Given many new handhelds coming on the scene and general disinterest of Microsoft to support the market, do you think SteamOS will take place of default OS the same way Android did on phones some time ago?
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
302 points (99.3% liked)
Steam Deck
14892 readers
768 users here now
A place to discuss and support all things Steam Deck.
Replacement for r/steamdeck_linux.
As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title
The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.
Some more Steam Deck specific flairs:
[Boot Screen] - Custom boot screens/videos.
[Selling] - If you are selling your deck.
These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.
Rules:
- Follow the rules of Sopuli
- Posts must be related to the Steam Deck in an obvious way.
- No piracy, there are other communities for that.
- Discussion of emulators are allowed, but no discussion on how to illegally acquire ROMs.
- This is a place of civil discussion, no trolling.
- Have fun.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Linux, currently, cannot handle everything Windows can unfortunately. Windows also has a massive software support advantage. Valve are in the best place to try and give Linux to the masses, but that's a lot of work and it won't have much return for them. Windows getting worse is the way Linux will get more market share, but most people are not power users and will probably just use Windows anyway as it 'just works'.
The reason Valve is so heavily investing in Linux is that they know that Microsoft could - in theory - flip a switch and kill their business, especially because Microsoft themselves is a competitor to Valve in the form of Xbox and Gamepass.
It's a defensive tactic, not a money-making venture.
And realistically Microsoft has a very good moment coming up in the next few years to effectively kill Steam: Valve only delivers pre-compiled files and does not have access to source code. Therefore Valve is not only stuck with a “Windows-like environment”, they are also shackled to x86. With Apple’s M-processors reigning supreme in the laptop space with insane values for performance-to-powerdraw (and in turn heat radiation and cooling requirements), the days of x86-by-default laptops are probably numbered and more manufacturers may want to switch to ARM, to avoid unfavorable comparisons to MacBooks. With Windows for ARM Microsoft can finally kill of all traces of Win32 in WinRT, as they tried for years and force everyone to use UWP-apps from the store exclusively on ARM. Apple does leave apps behind, when updating their operating systems on a regular basis, a similar move by Microsoft wouldn’t look totally unreasonable. The switch could even happen gradually, like Apple’s Rosetta translation layer, which runs x86 apps on arm great right now, but I don’t think it will be maintained forever and support for x86 apps on macOS will end one day. Microsoft could do the same for Windows for ARM. If this happens Valve will probably have the opportunity to install games as UWP-apps, but their back catalog of Win32 .exes becomes effectively worthless. But if Win32 .exes run great through some translation layer on linux, valve can continue to sell and support their back catalog on current hardware.
Why are they shackled to anything? They will sell whatever the market supports. Linux doesn't care what CPU it runs on and software can be compiled for anything. Valve isn't stuck with anything, all of their stuff is virtual.
If we move to ARM, MIPS or whatever the flavour of the day will be, they'll just follow the trend.
OTOH, Microsoft has to deal with an insane amount of legacy software in the corporate space. That's probably the main reason Windows still sucks so much (although it did manage to get much better) when Mac OS managed to make a clean cut and start over.
Technically you are right when saying:
But in practice software is compiled from source for the environment it will run on and Valve does seldomly have access to the source code of third parties. They generally have pre-compiled .exes and the accompanying files. If the developer chooses to recompile for different architectures, then valve will probably get a new compiled binary. But what about defunct developers or publishers who don’t want to invest any more development time in old software? Additionally: No, software as complex as games cannot always be compiled for anything without throwing ungodly amounts of errors. In these cases additional development would be needed, even if Valve had access to the source code and the rights to use or recompile it, which they probably don’t have for proprietary third-party software.
This is specifically a problem for valve’s immense back catalog, brand new games will probably release as a compatible binary.
I think this is a misconception.
M-processors are not amazing because they are ARM, or because they are Apple.
They are pretty much where everyone else is al well, just one node shrink ahead, because Apple is the first in Line, because they can pay for it.
for example, Apple M1 GPU vs Steam Deck GPU, Apple has a ~60% GPU lead (in performance measured in TFLOPs fp32). On the CPU side it's ~70% (in a fairly bad comparison, as there are notable differences between the analog used here). But the thing so many people ignore is that the M1 is on TSMC N5, whereas the Steam Deck GPU is built on the N7 node, (and there was the N6 node in between those two!)
The A12 is Apples N7 SoC, and draws up to ~6W, and the GPU has roughly 1/3rd of AMD Steam Deck compute, pretty in line with power draw.
Watt for Watt, Node for Node pure performance seems just good to me, not really surpassing anything else by a lot.
I partially agree for the GPU-side of things. But while there have been iPads without active cooling for over a decade now, there has never been a competitive, high performance laptop like the current MacBook Air build on x86. I know you are right theoretically and maybe it is a solvable challenge and the priorities were just different, but whatever ARM does, it seems to run cooler than x86. Even if it is only bigLITTLE or some other shortcut.
That bit is easy to explain. Apple (again) is on the latest node, so they do currently have the highest performance per watt SoC out there.
So it seems unsurprising that it's hard to compete with the latest. But the N5 is starting to get out. AMDs 7840U should be comparable, but of course is out roughly a year later. And that's going to be true for a while, because Apples markup allows them enough profits on the latest node and Apples vertical integration means they can be quicker to release a new device with their own new SoC, whereas for the competition they have to wait until AMD releases their products, and then build their product (the Laptop) around that.
I feel like MacOS could also be more efficient than Windows, especially in daily use but I may be wrong on that feeling, Apple is not making it easy to tell.
And of course there have been plenty of passively cooled x86 devices, but they've not been "good enough"
And finally, none of this is meant to knock Apples Achievements with ARM.
The native extensions for x86 translation they put in are pretty genius.
