Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Sep 2013 21:44 UTC
Games

Gabe Newell, the co-founder and managing director of Valve, said today that Linux is the future of gaming despite the minuscule share of the market it has today.

That seems hard to believe, given that Newell acknowledged Linux gaming generally accounts for less than one percent of the market by any measure including players, player minutes, and revenue. But Valve is going to do its best to make sure Linux becomes the future of gaming by extending its Steam distribution platform to hardware designed for living rooms.

"Half-Life 3 - SteamBox/Linux exclusive". There, chicken and egg problem solved.

Thread beginning with comment 572260
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Thom Nails It
by CapEnt on Tue 17th Sep 2013 03:37 UTC in reply to "Thom Nails It"
CapEnt
Member since:
2005-12-18

Anything that brings a little competition to the desktop world is good. The Microsoft monopoly has led to a complete stagnation, the PC world is virtually standstill for a decade now.

If you look 13 years in the past, you will see: my TV evolved from 29" CRT, to a 50" Plasma, then to a 45" LCD LED, and now i have a 3D capable LCD. Now, the desktop computer remains mostly unchanged. My phone changed from a Ericsson brick with a single line monochrome LCD display to a Razr HD. My console evolved from a Nintendo 64 to a soon to be PS4.

No matter how you look at Windows 7/8, it still has almost the same Win95 feeling/experience, and this leaded us to a stagnation in the very concept of desktop hardware: we are still interacting with it as we did 25 year ago, with a keyboard and a mouse on a plain 2D desktop.

Even crap monitor resolutions of 13 years ago like 1280x1024 are still popular, and almost all new desktop computers shipped at 2013 will never leverage their full processing power because there is simple nothing new to do on it: all new fun is on tablets, and desktops officially became just a electronic typewriter for common users

Touch is finally trying to take off for desktops, but as a result of the fast evolving tabled/smartphone market, not due a evolutionary drive on the desktop marked. Same for high density displays, SSDs, smooth GUI animations, focus on new user experiences, among other things.

The sole thing that has led to evolution on the desktop is the game niche and their enormous drive for new GPUs/CPUs.

The PC world currently is so boring that today it became just a small part of all news reported here at OSNews, and elsewhere.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Thom Nails It
by ssokolow on Tue 17th Sep 2013 04:47 in reply to "RE: Thom Nails It"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

Anything that brings a little competition to the desktop world is good. The Microsoft monopoly has led to a complete stagnation, the PC world is virtually standstill for a decade now.

If you look 13 years in the past, you will see: my TV evolved from 29" CRT, to a 50" Plasma, then to a 45" LCD LED, and now i have a 3D capable LCD. Now, the desktop computer remains mostly unchanged. My phone changed from a Ericsson brick with a single line monochrome LCD display to a Razr HD. My console evolved from a Nintendo 64 to a soon to be PS4.

No matter how you look at Windows 7/8, it still has almost the same Win95 feeling/experience, and this leaded us to a stagnation in the very concept of desktop hardware: we are still interacting with it as we did 25 year ago, with a keyboard and a mouse on a plain 2D desktop.

Even crap monitor resolutions of 13 years ago like 1280x1024 are still popular, and almost all new desktop computers shipped at 2013 will never leverage their full processing power because there is simple nothing new to do on it: all new fun is on tablets, and desktops officially became just a electronic typewriter for common users

Touch is finally trying to take off for desktops, but as a result of the fast evolving tabled/smartphone market, not due a evolutionary drive on the desktop marked. Same for high density displays, SSDs, smooth GUI animations, focus on new user experiences, among other things.

The sole thing that has led to evolution on the desktop is the game niche and their enormous drive for new GPUs/CPUs.

The PC world currently is so boring that today it became just a small part of all news reported here at OSNews, and elsewhere.


While I agree the PC world has experienced stagnation, I disagree with you on how that stagnation expresses itself.

As implemented in TVs, "3D-capable" is a headache-inducing gimmick. (Though I've got high hopes for the Oculus Rift.)

Windows 7/8 is the same core experience as Windows 95 for the same reason that cars have "stagnated" at a steering wheel, predictably-placed pedals, mirrors, shift, etc. ...because it works (the problem lies in the details, not the concept) well enough and people have decided that the productivity afforded by familiarity is more important than trying to squeeze more productivity out of a radical redesign.

"Crap monitor resolutions" like 1280x1024 are still popular for two reasons... one which is practicality and one which is stagnation:

First, practicality: What will you DO with a bigger monitor resolution? For a lot of people, 1280x1024 is enough and there's no reason to replace a perfectly good monitor just to have something shiny and new.

Second, stagnation: For a lot of people, the benefit of a bigger desktop is multi-tasking but, aside from Aero Snap, OS vendors haven't put much work into streamlining window management on larger desktops.

That, combined with how pretty much any computer can drive two monitors these days, leads to the paradoxical situation where some people (myself included) actually prefer to have two 1280x1024 monitors rather than one bigger one because it essentially doubles the number of Snap/Maximize zones available.

(Also, while this is more a niche complaint, do you have any idea how difficult it is to find non-widescreen LCDs these days?)

