Valve Removes Steam Machines From Its Home Page (extremetech.com)

Steam Machines were supposed to take PC gaming mainstream by simplifying setup and moving the games in your living room, but they never took off. Today, ExtremeTech reports that Valve has removed Steam Machine listings from the Steam front page due to poor sales. From the report: You can still access what remains of the Steam Machine landing site via a direct link -- not that you'll see much when you get there. It lists only five devices, one of which is no longer available on the manufacturer's site. Several of the remaining systems are arguably not even Steam Machines as Valve envisioned -- they run Windows 10 instead of SteamOS. The final nail in the coffin for Steam Machines may have come from Valve itself. In late 2015, it released the Steam Link. It's a small box that you plug into a TV, allowing you to stream a game from your PC in real time. The original price was just $50, and Valve is basically giving them away right now. Valve is still developing SteamOS, but I don't expect that to go on much longer.

Comments

Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

And Linux gaming dies...

Re:Frist Post!

[dryriver]

You shouldn't try to game Linux in the first place. Its not good for the security of Linux servers, or the integrity of the Linux kernel. =)

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

Really?
So the games already in there doesnt work so well? Have you tried any of them? Any of the 3000 games for Linux on Steam? Some of them may not have the best implementation neither for Linux or SteamVR (as most people still are on Windows), but technically there shouldn't be any limitations.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

What he meant was:
- Take your manchild gamershit and fuck off with it because Linux has more integrity than to pander to this denominator.
- I hope gaymer GPU prices blow up again to hear the tears and whines of the children and manchildren.
- Leave the adult OS to the adults and don't infect it with your smell.

Re: Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

Autism speaks.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

nope. indie games support linux almost by default. Yeah, there are not many AAA publishers that support linux but there are some. Hope to see more.
Also you're better off using ubuntu lts for gaming.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're so mature! I wish I could be as insecure as you!

Re:Frist Post!

[jellomizer]

I think the point is that Linux at heart is a Server OS. Yes it can be used as a Workstation/Desktop OS, and it can play games without a problem. But being that it was designed and its primary use is a server OS means there is little effort in porting games to it.

Windows on the other hand, is a Workstation/Desktop OS in its core. We have Windows Server but it is really just kinda of an hack on the Desktop OS.

Gaming normally wants to bypass a lot of the OS layer hence the popularity of DirectX in gaming engines. As it bypasses a lot of the the Operating System, and directly controls the hardware. Linux Games are usually a little bit behind (older games getting ported) The new games tend not to be a modern designed as the newest windows games. Because Linux wants to act like a server OS, and not give normal users so much raw access to the hardware. Because a server OS wants to run a lot of small applications and run them at the same time and well. Vs running one big program that uses nearly the full computer.

Re:Frist Post!

[bws111]

I think it was a JOKE. He didn't say "Don't game ON Linux" or "Don't game WITH Linux", he said "Don't game Linux". It is a play on gaming the system.

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

There is no real distinction between a "server OS" and a "desktop OS" since decades.

Gaming normally wants to bypass a lot of the OS layer hence the popularity of DirectX
That is nonsense. There never was an "OS layer" to access the graphics card. What exactly should that be?

Because Linux wants to act like a server OS, and not give normal users so much raw access to the hardware.
That is nonsense.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure there is. There has to be, otherwise Lunix Losers can't excuse the complete pile of shit that is Linux's general use environment.

How the fuck do you manage a worse experience than Windows 10 and OS X combined?

Re:Frist Post!

[retchdog]

that's mostly just because unity supports linux almost by default. if it weren't for that, there'd be a much lower proportion of indie linux games. still a few, but not nearly as many.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the tinfoil hat cut off circulation to the thing that passes for a brain.

Re:Frist Post!

[Tough Love]

I think the point is that Linux at heart is a Server OS.... Windows on the other hand, is a Workstation/Desktop OS in its core.

At core, you are woefully uninformed. Windows at heart is Windows NT, a server OS designed by Dave Cutler along the lines of VMS, a server OS.

Re:Frist Post!

[Hallux-F-Sinister]

I think the point is that Linux at heart is a Server OS. Yes it can be used as a Workstation/Desktop OS, and it can play games without a problem. But being that it was designed and its primary use is a server OS means there is little effort in porting games to it.

I love when people try to read into things that which was never there in the first place. Linux (I assume you meant, "GNU/Linux," the complete OS as packaged and distributed by many distribution maintainers worldwide, and not just the kernel, which alone, by itself, without a host of utilities is capable of doing nothing whatsoever..., like a director of a stage-play with no actors, or a producer with no... well, with no director OR actors, sitting glumly and forelorn in an empty theater, with also no audience, since there's no PLAY to see, no actors to perform it, and no director... you get the idea, hopefully,) was and I believe IS, at its heart, a reimplimentation of the original UNIX philosophy. That's it. It's a different way to solve the same problem, in such a way as to allow users (by which I mean whoever is using the computer, not dividing into classes, people who use a computer to do one thing versus another,) to do the same things they could do with a pricey UNIX license, without having to pay for the UNIX license. You see, since Thompson and Ritchie came up with their philosophy for how a multitasking, multiuser OS should be built and function, and published... um... the API? or whatever it was, detailing how processes should communicate with one another, be invoked, and what a program should do and how it should act, it became possible, with lots of effort, to duplicate it, withOUT violating any intellectual property rights or law.

It's kinda like how the first digital electronic calculator was created, and the process for representing decimal numbers in binary and manipulating them was patented, or copyrighted, or whatever... and someone, (who would have either had to pay royalties or been barred from making a competing product,) who wanted to make a competing product, worked out another way to solve the same problem that did NOT infringe, (one was "ten's complement," the other "nine's complement," or something like that, can't recall which is which and NOT looking it up...) both the authors (Linus T. & Co.,) of the Linux kernel, and those of all the various and sundry GNU, UNIX-replacing-but-not-actually-UNIX-in-fact utilities, could do something similar. Use the widely-distributed knowledge of how those binaries worked, even if you couldn't see the innards, the original UNIX source-code, you could cobble together another program, and as long as it reliably gives the same output in response to the same inputs, and has at least the same range of inputs as the original, (and ideally does it as well, as quickly, and as efficiently, or preferably better,) what you have is a drop-in-replacement for that utility or program. Do that for ALL the core programs, and you have a drop-in-replacement for the whole damned operating system. As far as I know, that's what Linux (by which I mean, "GNU/Linux,") was. That is what (GNU/)Linux is at it's heart. The fact that it's popular as a server OS is a side-effect of the fact that it's built to be like UNIX, and UNIX is powerful and works well as a server OS, but is NOT known to be especially user-friendly. In fact, it's RENOWNED for being fairly user-UNFRIENDLY, hence its popularity with computer experts, who feel insulted, I think, by the dumbed-down, crippleware coming out of Redmond, for example.

Just my two cents.

Also, the fact that a LOT of what became the internet had legacy software that works well on or with UNIX, since it PREDATED M$ WinDOS, there was an entrenchment factor here, operating in both directions. You see, early PCs simply COULDN'T run UNIX, as they weren't powerful enough to do so. M$-DOS was a solution to that problem, which I'm not even interested in getting started discussing; suffice it to say, it worke

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no real distinction between a "server OS" and a "desktop OS" since decades.

Actually you will find the design and operation of the process scheduler to be quite different for obvious reasons. You will see the difference exaggerated further if you are familiar with the schedulers in gaming console operating systems.

Gaming normally wants to bypass a lot of the OS layer hence the popularity of DirectX That is nonsense. There never was an "OS layer" to access the graphics card. What exactly should that be?

The graphics card is accessed through Direct3D, the OP was speaking about DirectX of which Direct3D is just a part. Direct access to APIs for audio and input devices (and graphics cards) was restricted as protected memory systems became commonplace so abstractions had to be created to deal with this. It's a very standardized set of APIs on Windows (DirectX) but not so much on Linux, in fact there are a bunch of different abstraction layers for audio and Linux was quite late to the game with the input subsystem for unifying access to USB input devices.

Because Linux wants to act like a server OS, and not give normal users so much raw access to the hardware.

That is nonsense.

It's less the raw access and more the lack of unification. Windows includes all the APIs for direct access to hardware (particularly for game developers) and they are unified as DirectX. Linux provides no such unified collection of APIs, yes you can cobble it together by using the various interfaces: joystick input can come from /dev/input/js or /dev/input/event, audio could be alsa or pulseaudio or jack or OSS, 2D hardware accelerated graphics comes from a myriad of different drawing APIs.

Re:Frist Post!

