It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Valve is working on steam for linux(88 posts)(88 posts)
(88 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 25, 2012
avatar
Magnitus: Good for them, though good luck convincing game makers to port their previously released games to that OS for less than a 2% slice of the pie and unless they seriously improve Windows emulation, there is only so much wrapping and cracking they can do.

It is much easier creating the game with multiple OSes in mind to begin with than to retrofit them to work on multiple OSes.
avatar
Miaghstir: Not too many existing games have been ported to the Mac since Steam:Mac was released either, have they? Valve's source games, sure, some indies, and a handful others through Cedega/Wine. I'd wager the Linux ports will be pretty much the same ones.
No, the Mac does get some native releases such as Civilization V, Two Worlds II, King's Bounty, Torchlight, GTA games and others and outside the world of Steam a couple noteworthy ones I can think of include Company of Heroes, World of Warcraft and the upcoming Diablo III. Also, there is nothing wrong with getting something like The Witcher bundled up with WINE as a commercial release. Who cares how it is ported as long as it works well? Mac is ahead of Linux in getting native versions of games like the ones just mentioned. But Linux may be growing enough now to start getting more attention as well like we're seeing here with Valve jumping in.
Post edited April 26, 2012 by dirtyharry50
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
dirtyharry50: No, the Mac does get some native releases such as Civilization V, Two Worlds II, King's Bounty, Torchlight, GTA games and others and outside the world of Steam a couple noteworthy ones I can think of include Company of Heroes, World of Warcraft and the upcoming Diablo III. Also, there is nothing wrong with getting something like The Witcher bundled up with WINE as a commercial release. Who cares how it is ported as long as it works well? Mac is ahead of Linux in getting native versions of games like the ones just mentioned. But Linux may be growing enough now to start getting more attention as well like we're seeing here with Valve jumping in.
No Blizzard games are on Steam though (but all their games have been on Mac at or near release since at least Warcraft: Orcs and Humans), so they're outside the Steam discussion as far as I'm concerned, I could have been clearer and said "not too many existing Steam games have been SteamPlay'd" instead of "not too many existing games have been ported". And no, it doesn't matter exactly how a game is made to run, though I personally think using Wine is taking the easy way out. Yes, the Mac is ahead, but with Steam getting ported to GNU/Linux I'm quite sure that system will be getting access (almost) all SteamPlay titles.
Post edited April 26, 2012 by Miaghstir
Posted April 26, 2012
The important thing is - how will this increase the number of games for linux? :P.
Posted April 26, 2012
Valve's a little late to the party.

With the imminent arrival of the Humble Store and Desura acting as pretty much the anti-DRM man's Steam for Linux, I doubt that Steam is going to find many real fans here. Most of the stuff that will fall under the SteamPlay umbrella is already available as DRM-free downloads elsewhere.

The main things that this is going to bring to Linux are L4D, Half-Life and Portal, which anyone using Steam (even under WINE) will already have played to death if they are remotely interested.

So unless Valve expects to get major publishers on-board and start providing standalone, DRM-free installers, I'm afraid Desura has the upper hand here.

avatar
hedwards: You're one to talk.
avatar
PoSSeSSeDCoW: Trolling is such a bad look for you.
Once again, you're a fine one to talk about trolling.
Post edited April 26, 2012 by jamyskis
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Pidgeot: Licensing is also a factor; GCC is licensed under the GPL, so they would have had to distribute the source code as well. Hardly ideal when you're competing against several other companies (plus, Microsoft really doesn't like GPL).
Only if they make changes. When you bundle GPL software you have to include a copy of the GPL in the same directory as the binary or source if you have it, and you must make it clear that the source code is available (adding a link to gnu.org at the bottom of the GPL file is enough).

You only have to include the source code if you make changes to it, otherwise just notifying the user that the original source is available is enough.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Pidgeot: Licensing is also a factor; GCC is licensed under the GPL, so they would have had to distribute the source code as well. Hardly ideal when you're competing against several other companies (plus, Microsoft really doesn't like GPL).
avatar
TheJoe: Only if they make changes. When you bundle GPL software you have to include a copy of the GPL in the same directory as the binary or source if you have it, and you must make it clear that the source code is available (adding a link to gnu.org at the bottom of the GPL file is enough).

You only have to include the source code if you make changes to it, otherwise just notifying the user that the original source is available is enough.
True, but you also have to GPL your program if it becomes too tightly bound to GPL software. Per my understanding, this would likely have been the case for their IDE, unless they approached it from an entirely different angle.

Even if it wouldn't have been an issue at the time, it could easily become one later, if they wanted to do something more advanced. It's just not worth the risk for a company like Microsoft to even contemplate using a GPL compiler.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Pidgeot: True, but you also have to GPL your program if it becomes too tightly bound to GPL software. Per my understanding, this would likely have been the case for their IDE, unless they approached it from an entirely different angle.

Even if it wouldn't have been an issue at the time, it could easily become one later, if they wanted to do something more advanced. It's just not worth the risk for a company like Microsoft to even contemplate using a GPL compiler.
Nope. You only release your software under GPL if it includes code from other GPL software. It's perfectly fine for me to create an IDE that uses GCC as an external compiler and lock my IDE up under a hurtful and dangerous proprietary license.

There are zero issues for anybody if Microsoft to use GCC instead of their own compiler in Visual Studio, so long as they didn't touch the GCC source code.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Elmofongo: I really don't get why there is so many steam haters here, steam has never been a skin off my nose so far I only had minor/bearable issues with it that I could easily fix.
avatar
gooberking: Then you must be missing something fundamental about how Steam works and how that differs from one of the MAJOR philosophies of GOG(here) that brings people like me here in the first place. Its easy math as to why there is a high rate of steam hate around this ol' digital tavern. For the ale here is marketed to that very type and we drink from it gladly.

