Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Steam Linux Usage Was Up Slightly In June

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Steam Linux Usage Was Up Slightly In June

    Phoronix: Steam Linux Usage Was Up Slightly In June

    With the start of a new month brings our monthly recap and it also brings Valve's updated Steam hardware/software survey numbers...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTczMjk

  • #2
    32 bit Linuxes declining but Steam itself is 32 bit only, right?
    Btw, does that mean that Steam games must also be 32 bit?

    Comment


    • #3
      No, Steam supports both 32bit and 64bit games. I believe XCom is a native 64bit port.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by bakgwailo View Post
        No, Steam supports both 32bit and 64bit games. I believe XCom is a native 64bit port.
        That is correct. The funny thing is that no PC that only has a 32 Bit capable CPU can run any game on Steam. Good luck powering your OpenGL 3.x graphics card with your Atlohn XP 1900+. Some people think it makes them hipsters when they use 32 Bit on modern hardware. I can't even use Steam for anything in my library on my 7 year old laptop (has Atlohn Turion 64 CPU), since it only has OpenGL 2.1 graphics.
        Last edited by blackout23; 07-02-2014, 04:44 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think the Library of available games is good enough for a Steam user to load and play his game on Linux. Still many games demand Windows so myself for example, I am forced to boot Windows when I play Assetto Corsa.

          The good news is that with new Steam service "Home Streaming", you can load a game on your powerful desktop and play it on a weak HTPC, just using your home network.

          I've played Tomb Raider that way. A game that has not Linux port but I connected the Xbox controller and played it in a Xubuntu HTPC through streaming from my Windows booted desktop.

          The experience is very good and playable!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by verde View Post
            The good news is that with new Steam service "Home Streaming", you can load a game on your powerful desktop and play it on a weak HTPC, just using your home network. [...] The experience is very good and playable!
            Right- well, I don't plan on buying a second computer to play a game I could already be playing on my primary machine. :\ I can see why you would want this to keep your powerful work computer safe in an office while keeping an inexpensive machine in the living room, but I tend to use traditional game consoles there and leave PC gaming for a large screen in the office.

            So, for me, that's just not a compelling option, although I'm glad they've gotten the functionality working so well already. However, I know many people who only plan to PC game at a desk, so I don't imagine it will grab them, either.

            That said, you're right that the selection is getting pretty good. Metro: Last Light, Witcher II, and many extremely fun indie titles (and Valve titles) are notable. Of course, the next step is getting the Tomb Raiders, Devil May Crys, and Cryses to come over. And, of course, the plethora of MMOs that ignore Steam altogether. I'm not complaining, but I can see a lot of my gamer friends complaining that there's just no support for that kind of gaming on Linux, yet. I really hope Steam boxes catch on, only so that I can play those kinds of games on my computer- I probably won't even bother buying one, if I'm being honest.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by scionicspectre View Post
              Right- well, I don't plan on buying a second computer to play a game I could already be playing on my primary machine. :\ I can see why you would want this to keep your powerful work computer safe in an office while keeping an inexpensive machine in the living room, but I tend to use traditional game consoles there and leave PC gaming for a large screen in the office.

              So, for me, that's just not a compelling option, although I'm glad they've gotten the functionality working so well already. However, I know many people who only plan to PC game at a desk, so I don't imagine it will grab them, either.

              That said, you're right that the selection is getting pretty good. Metro: Last Light, Witcher II, and many extremely fun indie titles (and Valve titles) are notable. Of course, the next step is getting the Tomb Raiders, Devil May Crys, and Cryses to come over. And, of course, the plethora of MMOs that ignore Steam altogether. I'm not complaining, but I can see a lot of my gamer friends complaining that there's just no support for that kind of gaming on Linux, yet. I really hope Steam boxes catch on, only so that I can play those kinds of games on my computer- I probably won't even bother buying one, if I'm being honest.
              And this is kind of the problem, only about 25% or so of the games can be run on Linux, and even some games that have linux ports (for example Atomic Zombie Smasher) don't have those ports on steam. It's going to require more like 75%+ of the catalogue before the PC gamers will feel okay switching over to linux. Which is why the steam machine is so clever, as it solves the problem of how to make linux reach that critical mass because console gamers don't have the pre-existing catalog to care about.

              Comment


              • #8
                There's a very, very compelling reason to switch: freedom.