[KingMotley]

Sure there is/was. The OS layer abstracted the graphics hardware away from the user level programs. DirectX (where the "direct" nomenclature came from) was the ability for user-level applications to interface with the graphics hardware either directly or at a much lower level than before.

The difference between a "server OS" and a "desktop OS" still exists, but the differences a much smaller than they used to be. Server OS's will tend to be on the security side more, while desktop os's tend to favor performance more. Also server OS's will prefer throughput (more work done before a task switch increases efficiency), while desktop OS's will prefer low latency/responsiveness -- usually.

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

Well,

why don't you simply admit that you have no clue about computing?

That is all wrong ... sorry.

Re:Frist Post!

[KingMotley]

Hmmm... Well, I'll just suggest that you brush up on your technical skills. Here is a list of suggested materials that cover the topic:
https://css.csail.mit.edu/6.85...

Pay particular attention to pages 106-128 which discusses the protection mechanisms, 145-149 which discusses I/O privileges, and 152-172 which describes interrupts and exceptions.

If you don't have the time, or the topics are too technical for you, then you can just read this, which granted, has a few faults, but from a high level, it's describes things pretty well without getting overly technical:
https://blog.codinghorror.com/...

As for the second part of my quote, you can read this: https://www.microsoftpressstor... please pay attention to the section labeled "Quantum" (about 1/3rd of the way through the document). That describes in further detail the differences between desktop and server optimizations. Again, old information, but it still applies today.

Enjoy!

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

Erm,
are you in a google frenzy?

The first link is for an intel 386 ... seriously?

There is no computer related topic that is to technically for me ...

I program them ...

Again, old information, but it still applies today.
No it does not. There is no difference at all between a CD that I put into a server and install an OS or into a laptop or desktop. And that is completely unrelated to Linux, Mac OS, HP US, AIX, Solaris or what ever ... it is the exact same code running on a desktop or a server. Perhaps you mix that up with a mainframe or micro computer?
Mac OS X had a special server distribution up till OS X 10.6. But that only changed the amount of software that was installed (e.g. Kerberus). The kernel and everything else is exactly the same.

You can run iOS or Android as a server OS ... no fucking difference to the "hand held device" version.

There never really was any.

The other two links make no sense either, but your link frenzy clearly shows: you have no idea what OS is ... hence you believe that servers and modern desktops run different kinds of OSes, which they don't.

Re:Frist Post!

[KingMotley]

There is no computer related topic that is to technically for me ...

Then I suggest you actually read those links so you understand. From you:

Gaming normally wants to bypass a lot of the OS layer hence the popularity of DirectX

That is nonsense. There never was an "OS layer" to access the graphics card. What exactly should that be?

No, that is how the OS actually works. See when a program that is running in ring 3 (or an user-level application... Like a game for example) wants to access hardware, it calls a API call, or makes an I/O request, or read/writes to a specific set of memory. The later will cause an exception (Access exception) while the former will just cause a ring transition, but in either case it is then caught by the OS, when then translates the request into something acceptable to the hardware. That exception handling is very costly in terms of performance (partially because of the ring transition). In order to reduce the number of ring transitions, you can either try and allow more things to be directly accessible from user mode without OS oversight (which then can cause stability issues, especially when you have multiple applications who want access to the same hardware), or you start to allow more drivers to run in a ring above ring 3 (usually ring 0) -- That of course leads to entire system stability issues -- AKA BSOD, kernel panic, or whatever the OS has.

So yes, one of the many things that a "server" OS will do is push as much of the drivers into userland so that a poorly performing driver won't take down the entire kernel. But that almost always has a fairly large performance hit. "Desktop" OSes will push as much of the drivers into kernel space in order to gain performance, but at the expense of system stability. Depending on the OS and what the needs of the OS is, dictates where along line of performance vs stability it will use. Obviously the best performance being that absolutely everything runs in Ring 0, and the most stable is that only the core kernel runs in Ring 0 and everything else (drivers included) get pushed down to rings 1-3.

And yes, in many cases, some of the server vs desktop tuning can changed at run-time and use the exact same binary. And yes, in many cases you can take an OS that is designed to be server-class, and run it on the same exact desktop or vice versa. That doesn't mean there isn't a difference, you've just changed the difference from a compile-time difference to a run-time difference, or of course optionally, running the OS sub-optimally (which apparently you don't seem to care about at all).

You may program computers, but for a long number of years, I actually wrote OSes, so yeah, I kind of understand exactly how they work. Apparently you don't. I gave you links so that you could actually read them, and at least understand the basics of what you are talking about, but apparently you'd rather just continue stating what you ignorantly believe to be true rather than educate yourself.

Using a common slashdot metaphor, you are arguing that there is no difference between engines.. They are all engines, they all burn something and make something go, and you can throw a semi-truck desiel engine in a ferrari or a ferrari engine in a truck and they are exactly the same. Therefore there is no such difference between them, and they work exactly the same and you can't understand why a ferrari engine costs as much as it does when you can buy a honda engine for 1/100 the cost. And since you've driven a car before, well you know what you are talking about, and with $2000 you can win nascar, and put tesla out of business. Good luck to you.

Since I can't actually force you to learn or to stop saying ignorant things, and you apparently refuse to do either on your own, I think I'm done here.

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no computer related topic that is to technically for me ...

You have demonstrated that even the basics are clearly beyond your capacity.

And that is completely unrelated to Linux, Mac OS, HP US, AIX, Solaris or what ever ... it is the exact same code running on a desktop or a server.

What you don't understand is that almost any computer can be a "server" by some definition of the term. However an operating system designed to be a server has a very different role than one designed to be a desktop operating system. Take a look at the various scheduler differences in Linux the O(n) scheduler, O(1) scheduler and the more recent CFS.

Now consider what are the fundamental differences between server and desktop workloads, do you think they exist or do not exist?

Then consider the implications process autogroups have in the context of server workloads and why a different scheduler is going to mean a difference in performance here.

Since you mentioned Android and iOS, yes you can run a server on them but it will not be as efficient because the operating system is designed for a different task. Continuing on with focussing on the scheduler the reason why Android uses its own scheduler rather than O(n), O(1) or CFS is for the same reason there are differences between server, desktop, mobile and embedded operating systems which is that they have different workloads and there is not one common solution to all problems.

Here I have only talked about the scheduler which is only a small part of the kernel which in turn is only one part of the overall operating system that services different workloads so we can talk about the performance impact of other components if you need help understanding why they are different for different workloads.

Fundamentally you can use a server OS to run desktop workloads and vice versa, in fact you can run server workloads on a mobile OS if you wanted to but given they are designed to do different things you'll find it inefficient to do so.

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

Just because a "graphic (card) driver" is called a driver, it does not mean it is part of the OS, nor is it technically a driver.
There is no "interrupt" or ring barrier when you call a DirectX routine. Why would that be the case?

While some OSes put drivers into user land, most don't.

So I repeat it again: thee is no "linux server OS" versus a "linux desktop OS" ... they are both the exact same OS.
There is no longer a "Mac OS server OS" versus a "Mac OS Desktop OS", and there never where any differences between server and client/workstation in any of the majour Unix brands.

Your idea is simply wrong. Regardless how much OS programming experience you claim.

If you knew more about it, you perhaps had mentioned Amiga OS and BeOS as "desktop/client" OSes ... but coming up with a link for a 386 processor made you look like a complete fail :D

Re:Frist Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no computer related topic that is to technically for me ...

Moron.

Re:Frist Post!

[KingMotley]

If you knew anything about OSes, you'd know exactly why I put up the link for the 386 processor. I even pointed you to the exact pages to read.

But since you obviously don't know, here it is. The 80386 processor was the first (and simplest) processor that allowed programs to be able to enter and exit into protected mode. Technically, the 80286 could run protected mode, but not without a complete reset. Without protected mode, the computer would act pretty much how you seem to think it does, with all programs having complete access to everything it wants. The 80386 added the descriptor tables which allowed for memory remapping (needed for virtualizing device memory and virtual memory). Maybe you never knew why, or maybe you were around to know, but there wasn't a UNIX or LINUX for 80286 processors, but there was for the 80386. That's why.

So if you want to learn the very basics of how modern operating systems actually work, the 80386 progammer's manual is one of the best places to start. But if you knew squat, you'd already know that.

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

You never heard about other architectures then ...
Just because did not call it 'protected mode' does not mean they did not have it ...
Why would Linus build a Linux/Unix for x286 when the next best computer he could buy was an x386?

Xenix and many other unix like OSes did run on 80286. The big difference between 80286 and 80386 is the MMU, not 'protected mode'.

Same with 68k and 68030/68040.

Re:Frist Post!

