• 111 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by Horgen (109953 posts) -

8.1 is not alot like win 7 unless you add start 8 etc. Now when windows 8.1.1 "8.2" comes out ,it will return the normal windows features that desktop should have had to begin with.

Ah, then "8.2" is what I had in mind.

#52 Posted by wis3boi (30901 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

everybody has different hardware and you need a piece of software to allow the games/programs to interact with the hardware in a unified way. DX and openGL and now mantle offer this middle-man.

#53 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@glez13 said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:
@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

Because it's basically what everyone uses? Also since MS backs it up it always has people testing it out and making advances. For example OpenGL while it even has a forum dedicated for anyone interested in contributing it's basically a wasteland and many reported bugs are left untended and who knows how many are unreported. That's why it's interesting to see what Valve's push for Linux will end up in because since they started putting resources on it they have figured a lot of stuff in OpenLG that was basically left alone to die. Of course it's also interesting what this rumored "Mantle light" DX12 will be all about.

I never hear about bugs being a problem in OpenGL, the only thing I have ever heard about the differences between DX vs OGL is that OGL dosen't have the tools that DX has, and thats a problem that can be relatively easily remedied. And DX has virtually no portability compared to OpenGL.

#54 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@glez13 said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:
@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

Because it's basically what everyone uses? Also since MS backs it up it always has people testing it out and making advances. For example OpenGL while it even has a forum dedicated for anyone interested in contributing it's basically a wasteland and many reported bugs are left untended and who knows how many are unreported. That's why it's interesting to see what Valve's push for Linux will end up in because since they started putting resources on it they have figured a lot of stuff in OpenLG that was basically left alone to die. Of course it's also interesting what this rumored "Mantle light" DX12 will be all about.

I never hear about bugs being a problem in OpenGL, the only thing I have ever heard about the differences between DX vs OGL is that OGL dosen't have the tools that DX has, and thats a problem that can be relatively easily remedied. And DX has virtually no portability compared to OpenGL.

I have heard the same thing.

and...I think with the disorganization of 'focus' at Microsoft at the moment plus the small dev team (compared to open source approach) OpenGL has a good chance at becoming the standard before too much longer

#55 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@horgen123 said:

@groowagon said:

@horgen123 said:

Why are people so against upgrading Windows? I expect to upgrade to Win 9 or 10 when I change CPU. Though atm I have no reason to upgrade the CPU.

i don't like the usability of Win8 from a pure desktop point of view. if it's not broken, don't fix it. i understand why they went there, but it doesn't serve desktop users one bit.

Without having actually tested it, I can see why. My impression though is that the search function is better the OS is faster if you are used/willing to use the keyboard more. And as Felipe says, 8.1 is alot more like Win 7.


8.1 is not alot like win 7 unless you add start 8 etc. Now when windows 8.1.1 "8.2" comes out ,it will return the normal windows features that desktop should have had to begin with.

It's the same as Windows 7 just with a bigger and more colorful menu.

If you're talking about the Metro Apps, then yes, the next update will be even better for that. But to use it in desktop mode like every other Windows, it works exactly the same, just faster. The "snappiness" of everything reminds me of XP.

#56 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@glez13 said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:
@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

Because it's basically what everyone uses? Also since MS backs it up it always has people testing it out and making advances. For example OpenGL while it even has a forum dedicated for anyone interested in contributing it's basically a wasteland and many reported bugs are left untended and who knows how many are unreported. That's why it's interesting to see what Valve's push for Linux will end up in because since they started putting resources on it they have figured a lot of stuff in OpenLG that was basically left alone to die. Of course it's also interesting what this rumored "Mantle light" DX12 will be all about.

I never hear about bugs being a problem in OpenGL, the only thing I have ever heard about the differences between DX vs OGL is that OGL dosen't have the tools that DX has, and thats a problem that can be relatively easily remedied. And DX has virtually no portability compared to OpenGL.

