Page 48 of 111 FirstFirst ... 3846474849505898 ... LastLast
Results 471 to 480 of 1105

Thread: It's Official: Valve Releasing Steam, Source Engine For Linux!

  1. #471
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonlord View Post
    Release is the wrong word. You took a binary from a "non-official" website (meaning the URL never had been posted into the public). Chances are people stumbled across a mess-around-with attempt of somebody at Valve. Nobody knows what the intention behind this had been. Chances are they got scared now as the "evil linux hackers" snagged whatever they had been looking at and hacked (yes, you hacked them folks! this kind of hack is very bad!). If I were in charge there I would pull the plug until I can be sure people won't "hack" my steam soft.
    Serious? If you were in charge of a milliondollar enterprise investing in an ongoing project... YOU would PULL the plug? Just to show your the boss?

    Dude, thats why your not in charge.

    But somewhere you have a point, high-tech enterprises with a commercial end are normally 'very' concerned about leaks. In this case they where 'notified' by the linux community. In other cases they never hear about it. the Community did them a favor! (If the leak was on purpose than the community did them a favor as wel).

    IF valve was working on a linux client... it would certainly not end the project because of a few 'naughty' linux dudes.

  2. #472

    Default

    If Valve can't even acknowledge Linuxs existence then maybe we should beg else where. Lets hope Google just makes a Google store where you can download games. That combined with Google talk would make a really nice competitor to Steam. Dreams.

  3. #473

    Default

    Gabe is an ex microsoft jobbie. Valve have been pretty anti Linux from the start. UNIX is the only platform when it comes to running their game servers, but they don't care for it when it comes to client software.

    Mark my words, steam isn't coming to Linux. I am not trolling, it's just the cold hard truth considering Valve haven't said anything about Linux.

  4. #474
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tmpdir View Post
    Serious? If you were in charge of a milliondollar enterprise investing in an ongoing project... YOU would PULL the plug? Just to show your the boss?
    For sure because it is not the case that this is an ongoing project with high investment costs. Otherwise they would deal with it differently. That's 100% for sure a mockup of somebody going along the line of "let's see how this could look like". There had been for sure no investment going for that mockup there, seriously not. It's a total no-brainer to pull the plug on a project no money went in yet... and it's the usual course of actions and will be. Or did they make available more versions of this mockup? I didn't hear about such a thing.

  5. #475
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tmpdir View Post
    Serious? If you were in charge of a milliondollar enterprise investing in an ongoing project... YOU would PULL the plug? Just to show your the boss?
    Depends on the nature of the risks posed by the problem. If you endanger millions on things, I can assure you that the guy in charge will very much pull the plug on something- if only to avoid fiduciary responsibility suits from shareholders if the company's public.

    Dude, thats why your not in charge.
    Heh... You've little good knowledge in that space, yourself apparently, based on the response to Dragonlord here.

    I've been in a similar role in the past and present- I'd pull the plug if it didn't align with my philosophy and posed a major expense with little apparent payoff. So, don't tell me that's why I'm not in charge. As for that company...it's extant, but I'm trying to resurrect it. Why? Because the CFO was caught embezzling investor funding at a critical time and we lost the wind in our sails. At that time, I was just the CTO, but I've been "promoted" since that time.

    IF valve was working on a linux client... it would certainly not end the project because of a few 'naughty' linux dudes.
    Depends on whether they're seeing this as an investment or a lark that might just pay off a bit down the line. If it's the latter, you can be assured they'll pull the plug.

  6. #476
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the_real_bill View Post
    Gabe is an ex microsoft jobbie. Valve have been pretty anti Linux from the start. UNIX is the only platform when it comes to running their game servers, but they don't care for it when it comes to client software.
    I believe Gabe's expressed the same thinking about MacOS as he did with Linux in the past...

    You can't say for positive what they're going to or not do unless you're directly privy to Valve's inner workings (at which point, you should be cautious about making remarks as you're divulging company confidential information without permission...)

    More to the point, I'm of the understanding that many of the indies that use his service have been asking for the possibility of it on Linux. It's not Source, you know, it's a DRM and delivery system and nothing else. If they did a Linux version, it'd not cost them much more than the MacOS version would in efforts (since at the bulk of the layers you're working at, they're identical...).

    Mark my words, steam isn't coming to Linux. I am not trolling, it's just the cold hard truth considering Valve haven't said anything about Linux.
    Oh, I don't believe you're trolling. I just think you're giving Gabe's past remarks a bit more weight than you ought to, in light of his past rantings on things- and what they've done in the last 3-4 years that runs strongly counter to it. And you're making it sound like you KNOW that it's not going to happen and just point to what he's said in the past and where he worked in the past.