                The problem is struggling with the reasons *not* to switch, and many of them of related to ignorance:
                • not knowing about the free software movement and its social/ethical/political signficance (ignorance),
                • only a very small selection of PCs can be bought with Linux, and you have to look hard to find them (ignorance),
                • lack of technical know-how (or courage) for installing an OS on your own,
                • force of habit, and general uneasiness about change,
                • confusion about the huge variety of free operating systems and desktop environments (you need a lot of preliminary research),
                • antiquated notions about "Linux requires you to be a programmer" or more recent FUD about user-unfriendliness (ignorance),
                • thinking you will have to give up on software you really need or are attached to (ignorance, sometimes!)
                I just want to add on to why I think the last point is ignorance-related, because I used to be ignorant about it: WINE has gone a very, very long way since the early days. It's trivial to get the full Microsoft Office 2010 working on Linux. It really, really works, and it works darn well. I manage a bunch of computers using Xubuntu over Linux Terminal Server Project and they all run the full Office suite without any problem. It really stunned me how well it works. We also pay Codeweavers for CrossOver support (bosses feel better when they know they are paying someone to solve problems). I think that if a lot of sysadmins just knew that this was possible, they'd be far more inclined to switch. Too many free software supporters try to convince people to switch to Open/LibreOffice, not realizing that it's prohibitively difficult for many organizations, and forgetting to mention that it's possible to switch to a free OS while keeping MS Office.

                Once you remove these sources of ignorance, through putting some effort in education, switching becomes quite attractive indeed.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by emblemparade View Post
                  There's a very, very compelling reason to switch: freedom.

                  The problem is struggling with the reasons *not* to switch, and many of them of related to ignorance:
                  • not knowing about the free software movement and its social/ethical/political signficance (ignorance),
                  • only a very small selection of PCs can be bought with Linux, and you have to look hard to find them (ignorance),
                  • lack of technical know-how (or courage) for installing an OS on your own,
                  • force of habit, and general uneasiness about change,
                  • confusion about the huge variety of free operating systems and desktop environments (you need a lot of preliminary research),
                  • antiquated notions about "Linux requires you to be a programmer" or more recent FUD about user-unfriendliness (ignorance),
                  • thinking you will have to give up on software you really need or are attached to (ignorance, sometimes!)
                  I just want to add on to why I think the last point is ignorance-related, because I used to be ignorant about it: WINE has gone a very, very long way since the early days. It's trivial to get the full Microsoft Office 2010 working on Linux. It really, really works, and it works darn well. I manage a bunch of computers using Xubuntu over Linux Terminal Server Project and they all run the full Office suite without any problem. It really stunned me how well it works. We also pay Codeweavers for CrossOver support (bosses feel better when they know they are paying someone to solve problems). I think that if a lot of sysadmins just knew that this was possible, they'd be far more inclined to switch. Too many free software supporters try to convince people to switch to Open/LibreOffice, not realizing that it's prohibitively difficult for many organizations, and forgetting to mention that it's possible to switch to a free OS while keeping MS Office.

                  Once you remove these sources of ignorance, through putting some effort in education, switching becomes quite attractive indeed.
                  To you maybe, but reality check most users don't care about your political movement, what they want is for the OS to work with the apps they want to use. For gamers what this means is that most of their games need to be available through either steam or GOG for the platform to even be considered. No support? No dice. WINE still isn't an answer because it's a far from perfect solution.

                  The average user is, on the other hand, not confident enough to install an operating system. To them the computer is a magical black box and they're too afraid of breaking something to even consider such a thing. Unless linux boxes start showing up pre-installed, they're not going to try it. Further unless WINE is preinstalled, and there's an Intro Tutorial explaining to them that this is not windows and does not operate like windows (and most importantly that you get applications from the package manager not off random sites on the internet) they're not going to be happy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
                    To you maybe, but reality check most users don't care about your political movement
                    They don't know enough or at all about "my" political movement, but if you look at issues related to privacy, DRM, and ownership of data, you find the "most users", and definitely many gamers, care a lot. I think that if users were more informed about what's at stake in the free software movement then they would find a compelling reason to switch to free software.

                    Otherwise, why prefer Linux at all? Why is Steam pushing for it?

                    A "reality check" is just a picture of the current situation, but what's at stake is a future reality that none of us can see.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X