I have heard the same thing.

and...I think with the disorganization of 'focus' at Microsoft at the moment plus the small dev team (compared to open source approach) OpenGL has a good chance at becoming the standard before too much longer

And DX10 and 11 are almost always implemented as an afterthought too. So whats the point of using it over OpenGL?

#57 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

I have heard the same thing.

and...I think with the disorganization of 'focus' at Microsoft at the moment plus the small dev team (compared to open source approach) OpenGL has a good chance at becoming the standard before too much longer

And DX10 and 11 are almost always implemented as an afterthought too. So whats the point of using it over OpenGL?

But that's the developer's fault isn't it? MS provides the tools for DX9-11, then the developer decides to create a game only in DX9 or with just a bit of 10-11. It's totally natural too, companies are always behind in upgrading technology, that's why we still get games in DX9.

If everything went OpenGL the same thing would happen. There would be new versions of it but most developers would still use what they are used to, a few versions back and then play the catchup game.

#58 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@AlexKidd5000 said:

I have heard the same thing.

and...I think with the disorganization of 'focus' at Microsoft at the moment plus the small dev team (compared to open source approach) OpenGL has a good chance at becoming the standard before too much longer

And DX10 and 11 are almost always implemented as an afterthought too. So whats the point of using it over OpenGL?

But that's the developer's fault isn't it? MS provides the tools for DX9-11, then the developer decides to create a game only in DX9 or with just a bit of 10-11. It's totally natural too, companies are always behind in upgrading technology, that's why we still get games in DX9.

If everything went OpenGL the same thing would happen. There would be new versions of it but most developers would still use what they are used to, a few versions back and then play the catchup game.

But at the very least, it would make porting to other platforms easier.

#59 Edited by amafi (10 posts) -

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@glez13 said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:
@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

Because it's basically what everyone uses? Also since MS backs it up it always has people testing it out and making advances. For example OpenGL while it even has a forum dedicated for anyone interested in contributing it's basically a wasteland and many reported bugs are left untended and who knows how many are unreported. That's why it's interesting to see what Valve's push for Linux will end up in because since they started putting resources on it they have figured a lot of stuff in OpenLG that was basically left alone to die. Of course it's also interesting what this rumored "Mantle light" DX12 will be all about.

I never hear about bugs being a problem in OpenGL, the only thing I have ever heard about the differences between DX vs OGL is that OGL dosen't have the tools that DX has, and thats a problem that can be relatively easily remedied. And DX has virtually no portability compared to OpenGL.

There are plenty of bugs in openGL just like there will be in any advanced piece of software. Unavoidable.

And opengl is only visual stuff, and only 3D. That's kind of important. It doesn't concern itself with audio, or 2d graphics, or inputs, or any of the other things directx does. Which means that instead of using a very well integrated toolset with a lot of very handy helper functions for all sorts of things a game might need you're either buying someone else's solution, or you're making your own. Which is not a trivial problem, far from it.

As for windows 8, it's pretty great. It's basically faster windows 7 with an uglier start menu. I don't use the start screen just like I never used the start menu in 7, that's what pinning, search and jumplists are for. Mousing around the menus is for suckers.

#60 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -
@amafi said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@glez13 said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:
@wis3boi said:

we've barely even used or started to use 11....my gut says it will end up like 10.1 and 11.1...i.e. sitting there being useless.

Which begs the question, why is DirectX so important then?

Because it's basically what everyone uses? Also since MS backs it up it always has people testing it out and making advances. For example OpenGL while it even has a forum dedicated for anyone interested in contributing it's basically a wasteland and many reported bugs are left untended and who knows how many are unreported. That's why it's interesting to see what Valve's push for Linux will end up in because since they started putting resources on it they have figured a lot of stuff in OpenLG that was basically left alone to die. Of course it's also interesting what this rumored "Mantle light" DX12 will be all about.

I never hear about bugs being a problem in OpenGL, the only thing I have ever heard about the differences between DX vs OGL is that OGL dosen't have the tools that DX has, and thats a problem that can be relatively easily remedied. And DX has virtually no portability compared to OpenGL.

There are plenty of bugs in openGL just like there will be in any advanced piece of software. Unavoidable.

