Valve: Steam for Linux Not In Immediate Future

[swell9]

LOL @ "linux gamers"

 

[Djhg2000]

Why don't we show them just how much we care about Steam for Linux?
http/www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?p=143969&posted=1#post143969

It's simple; run Steam.exe as NT 3.5 in WINE till support ends on Aug 31st.

 

[gnice3d]

LAME

 

[the_crippler]

[citation][nom]gnice3d[/nom]LAME[/citation]

What does an MP3 encoder have to do with anything?

 

[the_krasno]

Stay tuned... on Valve Time.

 

[Pyroflea]

I am so angry at you Valve.

 

[randomizer]

I'd like to take this opportunity to say that Phoronix have once again been caught with their pants down "confirming" that Steam is coming to Linux in the near future. It won't be the last time either, I'm sure. It's a shame though, because it's the only thing I still can't run in a Windows VM.

That said, Michael maintains that the Linux version is still being worked on, it's just not going to arrive when they originally planned. We should all expect this from Valve now anyway. Nothing ever arrives on time.

 

[Guest]

Wow, look at the two base classes of moron commenting on this:

First, there's the Stallmanists who seem convinced if anything should get ported to Linux it should be open source (Nowehre in the GPL or LGPL does it say software running on an open source platform should also be open source. It is politics coming from the FSF that is keeping a hell of a lot of game developers OFF of Linux right now. If they had any doubts about whather they would have any success putting thsir games on Linux it'd almost constantly be affirmed by the Stallmanist zealots out there not content to keep their software choices to themselves.

Second there's the idiots who seem to think no one makes any money or does anything worthwhile on an open source platform, to which I say, "Get the fuck off my Internet." The Internet is almost entirely RAN on an open source platform. Microsoft's server market share is nowhere near as healthy as their marketing PR would have you believe! And the vast majority of programmers in the industry are open source systems-oriented. The industry never has and never will orbit around what Microsoft does on the desktop. Most people are decidedly paid to develop for NON-Windows platforms, just because most of what you see on PCs is Windows doesn't mean the ENTIRE OS market is Windows-centric.

Valve actually provides official dedicated Linux server binaries. And I can guarantee you they run those same binaries on their own servers under Linux, because Windows runs servers like shit.

Also, the "free" in free software is NOT about cost! Stop it with that idiot misconception right now. It is because morons like you kept deciding free meant "gratis" in this concept the term open source was coined by ESR and Bruce Perens. In free in the actual legitimate open source concept means free as in freedom. Synonimous with open source.

However, despite what Microsoft would have you believe, most software companies make most their money off of three things, none of which have to do with sales of their software:

1. Support.
2. Consulting.
3. Technology Licensing (This is NOT the same as software licensing AKA software sales.).

Finally, Just about EVERY major open source project has the majority of its contributors being PAID to contribute by their companies who are using the project in their own deployment. Almost all the drivers in the Linux kernel have at least TWO employees chipping in code or even being the primary developers, as in they're not afraid to provide their hardware specs if it means they can alleviate costs of making the drivers themselves.

The Linux kernel itself is almost entirely written by paid programmers, and massive chunks of it these days are designed by professional software engineers who know the kernel upside down and backwards.

And believe me, companies like IBM, HP, Red Hat, and Novell are making gobs of money off of Linux, which you ignorantly assume no one can make money off of simply because the source is available freely and free of charge. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As for why Valve isn't giving Steam/Source to Linux, my theory is it's because of the political bickering caused by the Stallmanists who aren't happy just using all open source themselves, but have to cram their licensing ideals down the throat of every NORMAL FOSSie who uses Linux. Valve doesn't want to be heralded as evil because their products are:

1. Proprietary (As a Linux user, I don't give a shit about this.)
2. DRM'd through Steam. (I do give a shit about this, simply because DRM breaks things for legit users and does nothing to stop pirates.)

So please, enough with the false assumptions about no one making money off Linux, okay? It's getting old and it's never been even remotely true.

 

[bobwya]

Hmmm,

Interesting reading... Personally I continue to run the Steam client via Wine on my Ubuntu install and contribute as much bug-triaging support to Wine as I can! It's an amazing project (that gets bad-mouthed by both GNU/Linux and Windows users). I get a buzz from seeing games like World In Conflict running (with full DX9.0c single-player and multi-player support) with good FPS on Ubuntu 10.04. It's just a shame the Steam client doesn't have a switch to notify it that it is being run via Wine.

The one big problem that MS Windows will always have in my eyes is the lack of true community support. Reporting bugs to MS support would actually cost me a lot of money (even though I am a licensed Windows 7 user - 2xHP and 1xPro).