]

They absolutely will. I will crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and revel in the lamentations of their women.

Check out the Shadowrun test. That made Microsoft table desktop-console gaming for years. It was a total slaughter of the console players.