And opengl is only visual stuff, and only 3D. That's kind of important. It doesn't concern itself with audio, or 2d graphics, or inputs, or any of the other things directx does. Which means that instead of using a very well integrated toolset with a lot of very handy helper functions for all sorts of things a game might need you're either buying someone else's solution, or you're making your own. Which is not a trivial problem, far from it.

As for windows 8, it's pretty great. It's basically faster windows 7 with an uglier start menu. I don't use the start screen just like I never used the start menu in 7, that's what pinning, search and jumplists are for. Mousing around the menus is for suckers.

Well couldn't SDL, and OpenGL be used together to get everything?

#61 Posted by Ribstaylor1 (435 posts) -

I doubt it's coming to 7. I really hope OpenGL picks up and linux gets a little more mainstream with support. I'd really like to get away from having to deal with Microsoft and having them most likely only allowing directx12 on windows 8 or 9 just keeps pushing me away as a customer.

#62 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@ribstaylor1 said:

I doubt it's coming to 7. I really hope OpenGL picks up and linux gets a little more mainstream with support. I'd really like to get away from having to deal with Microsoft and having them most likely only allowing directx12 on windows 8 or 9 just keeps pushing me away as a customer.

And you think that won't happen if SteamOS takes off?

You think SteamOS will always use the same version of OpenGL and never upgrade?

#63 Edited by Ribstaylor1 (435 posts) -

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

#64 Edited by seahawks32691 (4 posts) -

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

#65 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

#66 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

So going from one OS (Win7) to another identical OS (Win8) just faster and with a different menu which YOU CAN DISABLE was like drinking bleach?

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

#67 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@seahawks32691 said:

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

So going from one OS (Win7) to another identical OS (Win8) just faster and with a different menu which YOU CAN DISABLE was like drinking bleach?

@ribstaylor1 said:

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

#68 Edited by Ribstaylor1 (435 posts) -
@FelipeInside said:
@seahawks32691 said:

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

So going from one OS (Win7) to another identical OS (Win8) just faster and with a different menu which YOU CAN DISABLE was like drinking bleach?

@ribstaylor1 said:

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

Linux won't do the same simply because it's based of an open source concept and is essentially free. It's not here to please investors with the profits of the next release. You are right on the fact a big company like valve needs to back linux and it is. But if I'm using a version of linux as my operating system then why would I ever need to deal with steamOS? Steam like it is isn't going to go away on a pc. It might change it's looks and policies and general stuff but I will not need steamOS to play games on linux when the time comes around that games mostly support the operating system. It's an operating system based off linux meant for steam boxes and small form factor media centers and pc's. I wont be anywhere near it If I'm running linux. It's code and all that stuff yes but not through SteamOS but what ever program or download agent they use, probably just an updated version of what's available now.

I understand SteamOS has a play in all this and is a major factor in bringing gaming to linux. I'm pumped to see where it takes things. But I highly doubt I'll use a machine that uses the OS simply for the fact it's just a more closed off pc. Would be nice to get away from Microsoft for once. Been using their system my whole life. Would be nice for a change of pace.

#69 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:
@seahawks32691 said:

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

So going from one OS (Win7) to another identical OS (Win8) just faster and with a different menu which YOU CAN DISABLE was like drinking bleach?

@ribstaylor1 said:

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

#70 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:
@seahawks32691 said:

going from vista to w7 was amazing, going from w7 to w8, id rather drink bleach

So going from one OS (Win7) to another identical OS (Win8) just faster and with a different menu which YOU CAN DISABLE was like drinking bleach?

@ribstaylor1 said:

Why would the steamOS have anything to do with this? I'll use their updated steam interface at the time all that's out. And Yes OpenGL will get upgraded just like everything else but unlike windows, new versions of linux aren't coming out with exclusive graphics API's that previous versions can't use without paying money to upgrade.

For now, but if gaming on Linux takes off how do you know that won't happen?

You think Valve won't do the same with SteamOS? and yes, SteamOS has EVERYTHING to do with this because like I've been saying for the past two decades, for gaming to really take off on Linux they need a big company behind it... just like Samsung was for Android phones.

