Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Valve Confirms Linux Steam Box Will Be Open Platform

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

  • XorEaxEax
    replied
    It was great news that the 'official' Steambox atleast will not be locked down, meaning if the hardware is decent it could find more uses than just to play Steam games.

    Leave a comment:


  • Calinou
    replied
    Originally posted by Vincent553
    I seriously hope they select a low-latency kernel to go along with it, which would also help for a smoother framerate.

    It actually hurts framerate. It helps in sound latency (but -- on good CPUs, the sound latency is unnoticeable already) though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Apopas
    replied
    Originally posted by IanS View Post
    To the best of my knowledge there is still no proof that Valve plan to use Xi3 for their own steam box, it is far more likely Xi3 are one of the many partners that Vavle are talking with to make Steam compatible devices.
    Exactly!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Apopas
    replied
    Originally posted by Nille View Post
    Technical Documents talk about an Trinity APU. Currently is the xi3 website down so i cant link the informations:/
    But this is not steambox.

    Leave a comment:


  • blackiwid
    replied
    Originally posted by entropy View Post
    Are they allowed to ship the box with the proprietary drivers?
    Isn't it more likely that they ship it with the open drivers and provide a manual installer for the proprietary drivers which
    downloads and installs them on behalf of the user? They need at least some kind of "disclaimer", don't they?
    yes thats true... they will do that or they will get sued and will loose that... they dont want that to happen I guess...


    just dont get the point... it does not say anything about free drivers are bad or good or anything else... its just boring facts... closed source drivers are not allowed to get included... install it easily no big deal... but at least the users read something about that they agree to install proprietary nvidia drivers or something... some dont bother, some do... the people buying this hardware most likely dont...

    I dont understand how somebody make here a war out of it... of course the opensource drivers are not fast enough to play latest highend commercial games with maximum fps... nobody said something else... valve is using this console for a gaming console for propriatary only games...

    there is just no point in using a free driver to play propriatary games... except maybe at least the games maybe dont have root-rights to make security holes like the nvidia driver did...


    its basicly what I do too... I try to seperate the worlds as far as possible... on one machine I go completly propriatary stuff... ok some small opensource tools are mixed in too... on the other linux non-gaming machines... I try to use as less propriatary stuff as possible... there I would even like to use coreboot...

    so if you use some propriatary parts in your system its compromised anyway... it doesnt matter much then to mix in some opensource parts... except when they are better/cheaper or even when they are good enough because at least they only do what they are supposed to and often they dont use minimal system-resources, but you have a compromised or tainted system...

    just my 2 cents...
    Last edited by blackiwid; 01-09-2013, 10:31 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hamish Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by Larian View Post
    I note that the 20% rule has struck again - about 20% of meaning and intent actually comes across in text. I assure you I'm not trying to bash you or anyone else in particular. It just tends to sound that way from a casual reading when addressing points at this level. Go put on your thickest skin and have a pint or five and it'll look better. Promise.
    Actually, that is probably true for both of us.

    Leave a comment:


  • Larian
    replied
    Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Actually, you were labelling some of the people here:
    No, I did not. In fact, I didn't call anybody anything nor brand anyone with a term of opprobrium. However I can see where it might look as if I did. Mentioning that some people "sound like dictators without a sufficiently large fan club" is not calling them a dictator. It's saying they are making statements seemingly designed to impose their will on the majority. Nor is saying that such people are "often referred to as 'wackos and nutjobs'" isn't calling them crazy - it's saying that other people might.

    They may or not be idiots depending on your opinion of their actions but even then they are not yet tyrants and you probably should be cautious about using the word like this. Save it for people who actually have power and deserve it. You can argue your point without labelling other people with these heavy, important markers.
    I'm pretty sure you were the one who brought out the T word, but I can't check because it's too far back in the post history. My apologies if I am mistaken. Might have been BO$$.

    But the meat of my point here is that it should not matter what they "yet" are or are not - and I'm pretty sure I've already explained why. Just as an argument should stand or fail based upon its own merits, I believe an individual (or a group of them when of like mind), should be assessed, commended, reprimanded, or dismissed based on their proclamations and actions. The alternative is to give people license to be any kind of dick they want to be right up until they cobble together an army.

    Please note that this is a forum thread, and as such, my comments will reflect the discussion as a whole and not just a specific person. If I am talking specifically about you I will mention you as part of my statement.
    Provided you aren't directly quoting me, I have no problem with that.

