Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2012 23:34 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 540528
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Depends on your definition of "viable"
by mistersoft on Tue 30th Oct 2012 14:09
in reply to "RE[3]: Depends on your definition of "viable""
I think that's about spot on. Even if down the line at around windows 9 time, the situation is Steam running on a 'less Metro-only' Windows 9 the majority of the time, alongside a really good smooth running Linux variant with some better graphics and audio drivers ; let alone the slightly less likely but not impossible situation of a Valve sponsored/produced 'Valve-OS' running atop a bespoke 'Steam PC'/console - that might be Valve's dream triumvirate outcome for Steam -- which would still be Windows in the top spot numbers wise, and could evolve from there. Who knows.




Member since:
2010-06-24
I think that's exactly Valve's agenda. They are afraid Windows 9 will be metro only and only allow windows store and they are trying to put pressure on Microsoft. The best way to put pressure on Microsoft is to prove them they can build a gaming platform on a competing operating system.
Even if Valve doesn't Valve to abandon Windows, it also make sense from a business perspective to not depend on a single vendor (Microsoft) for a critical requirement of your product (the OS on which it runs).