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

#71 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

Thing is, MS is not the one that needs to gain market share, they own the PC gaming market.

For each person that wants to use Linux (like you and AlexKidd), there are 30 people that are fine using Windows, and don't even care or would want to move to something else.

When you say why buy a Windows machine over the others? Why not? For the normal user Windows has all the gaming needs, all the work needs and all the home leisure needs, with Steam as well. The price thing is irrelevant. A PC gamer is used to spending big on hardware, so something like $100 for a new Windows license is nothing. Why buy something that is limited when you can get something that has everything? On top of that, if they make that complete package FREE with ads (like MS are testing), then it's going to be even harder to convince people to go Linux.

Don't take me as a fanboy, I just comment on how things are. I don't mind gaming taking off on Linux, I have friends who use it, but NOT at the cost of fragmenting PC gaming, which is already on a delicate balance.

#72 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

Thing is, MS is not the one that needs to gain market share, they own the PC gaming market.

For each person that wants to use Linux (like you and AlexKidd), there are 30 people that are fine using Windows, and don't even care or would want to move to something else.

When you say why buy a Windows machine over the others? Why not? For the normal user Windows has all the gaming needs, all the work needs and all the home leisure needs, with Steam as well. The price thing is irrelevant. A PC gamer is used to spending big on hardware, so something like $100 for a new Windows license is nothing. Why buy something that is limited when you can get something that has everything? On top of that, if they make that complete package FREE with ads (like MS are testing), then it's going to be even harder to convince people to go Linux.

Don't take me as a fanboy, I just comment on how things are. I don't mind gaming taking off on Linux, I have friends who use it, but NOT at the cost of fragmenting PC gaming, which is already on a delicate balance.

To be clear I have never used Linux so I am unsure if I am a fan of it or not. What I like to do is read the gaming market, watch what is going on an then speculate.

The reason all of us game on Windows is because the games we play are not possible to be played on any other system. We dont play on Windows ecause we have an affinity for Windows itself. We have an Affinity for some games that technically will not run on other platforms because DirectX is closed.

So if Direct X can 'effectively' run on any platform then the OS becomes a deciding factor.

The other question is how does Microsoft want to be in the home? do they want PCs in the home despite the fact everyone in the home is using a tablet to browse the internet? ok well what about gaming? and that is where we end up back to square 1.

The main reason people have a PC in the home is for the internet and for games. If they get internet from tablets that leaves only games and I do not think that is a good enough reason to fight for PCs.

Does this make sense?

I say the same thing to many people in different ways so not sure if I am making myself clear.

#73 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:


The other question is how does Microsoft want to be in the home? do they want PCs in the home despite the fact everyone in the home is using a tablet to browse the internet?

Exactly, and people ask me why Windows 8 was released with a new menu.

Tablets have become a big part of the market, same with mobile... and MS is late to the party (like they always have been). Windows 8 and Windows Phone were a NECESSITY for MS to grab market share, and they are both gaining market share day by day.

Have to wait and see what happens. MS have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open, and that the next Windows might have a free version (or dirt cheap). If these things become true, it's a smart move from them. They see Valve as a small threat for now, but which may become a bigger threat, so they need to adapt. They are good at that, being doing it for years.

Also, I suggest you try out Linux. Something like Ubuntu which is easier to install and run. It will give you a broader view of things when comparing it to Windows. You don't even have to install it, you can run it off the DVD.

#74 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:


The other question is how does Microsoft want to be in the home? do they want PCs in the home despite the fact everyone in the home is using a tablet to browse the internet?

Exactly, and people ask me why Windows 8 was released with a new menu.

Tablets have become a big part of the market, same with mobile... and MS is late to the party (like they always have been). Windows 8 and Windows Phone were a NECESSITY for MS to grab market share, and they are both gaining market share day by day.

Have to wait and see what happens. MS have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open, and that the next Windows might have a free version (or dirt cheap). If these things become true, it's a smart move from them. They see Valve as a small threat for now, but which may become a bigger threat, so they need to adapt. They are good at that, being doing it for years.

