I'm glad he approves of it. Generally if he doesn't approve of something like this then it triggers a string of "Torvalds says" articles that do nothing for nix. Then someone brings up a RMS angle and then it all devolves into an artificially created shtstorm which keeps the entire FOSS scene in this constant paralyzed state.
Personally I think Valve - as great as they are - will step on a pile of RMS flavored toes. So be it. They bring raw power to the (desktop) nix world like never before. nix hasn't really moved an inch on the desktop front anyway...whats the worse that could happen? The risk is acceptable given the massive potential progress.
I think it'll also provide much needed focus to the nix world. Sure variety has its benefit...but at some point it becomes fragmentation not variety. A central vocal point like valve will go a long way to fixing that.
nix hasn't really moved an inch on the desktop front anyway
What a ridiculous thing to say. Millions of people use *nix operating systems on their desktop computers every day. This number is significantly higher than a few years ago. When I hear someone complaining about state of GNU/Linux on desktops, they usually mean they can't play gamez. Sometimes they add something about lacking good video drivers (to play gamez).
And by your statement you reduce the whole range of possible computer uses to gaming. Maybe we shouldn't confuse "linux in entertainment" with "linux on desktops"? Former is only a subset of the latter.
Don't get me wrong, I like playing, and I adore Valve and their games. But for many GNU/Linux users giving up their freedoms may not be worth another brainless AAA title.
It has moved on the desktop front - a few inches anyway.
I use desktop linux as my primary OS every day. It's still not ready for prime time, but it's finally close enough that I can deal with it.
Some fun things that happen to me on a regular basis - you'll note that these issues have nothing to do with "gamez":
* my sound stops working and/or diverts to anther output. I still can't get it to detect when I put in a mic or headphones with any reliability. Yes, the hardware is compatible.
* behavior on attempted suspend or wake is always a crapshoot.
* it shuffles my desktop layout every time I unplug/replug in my two external monitors
* memory gradually gets consumed. Even doing a restart of X doesn't fix it. (No, I'm not talking about cache.) Under mac I was rebooting once a month. Under windows it was once a week. On *desktop* linux I do it every 2-3 days just to keep things working. (Server-side linux goes for months.)
* sometimes networking stops working. I have to disconnect/reconnect wifi.
* invariably, on a daily basis, I find I have to tweak *something* to make it work or keep it working.
* Here's a fun one: using vim with clientserver enabled resets my Konsole appearance profile (fonts, colors, transparency) every time I open the editor or remote-open a file with an existing session.
Obviously none of these are deal breakers - the positives outweigh the negatives. The control, user interface, tools and projects available, and many other things make the tradeoff worth it to me. But I wouldn't call it a smooth experience, or even an experience on-par with other desktop OSes if we're talking about ability to "just work" without issues.
"But for many GNU/Linux users giving up their freedoms may not be worth another brainless AAA title."
Neither you, I nor any other users who are intensely interested in freedoms are the target audience for SteamOS. SteamOS won't affect what you and those users and I can use Linux for.
And - because I suspect somebody will pipe up with some veiled-snark solutions or suggestions for my issues - you're missing the point. When using a stable desktop OS, I should not have to spend time on these things. I didn't have to on either Mac or Windows.
>What a ridiculous thing to say. [...] This number is significantly higher than a few years ago.
Significantly higher yes...off a low base. We're talking 1..2..3...maybe a (naive)5 percent of progress on total market share over literally decades in the desktop market. Compare that to the androids absolutely crushing the entire mobile market in a few short years. So yes in the bigger scheme of things "nix hasn't really moved an inch on the desktop front".
>And by your statement you reduce the whole range of possible computer uses to gaming.
You're kidding, right? I focused on gaming, because we are discussing a post about Valve. The effects will extend to every corner of GUI driven nix given that nvidia has already made real world changes based purely on this announcement. The nix world can fight another 10 years of a losing war against an unmotivated nvidia & linux or they can grab something like this by the balls.
Compare that to the androids absolutely crushing the entire mobile market
Why would I compare totally different things? When Android came by, there was no monopoly in the mobile OS market. Every vendor had its own. Also, there are much less legacy applications than on desktops. And mobile OS is substantially easier to catch up with. Prior to smartphone era users had no trouble switching between phone vendors (and subsequently the OSes). Switching to a new a desktop OS is way more difficult step.
Better compare it to OS X. Same decades in the market, and still only ~15% share. Yes, more than GNU, but they do their own hardware, and OS is by far not their main selling point.