Being able to compete with AMD/Intel/Nvidia on their first out is really impressive as well.
M1 M2 etc. are great products, they're just not magic, and unfortunately intentionally very limited (no Vulkan, no DirectX etc.).
That is indeed a good reason, but while it's possible for Microsoft to do that, it's extremely unlikely to ever happen.
Don't discount it, it feels like they've been pushing cloud gaming and their subscription pretty hard
Not just cloud gaming, cloud Windows itself. Gaming is just a massive market now and cutting off Steam would be PR suicide if nothing else, they would only do it if they really thought there was no good alternative for gamers to turn to, but with Valve's spearheading of Proton etc, I think it would be too risky for MS. But yeah, you never know right.
Windows, currently, cannot handle everything Linux can. Linux also has a massive software support advantage, running on vastly more hardware and architectures than Windows does.
Linux has already been given to the masses. People use it every day in super user friendly ways; they just don't realize they're using Linux.
The only reason people use Windows is because they don't choose it. Imagine if every PC sold had a Linux option and a Windows option that cost an extra $100. What do you think people would buy?
The same hardware running Linux will easily outperform Windows (especially at the most common end user tasks like web browsing) by a long shot. In a few days NTFS turns 30 years old FFS (LOL).
Any given hardware accessory will "just work" when plugged in to a Linux PC but Windows will require a special driver that you have to go out and find on your own at the vendor's website that will be bloated AF. It'll also reinstall it if you change the USB port LOL.
I get it you like Linux, so do I. And I just have yet to have a smooth experience with it as a desktop and for games. We talking about the average gaming market here, nothing more, Linux is obviously very powerful and is the most used OS outside of desktops.
Most users have Nvidia cards that still do not play nicely with a lot of Linux setups, although that seems to be coming around now. Linux is a very customisable platform and it can be a lot better than Windows if you spend the time tweaking every aspect of it, but you are kidding yourself if you think Linux is better OOTB than Windows for most users. It's fine for us to stick our heads into wikis and play around in the terminal, but most people don't want to bother with all that.
I hope Linux does get more adoption so that support is further improved and I hope it reaches that tipping point where most people can pick up for their everyday machines.
Uh, no. I tried Linux (Mint). I hated it. It doesn't even have a damn colorblind mode... The best you can hope for is a goofy workaround with some app that's meant for devs testing colorblind modes, and that may or may not even work. Colorblind mode is a rock bottom basic accessibility feature, especially in 2023, and the most highly recommended distro for people coming from Windows doesn't even have that.
And it rather shows that average or non-Linux-nerd users, and what they need from their OS, are not a priority at all, which means the system will never be friendly or appealing to them until and unless that changes.
I also personally hated the way it wanted me to install everything from a launcher, vs downloading exe's from their owners websites that have a lot more info than the generic Linux launcher does.
I hated all the crashes, the requirement for tinkering at random times when I really just needed my PC to work reliably, and the way so many people in the Linux community look down on and/or insult everyone who asks for help with anything or has any gripe about Linux (thus assuring helpful feedback from average users won't be reporter or heard, their problems won't be fixed, and confusing UI will remain confusing and bogged down in jargon).
Linus Tech did a good youtube series on what Linux is like to encounter as a newbie. He had problems. When even one of the most popular tech/PC youtubers has problems right out the gate, how can you expect it to work for everyone else?
I want it to get better and become a real conpetitor to Windows, but it just flat out isn't yet except for specific applications like servers, and pretending it is only insures it won't ever be. The culture around it is holding it back.
Tl;dr: there are actually quite a lot of people like me who are aware of Linux and choose Windows or Mac instead.
I specifically phrased it "could be" as people tend to believe there are 3 preferences, Mac, Linux and Windows. Linux is not one user experience, it could work exactly like your favorite OS. In the face of SteamOS already being a viable option for the average gamer as Valve is basically strong arming it to be, on Steam Deck you're not exactly doing PC gaming any good deliberately installing Windows on it. SteamOS just works.
I also think you're very misguided in thinking it won't have any return to Valve. Microsoft has to be looking at Google Play Store and whatever the Apple Store is called with a lot of envy with how they've managed to lock the entire ecosystem under their stores. This is the end result for Windows as well and its likely anti-competetive clauses are a very bad sign for a company like Valve. Looking back I'm actually impressed just how far back Valve saw this happening. Decoupling PC gaming in its entirety from Microsoft's vendor lock-ins is in the best interest of all of the companies in the gaming industry, but it takes a rich private company like Valve to start doing the hard work for long term benefits instead of always chasing the short term profits.
Even if tomorrow Microsoft launched something that pulled ahead of SteamOS, it would still be in the gamers' best interest to stick with the open platform. With a consistent, large userbase on an open platform it will eventually eclipse anything Microsoft could ever muster.
I mean it could, companies just don't port their software because there's not enough market share to justify it. And there's not enough market share because the software isn't there. and the software isn't there....
Yep exactly ahah, I feel linux will forever be stuck in this loop.
Valve is doing this for strategic reasons and also because they wanted to start the handheld PC market (Steam Deck). Strategic reasons: Microsoft could at any point buy several important gaming studios or distributors, distribute a lot of games (maybe exclusively) via their own store (they even announced that several years ago, but they didn't do it in the end). MS could even implement small things which make Steam perform worse on Windows, as its 100% controlled by MS. If you compete directly with Microsoft on the Windows platform, you will eventually lose because MS can do some very tiny tweaks which happen to make your product be more annoying or slower to use than Microsoft's own. That way they'll still fly under the radar for anti-competitive behavior. So Valve has to ensure that their main business model (selling/distributing games on Steam) remains future-proof, and that means more independent from Microsoft's agenda. To do this, they need to push a fully neutral, but viable alternative to Windows for gaming. Which is Linux.