    I'm not going to take a position either way, mind. I don't know and I am not going to be cynical or optimistic on this. And I'd think people would be wise to adopt the same position on this. That way you'll not be overly disappointed if your position on this is right, and you'll be mildly and pleasantly surprised if it does go the way that we're being told it's going to be.

    (As an aside, I'll mention that the last time Michael did something along these lines, it did actually pan out over time- it just took about 6 months longer for AMD to roll out programming info for their Radeon lineups. This is one of the reasons I'm setting squarely in the middle on this. I'd be cynical like you, just for differing reasons if it wasn't for that... )

  7. #477
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonlord View Post
    Release is the wrong word. You took a binary from a "non-official" website (meaning the URL never had been posted into the public). Chances are people stumbled across a mess-around-with attempt of somebody at Valve. Nobody knows what the intention behind this had been. Chances are they got scared now as the "evil linux hackers" snagged whatever they had been looking at and hacked (yes, you hacked them folks! this kind of hack is very bad!). If I were in charge there I would pull the plug until I can be sure people won't "hack" my steam soft.
    Logging into a public FTP is not "very bad". They're not idiots, they know whats up, and I'm very sure they know all about this whole debacle. The fact is there are unfortunately a lot of stupid political possibilities for this situation, and until the guy at the top gives the official okay to Steam on Linux, it won't happen, and there are dozens of reasons to do it and dozens of reasons not to do it. Pressures within and from the outside can change anything at any time. While it's slightly more possible due to them having dabbled into it than if there were no Linux binaries at all, many companies have done this dabbling before, for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes it's even done so that those trying out the Wine/Cider-wrapped Mac version can be working on it on something other than a Mac, explaining why these Linux binaries came along with it.

    We'll see, lol. We'll see.

  8. #478
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    Maybe so. But even if the binary had been there for public reasons (which I doubt but nobody knows the truth there) the sources have not. So they did definitely not wanted people to hack (as in modifying) their testing binary. The important point here simply is what signal is going out from this action. People here have to be aware that Linux people are looked upon as little (thievery) hackers which want anything for free and hack anything the way they want. That action there did not much to nullify this cliché about us. That's my main point. If we want games on Linux and therefore Linux gaining momentum as a gaming platform we have to make it (and us) look serious. That definitely didn't look like this I'm afraid.

  9. #479
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonlord View Post
    Maybe so. But even if the binary had been there for public reasons (which I doubt but nobody knows the truth there) the sources have not. So they did definitely not wanted people to hack (as in modifying) their testing binary. The important point here simply is what signal is going out from this action. People here have to be aware that Linux people are looked upon as little (thievery) hackers which want anything for free and hack anything the way they want. That action there did not much to nullify this cliché about us. That's my main point. If we want games on Linux and therefore Linux gaining momentum as a gaming platform we have to make it (and us) look serious. That definitely didn't look like this I'm afraid.
    Phoronix wasn't serious, they flat out lied by calling it "official" when it isn't. Linux users are just like most other computer nerds though and "hacking" at a binary is normal, and I support everyone's right to do so. Just because someone claims copyrights doesn't mean you can't still play around with modifying their stuff. I respect the rights of users over the wishes of the artists. Artists can wish that you do X, Y, and Z all they want, but if you have it you can do what you want with it, like they can stop that any way lol, what are they going to do, come to your house and watch you at your computer to make sure you don't poke their software with a stick they didn't certify? Fuck all that. Companies are used to "hackers", and if they want to ban them from their online games or whatever so be it, but you can't stop someone from tinkering with things that are in their possession if they want to do so and companies have to and are dealing with that fact.

    Valve knows about everything here, you're helping in telling them yourself with every post you write, and if it wasn't something they intended they would have shut off access or moved the files long ago. Believe me, I work for, well, lets just say I'm in the "exact same situation" from where I'm at, and if Valve didn't want the public to have FTP access to those files, the public wouldn't have that access. All this is even on Wikipedia even for heavens sake. They know. If they didn't like the "hacking" on their binaries, they would have pulled them from public scrutiny by now.

    Truth is, they like you and want you "hacking" their stuff. The more bugs and holes you find in it, the more patches they can cover before and if they actually do release a Linux client version. Leveraging the open source community to help fix their own software could even be the reason it is open to the public to begin with, so you can start poking it and report bugs to them.

  10. #480
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    833

    Default

    I would not bet on that. After all they leaked HL2 pre-release too so I don't think they are "that" good at not letting something out into the wild :P

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •