Linked by Debjit on Mon 23rd Aug 2010 21:16 UTC
Games A rumor has been going around for about four months now that Valve is coming out with a Linux version of Steam and had a lot of people in the Linux community very excited. However Valve have officially killed the rumor. And it is not what people wants to hear - there is no Linux version of Steam in development.
Thread beginning with comment 437932
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well this goes in the 'duh' category
by Icaria on Tue 24th Aug 2010 08:49 UTC
Icaria
Member since:
2010-06-19

The formal announcement made by phoronix could never be verified, as the only source they were willing to provide was another site that was explicitly reporting on the rumours in earlier phoronix articles, along with the Mac announcement. It was bunk from day one, as anyone who did any cursory fact checking would have known.

There obviously are some barely functional builds of the steam client for *nix but that in no way ensures that Valve have any intention of releasing it, let alone making it production-ready.

Reply Score: 2

deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Agree. Phoronix's so called 'proof' was dubious at best... Oh wow, some id strings in the DLL's and executables list a bunch of OS... you'd think they were using or incorporating some stock libraries or something.

... and just because one of a dozen libraries used can compile to a target doesn't mean the entire application can or that the developer WANTS TO!

I mean, I write games in Free Pascal (which can target a bunch of systems) using SDL, OpenGL and OpenAL (which can target a bunch of systems) -- but I only PLAN on windows releases and have done zero testing or planning to run anything I've written on other platforms. Even though I'm releasing windows only, I'm willing to bet you could find all those same strings in my code.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

Agree. Phoronix's so called 'proof' was dubious at best... Oh wow, some id strings in the DLL's and executables list a bunch of OS... you'd think they were using or incorporating some stock libraries or something.

The evidence was slightly more compelling than that. There was an actual Linux binary (i.e. totally separate from the Windows and Mac OS X binaries), it just didn't do much.

However, I agree with your conclusion. There was no evidence that this support was official or that a real Linux client would ever come. Phoronix totally made up that part.

Reply Parent Score: 2