New users will not need to install SteamOS, they just need to buy a SteamBox which will have SteamOS preinstalled and configured with the proper drivers. And, any manufacturer can take SteamOS and build its own SteamBox and it's the manufacturer's responsibility to make sure the drivers are configured correctly, not the user's responsibility. This is exactly what happens on the Windows side. In short, you are wrong.
Originally Posted by asdfblah
GPL and Kernel Blobs
The Steam Box is exciting, but what is the current legal situation around shipping BLOBs linked to the Kernel?
I thought that the reason that the ATI/NVidia drivers were "ok" was that effectively the end user downloads and installs them (i.e. the bits that link to GPL code/headers aren't supplied in binary form)?
Can Valve actually ship a Linux kernel including pre-built kernel modules for ATI/NVidia? I know that the standard Distros don't (at least by default - you have to enable an iffy non-free repo)...
Valve can distribute the blobs just fine with their distro if they wish however to avoid a bunch of stink being made they can just do like many other distros do for binary packages and point the system to a link away from the distribution media. openSUSE for example points nvidia and amd users to nvidia's and amd's own hosted repositories.
Originally Posted by OneTimeShot
I pretty much agree with your post, but this, I need to point out, is a contradiction. A PC enthusiast that doesn't bother reading before testing anything (this means, you should actually check support for your hardware, and have a basic understanding of its situation) is either not really an enthusiast, or severely stupid.
Originally Posted by asdfblah
Are you sure? The only (not confirmed) claim I've seen is that it will be based on Ubuntu 12.04. Which uses X.org.
Originally Posted by e8hffff
That is a great point. Valve would have much to gain from that approach. Would Valve be concerned that this may lead to incompatible fragmentation through modifications introduced by equipment vendors? Google's solution to this problem in Android has been a proprietary runtime that only Google-approved vendors are allowed access to, which in my opinion is an absolutely horrible solution. I hope that this mode of thinking does not influence Valve.
Originally Posted by iniudan
Even though I don't play games personally, I would love to see an open source Steam client that distributions can distribute through their repositories, using their own packaging and distribution techniques. I believe something like that would strengthen the existing concepts of centralized package management, which I have always felt was one of the key practical advantages of the Linux world over proprietary OSes.
It does. "We made it easier for the Call of Duty guys"
Originally Posted by Kristian Joensen
They say play also all your Win/Mac games! I wonder how...streaming from where to the TV? It needs two machines running?
Will all games be in 3D with a 3D TV or there's more needed?
Last edited by mike4; 09-24-2013 at 02:06 AM.
correct, he does say that, which is what I was referring to although I didn't notice it the first time. That statement in addition to this tweet from infinityward back in march: http://www.geek.com/games/infinity-w...m-box-1541671/
Originally Posted by blackout23
Yes. The Windows PC would stream to a SteamBox attached to the TV. Kind of similar to the NVIDIA Shield concept. That's for games that don't have native Linux versions.
Originally Posted by mike4
I think SteamOS is a good idea because this way gaming on most Linux distros will be easily supported via automatically set up SteamOS chroots (delivered as a package through existing package management), suddenly making many Linux distros viable choices for gamers and giving developers a single build target for near universal Linux support... hopefully.