[KingMotley]

Why would Linus build a Linux/Unix for x286

Well there is a simple answer to that... He didn't. The first version of linux was written for the 80386. A quote from Linus himself... His announcement of linux:

Hello everybody out there using minix -

I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons) among other things).

I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work. This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and I'd like to know what features most people would want. Any suggestions are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them :-)

Linus (torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi)

PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs. It is NOT portable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have :-(.
—Linus Torvalds

If you scroll up, you will see that I said the 80286 had protected mode. How is it that you can't read? One of the things (of many) that made the 80386 different from the 80286 was that it could enter and exit protected mode without having to completely reset. Sure, there were other big architecture changes as well, like 32-bit registers, and a MMU that could do page level protections instead of segment level protections like the 80286. But the 80386 was the first intel chip that could (and still can really) run a modern operating system.

The 68000 didn't have a protected mode either. It kind of had a user/supervisor mode, but since the MMU wasn't integrated, it depended heavily on external chips to implement most of the functionality. That wasn't implemented until the 68010 or 68020 I believe (Maybe even 68030). And yes, I wrote a lot of 68xxx code as well as x86 code. I actually started on 6502 -> 68000 -> x86. Haven't done any ARM programming, but I try and keep up with the different architectures. I've run/used Windows on x86, ARM, Alpha, and MIPS. I haven't written an OS for anything other than the x86, but I did a lot of systems programming on the 6502 and 68000 (and x86), including multitasking when the OS wasn't multitasking itself. The concepts aren't all the much different.

Here's an online magazine from 1990 that highlights a shareware project I did on the 68000 in assembly (YMG), in the background. On an OS that didn't support multitasking, and using hardware devices (RS232 port): https://atarimax.com/freenet/f...

I'm too lazy to go googling, but I'm sure you can find references on the web to some of my past projects.. Super fast disk defragmenters, bulletin board systems, file transfer protocols, multi-user systems, online multiuser gaming systems, multitasking/multiprocessing systems for DOS, windows device drivers, proxy servers, conversations with the w3c groups on html and css specs, etc etc. I'm a pretty decent programmer, and I've been around enough to know a lot of things about a lot of esoteric things.

And you?

Re:Frist Post!

[angel'o'sphere]

I program since 35 ... actually nearly 40 years, on 6502, 68k, ARM, SPARC, but recently only in Java and Bash.

I'm absolutely not interested in the historics of one of the worst processor architectures we ever had on the planet :)

In one of your previous posts you said that 386 was the first with 'protected mode' ... now you say 286 was it ... sorry, completely irrelevant to the start of our discussion: a DirectX library does not run in kernel space! It is on the same 'ring' as the application calling it. There is no difference between a desktop or server OS unless your server is a mainframe and runs an OS that is not availabble for desktops.

You disagree ... fine for me.

not unexptected

[Anonymous Coward]

I can use SteamLink for all my games without noticing that it's not running locally. The only thing I'm not able to to there is SteamVR. I really hope there will be a solution soon, but I'm not holding my breath, also as SteamVR probably hasn't taken completely off yet either with VR sets still a bit pricey for the avg gamer.

Re:not unexptected

[M.D.Smith]

Biggest issue for the Link was not being able to port over voice channels. I was gonna buy one, then realized after research that I couldn't access discord (kinda expected but disappointing) or any other voice channel through Steam itself. Combined with the Steam controller, I could have seen playing several games from the couch, but would have effectively been cut off from playing any of these games with friends.

I know you can access Discord from the phone as well, but then you get into further logistics issues. I don't have a bluetooth headset. For those that do, you'd need a single ear deal because you couldn't connect both your phone and the link at the same time, rather than say, the xbox headset I already had. Etc. Etc. Was bad planning on their part.

Re:not unexptected

[arth1]

I can use SteamLink for all my games without noticing that it's not running locally.

It depends on the game. For a twitch FPS where many players use PS/2 mice because USB is too damn slow, a networked client is just not going to work well, even for very short copper cabled distances.
For assisted aim console ports, it won't make much if any difference.

Re:not unexptected

[Oswald McWeany]

Biggest issue for the Link was not being able to port over voice channels. I was gonna buy one, then realized after research that I couldn't access discord (kinda expected but disappointing) or any other voice channel through Steam itself. Combined with the Steam controller, I could have seen playing several games from the couch, but would have effectively been cut off from playing any of these games with friends.

I know you can access Discord from the phone as well, but then you get into further logistics issues. I don't have a bluetooth headset. For those that do, you'd need a single ear deal because you couldn't connect both your phone and the link at the same time, rather than say, the xbox headset I already had. Etc. Etc. Was bad planning on their part.

It really depends on the type of game you're playing. I saw the Link being ridiculously cheap over Black Friday last year and was tempted to buy one, but then I tried to think of a game I could play with it. The reason I PC game is because I like strategy games and they typically require keyboard and mouse. Link doesn't really work for that.

FPS and racing games, yeah, I can see the couch being ideal for that... I'd probably buy a console though if I liked that type of game since they are tuned for that type of game.

Re:not unexptected

[Anonymous Coward]

This might have been true in the past, but recently Logitech among others has made the wireless mouse work in competitive FPS. If you look carefully, for example, at what hardware most Overwatch streamers have listed in their streams a fair share has some model of Logitech G-series wireless mouse. It is also visible in LAN tournaments like the Overwatch League.

The lack of cord is a surprising difference when your sensitivity gets very low and you have to work quickly with a giant mouse pad - as almost all of the pro players do.

Re:not unexptected

[arth1]

The problem with USB is not solvable through faster hooking up to the USB port. USB is always "best effort", and while 99.9% of packets may get through the bus quicker, there's no guarantee. Every once in a while, a packet can get delayed, and that is fully within the specs.
On a PS/2 port, you may have a slower average latency, but you have a guaranteed maximum latency due to it being interrupt driven. That's why many gamers even today prefer PS/2 over USB.

It's much like some online players prefer leased lines with slower speeds but a CIR (latency/throughput guarantees) over much faster offerings that are only faster on average. It's the worst case that will get you headshot.

Re:not unexptected

[dpidcoe]

Yep. I never got to the level of play where I felt the need for a PS/2 mouse, but definitely in my experience playing twitch fps games I valued consistency in framerates and ping over anything else. I'd rather have to lead a target twice as much every time than some smaller but random amount.

Re:not unexptected

[Ranbot]

It really depends on the type of game you're playing. ....FPS and racing games, yeah, I can see the couch being ideal for that... I'd probably buy a console though if I liked that type of game since they are tuned for that type of game.

FWIW, there are many good single-player platformer and puzzle games on Steam that would transfer to the couch+TV really well (games like Limbo, Inside, Deadlight, Tale of Two Brothers, This War of Mine... and many others). Many of those games also available on consoles, but Steamlink is far cheaper.

But, I agree with earlier poster above that SteamLink's lack of an easily accessible chat function hurts it for many titles.

Re:not unexptected

[M.D.Smith]

For me personally, it was primarily Rocket League or other mostly casual non-competitive games with a multiplayer aspect like Don't Starve, Terraria, Dead Island, Borderlands, etc. Even a game like Civ, where timeliness isn't crucial like some other RTS's, play surprisingly well with the Steam controller and when I still had a PC in the living room it worked just fine from the couch. Built my man cave a couple years back and most of my equipment went out with it and that's when I started considering the Link. If they had some kind of USB bus back to the main rig it would've been great.

Re:not unexptected

[Ranbot]

Biggest issue for the Link was not being able to port over voice channels. I was gonna buy one, then realized after research that I couldn't access discord (kinda expected but disappointing) or any other voice channel through Steam itself.

Agreed the lack of a user-friendly voice option is a big drawback to Steam Link. I can understand Valve not wanting to deal with supporting third-party chat software, but it is odd to me they didn't at least incorporate Steam's chat system into Steam Link. Or did they? ...It's not on my radar. I don't use Steam chat (does anyone?) and I don't own a Steam Link.

Combined with the Steam controller, I could have seen playing several games from the couch.

I bought the Steam Controller for my PC (for Rocket League and platformers) but returned it after two days of fumbling with it. The touchpads are a neat concept, but I found the lack of a tactile stick or button difficult, and pressing the touchpad was awkward. The rear double triggers weren't helping me either. YRMV. I switched it for a cheaper Xbox 360 (USB) controller and have been very happy.

Re:not unexptected

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a Link over black Friday sales. I also bought a steam controller. After a week I added a wireless keyboard and mouse. It works really well, and sometimes it's just nice to game from the couch with the "good" stereo and a giant screen I can see.