Also, I suggest you try out Linux. Something like Ubuntu which is easier to install and run. It will give you a broader view of things when comparing it to Windows. You don't even have to install it, you can run it off the DVD.

let me break it down differently.

Crysis was a game that could only run on Windows.

Now that this game will be able to run on anything (open source DirectX) I am not tightly bound to buy a Windows Machine.

Another example would be this. Open DirectX is the same thing as Xbox saying they will not have any exclusives.

Is it the right move? yes, HOWEVER, if they are not committed to the game space they will be devoured and knowing Microsoft fairly well as I do (I am in IT primary Microsoft) their bread and butter as well as what they are really good at is Enterprise solutions, not consumer solutions.

The refactoring required for them going to the cloud is smaller then the re-factoring that will be required for them to stay viable in the gaming industry.

#75 Posted by Gammit10 (2236 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

given the radical changes in the industry and Microsoft specifically I think it might be premature to assume that DirectX 12 will even be OS dependent at all, let alone Windows 8 only.

MS will not allow DX 12 on 7 thats a fact,also they didn't even allow direct x 11.1+ on 7. At most they will allow an dx 12 update on 8. Chances it will be windows 9+ feature.

Don't use the word fact to describe something that is speculation at this point.

#76 Edited by topgunmv (10057 posts) -

Hopefully with valve's big linux push we'll start to see games supporting opengl again.

#77 Edited by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

Thing is, MS is not the one that needs to gain market share, they own the PC gaming market.

For each person that wants to use Linux (like you and AlexKidd), there are 30 people that are fine using Windows, and don't even care or would want to move to something else.

When you say why buy a Windows machine over the others? Why not? For the normal user Windows has all the gaming needs, all the work needs and all the home leisure needs, with Steam as well. The price thing is irrelevant. A PC gamer is used to spending big on hardware, so something like $100 for a new Windows license is nothing. Why buy something that is limited when you can get something that has everything? On top of that, if they make that complete package FREE with ads (like MS are testing), then it's going to be even harder to convince people to go Linux.

Don't take me as a fanboy, I just comment on how things are. I don't mind gaming taking off on Linux, I have friends who use it, but NOT at the cost of fragmenting PC gaming, which is already on a delicate balance.

I would not want a version of windows that has ads, and unwanted services (most of which will probably be optional though). A typical MS OS environment would have ads crawling all over it like Xbox Live.

And I doubt Linux being a viable gaming platform would fragment PC gaming much at all, I see it the same way as devs making games for multiple consoles, but still not even that bad.

#78 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

Thing is, MS is not the one that needs to gain market share, they own the PC gaming market.

For each person that wants to use Linux (like you and AlexKidd), there are 30 people that are fine using Windows, and don't even care or would want to move to something else.

When you say why buy a Windows machine over the others? Why not? For the normal user Windows has all the gaming needs, all the work needs and all the home leisure needs, with Steam as well. The price thing is irrelevant. A PC gamer is used to spending big on hardware, so something like $100 for a new Windows license is nothing. Why buy something that is limited when you can get something that has everything? On top of that, if they make that complete package FREE with ads (like MS are testing), then it's going to be even harder to convince people to go Linux.

Don't take me as a fanboy, I just comment on how things are. I don't mind gaming taking off on Linux, I have friends who use it, but NOT at the cost of fragmenting PC gaming, which is already on a delicate balance.

I would not want a version of windows that has ads all, and unwanted services (most of which will probably be optional though). A typical MS OS environment would have ads crawling all over it like Xbox Live.

And I doubt Linux being a viable gaming platform would fragment PC gaming much at all, I see it the way same as devs making games for multiple consoles, but still not even that bad.

let me ask this simple question.

If you could play all your PC games on a Steam Machine and the Steam Machine performed better than your PC and cost less would you buy one?

#79 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

completely agree with point in bold.

