'Valve: Linux more viable than Windows 8 for gaming'
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2012 23:34 UTC
Games I'm not 100% sure this is actually word-for-word, but alas. "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 moving away from an open platform model." I feel like a broken record by now but here we go again: keep an eye on Valve, even if you're not into games. This is the company pushing NVIDIA and AMD to improve their Linux support, with enough clout and name to actually get stuff done. Valve doesn't mess around.
E-mail Print r 4   134 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/kgf
Permalink for comment 540722
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

I thought you weren't the "omg the sky is falling" type? Those fictional series of steps you just listed are the epitome of the paranoid quote you just said you were not.


Im not being paranoid. I don't believe Microsoft will end up doing that. But it is a completely realistic scenario. I believe it is naive to pretend that something like this couldn't happen, it could - quite easily actually.

In other words, Microsoft CAN'T close off Win32. Because again, the basis of what makes Windows so powerful are applications that exist today *AS THEY ARE NOW*


You didn't read what I posted. If they wanted to they could make a whitelist of popular apps and allow them to run unsigned... Sure, they can't include everything obviously, but they could more than likely include enough to make the vast majority of users not notice. They could even forego the whitelist and just go the "bug the user with a warning" route indefinitely - i.e. never really "break" the apps, just make it a pain to run them if they are not signed...

The result is the same either way - it herds developers to their distribution model, and they make more $$$. Don't underestimate the power of $$$.

Like I mentioned earlier to Thom, this disaster scenario you are making up is making the following assumptions:

1. That Microsoft is willing to throw away all of their backwards compatibility that they worked so hard to preserve the past few decades.
2. That Microsoft even WANTS to get rid of the desktop.
3. That Microsoft even CAN get rid of the desktop.


Your absolutely right. The thing is nobody but Microsoft knows the answer to 1 and 2. But 3 is definitely true, pretending its not isn't terribly useful.

Microsoft recognizes the strength they have with the desktop. It's why they are using it is as a selling point for Windows 8. Microsoft will not abandon the desktop until the desktop and laptop form factor themselves are dead. And the only way that will happen is if every x86 device on the planet dies and x86 is never again produced. But hey, that's another ridiculous assumption altogether.


I think you are underestimating the allure of having total control of distribution on the platform... Again, I don't think Microsoft will go this route - but at the same time I don't for a second believe they wouldn't do to if they felt they could get away with it.

I just want to keep them honest. I think demanding a roadmap for win32 development going forward is not too much to ask.

Edited 2012-10-31 17:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3