Re:not unexptected

[Oswald McWeany]

For me personally, it was primarily Rocket League or other mostly casual non-competitive games with a multiplayer aspect like Don't Starve, Terraria, Dead Island, Borderlands, etc. Even a game like Civ, where timeliness isn't crucial like some other RTS's, play surprisingly well with the Steam controller and when I still had a PC in the living room it worked just fine from the couch. Built my man cave a couple years back and most of my equipment went out with it and that's when I started considering the Link. If they had some kind of USB bus back to the main rig it would've been great.

Very well, I may give it a try next time they're $5 again like they were last time. If it works well that will be great, if it doesn't I haven't lost too much.

Success!

[mwvdlee]

I don't think it was ever intended to sell well. It was intended to stop the Windows Store in it's tracks.
In that it was quite succesful.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a twitwanger.

Re:Success!

[complete loony]

According to the stats page, 0.33% of steam users are running linux, mostly Ubuntu. Personally, I'm running steam on debian.

Buying a new machine to run steam might be a big ask, but support for running steam on linux is appreciated by those of us that want to play games on our favourite OS.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed; I'm thinking that it may just be time to get a life...I sure as fuck won't run Windows.

captcha: astute

Re: Success!

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

That is why I'm more skeptical of the "Valve is still developing SteamOS, but I don't expect that to go on much longer." part of the claim.

Given that prebuilt console-size PCs are a bit of a niche; and ones running Linux are niche within a niche(especially now that various cheapo ARM-SoC-with-hardware-decode boxes have basically eliminated the need for a PC by the TV if you want either the streaming services of your choice or your giant NAS-o'-piracy); it probably doesn't make sense to keep them in stock; but abandoning the 'encourage game compatibility with Linux and Linux driver, especially GPU, support for what games need' effort is a somewhat different story: if PCs running SteamOS aren't selling the PC OEMs aren't going to be happy about making them(much less providing timely updates as new parts become available) without Valve outright paying them to do it; but reactivating production if circumstances change is trivially quick and cheap if a sutiable OS is still available.

What isn't quick or trivial is reviving the effort to improve GPU and other gaming-related Linux development and encourage game devs and engine/middleware vendors to support Linux. If you let that lapse you are likely to have a period where even more games than normal don't have Linux support and never get it; potentially engine releases that don't offer Linux support; and the need to rebuild cooperation with hardware vendors and the developers of kernel, Xorg, etc.
br. Maintaining that development effort certainly isn't free; but it is also something where it is difficult, if not impossible, to 'make up for' a period of no support by trying to rush later.

Re:Success!

[substance2003]

I don't think it was ever intended to sell well. It was intended to stop the Windows Store in it's tracks. In that it was quite succesful.

I doubt the problems with the Windows store have anything to do with Valve's efforts and more with Microsoft's way of trying to force people to use it. Since Windows RT, people have worried that they would try to lock Windows to that curated cesspoo.. err I mean garden. I think their approach on a platform that's always been used to openly install anything they want has turned it's users off from wanting to use it so far.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a faggot nigger.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Have they made any substantial changes to SteamOS in the last 3 years? The project seems stalled because there are no improvements. (Perhaps that's because Valve knows there isn't much they can do except work with game publishers to use Vulkan either in place of or in addition to DirectX. Games are everything, of course). I run big picture in Windows on my Steam Machine because it works so much better. Even sleep and wakeup is garbage on SteamOS.

Re:Success!

[thegarbz]

It was intended to stop the Windows Store in it's tracks.
In that it was quite succesful.

Successful? I would say pointless. Windows Store was always going to be a shithouse disaster without the need for anyone else's help.

Re:Success!

[Kartu]

Windows Store not taking off hardly has anything to do with Steam Machines.

Re:Success!

[Oswald McWeany]

Windows Store not taking off hardly has anything to do with Steam Machines.

They wanted to mimic iOS's walled garden, but wanted to still support existing applications because it was the only way to get people to convert over. You can't give people a choice of "choice" and "walled garden" within an operating system and expect people to choose "walled garden".

Windows Store failed because MS did a compromise and didn't force it on people. (thankfully)

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you looking at my webcam?

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

More precisely, I believe it was a *hedge* versus the Windows Store becoming successful.

Windows Store failed all on its own merits (or lack of).

Re:Success!

[Joviex]

I don't think it was ever intended to sell well. It was intended to stop the Windows Store in it's tracks. In that it was quite succesful.

LOL WUT? The windows store is as strong as ever? What medication you on, its fucking your your brain.

Re:Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

How is that possible when Steam Machines were announced long before the Windows Store was?

Re:Success!

[Altanar]

You really think Steam Machines affected the Windows Store at all? That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Re: Success!

[Anonymous Coward]

Lul. You sound like a caveman.

Caveman: wut? My spear is perfect for hunting. The best weapon for the job. LUL.

Cmdr Taco Loves Steam Era

[Anonymous Coward]

But come on already, this is the 21st century, and that's starting at -4.5 billion.

Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[dryriver]

What happens if someone with lawyers requests to remove or unlink his or her owned library of Steam-dependent games from the Steam service? Does Steam have the legal right to keep games you paid money to own locked into their DRM garden and DRM client? Or could someone successfully argue "I own these games. I should have the right to leave Steam and keep my games running!" in court? That argument could well be the "design flaw" in Steam's Death Star. One change in the applicable laws, and Steam might be FORCED to let you take your Steam games out of Steam's service and allow them to run like normal, independently executable Windows or MacOS apps again.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would Valve care in that scenario? They got money for the game when you bought it, it's not like providing the ability to download the game again through Steam etc is making them more money.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[nzkbuk]

Sadly I believe the response boils down to Steam is selling a service / licence and so not a physical product. As such when you loose access to your steam account you loose access to all the games you have paid them for.

I'd prefer that it was the other way, but there's been a lawsuits in both EU and USA which sets this as the current position.
It seems to change every few years so if you wanted to exit you might want to wait for the correct time. You could always use www.gog.com

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[ISayWeOnlyToBePolite]

What happens if someone with lawyers requests to remove or unlink his or her owned library of Steam-dependent games from the Steam service? Does Steam have the legal right to keep games you paid money to own locked into their DRM garden and DRM client? Or could someone successfully argue "I own these games. I should have the right to leave Steam and keep my games running!" in court? That argument could well be the "design flaw" in Steam's Death Star. One change in the applicable laws, and Steam might be FORCED to let you take your Steam games out of Steam's service and allow them to run like normal, independently executable Windows or MacOS apps again.

http://store.steampowered.com/...

" The Content and Services are licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services.".

Unless you can revive Johnnie Cochran, I'd say your're pretty much SOL.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[known_coward_69]

There are these thing called contracts and Valve makes you sign one before you can list games for sale on Steam and it will have all kinds of conditions you have to agree to

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[Anonymous Coward]

What if you tighten access? Does that help?

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[crypticedge]

This has actually happened in the past.

Companies that closed their doors for good, who's products could no longer be sold and who's new rights holders refused to sign an agreement with steam to resume sales. People who purchased that product could continue to download and use it, but no new purchases have been allowed.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[BradleyUffner]

There are these thing called contracts and Valve makes you sign one before you can list games for sale on Steam and it will have all kinds of conditions you have to agree to

That really only applies to software you have the legal right to distribute on Steam. One could theoretically get a game listed on Steam that you don't have distribution rights for by sneaking it past whatever controls they have in place for that kind of thing. I'm pretty sure people who purchase the game in that situation of just SOL.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[RoccamOccam]

For future reference, "who's" should be "whose", in this case.

Re: Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe in the US, but in the EU we would be entitled to a refund from Steam. Of course, Steam would then be entitled to sue whoever fraudulently listed the product, but the refund isn't contingent on that case.

This actually happened early on with Amazon and the Kindle store. A print book publisher listed Farenheit 451 without having digital publishing rights. Thousands of copies were sold, but when the lack of rights were discovered, Amazon's reaction was to delete it from everyone's Kindle. Eventually, they negotiated rights with the real rights holder and gave everyone who had bought a copy access again.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[The MAZZTer]

Your questions are all answered in the Steam EULA. I would imagine Steam does have the legal right to DRM lock your games just like any other DRM, since you agreed to it with the Steam EULA. If you change your mind you are welcome to walk away but you don't "own" your games outright. Perhaps the courts will eventually decide that if you buy something you do indeed expect to own it and companies trying to subtly change the definition of ownership to licensing is misleading and unethical. But that hasn't happened yet.

It should also be noted you and Steam are not the only entities involved here. Third party publishers have their own agreements with Steam. Steam can't just give you un-DRMed copies of games (unless ordered to by the courts as you suggest) due to these agreements, even if Steam dissolves (before third party games were on Steam Valve said if Steam failed they would remove the DRM from their games in a final update. It is not clear if this would apply to third-party games but I doubt it... it would need to be part of Steam's contracts with publishers). Plus, third-party publishers sometimes put their own DRM on top of Steam's. Steam has no way to remove this DRM even if the courts order them to.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[Zumbs]

Your questions are all answered in the Steam EULA.