I would add that at this time (2014) Valve could not pick a better year to try this. Microsoft is at this point now where they will have to decide to go all out on gaming or punt and stick with their strong points which is Enterprise solutions and my hunch is they will do exactly that.

I dont think they will pull the cord immediately but by 2016 I think Microsoft will effectively be out of the gaming industry.

I think MS is already looking into it.

They have stated that DirectX12 will be a lot more open for developers and are also testing a free version of Windows.

If all this happens, (DIrectX12 open friendly and free versions of Windows), then SteamOS has no chance. It's a smart move from MS.

even with that I think it depends..

DirectX has to be better than OpenGL for that to work.

In other words why would I buy a windows machine vs a Steam machine or even a chromebook for that matter.

Thing is, MS is not the one that needs to gain market share, they own the PC gaming market.

For each person that wants to use Linux (like you and AlexKidd), there are 30 people that are fine using Windows, and don't even care or would want to move to something else.

When you say why buy a Windows machine over the others? Why not? For the normal user Windows has all the gaming needs, all the work needs and all the home leisure needs, with Steam as well. The price thing is irrelevant. A PC gamer is used to spending big on hardware, so something like $100 for a new Windows license is nothing. Why buy something that is limited when you can get something that has everything? On top of that, if they make that complete package FREE with ads (like MS are testing), then it's going to be even harder to convince people to go Linux.

Don't take me as a fanboy, I just comment on how things are. I don't mind gaming taking off on Linux, I have friends who use it, but NOT at the cost of fragmenting PC gaming, which is already on a delicate balance.

I would not want a version of windows that has ads all, and unwanted services (most of which will probably be optional though). A typical MS OS environment would have ads crawling all over it like Xbox Live.

And I doubt Linux being a viable gaming platform would fragment PC gaming much at all, I see it the way same as devs making games for multiple consoles, but still not even that bad.

let me ask this simple question.

If you could play all your PC games on a Steam Machine and the Steam Machine performed better than your PC and cost less would you buy one?

I probably would.

#80 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

let me ask this simple question.

If you could play all your PC games on a Steam Machine and the Steam Machine performed better than your PC and cost less would you buy one?

I probably would.

That's the thing, probably only you two would. See what I mean by market?

If you wanted to buy a Steam Machine, then why not just buy a console, that's basically what it is?

And what things can perform better? All my games perform perfect on my Windows machine, and on top of that I can do another million things on it. Why would I consider a Steam Box?

It all comes back to square one. If you have two options, one which is limited and the other which has the limited options PLUS a thousand things more, and cost roughly the same... why would you consider the first?

#81 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@SEANMCAD said:

let me ask this simple question.

If you could play all your PC games on a Steam Machine and the Steam Machine performed better than your PC and cost less would you buy one?

I probably would.

That's the thing, probably only you two would. See what I mean by market?

If you wanted to buy a Steam Machine, then why not just buy a console, that's basically what it is?

And what things can perform better? All my games perform perfect on my Windows machine, and on top of that I can do another million things on it. Why would I consider a Steam Box?

It all comes back to square one. If you have two options, one which is limited and the other which has the limited options PLUS a thousand things more, and cost roughly the same... why would you consider the first?

what you are saying makes no sense on a lot of levels.

If a Steam Machine had more games, more power, and less cost only two people would buy it? what the fuck is that all about....lol think about what you are saying.

Now to your questions.

1. Why not buy a console? consoles are garbage. full stop. Steam Machines will be a lot better. They will be more powerful for the price and not upcharge you to access alll features the internet has to offer like the idiot boxes now charge you for some of the internet features

2. How will they perform better? well so far Valve have converted one game to run better on Linux then on windows. What is next to come we dont know.

3. In 3 years time its highly likely that there will be more new games for Linux then for Windows.

How do people not see this coming is beyond me.

#82 Posted by not_wanted (1977 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

given the radical changes in the industry and Microsoft specifically I think it might be premature to assume that DirectX 12 will even be OS dependent at all, let alone Windows 8 only.

MS will not allow DX 12 on 7 thats a fact,also they didn't even allow direct x 11.1+ on 7. At most they will allow an dx 12 update on 8. Chances it will be windows 9+ feature.