    I note that the 20% rule has struck again - about 20% of meaning and intent actually comes across in text. I assure you I'm not trying to bash you or anyone else in particular. It just tends to sound that way from a casual reading when addressing points at this level. Go put on your thickest skin and have a pint or five and it'll look better. Promise.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hamish Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by Larian View Post
    Wow. There are so many things wrong with this that I'm not sure where to start. Who are you arguing against? Certainly not me. I have labeled no one a "blind advocate" of anything. What I said was that blind advocacy and bandwagon group-think is ill-considered, and they should be avoided for that reason alone.
    Actually, you were labelling some of the people here:
    Originally posted by Larian View Post
    Some of the noise being made here on this subject (and their numbers are, thankfully, few) sounds remarkably like that of a dictator without a sufficiently large fan club. In common parlance they are oftentimes referred to as "wackos and nut jobs". I fear them with power, because they haven't demonstrated temperance with the "you're either with us or you're against us" stand on using proprietary drivers.
    You may have tempered your statement, but that does not absolve you from actually having done it. If you think it is fair to do that, fine, but please don't say you have not done it.

    I will also temper my statement by saying I do feel it is somewhat unfortunate that this has taken on such a aggressive tone.

    Moving on to another point:
    Originally posted by Larian View Post
    I'm not saying that promoting a position should be curbed for fear of tyranny. I'm saying absolutist positions which demand everyone kowtow to their way of doing things, and then degrading and generally bashing anyone who resists ... well sir, that's the mark of an idiot. Those who behave thus are just a wee bit of power away from being tyrants.
    They may or not be idiots depending on your opinion of their actions but even then they are not yet tyrants and you probably should be cautious about using the word like this. Save it for people who actually have power and deserve it. You can argue your point without labelling other people with these heavy, important markers.

    Originally posted by Larian View Post
    I suppose I have failed to make myself clear. I am suggesting caution. I am also formally requesting that when arguing with me, you actually stick to the arguments I make instead of projecting those of others on me. Most often I don't agree with them.
    Please note that this is a forum thread, and as such, my comments will reflect the discussion as a whole and not just a specific person. If I am talking specifically about you I will mention you as part of my statement.

    Leave a comment:


  • IanS
    replied
    To the best of my knowledge there is still no proof that Valve plan to use Xi3 for their own steam box, it is far more likely Xi3 are one of the many partners that Vavle are talking with to make Steam compatible devices. From what I have been reading Valve plan to design their own Steam box but are also allowing 3rd parties to design and distribute their own with a variety of hardware levels and price points. This article makes a lot of that more clear: http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/8/385...ture-of-gaming

    So we really have no idea what they have in store harware wise for their own Steam box, other than what Gabe has alluded to with the fact that the "better" level they plan to focus on will have dedicated CPU and GPU, meaning an AMD APU is likely not even on the table for the official Valve Steam box. Nvidia seems to have a better working relationship with Valve and have the best driver options to date on Linux, my money would be on Valve going with Nvidia and the proprietary blob.

    Leave a comment:


  • Larian
    replied
    Originally posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Yes, but saying advocacy is tyranny is still a tyrannical position in of itself, and a position which has promoted tyranny a lot more often than these "blind advocates" (speaking of strawmen...) that you make mention of.
    Wow. There are so many things wrong with this that I'm not sure where to start. Who are you arguing against? Certainly not me. I have labeled no one a "blind advocate" of anything. What I said was that blind advocacy and bandwagon group-think is ill-considered, and they should be avoided for that reason alone.

    The main thing that keeps tyranny going is apathy, which is what a lot of people who state they are on the side of "pragmatism" often accept and promote.
    Not necessarily.
    You can complain about someones actions, you can even criticize another's words, but please don't tell me someone can not promote a position for fear of tyranny. Because really, is that not the censor's argument, that we need it to prevent the spread of dangerous ideas in society?
    Bait and switch. Also, Missing the Point. I'm not saying that promoting a position should be curbed for fear of tyranny. I'm saying absolutist positions which demand everyone kowtow to their way of doing things, and then degrading and generally bashing anyone who resists ... well sir, that's the mark of an idiot. Those who behave thus are just a wee bit of power away from being tyrants.

    Now let us be done with the "T" word and its derivatives.

    And then there are people calling out FOSS users and developers saying they are idiots or tyrants, and that they are actively conspiring against these hardworking innocent hardware vendors. Seriously, have you not read a Phoronix thread before?
    I suppose I have failed to make myself clear. I am suggesting caution. I am also formally requesting that when arguing with me, you actually stick to the arguments I make instead of projecting those of others on me. Most often I don't agree with them.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X