Depending on your juristiction, the EULA is not a legally binding document. Some parts (or all) of it can be void if they are in violation of local rights that cannot be signed away. Given that the button says "buy" and not "rent until Steam goes out of business" and "buy" indicates ownership, I would not be surprised if courts in juristictions with a high degree of consumer protection would find against Steam.

Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[drewlake2000]

I never want to go back to the old days when you had physical media. The number and cash value of games that I couldn't finish or play again because a disc got scratched is higher than I even want to know. Only the other day I read an article about a game I haven't played in over a decade. In the old days I would have to locate the disc and pray to the flying spaghetti monster that it didn't have a scratch. With steam I was playing it within minutes.

Whoopdy Dooooo

[Anonymous Coward]

The hell did you expect? Valve who doesn't even know how to code a game anymore and produced the pile of crap that's poorly coded to this day - Steam, being engaged in an OS? Fucking hilarity.
Not to only ignore that the marketing was poor, but Valve should never have taken it upon themselves but instead taken from the LInux community itself alone and acted as a 3rd party intermediary between game devs and the Linux devs responsible for the distro, including hardware support communication.
The OS would be a hit with merely one directive: One person in charge scrapping all criticisms of Windows on gaming forums and tech forums, and using those features as a counter-marketing venue to pull people over.
None of the things were done, therefore SteamOS was a flop, therefore the machines were a flop.

Re:Whoopdy Dooooo

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux as an OS for a dedicated gaming machine is the dumbest thing I've ever heard in my entire life. It's like "it costs the same as a Windows gaming PC but it can only play a small fraction of its library and it has no exclusive games whatsoever! BUY IT NOW IT HAS A VALVE STICKER YOU MORON!"

Re:Whoopdy Dooooo

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux as an OS for a dedicated gaming machine is the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life?
I hope then that you haven't heard of the Sony Playstation, because they used to use Linux you muffinbrain.

Also, the fraction of the library excludes console ports which can take a hike to shitsville and good riddance, and the contemporary games being released already have so much creativity and take up so much time that past libraries and stagnated consoleshit doesn't matter. Just a combo of Terraria, Total War, Mount&Blade, RimWorld, and any Space Sim like X3, can each take up 2 fucking years of playtime ALONE, not to mention many others. And games which focus on content over graphical jerking and also long-term-development keep being dished out on PC, so there's a steady flow of time-consuming shit in the full sense of the words.

Re: Whoopdy Dooooo

[nmo.marques]

Wrong. PS4 is BSD based.

Re: Whoopdy Dooooo

[Anonymous Coward]

PS2 and PS3 are linux based you poofter.

Re: Whoopdy Dooooo

[Anonymous Coward]

PS2 had a special Linux available for it, but it did not use Linux for anything else.

Re: Whoopdy Dooooo

[otopico]

FreeBSD 9 to be exact.

I love me some FreeBSD.

Re:Whoopdy Dooooo

[Pinky's Brain]

Yet Chromebooks which have only a fraction of the capability of a windows laptop are selling fine. If Valve had been willing to put in the time and effort to create hardware which Just Werks, while creating a special store section for QA'd software which is up to standard ... it would have sold. It would have been like a console, which can dual boot windows.

They never wanted to go far enough to do that though, they don't want to be in the business of selecting a subset of games and giving it their seal of approval.

Re: Whoopdy Dooooo

[CronoCloud]

No. While PS2's can use the Linux kit, PS2's are not Linux systems when running games. IIRC some PS2 games include open source notices for things like image libraries or networking.

PS2 TOOL's do use Linux, RedHat in fact.

PS3's are BSD-based systems but not pure BSD. The kernel isn't a BSD kernel. The same pretty much applies to the PSP and Vita.

PS4's however ARE full-fledged BSD systems.

Eh

[skovnymfe]

Was there ever a market for this? It's always the same two Linux enthusiasts who are vocally adamant about there being a market for games on Linux, but who are we really kidding here? Games on Linux is a cute niche, sure, but it is a niche nonetheless. There is absolutely no need for it because it will always have consoles and Windows as competitors, and that just isn't a market you break into half-assedly. If Linux as a gaming platform was 150% better than Windows, then absolutely games on Linux could become a thing. But until then who really gives a fuck? Who's really going to invest the hundreds of millions of dollars that it's going to take to make Linux a competitive gaming platform?

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course there is a market, a giant one in terms of Steam users who could be swayed with a SteamOS banner/ad, and of course the few instances where Microsoft was so under fire for its Windows shit that utilization of those instances would have made a further domino, and the Steam users would have spread word of mouth as a testing base. Just stuff a few lines: "Easy to Install, All-Graphical-Interaction, no Auto-Updates, UI Focused on Desktop/Laptop Users, Easy to Customize UI, Default Music Player with great management + easy-to-switch themes, Default Video Player with easy-to-switch themes, Comes with LibreOffice or whatever compatible with Microsoft Office, all out of the box, PORTABLE (you can take it anywhere with you on a thumbstick!" and you've got yourself hotcakes selling whenever people are pissed at Windows.
The problem is that you have to have such an OS in the first place.

Re:Eh

[thebullshitpatrol]

> Who's really going to invest the hundreds of millions of dollars that it's going to take to make Linux a competitive gaming platform?

A company which wants to stand their ground against the platform which monopolizes their existence. Valve's just brandishing at this point, though.

Re:Eh

[MobyDisk]

It's all fun and games until Microsoft drops Windows as a gaming OS to focus on Cloud.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Your confusion all stems from your ignorance of why steam machines were created in the first place and what Microsoft was doing at the time.

Rewind a few years and Microsoft stated Windows 10 will be made so you can't just install software on it, but only be allowed to install from the windows store.
They also stated Steam would not be allowed on that store.

That alone should answer most of your questions.
Windows would no longer be a platform for gaming, except for the five people that use the windows store.

This leaves mac and linux as the only options.
You rail against linux as an option, which only leaves macs. But there is no reason to think that would become the best option of the two.

You mention linux would only be an option if it was better than windows. Well the fact linux and mac would be the only two platforms able to run games and windows would not, that is clearly a 100% better sort of thing.

You also claim steam machines were pointless, and yet here we are years later and the one and only effect steam machines were intended to have is prevent microsoft from locking out steam like they claimed they would. Do you see steam locked off of windows? No, so how does a product that served 100% of its goals count as pointless?

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Valve's just brandishing at this point, though.

If Valve sees the writing on the wall, why are they just brandishing? Their platform is built on their competitors platform, and their competitor wants to increase their integration between its previously separate gaming platforms. What can brandishing do other than buy them a few years? If they need to get off Windows to reduce risk (which they probably do), they should be doing it ASAP. It seems difficult to convince game publishers to support linux (which, as I understand, the graphics API is the biggest thing that needs to be done; if the game doesn't support Vulkan, it likely won't come to linux). So, why does SteamOS feel so abandoned?

Re:Eh

[iampiti]

I'd say Microsoft is not THAT stupid but seeing how they fucked up Windows 10 in various ways I'm starting to believe what you say can happen.

Re:Eh

[angel'o'sphere]

Linux is a competitive gaming platform.
You don't need more than a graphics card, a keyboard and a mouse to play a game.
And as far as I know, Linux supports Open GL just fine. E.g. Descent, one of my favourite games: https://www.dxx-rebirth.com/

The problem is that there are no mayour players targeting the market. I for my part would love to _write_ a game on/for linux, but I suck in marketing and doing it for free, I don't have the time.

Re: Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Citation needed for that one.

Microsoft never claimed that they would lock down running software on Windows 10. They did say they would release a cut down, more tablet like experience in Windows 10S, but that never materialized and is now showing up as an "easy mode" in the next update.

The only accurate thing in your post is saying that MS wouldn't allow Steam on the Windows store, but then no appstore that I'm aware of allows another to be installed like that! Google won't put the Amazon appstore in Play, but they don't stop you installating it manually

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem now is that Microsoft and Apple both have their own APIs for games (directx and metal) and are trying to kill the cross platform OpenGL. (and EGL)

Even blizzard has given up with overwatch.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

That's precisely the train of thought at Valve. MS had already shown a willingness to lock Windows to an App Store, and the whole Steam Machine/SteamOS maneuver was a move to show that they'd still have options if MS went that route. Sure, the project has been mostly a waste of money and time on paper, but MS has since thought twice about fucking with the gaming community, which vindicates the existence of Steam Machines/SteamOS.