Most likely it will happen this way. It's the only way these bastards can make us upgrade. lol

If it wasn't for all this DX crap OS upgrade I would be still using XP. :P

#84 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

what you are saying makes no sense on a lot of levels.

If a Steam Machine had more games, more power, and less cost only two people would buy it? what the fuck is that all about....lol think about what you are saying.

Now to your questions.

1. Why not buy a console? consoles are garbage. full stop. Steam Machines will be a lot better. They will be more powerful for the price and not upcharge you to access alll features the internet has to offer like the idiot boxes now charge you for some of the internet features

2. How will they perform better? well so far Valve have converted one game to run better on Linux then on windows. What is next to come we dont know.

3. In 3 years time its highly likely that there will be more new games for Linux then for Windows.

How do people not see this coming is beyond me.

Ok, in about 2-3 years time we can have this same chat and see where Steam Boxes and Steam OS is. You ask how people don't see this coming? Because we have "seen it coming" for the past 20 years, so pardon if we are a bit doubtful.

I still don't get why you are so for Linux when you've never used it.

#85 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:
@SEANMCAD said:

given the radical changes in the industry and Microsoft specifically I think it might be premature to assume that DirectX 12 will even be OS dependent at all, let alone Windows 8 only.

MS will not allow DX 12 on 7 thats a fact,also they didn't even allow direct x 11.1+ on 7. At most they will allow an dx 12 update on 8. Chances it will be windows 9+ feature.

Most likely it will happen this way. It's the only way these bastards can make us upgrade. lol

If it wasn't for all this DX crap OS upgrade I would be still using XP. :P

Dude, upgrading an OS isn't just about gaming.

In that case it wouldn't be XP, you should still be using Windows 95. XP was a great OS, keyword: WAS. It's dated now, not as secure as the new versions and has missing features that you use.

#86 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

what you are saying makes no sense on a lot of levels.

If a Steam Machine had more games, more power, and less cost only two people would buy it? what the fuck is that all about....lol think about what you are saying.

Now to your questions.

1. Why not buy a console? consoles are garbage. full stop. Steam Machines will be a lot better. They will be more powerful for the price and not upcharge you to access alll features the internet has to offer like the idiot boxes now charge you for some of the internet features

2. How will they perform better? well so far Valve have converted one game to run better on Linux then on windows. What is next to come we dont know.

3. In 3 years time its highly likely that there will be more new games for Linux then for Windows.

How do people not see this coming is beyond me.

Ok, in about 2-3 years time we can have this same chat and see where Steam Boxes and Steam OS is. You ask how people don't see this coming? Because we have "seen it coming" for the past 20 years, so pardon if we are a bit doubtful.

I still don't get why you are so for Linux when you've never used it.

Its not about being for linux. Its about taking a look at the current state of gaming industry and taking a look at Microsofts current state and trying to predict what is going to happen in the future rather than what has happend in the past.

why is it people do not read my posts?

#87 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

Ok, in about 2-3 years time we can have this same chat and see where Steam Boxes and Steam OS is. You ask how people don't see this coming? Because we have "seen it coming" for the past 20 years, so pardon if we are a bit doubtful.

I still don't get why you are so for Linux when you've never used it.

Its not about being for linux. Its about taking a look at the current state of gaming industry and taking a look at Microsofts current state and trying to predict what is going to happen in the future rather than what has happend in the past.

why is it people do not read my posts?

We all read your posts mate, it's just that they come across as facts that it's going to happen. Phrases like "How do people not see this coming is beyond me." Some people don't see it cause there have been people saying Linux will take over gaming for the past 20 years, and it's never even come close... so do you blame them for being doubtful?

I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up. But nothing is certain yet, and if SteamOS/Steam Boxes fail then Valve needs to pull out or they will loose lots of money.

#88 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

Ok, in about 2-3 years time we can have this same chat and see where Steam Boxes and Steam OS is. You ask how people don't see this coming? Because we have "seen it coming" for the past 20 years, so pardon if we are a bit doubtful.