I focused on gaming, because we are discussing a post about Valve
Sorry, I shouldn't have jumped on you so quickly. Yes, GNU/Linux seriously lacks in a few more areas besides gaming (namely, professional media editing). But it is still a far stretch to say Linux isn't advancing on the desktops. Jeez, 10 years ago we didn't have a decent office suite.
Anyway, what makes you so concerned about Nvidia motivation? My integrated Intel video does an excellent job drawing whatever 2D I throw at it. And it even can do 3D well enough to play some 5yo games (if you consider TF2 one of those).
The "potential progress" was already there. It's just been held up by proprietary companies every step of the way. In the case of games, nearly every single game company refuses to provide their games as free (libre) game software. In the case of GPU drivers, the two big players still refuse to provide free drivers. There are plenty in the free software community willing to contribute to graphics drivers and to porting games to GNU/Linux, but these companies won't let them because it conflicts with their goals of exerting strict control over their own users. I haven't seen any evidence that this situation will let up any time soon because it seems that people have fallen for their PR tricks and so don't seem to mind whether or not most drivers and game software are proprietary. And so the cycle of abuse continues.
The whole reason why we use free software like GNU/Linux to begin with is because it doesn't make us subservient to one vendor like nonfree software does. It disturbs me that I see people making statements implying that "we need this particular proprietary company to come along and save us" or "we only need to be patient, slowly but surely they will port their games to GNU/Linux" because this is exactly the kind of thinking that free software discourages. As long as these companies are in the business of publishing nonfree software, you can be guaranteed they will drag their feet every step of the way. People need to stop buying into their lame excuses about why they can't publish free software ("We can't make money that way" is probably the oldest and stupidest one), excusing their abusive behavior and then begging them to do things only makes the situation worse.
>It's just been held up by proprietary companies every step of the way.
With that kind of angle the FOSS movement might as well fall on its own sword.
Profit driven companies have zero incentive to bother with FOSS & thus they don't bother. One can whine about how unfair that is (see Torvalds vs Nvidia). Write epic arguments about it even...but ultimately that achieves exactly nothing.
Steambox changes the game fundamentally though. There is now a real economic incentive here for nvidia etc to commit real resources...and that has the side effect of benefiting pure FOSS too.
Yes RMS, FOSS, half a percent gain in nix usage, the year of the linux desktop and all that crap...the real world does not care. nix has to take some real world risks to get anywhere...and no moving from gnome 2 to gnome 3 is not a risk...despite all the drama it caused.
>In the case of games, nearly every single game company refuses to provide their games as free (libre) game software.
Obviously. Sinking a couple of million into a game and providing it for free is not exactly a winning strategy. Or worse, devs do so and then introduce microtransactions and similar evils.
The current model suits me perfectly (aside from the DLC bullsht). Once off payment for indefinite access (well until obsolescence anyway).
They don't bother because all their users have been convinced not to care, perhaps by proprietary software marketing efforts. The free software movement seeks to educate people on why they should care, and why it's valuable for companies to give users freedom instead of trying to lure them into proprietary licensing traps. I don't know what you gain from viewing GNU/Linux as a product that is supposed to compete with proprietary software on the same level, because it's not that at all. As we've seen from countless failed companies trying to pitch GNU/Linux on the desktop, traditional marketing strategies for proprietary software do not carry over to free software. This is the true misallocation of resources and it's the only thing causing the "wheel-spinning" you're referring to.
>Sinking a couple of million into a game and providing it for free is not exactly a winning strategy.
It's free as in freedom, not free as in price. Most if not all games sell based on content anyway, which doesn't need to be free (as in freedom or as in price) to resolve the problem of the users being treated like garbage and being forced into a subservient relationship.
>In the case of games, nearly every single game company refuses to provide their games as free (libre) game software.
Rockstar spent $266 million to develop Grand Theft Auto V. How do you expect them to recoup this cost if they gave it away as free software? What communist fairly land do you come from?
If GP is from the RMS school of thought, then only the code needs to be free. The assets aren't. The code, with no assets, is practically worthless to the end-consumer.
Personally I think Valve - as great as they are - will step on a pile of RMS flavored toes. So be it. They bring raw power to the (desktop) nix world like never before. nix hasn't really moved an inch on the desktop front anyway...whats the worse that could happen? The risk is acceptable given the massive potential progress.
I think it'll also provide much needed focus to the nix world. Sure variety has its benefit...but at some point it becomes fragmentation not variety. A central vocal point like valve will go a long way to fixing that.