Besides that, Valve's privately owned and doesn't need to answer to shareholders when spending their billions.

Re:Eh

[Pinky's Brain]

A market for what Valve offered no. A market for certified hardware platforms running a highly QA'd version of Linux already exists outside of home gaming though, Chromebook and Android. I think there would have been a market for a Valve certified Linux based consoles, with certified games guaranteed to meet UI specs and to run well. Especially if it could just run windows or Linux in a VM, to get the best of both worlds.

Valve never wanted to commit that much though. Quite the opposite if you look at Steam Direct, they don't even want to be involved to see if a game has an executable file at this point. They want to dump a steaming load on your PC, take their cut and run away cackling.

Re:Eh

[Oswald McWeany]

It's all fun and games until Microsoft drops Windows as a gaming OS to focus on Cloud.

Once they do that, I drop Windows. If Microsoft make it impossible for me to game on a PC, or force them to use Microsoft store... that will force me to learn Linux and set my computer up as a Linux machine. Despite MS's best efforts to push me away from them- I still use Windows.

Re:Eh

[dyslexicbunny]

I feel like if Valve was really serious about Steam OS, they would have announced Half Life 3, Team Fortress 3, Portal 3, DotA 3, and Left 4 Dead 3 all as exclusives to their platform. That's probably enough install base to get serious traction for Linux in gaming and that might be enough to have a momentum shift. But they don't make games anymore.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Was there ever a market for this? It's always the same two Linux enthusiasts who are vocally adamant about there being a market for games on Linux, but who are we really kidding here? Games on Linux is a cute niche, sure, but it is a niche nonetheless. There is absolutely no need for it because it will always have consoles and Windows as competitors, and that just isn't a market you break into half-assedly. If Linux as a gaming platform was 150% better than Windows, then absolutely games on Linux could become a thing. But until then who really gives a fuck? Who's really going to invest the hundreds of millions of dollars that it's going to take to make Linux a competitive gaming platform?

I know quite a few people (mostly engineers) that game exclusively on Linux.

Re:Eh

[nine-times]

If Linux as a gaming platform was 150% better than Windows, then absolutely games on Linux could become a thing. But until then who really gives a fuck?

Listen, the reality is that an awful lot of people just don't care about the OS. The question largely boils down to, "Can I play the games I want to play with adequate performance?" If the answer is "yes", then they don't much care what OS they're running those games on.

And then a lot of people particularly want to avoid being locked in to crappy vendors. Microsoft and Sony both have a long history of screwing over their customers and their partners, and people would like to avoid being stuck with them. Windows 10 keeps getting worse and worse, and consoles don't provide a lot of options, so people would like some alternative, and Linux is an obvious choice.

But what I don't really understand is, why are you so angry about that? Here you are, yelling at people on the Internet because they'd like to be able to play video games on a platform that you don't use. What's your goal here?

Re:Eh

[F.Ultra]

Which is why you have https://moltengl.com/ that let's you create your game in Vulkan (which works on Windows, Linux and Android) while still having it work with Metal automatically.

Re:Eh

[nine-times]

If Linux as a gaming platform was 150% better than Windows, then absolutely games on Linux could become a thing. But until then who really gives a fuck?

Listen, the reality is that an awful lot of people just don't care about the OS. The question largely boils down to, "Can I play the games I want to play with adequate performance?" If the answer is "yes", then they don't much care what OS they're running those games on.

And then a lot of people particularly want to avoid being locked in to crappy vendors. Microsoft and Sony both have a long history of screwing over their customers and their partners, and people would like to avoid being stuck with them. Windows 10 keeps getting worse and worse, and consoles don't provide a lot of options, so people would like some alternative, and Linux is an obvious choice.

But what I don't really understand is, why are you so angry about that?

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

They'd lose TONS of money in publishing these games on an OS that doesn't even occupy a half a percent of their consumer base. That's a big gamble to take just so they can shake their fists in the air and scream "LINUX!!!!" at the top of their lungs. A big enough of a gamble it might even sink them when... er, if... it backfires.

I'm sorry but I've been around here for over a decade and these fanboi scenarios have been around for longer than Slashdot has and every single one of them with the exception of Android has fallen on its face in an overly dramatic William Shatner style way. And even Android has its detractors from the Open Source goose steppers. Linux has come a long way but it's just not going to be the OS of choice on the home front. Yes, there are many small success stories if it makes you feel better but in all reality its still a floundering pet project on the desktop. I use to fanboi back in the era of Amiga and I know what it's like to watch a great product fade into obscurity. Linux will survive what Commodore couldn't but you're not going to see stories of MS going bankrupt because of open source in your lifetime nor your children nor your grandchildren.

Re:Eh

[skovnymfe]

I think you're projecting a degree of anger onto my post which just isn't there. It's just words. Maybe you're angry at someone?

Re:Eh

[phorm]

You might also like Descent Underground, though it's not fully released yet it is slowly getting there:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:Eh

[Nivag064]

Was there ever a market for this? It's always the same two Linux enthusiasts who are vocally adamant about there being a market for games on Linux, but who are we really kidding here? Games on Linux is a cute niche, sure, but it is a niche nonetheless.
[...]

If I bought any games, they would be for Linux.

Linux runs on more devices than all other O/S's combined.

We have two Linux desktops and a Linux laptop.

My son has his own Linux laptop for his University studies.

So why would I want games that only play on Microsoft boxen???

Re:Eh

[MobyDisk]

Yup. And the only thing that will let you be able to play all those games you've accumulated is Valve's efforts. So if/when the day comes, I'll be happy they ported all that stuff over.

Re:Eh

[skovnymfe]

You are, by your own definition, not someone who buys games so why should your opinion carry weight?

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

The Steam machine is effectively just an inferior console.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been tracking Operating Systems since before Microsoft existed.

Once CP/M was the main business O/S.

As niche markets open up that are too small for Microsoft to consider, they use Linux. As Linux can be modified to use new types of harder easier, and cheaper, than for a Microsoft O/S. Not to mention that there are more companies and developers for Linux than there are for Microsoft.

Currently the only market segment that Linux does not dominate is the desktop, and that is merely a matter of time.

With Microsoft's record for security and its attitude towards people who use its products, we should all encourage people to use alternatives. You seem oblivious to the problems Microsoft foists on people. In one two year contract, twice there were 2 days when we were not allowed to use our Microsoft boxen due to malware infestations. Several times I came back to my desk to find that Microsoft had decided to reboot my computer without giving me a chance to save my work. These are not problems I've ever had with Linux.

So it is somewhat of a stretch to say that Microsoft will always be a competitor.

I provided some facts and analysis in my previous post, not opinion -- which should be obvious had you cared to read what I wrote carefully.

Supporting the Windows monopoly

[Anonymous Coward]

By discontinuing steam machines your basicly sayng use the Windows Store instead, it’s integrated into the OS so why install steam. It looks like valve wants to be Netscaped.

better this way

[sad_]

i never really saw the point of steam machines, steamOS is available for free and you can build your own 'machine' install steamOS on it and you're done.
all the people i know that have a steam machine, have build their own. the official ones were either very expensive or underpowered while in the end, they were just plain pc's (alienware was about the only vendor that tried to make it not just a pc).

valve developed a controller and the link, i honestly don't know why they didn't do the same for steam machines.

Re:better this way

[Skinny Rav]

ZOTAC NEN, while not entry level at €900, was quite capable at that time with an i5 CPU and GTX 960 and good luck putting such hardware into a box the size of Mac mini, just thicker. I have it and two years later it still handles well any Linux-compatible game I throw at it. It's quiet and unobtrusive.

Having SteamOS preinstalled, preconfigured and tested on a capable, quiet and tiny system was definitely worth its price. BTW, I have a self-built desktop PC with dual booting, a RAID and whatnot, so it's not that I couldn't build an ITX SteamOS PC - but it would still be like four times bigger volume than ZOTAC.

However, I agree that the niche of tiny gaming PCs is tiny, it's fully occupied by ZOTAC and with the price tag it's definitely not "console replacement".

Re:better this way

[Anonymous Coward]

i never really saw the point of steam machines...

The point was to hedge their bets against MS and their "Windows Store" aspirations. Surely that was obvious all along.

Re:better this way

[Oswald McWeany]

valve developed a controller and the link, i honestly don't know why they didn't do the same for steam machines.

If you look at Windows desktop share % and Mac desktop share % I think that tells you what Valve were thinking.

The reason Windows is dominant and Mac as a desktop % is tiny is mostly down to the fact that anyone could make a Windows machine. High end, low end, everything in between- anyone could make a windows run PC and target any niche they wanted. Valve probably hoped the same thing would happen with steam machines. They were wrong, it didn't take off, but that's probably what they hoped would happen.