As for new PCs never leveraging their processing power, what "new fun" do tablets have that PCs don't? Aside from "retinal" displays (which aren't limited to tablets), the only innovation I see is the march toward lower and lower power CPUs... and you can always do that on a desktop too if you want. (My current PC has a 65W TDP dual-core Athlon and I'll probably go to something 48W next time I replace it.)

Sure, there are various computer vision innovations and ideas like augmented reality, but those are more smartphone things since waving a tablet around in front of your face is almost as awkward and ridiculous-looking as doing so with a lightweight laptop.

Ok, Touch. What good does touch on the desktop do? (Aside from tiring out your arms if the screen is on the desk or giving you a kink in your neck and/or a hunch if it's on your lap?) Put smudgy fingerprints on your screen?

As for glitzy animations... there's a reason that everyone in my family (two artists, a programmer, and a gamer with an engineer's mind) either runs Linux with an LXDE desktop or runs Windows 7 with Aero turned off... it's a waste of resources that could be better directed at making the system more responsive.

While I agree there is some stagnation, as evidenced by how long it took for the XBox 360 controller's Windows drivers to finally give indie platformer devs a "standard" gamepad to develop against, most of what you complain about isn't stagnation... it's just the signs of a form factor that's matured and is selective about which so-called innovations it embraces.

I get the feeling you've got the "the OS itself should be a toy and anyone who doesn't agree is blind" mindset I grew out of. Yes, I still love to tinker around with OSes... but there's a time for that and, when I'm on the clock, I don't want change for change's sake.

(That's why I try to avoid things like GMail. Their UIs keep changing and popping up "Hey! Try our fun new feature!" dialogs when I just want to get things done. It's also why I work on Linux. If I pick a "get things done" distro like Debian and install a "get things done" desktop like LXDE or Fluxbox, I don't have to retrain my skills every second upgrade.)

Edited 2013-09-17 04:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[3]: Thom Nails It
by ssokolow on Tue 17th Sep 2013 05:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Thom Nails It"
ssokolow Member since:
2010-01-21

P.S. Two other things I'd suggest if you really think touch is such an innovation:

http://www.osnews.com/story/23371/The_CLI_Reincarnate_the_Gesture_I...

https://www.leapmotion.com/

(The latter being an example of a design with potential to be more ergonomic and smudge-free than an actual touch screen)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Thom Nails It
by tkeith on Tue 17th Sep 2013 14:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Thom Nails It"
tkeith Member since:
2010-09-01

I can sum up your post in one sentence:

"I don't like change!"

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Thom Nails It
by bert64 on Tue 17th Sep 2013 19:48 in reply to "RE[2]: Thom Nails It"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Your talk of "snap/mazimize zones" suggests you are very windows centric, an os that has always been poor at multitasking and was largely designed to run a single app maximized at once...

A larger screen has always been beneficial for the typical unix based window manager... And even old versions of X11 would compute the DPI of the screen and scale things appropriately, at least programs that were properly written...

I want a higher resolution screen to provide more detail at the same physical size, and i want a physically larger screen for multitasking...

I also never really liked multiple screens, having multiple virtual screens (10+) is much easier as you dont have to keep tilting your head and lack of virtual screens is again something that virtually every platform except windows has had for years.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Thom Nails It
by Fergy on Tue 17th Sep 2013 06:35 in reply to "RE: Thom Nails It"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Anything that brings a little competition to the desktop world is good. The Microsoft monopoly has led to a complete stagnation, the PC world is virtually standstill for a decade now.

Agreed.
If you look 13 years in the past, you will see: my TV evolved from 29" CRT, to a 50" Plasma, then to a 45" LCD LED, and now i have a 3D capable LCD.

My cpu evolved from a .8Ghz single core to a 3Ghz quad core. My harddrive evolved in to a super fast ssd. My simple gpu evoled into a multipurpose number cruncher.
Now, the desktop computer remains mostly unchanged. My phone changed from a Ericsson brick with a single line monochrome LCD display to a Razr HD. My console evolved from a Nintendo 64 to a soon to be PS4.

Even your once special console evolved into a microATX pc
No matter how you look at Windows 7/8, it still has almost the same Win95 feeling/experience, and this leaded us to a stagnation in the very concept of desktop hardware: we are still interacting with it as we did 25 year ago, with a keyboard and a mouse on a plain 2D desktop.

Even though the consoles tried to change games until they would be better played on a gamepad the mouse could not be beaten and the gamepad stayed an accessory to the pc.
Even crap monitor resolutions of 13 years
that are still higher than what consoles do
ago like 1280x1024 are still popular, and almost all new desktop computers shipped at 2013 will never leverage their full processing power because
I have never heard of Crysis 3
there is simple nothing new to do on it: all new fun is on tablets
like infinity blade and...[q], and desktops officially became just a electronic typewriter for common users

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Thom Nails It
by tkeith on Tue 17th Sep 2013 14:17 in reply to "RE: Thom Nails It"
tkeith Member since:
2010-09-01

I could not agree with your comment more. While it's not going anywhere soon, anything to reduce our reliance in society on Microsoft is a good thing. We should never lock such an important part of technological development(computers) to one company. Especially not one who squanders its success as much as Microsoft has.

Reply Parent Score: 1