Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Valve: Linux Better Than Windows 8 for Gaming

Posted by samzenpus on from the top-of-the-heap dept.

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."

28 of 768 comments (clear)

  1. no more donuts for Gabe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's just angry that Windows Marketplace is going to cut into his donut funds.

    1. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by apexwm · · 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.

    2. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Baloroth · · 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.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    3. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Vanderhoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had to comment on this.

      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.

    4. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Tharkkun · · 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.

    5. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by SplashMyBandit · · 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/

      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 :) ).

    6. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Microlith · · Score: 5, Informative

      Until Linux stops all their internal bickering and decides on one native standard for all gaming they will never been seen as better.

      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 is because they standardized the market on Directx.

      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.

      For Linux it's not that easy yet and 3% performance doesn't outweigh the headaches.

      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.

    7. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll get hate for saying this, but its the FOSSies at the top that will ruin it, Valve or not. By "FOSSie" I mean those that hold GPL as inviolate and will hate Valve for daring to bring their DRM platform to Linux. We saw this right here when many of the old guard devs were posting things like "Well as long as they don't put it in the repo" because God forbid things should be easy for a non GPL package!

      You see right now Linux is split in 2, on one side you have the pragmatists that just wants the damned thing to work for as many as possible, then you have the FOSSies that don't give a shit if its the most fiddly obtuse mess on the planet as long as GPL is held above all. I have a feeling that Valve is gonna find out like so many before that the FOSSies hold positions in the higher levels of your system internals and there is gonna be a LOT of "Ooops, broke your shit Valve...well if you'd just open your source code why that shit wouldn't happen".

      This is why the ONLY time Linux has gained any ground is when Google just took the system internals away from the devs and took everything in house, where they could force some order and direction. If Valve thinks those devs that hold GPL like the ten commandments are gonna play nice with their DRM platform? Shiiit, they might as well ask for abortion clinics at the RNC, it would probably go over as well.

      Final verdict? Win 8 bombs, OEMs continue selling Win 7, Gabe quietly lets the Linux version rot after he has to do a couple of major rebuilds thanks to the FOSSie faction trying to force him to Open Source his code, and that will be the end of that. There is A REASON why you don't get proprietary software on Linux, its not because you can't make it run, its because the FOSSie faction will make damned sure it won't run for long, so why bother? Until the faction that worships GPL isn't in command you can give it up Chuck.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Requiem18th · · 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.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    9. Re:no more donuts for Gabe... by Khyber · · 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)

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  2. If only more companies acted on their thoughts by hinchles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've read alot about companies saying win8 is bad for gaming yet very few are actually willing to put their money where their mouth is and actually produce linux native games (or at least games that work perfectly well under wine). Couple that with the lack of installed userbase with capable hardware and the commercial aspects of linux don't really stack up. As much as I'd love to run mint full time its stuck on its vm currently or on underpowered hardware (where linux really shines as a desktop making old/low powered hardware useable!) neither of which are gaming capable.

    1. Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts by CAPSLOCK2000 · · 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.

    2. Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts by Microlith · · 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.

    3. Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts by Catiline · · Score: 5, Informative

      In fact you can register for their beta-program right now.

      Thank you for mentioning this without actually linking to the survey. I don't want a flood of Slashdotters lowering my chances of getting in the beta early.

      --
      Do you like Japanese imports?
    4. Re:If only more companies acted on their thoughts by jopsen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think it's just a negotiation strategy. There is no stopping Windows App Store or Mac OS X App Store, they are going to happen, and they are going to be the future for application deployment on Windows and OS X, respectively. So for Valve to try and make Linux a viable platform makes a lot of sense.
      In the long-term they will be better suited for fixes bugs and providing better hardware support.

  3. Fear... by rwven · · 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.

    1. Re:Fear... by second_coming · · Score: 5, Interesting

      SteamOS... the next logical step.

    2. Re:Fear... by OG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While there are challenges, i think that Valve's doing it at least partly right. For starters, they're initially supporting Steam on a specific distribution and release. While some people may disagree with that stance, I'd say that it's smart to focus on the most popular distro first and get that working well, as it'll provide a much more solid base for the product. Additionally, if they could recommend/support specific drivers for optimal performance, that would also reduce initial variability. I think part of the problem with launching an application on Linux (especially a game or gaming system, which tends to really utilize all of the different components of a system) is the thought that it needs to run on all Linux distros out of the box. That may be a great goal, but it's a support nightmare. It's probably better in the long-run to target a certain platform, get it working great on that platform, and then expand from there. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out for them.

    3. Re:Fear... by Lonewolf666 · · 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.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  4. Just greed. by Haxagon · · 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.

    1. Re:Just greed. by Microlith · · 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.

  5. If Valve says so many will listen by CAPSLOCK2000 · · 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.

  6. Perhaps, but... by Junta · · 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.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  7. better than Windows 8 for by dtjohnson · · 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.

  8. Hmmm... ValveOS? SteamOS? by Rogerborg · · 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.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  9. Re:Due to the huge Linux market share? by MrEricSir · · 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.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  10. Re:Finally by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I installed Windows 8 RC on my work PC today, purely because we'll either be upgrading to Win7 or Win8 come summer 2013, and I thought I'd best at least give it a go before dismissing it entirely. If you've not used it, try it; Metro is not bad. In fact, i'd say it's almost exactly like Win7 Start Menu, only it has more information on it.

    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".

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  11. Re:Finally by tnk1 · · 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.