Give away?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are they giving away steam links? I only see them selling it for about full price.

Re: Give away?

[dj245]

I just got one 2 days ago in a bundle with Human Fall Down for $1 plus (~$8?) shipping.

Steam Box is cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought ZBOX NEN SN970 Steam Box, which is a machine that is smaller than Mac Mini, yet packing a quadcore i5, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD and 1TB HDD. I used SteamOS as a primary OS, with additional partitions for Win7 and Win10 for games not available on SteamOS nor running under Wine. Moreover, that machine is very quiet and power efficient, so when not running games, I use it for Ethereum (GPU) and Monero (CPU) mining. The 970M there is in MXM format, so it could be replaced by 1070 in MXM format as well if upgrade is needed (e.g. from SteamVR capable to SteamVR ready). And the large Steam logo on white top looks super rad!

steam on smart tv's soon ?

[sjwest]

I would guess a game platform like on a smart tv sooner or later. Steam machines are a nice reminder that not everything has to be microsoft but i guess the lack of gpu's and Linux support for crappy proprietary drivers say from nvidia did not help.

I run linux (no windows) and even i steer clear of gpu's.

An integrated smart tv (normally linux) with decent games i recon is where the consoles and steam will go next

Re:steam on smart tv's soon ?

[Skinny Rav]

So, you're not happy with a closed binary drivers on Linux, but happy to use a completely closed computing device, i.e. a smart tv?

Re:steam on smart tv's soon ?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can game on Android or did Google pull the plug on that? There are alternatives to MS yet none of them last very long

Re:steam on smart tv's soon ?

[Khashishi]

I think the emphasis is on crappy. If it was open and crappy, then at least the community can make it better.

GNU/Linux is a server OS

[SurenEnfiajyan]

I'll be probably down-voted by GNU/Linux advocates but it's mostly due to the fact that GNU/Linux isn't suitable as a gaming OS. As an OS it lacks several mechanisms that are necessary especially for complicated interactive/heavy software such as AAA games. For example, Linux threads were poorly implemented as a hack on fork() and as a result thread priority sucks https://www.gamingonlinux.com/... as IRL some threads are more critical like sound threads. Also the notorious bug 12309 where symptoms are sill present or bug 14505 where file descriptors and network sockets cannot be forcibly closed and without unmounting them first it leads to stale mount points, and in certain cases to oopses and crashes. Not even talking about unstable API/ABIs. Windows Mac OS and strangely many BSDs are mostly free from such Linux diseases. Even Google is planning to replace it with Fuchsia/Zircon in future.

Re:GNU/Linux is a server OS

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree with the shortcomings in linux, I think you're missing some things that Linux has an advantage on.

1. The network stack is much better than windows. This matters for FPS games. For this very reason, I used to run enemy territory on linux. (when it was still a thing)
2. Linux threads are terrible in many ways, but one upside to their design is that they have huge stack sizes. This is a nightmare when porting software to correct platforms, but it does work around bad coding issues in games.
3. Linux has one of the best VFS layers I've ever seen. It's probably the killer feature of that kernel.
4. Compared to Macs, Linux has faster system calls.
5. Linux is the second best platform for graphics drivers (sadly).
6. The linux kernel is the reference implementation of DRI/DRM code used for all accelerated graphics in other unix/bsd systems. (excluding mac os )

In summary, Linux is actually a decent gaming OS.

Windows is probably the best overall, but that could easily change if enough people cared.

Now I'm a BSD developer and I don't particularly like linux, but considering it's running on smart home products, cell phones, thermostats, servers, game consoles, etc I don't think it's terrible.

It would be nice if sony's PS4 work went into freebsd proper, but that's another issue.

Re:GNU/Linux is a server OS

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll be probably down-voted by GNU/Linux advocates but it's mostly due to the fact that GNU/Linux isn't suitable as a gaming OS. As an OS it lacks several mechanisms that are necessary especially for complicated interactive/heavy software such as AAA games. For example, Linux threads were poorly implemented as a hack on fork() and as a result thread priority sucks https://www.gamingonlinux.com/... as IRL some threads are more critical like sound threads. Also the notorious bug 12309 where symptoms are sill present or bug 14505 where file descriptors and network sockets cannot be forcibly closed and without unmounting them first it leads to stale mount points, and in certain cases to oopses and crashes. Not even talking about unstable API/ABIs. Windows Mac OS and strangely many BSDs are mostly free from such Linux diseases. Even Google is planning to replace it with Fuchsia/Zircon in future.

You sir have a lot of misconceptions. Linux is just fine as a gaming OS, and sometimes beats Windows if the games are native implementations (instead of badly ported console/Windows games).

Threading is much better on Linux that it is on Windows actually. You can look at Valve's port of the source engine - they were seeing higher frame rates on Linux than on Windows mostly due to better threading.

open source FAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another massive fail for linux and open source. How much longer can this shit go on, I'm actually embarrassed for you losers. Are you tired of losing yet snowflakes?

Re:open source FAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Blind much? There are so many wins, that these losses don't matter.

I'll assume you're right-wing, conservative, and hopefully business manager rather than food stamp junkie. Do you kick yourself for every time one of your business plays fails, ignoring all the wins? Then why the fuck do you pick on Linux?

Re:open source FAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Be embarrassed for yourself. Full time Linux user here for almost a decade. I have a fast PC with over 3000 games written for my OS and thousands more that run in emulation. I also enjoy a secure OS without telemetry data being harvested but you be special cause it means so much to you. I honestly don't care if you use Windows or Mac feel free I have an OS that I like that does what I need and runs thousands of applications and doesn't spy on me.

I'm lovin it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Disclaimer: I'm not running SteamOS or Steam Machine.

But I AM running Steam on Slackware64 and love, Love, LOVE IT!!

I just auto-got a bunch of new DLC for Kerbal Space Program.

Most fun I've had since Jumpman on the Commodore64.

Thanks Steam!

Re:I'm lovin it!

[OrangeTide]

As a Linux user I really appreciate that Steam works on Linux and there are several ported games. I think that's great.

But from a business standpoint I question if it is worth going after the 0.1% of linux gamers (as of 2017). I guess it depends on the development costs for a game publisher. If it amounts to flipping some build options on Unity and some additional testing, then maybe if it's a net profit for a game studio. If it involves new software architecture and implementation, then Linux support must be a labor of love rather than a smart business decision for a game studio.

P.S. - I use SDL2 for all my hobby game projects. It's great! (I'm a C dev so I'm biased toward C-friendly libraries and frameworks)

SteamLink

[Anonymous Coward]

I never expected the Steam Machines to gain much adoption - people running steam already have a gaming-capable computer.

The SteamLink, however - that is a useful device. I have one, I use it, it works very well. It's much better than buying a second separate machine to put in a different room, or trying to do something crazy with long cables through the house.

Re:SteamLink

[iampiti]

I don't think you'll ever see this since you're an AC but are you using ethernet? I guess so. I haven't been able to make it work well enough with ethernet (Steam link --> Router) and Wifi (PC --> Router) but it seems some people have.

Re:SteamLink

[focitrixilous P]

I have with a similar setup to yours, anything on 2.4Ghz is too noisy in my apartment building, it is great but not flawless on 5Ghz N

Re:SteamLink

[iampiti]

In my case it works almost the same both on 2.4 and 5 Ghz I suspect my router is to blame (the one the telco gave me)

Damn near free!

[bensafrickingenius]

"The original price was just $50, and Valve is basically giving them away right now." Current price? $49.99. So basically giving them away compared to original price...

Re:Damn near free!

[Anonymous Coward]

It goes on sale a lot, sometimes as low as $5.

Re:Damn near free!

[bensafrickingenius]

That's more like it! Thanks.

Re:Damn near free!

[Not-a-Neg]

They were on sale for $5 a few months ago.

Oh... uh... no. How sad.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was waiting for version 3 of the Steam Machines before I would purchase one, fucking GABEN!

Small wonder

[nospam007]

Who wants a steam machine in their living room, the noise, the coal and the risk of CO-poisoning alone.

Re:Small wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention the actual steam.

https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2665/can-high-pressure-steam-cut-a-body-in-half/

Hopefully steam os continues

[Anonymous Coward]

SteamOS itself has a small amount to do with the failure of these, it was mainly lack of advertising. SteamOS it's valves intent to be separate from windows as Microsoft makes their platform more closed down and monopolized.

Non steam streaming

[Anonymous Coward]

I find myself using the Steam Link mostly for streaming non-Steam content like streaming live sporting events from my PC since I cut the cable cord. Works pretty well for that. I haven't found a lot of games that look AND play great except for older titles like Dark Messiah: Might and Magic. That was fun on the big screen. Hopefully, they will allow them to continue to work and not brick them at some point.

