Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 4th Dec 2013 18:06 UTC

"Joining the Linux Foundation is one of many ways Valve is investing in the advancement of Linux gaming," Mike Sartain, a key member of the Linux team at Valve said. "Through these efforts we hope to contribute tools for developers building new experiences on Linux, compel hardware manufacturers to prioritize support for Linux, and ultimately deliver an elegant and open platform for Linux users."

Mark my words: Valve will do for Linux gaming what Android did for Linux mobile. Much crow will be eaten by naysayers in a few years.

Permalink for comment 577984
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by shmerl
by Alfman on Thu 5th Dec 2013 09:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:


"This is the problem with the Linux community, cannot and will not listen to any criticism no matter how valid."

Well, some people don't like hearing criticism of the communities they belong to. However it's no more true for linux than for other communities. You get the same kind of flack for criticizing microsoft and apple.

For what it's worth, I think linux should adopt a stable ABI. I've given it a lot of thought and in my mind a good compromise exists by making the ABIs stable between minor versions and allowing them to break between major ones.

Keep in mind that even though the windows kernel maintains long term kernel API/ABI, microsoft has never the less broken many existing drivers using those stable APIs due to new kernel restrictions (especially with win vista/7). Even with win8 I discovered the dameware mirror driver broke from win7. So from a practical user point of view, windows users sometimes have to go through similar kernel driver breakages (regardless of the underlying cause).

So for a linux example: a driver could be compatible with specific major versions like linux 3.x. A new driver build will be needed for linux 4.x. This allows linux to have most of the benefits of stable interfaces. Additionally linux would not get stuck with long term cruft in legacy interfaces that no longer make sense or aren't optimal for exposing the features of new hardware. Hardware manufacturers could stop worrying about individual kernel builds, only the major ones.

I think this is a very reasonable approach, but alas I am not in charge.

Reply Parent Score: 3