What is taken away from the current Linux arena by the addition of Steam if you don't actually use Steam? If you're using Linux for the software freedoms, then they remain intact. If you're using it for the obscurity, then I don't know what to tell you.

My comment wasn't that Steam would edge out the original linux core directly, but that very thing could occur by Linux becoming a more mainstream option. If a person was using linux to avoid being "average," "mainstream," or "a sheep," then such a person may end up rejecting linux down the road simply for becoming the viable platform it has been aspiring to become. In this case it has nothing to do with Steam, but the migration of people to the linux platform that some early adopters may find distasteful.

Its just a theory but it tends to happen that the "cool" people like to go find other cool things once its not cool anymore because everyone else decided to like it too.

Linux becoming "more" mainstream is a good thing.

I think so, though I think there could be some hardcore old time linux users out there that aren't wild about the idea. Not that it really is up to them.

I agree, but I think the additional thing to consider is that along with engine technology, middleware like Havok may also need to be ported too, or at least get ripped out and replaced with a suitable equivalent. Either that (will they all jump to Haiku/BeOS? Amiga OS5?) or there may be an upsurge in interest for other DD portals like Desura, IndieVania, GamersGate, and of course, GOG.

Why is that a bad thing? Good riddance to them. Precisely this kind of blind emotional zealotry is very hurtful to the community as a whole.

Originally Linux or other similar Os/Kernel were not created to be "cool","geeky" or "anti-corporate" but were trying to promote a different way to see software development were every users or developer could have freely access to the full source and were free to improve/modify it should they want to.

Whenever you or I agree with it is another debate, personally I am not a great fan of several of Stallman or the FSF views. But still that's what Linux or even BSD are about, not just to be a "l33t" or free alternative to Windows.

So yes, Steam will probably bring more users to Linux but I see it more as a double edge sword, new users yes, but a sizable porting of them not giving a damn about what Linux stands for or was originally created for.

It's like if a vegetarian club was trying to convince more peoples to join them by offering an all you can eat steak tartare and barbecue buffet. Yes it will probably means more peoples joining you "club", but if someday 90% of the member of your club are meat lovers can you still call yourself a "vegetarian" club.

Indeed, they're very much as big sheep as the ones they were trying to avoid being, just listening to a different whistle.

Then there are some of us hat don't actually care about what the club is called, only what it can offer us (as long as it serves good enough vegetarian food without the hassle of other places where I have to make a special order a week earlier, I'm fine).

There are some fine philosophies in the linux world beyond raw MS hate, but that doesn't mean such people haven't been hanging out in Linux world out of lack of better options. If I had nickel for every time I've heard someone saying , "I WONT EVER F'ING PUT THAT PIECE OF WINDOZE S*** ON MY PC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" well then I would probably be able to buy something quite nice for myself. In fact one guy was livid, because he couldn't play the Linux version of ID's Return to Castle wolfenstein without extracting the game data files. Which you had to have a working install for, meaning he would have to use wine. And he didn't want to use wine because that was far too much like supporting Windows and "I WONT EVER F'ING PUT THAT PIECE OF WINDOZE S*** ON MY PC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Such people exist, and to some degree have probably both contributed to linux development, and hurt its growth. My statements weren't really saying anything beyond that, nor was I implying that such people were the foundation upon which the linux community is founded. There are some ideals of transparency, and giving that are much healthier that have not just given us linux but true open source, cross platform alternatives to major software needs. I prefer to think that those people are linux's fathers and future.

It better. GOG sells some of my favourite games free of DRM, regional pricing, and other such good stuff, and yet has the gall to not sell the Linux versions of these games despite them already existing? I want Heroes of Might and Magic 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004 for Linux already!

I know I am probably preaching to the choir by asking this but have all of you voted here?

What licensing would be required to sell indie titles, though? Many of them have Linux versions these days. That, plus some developers/publishers like Epic do the Linux versions themselves so it can't be that difficult. What's more, why wait for Steam when Desura is already doing all the work?

True, the indie titles and Epic are the exception in general, but that is only a small fraction of the GOG catalog. For the vast majority of GOG's library, it's not that simple. Besides, even if they did have the licensing, they would still have the problem of support; they would need Linux gurus in the fold in order to support the games and in the past they have said they don't (yet). Why wait for Steam? What's Desura, that's why. Desura is almost more insignificant than GOG in the digital distribution market and they've only had a Linux client for less than a year now. If someone as big and established as Valve can make Linux gaming a success on Steam, then GOG can be certain that it will be safe for them to give it a try.

Sounds logical enough. It will be a while before GOG goes through with it if that is the case, however. I hope the GOG Community Wishlist helps persuade them further and quicker.