Used bundles

[Chewbacon]

Go for nearly nothing, compared to retail, on eBay. I may have to try one of these out. Never wanted to drop the cash on them because of stutters and disconnects on my wifi'd laptop. Maybe it's more polished on the link?

Re:Used bundles

[Anonymous Coward]

Wifi is out for streaming games. My steam link is nice over the cat 5. I've started playing Ori and the blind forest and the Witcher 3 on it with a controller. I love it.

I'd suggest trying out a cable on your laptop first. Might save some cash.

Re:Used bundles

[Anonymous Coward]

If ethernet between different rooms is not feasible, check out powerline networking over house electrical wiring. It's in the gigabit speeds now.

Re:Used bundles

[Anonymous Coward]

They can easily be 5x slower than the rated speed (dunno about the latest ones though), and/or you should probably use only two of them (as a point-to-point link) ; with more they gotta share the "party line" surely.

Best is if all your stuff is recent enough so that you get a H265 encoder in the GPU and H265 decoder in the streamer box? I believe even 100 Base T ethernet would be usable then.

hmm

[blackomegax]

It's the year of the linux desktop! For the gnomes that live in landfills.

Just found out these were available

[The_Revelation]

But they still don't sell any of their hardware to Australia, so thats a bit of a missed opportunity for Steam. I've been hanging out to get a Steam Machine since almost 100% of my gaming is via in-home streaming. I've been waiting for ages for their Vive to be available as well... and their Steam controller (although I eventually caved last year and now have a really good DS4 controller - and as a result probably won't bother trying to find a Steam controller now I've mastered this) but unfortunately, since they don't sell them here I now have an Oculus on the way.

And I guess this is always going to be the problem with Steam. If they can't make their products available to international markets like their competition can (in this case, Sony or Facebook), then their products are always going to be niche obscurities with their exception of their first party titles (HL3 anyone?). And to be fair, Steam's name is garbage in Australia due to the way they keep screwing us which is why the ACCC keeps dragging them over the coals.

Re:Just found out these were available

[Oswald McWeany]

But they still don't sell any of their hardware to Australia, so thats a bit of a missed opportunity for Steam.

That's because steam rises and can't make it down-under.

Re:Just found out these were available

[scdeimos]

But they still don't sell any of their hardware to Australia, so thats a bit of a missed opportunity for Steam.

Not true. I bought a Steam Link and Steam Controller from EB Games about a year ago thinking it would be nice to play games on the big screen in the lounge. If you wanted a Steam Machine you could still buy the Alienware Steam Machine from Dell, but you'd have been better off buying a regular PC with more performance for the same price.

I found mouse/touchpad on the Steam Controller to be painful to use and the charm wore off after a couple of weeks. Now it's packed away.

~Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not bring some useful content instead of bashing on others. Thanks grammar nazi!

Re:~Re:Steam's Real Problem Will Be Different

[RoccamOccam]

That was clearly not bashing. The poster used "who's" twice, so I thought that he/she might want to know about "whose". I think that I was polite enough. You might want to consider your own posting, though.

Consoles are for vanilla games

[tepples]

FPS and racing games, yeah, I can see the couch being ideal for that... I'd probably buy a console though if I liked that type of game since they are tuned for that type of game.

The trouble with console versions of these games is that you can only play the vanilla game, not community-made mods that extend replay value.

Re:Consoles are for vanilla games

[CronoCloud]

That's not as much of a disadvantage as it sometimes has been in the past since even the "vanilla" versions of most games these days have more content than you can shake a stick at.

I mean sure, some gamers love their mods....but we have finite time and it eventually reaches a point of excess content that you'll never get to see even in the base game.

Re:Consoles are for vanilla games

[M.D.Smith]

Skyrim immediately comes to mind. That game was made so much better by the community driven mods, even a lot of the base game itself. Towns were made better, bugs were fixed that still existed in the vanilla game, new missions that made the world more populous. Fallout as well. But I understand that's more of the exception than the rule. My issues with consoles were all about lack of choice. The choice to build a better system and get true HD quality at 60+fps. Choice to play more than licensed IP. Choice to use more than the dual sticks for input. Modded games. Better deals from multiple vendors than you could receive in the second hand disc market. Attempting to build my own games. Haven't bought a console in a long, long time.

Sigh.

[ledow]

Release Half Life 3.

Make it SteamOS exclusive for 6 months.

Watch the money pour in (if it's anywhere near half-decent).

That they haven't already done this means they have no clue. I love Steam, I think they're great. But they missed the boat by just letting people make Steam Boxes that have... no unique selling point whatsoever. It's just an expensive PC operating as a console using software you can install on your existing PC for free.

Or you could have had the first PROPER set of VR-designed consoles by getting into bed with HTC or someone, and done the same.

They'll still rake in millions, from silly loot boxes and shite, but it bugs me that they aren't in the game-development industry any more. Steam was just a distribution method for HL2. They forced you onto it if you wanted to play HL2 or CS (after shutting down WON).

Now... there's nothing of incentive to move platform.

Re:Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a diehard half-life fan that has been playing it as long as it has existed. I've read theory sites. I've played the community led efforts like Black Mesa. I would not buy a steam machine for this game in 1 billion years. I would not install SteamOS on my machine either. Why would I need to do that when Steam client runs just fine on top of Linux or Windows?

Playing the long game

[Dega704]

I honestly don't think Valve had high hopes for it. At the very least, they weren't banking on it. It was more of an experiment to generate enthusiasm and get certain wheels turning to wrest control of PC gaming away from Microsoft; and to that end it seems to have been very effective. The Windows Store hasn't taken over gaming, Vulkan is poised to supplant Direct3D, AMD is open sourcing their Linux drivers, and Linux as a gaming OS (and even as a desktop OS in general) has improved by leaps and bounds as a result of their efforts. Criminy, DX12 wouldn't have even been released if Valve hadn't pulled this stunt; and yet every year the naysayers come buzzing to pronounce the death and failure of the entire effort because they can't see the forest for the trees. Meanwhile development keeps cranking along and more games keep getting Linux support. Will Linux ever truly compete with Windows as a PC gaming platform? Not for a long time, if ever. Does that matter? Not really. At this point it's like a knife Valve sharpens in their spare time to keep pointed at MS.

Steam link nearly given away?

[carni]

>The original price was just $50, and Valve is basically giving them away right now I just checked the Steam store, it's $49.99. Please let me know about the giving away part, I'd love to pick one up for nearly free or some such.

Re:Steam link nearly given away?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just checked the Steam store, it's $49.99. Please let me know about the giving away part,

Put it on your wishlist and next time it goes on sale, Valve will tell you about it themselves.

Linux is for REAL gamers

[OrangeTide]

Nethack, the greatest game ever made, runs on Linux.

Linux is for losers

[OrangeTide]

I mean sure, Linux won the phone market, home router market, and server market. But we can't call ourselves REAL men until we win the desktop market. Even if we overthrow the PC master race, somehow we'll never be as cool as they were.

also killed any hope of next DX being store only

[Joe_Dragon]

also killed any hope of next DX being store only

Well of COURSE!

[Hallux-F-Sinister]

Steam Machines were supposed to take PC gaming mainstream by simplifying setup and moving the games in your living room.

HOW did they expect, in this day and age, to get people to buy a computer powered by STEAM? What do they think this is, the eighteen eighties?!? First, there's the fact that powering them with electricity is FAR more convenient, and although modern high-end graphics cards DO seem to produce enough heat to fire a boiler off of, that would imply having a computer powered by electricity already, meaning no need for a Steam Machine... and who wants to be constantly interrupted while gaming, having to feed logs or filthy, dirty coal into the firebox?!? Then you get that crud all over your controller... also there's the risk of steam getting the electrical devices it's hooked up to wet, and while I'm sure steampunk fans would LOVE a Steam Machine, there simply aren't enough fans out there to... what's that? They're NOT literally powered by steam? It's just a name?

OH. Never mind. XD

Automated scripts removed it...

[Wescotte]

You can read http://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/1696043806550421224/ to the link being removed.

SteamOS is not going anywhere

[sad_]

https://steamcommunity.com/app...

"...we're continuing to invest significant resources in supporting the Vulkan ecosystem, tooling and driver efforts. We also have other Linux initiatives in the pipe that we're not quite ready to talk about yet; SteamOS will continue to be our medium to deliver these improvements to our customers, and we think they will ultimately benefit the Linux ecosystem at large."

And No One Noticed the Meme?

[tmjva]

So no one noticed the obvious meme in shutting a Valve to turn off Steam?