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

[d2kx]

Valve didn't "come out and denied it". They got explicity asked in an interview and Doug got into an uncomfortable situation. He had to answer, he couldn't confirm it just yet and didn't have time to think about a good wording before the interview.

[Setlec]

(...) why would Valve falsely deny the existence of the client (...) and what would they possibly gain from it?

they never denied the existence of the client, afaik. I've no clue what gain they would get other than tarnishing their creditability!

[Gokumon]

Valve didn't "come out and denied it". They got explicity asked in an interview and Doug got into an uncomfortable situation. He had to answer, he couldn't confirm it just yet and didn't have time to think about a good wording before the interview.

Then he would have said he can't comment instead of saying they aren't working on it.

[Gokumon]

they never denied the existence of the client, afaik.

They said they aren't working on the client which directly contradicts Michael's statement about them currently working on it. You can keep flailing around all you want, but both statements can't be true.

I've no clue what gain they would get other than tarnishing their creditability!

Which would make no sense at all for them to do. When the Mac OS X client was first discovered they didn't say they weren't currently working on it. So there would be no reason for them to make such a statement if they were really currently working on a Linux client as Michael claims.

[Setlec]

no no, you misunderstood me on the first quote, i didn't say that Micheal or valve are lying about working on right now or not! I'm going to repeat myself again, "they (Valve) never denied the existence of the client, afaik."

But as Doug Lombardi said that they weren't working on a linux client, at the time of the interview, now Micheal is saying that they are working at this time on the linux client. That could means that valve might have restarted to work on the linux client after the interview... 7 days is the enough time to change some things, isn't it?

[mirv]

Valve have denied working on a steam client for linux. They never denied looking into the matter, never denied possibly later putting some effort into one, never denied having possibly had prototypes running. The latter I'm of the opinion is the result of some software developer doing it for kicks.
I will however point out that as much as you can try to pick apart the wording of valve's official response, any information given to Michael could be in error as well.
I doubt that valve will dismiss the idea of a steam client for linux (and source engine), but I don't think they're looking into releasing or even working on such things anytime soon either.

[Gokumon]

no no, you misunderstood me on the first quote,

No, I didn't.

i didn't say that Micheal or valve are lying about working on right now or not!

Good for you. What relevance does that have to anything I posted?

I'm going to repeat myself again, "they (Valve) never denied the existence of the client, afaik."

That's great. So what? I was merely pointing out that Michael's claim that Valve is currently developing the client goes in complete contradiction to Valve's official statements.

But as Doug Lombardi said that they weren't working on a linux client, at the time of the interview, now Micheal is saying that they are working at this time on the linux client. That could means that valve might have restarted to work on the linux client after the interview... 7 days is the enough time to change some things, isn't it?

Except that Michael claimed they were working on it and it was supposed to get an end of summer release over 3 months ago. You can weasel word all you want, but the fact of the matter is that either Valve has to be lying about working on this client or Michael is wrong. Considering Michael's poor track record on these claims (such as claiming it was "confirmed" back in 2008) there is no reason to believe he is correct.

[Gokumon]

Valve have denied working on a steam client for linux. They never denied looking into the matter, never denied possibly later putting some effort into one, never denied having possibly had prototypes running. The latter I'm of the opinion is the result of some software developer doing it for kicks.
I will however point out that as much as you can try to pick apart the wording of valve's official response, any information given to Michael could be in error as well.
I doubt that valve will dismiss the idea of a steam client for linux (and source engine), but I don't think they're looking into releasing or even working on such things anytime soon either.

Exactly. If they were really working on this client they would not have come out and said they weren't working on it. As has to be repeated apparently time and again, when evidence for the Mac OS X client was first discovered Valve didn't say they weren't working on it such as is the case here. So there is no reason to think that Valve would be falsely denying the development of a Linux client if they really were.

[Almindor]

They won't

They won't make a Linux client even if it'd be just a matter of recompilation. Same with Blizzard, they have the GL versions done and ready but they wouldn't bother with Linux clients for a very simple reason.

Linux has no ABI/lib stability. You can't easily distribute binaries even for a single distro (multiple version of it) with the gcc version crap, not to mention the other problems on 3rd party libs (when their versions change) combined with packaging "descisions" to rename libs for fun.

This is THE thorn in the eye (and ass) for me as a developer as well when it comes to Linux. And it's fixable but nobody wants to even hear about it.

[snuwoods]

They won't make a Linux client even if it'd be just a matter of recompilation. Same with Blizzard, they have the GL versions done and ready but they wouldn't bother with Linux clients for a very simple reason.

Linux has no ABI/lib stability. You can't easily distribute binaries even for a single distro (multiple version of it) with the gcc version crap, not to mention the other problems on 3rd party libs (when their versions change) combined with packaging "descisions" to rename libs for fun.

This is THE thorn in the eye (and ass) for me as a developer as well when it comes to Linux. And it's fixable but nobody wants to even hear about it.

Haha.
That's odd because UT2004, Osmos, and Any Yet It Moves all seem to have it figured out. What about any of the Humble Indy Bundle games?
To me, the problem seems like a situation of catering to the cash cows and industry standards(M$ and DX).