Which isn't to say steam users don't come here too, but it is a little surprising why the suits come into the biker bar wondering whats up with all the guys in leather.
Well said, exactly my feelings.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Pidgeot: True, but you also have to GPL your program if it becomes too tightly bound to GPL software. Per my understanding, this would likely have been the case for their IDE, unless they approached it from an entirely different angle.

Even if it wouldn't have been an issue at the time, it could easily become one later, if they wanted to do something more advanced. It's just not worth the risk for a company like Microsoft to even contemplate using a GPL compiler.
avatar
TheJoe: Nope. You only release your software under GPL if it includes code from other GPL software. It's perfectly fine for me to create an IDE that uses GCC as an external compiler and lock my IDE up under a hurtful and dangerous proprietary license.

There are zero issues for anybody if Microsoft to use GCC instead of their own compiler in Visual Studio, so long as they didn't touch the GCC source code.
Again, that depends on the architecture and functionality of the IDE.

For example, in order to support auto-completion (e.g. IntelliSense), you need some way of making sense of the code. If Microsoft used GCC as their primary compiler, they would need a secondary compiler to avoid integrating parts of GCC into the IDE, or they would need to find a way to make GCC output everything in a manner they could parse (without becoming too reliant on the fact that it is GCC doing the output).

GNU themselves state that it is not well-defined what exactly the line is between an "aggregate" (simple bundling), and a "modified version", but something can - at least in their opinion - be a modified version even if it is strictly a separate program that includes no code.
Posted April 26, 2012
Gabe Newell...Linux saint? I don't think so.

Valve is not a charity. It is company build for profit. And now Gabe cornered by Windows 8, Apple Store, consoles and other things, look forward for alternative plans. And Linux is great base for his Steam box plans. He has no restrictions for license, have free tools etc...

Steam philosophy is the opposite of the Linux philosophy. In fact we can not compare them because one is a company seek profit one is a community-driven effort for an operating system for everyone to use however they want freely.
Steam coming to Linux for "not loving us Linux users of course" but to make profit.

If Gabe want to win the Linux community he should strip the DRM from Linux version, but keep the DRM in Windows version and simple packages for games. And of course we should launch games without need of Steam. Open sourcing the client while keeping the copyright will also benefit greatly. Releasing the Steam codes will cost them no harm. On the contrary they will benefit from the experienced Linux community for developing Steam even further in Linux platform. And if everything goes well Nvidia and ATI(AMD) join to improve their drivers and them the OpenGL and other tools. We can have a great platform for gamers. Without the chains of Window they can get gaming to point that has never seen. And also we can forget about the old games don't run on Windows 9 or 10 etc. In Linux you won't see that kind of problem.

Think about it, if it occurs would be great. But i see it as a %00000.1 possibility.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
Paingiver: Gabe Newell...Linux saint? I don't think so.

Valve is not a charity. It is company build for profit. And now Gabe cornered by Windows 8, Apple Store, consoles and other things, look forward for alternative plans. And Linux is great base for his Steam box plans. He has no restrictions for license, have free tools etc...

Steam philosophy is the opposite of the Linux philosophy. In fact we can not compare them because one is a company seek profit one is a community-driven effort for an operating system for everyone to use however they want freely.
Steam coming to Linux for "not loving us Linux users of course" but to make profit.

If Gabe want to win the Linux community he should strip the DRM from Linux version, but keep the DRM in Windows version and simple packages for games. And of course we should launch games without need of Steam. Open sourcing the client while keeping the copyright will also benefit greatly. Releasing the Steam codes will cost them no harm. On the contrary they will benefit from the experienced Linux community for developing Steam even further in Linux platform. And if everything goes well Nvidia and ATI(AMD) join to improve their drivers and them the OpenGL and other tools. We can have a great platform for gamers. Without the chains of Window they can get gaming to point that has never seen. And also we can forget about the old games don't run on Windows 9 or 10 etc. In Linux you won't see that kind of problem.

Think about it, if it occurs would be great. But i see it as a %00000.1 possibility.
Why is it being cornered by Windows 8?
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
NightK: Why is it being cornered by Windows 8?
Apparently it'll have integrated GFWL or something.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
NightK: Why is it being cornered by Windows 8?
avatar
Pheace: Apparently it'll have integrated GFWL or something.
Everytime I hear about windows 8 I get annoyed, it seems they're going for a closed OS much akin to Apple's OS... I hate being chained... I do love Linux releases but I hate not being able to play most games I love.
Posted April 26, 2012
avatar
NightK: Why is it being cornered by Windows 8?
avatar
Pheace: Apparently it'll have integrated GFWL or something.
Yup. In phoronix news they also stated that how much he hate about Windows 8. Even the author told himself to install and try Windows 8 to see is it really that bad as Gabe said.

That's enough already. Gaming really should be moved to Linux. The community must supply development tools and API's better than Microsoft's to encourage Linux gaming. Valve has power to be a lokomotive but i think too much about Linux community.
Posted April 26, 2012
Well, Gabe surely isn't alone in his dislike for Windows 8. That seems to be the general opinion at the moment. I doubt I'll make the switch unless something forces me.

But yeah, he has more reason to dislike it when a competitor (lol... well. somewhat...) gets worked into windows like that.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Valve is working on steam for linux(88 posts)(88 posts)
(88 posts)