I still don't get why you are so for Linux when you've never used it.

Its not about being for linux. Its about taking a look at the current state of gaming industry and taking a look at Microsofts current state and trying to predict what is going to happen in the future rather than what has happend in the past.

why is it people do not read my posts?

We all read your posts mate, it's just that they come across as facts that it's going to happen. Phrases like "How do people not see this coming is beyond me." Some people don't see it cause there have been people saying Linux will take over gaming for the past 20 years, and it's never even come close... so do you blame them for being doubtful?

I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up. But nothing is certain yet, and if SteamOS/Steam Boxes fail then Valve needs to pull out or they will loose lots of money.

I am laying out SPECIFIC items in detail that are different now then they have EVER BEEN IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD and instead of reading it and trying to understand why its different you just select to say 'i have no idea what you are talking abut i just know it never happend in the past thus it will never happen in the future'

that can get pretty ftustrating.

#89 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

Ok, in about 2-3 years time we can have this same chat and see where Steam Boxes and Steam OS is. You ask how people don't see this coming? Because we have "seen it coming" for the past 20 years, so pardon if we are a bit doubtful.

I still don't get why you are so for Linux when you've never used it.

Its not about being for linux. Its about taking a look at the current state of gaming industry and taking a look at Microsofts current state and trying to predict what is going to happen in the future rather than what has happend in the past.

why is it people do not read my posts?

We all read your posts mate, it's just that they come across as facts that it's going to happen. Phrases like "How do people not see this coming is beyond me." Some people don't see it cause there have been people saying Linux will take over gaming for the past 20 years, and it's never even come close... so do you blame them for being doubtful?

I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up. But nothing is certain yet, and if SteamOS/Steam Boxes fail then Valve needs to pull out or they will loose lots of money.

valve is just a small part of the story.

Microsoft however is the larger picture..as I have been trying to say over and over and over again

#90 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

We all read your posts mate, it's just that they come across as facts that it's going to happen. Phrases like "How do people not see this coming is beyond me." Some people don't see it cause there have been people saying Linux will take over gaming for the past 20 years, and it's never even come close... so do you blame them for being doubtful?

I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up. But nothing is certain yet, and if SteamOS/Steam Boxes fail then Valve needs to pull out or they will loose lots of money.

I am laying out SPECIFIC items in detail that are different now then they have EVER BEEN IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD and instead of reading it and trying to understand why its different you just select to say 'i have no idea what you are talking abut i just know it never happend in the past thus it will never happen in the future'

that can get pretty ftustrating.

Dude, I said "I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up." Did you even read that?

And Valve ISN'T a small part of the story. The ONLY way for linux to really take off in gaming is to have Valve pushing it.

But enough of this. In your eyes it's going to go the way you say and no other way, so I see there is no point talking.

Like I said before, we'll have this chat in 2 years time and see where Linux is at.

#91 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

We all read your posts mate, it's just that they come across as facts that it's going to happen. Phrases like "How do people not see this coming is beyond me." Some people don't see it cause there have been people saying Linux will take over gaming for the past 20 years, and it's never even come close... so do you blame them for being doubtful?

I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up. But nothing is certain yet, and if SteamOS/Steam Boxes fail then Valve needs to pull out or they will loose lots of money.

I am laying out SPECIFIC items in detail that are different now then they have EVER BEEN IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD and instead of reading it and trying to understand why its different you just select to say 'i have no idea what you are talking abut i just know it never happend in the past thus it will never happen in the future'

that can get pretty ftustrating.

Dude, I said "I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up." Did you even read that?

And Valve ISN'T a small part of the story. The ONLY way for linux to really take off in gaming is to have Valve pushing it.

I feel that you do not even know what my position is on Microsoft on this story.

also, why would anyone think opening up DirectX to mulitplat would help windows sales? that is idoitic

#92 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

Dude, I said "I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up." Did you even read that?

And Valve ISN'T a small part of the story. The ONLY way for linux to really take off in gaming is to have Valve pushing it.

I feel that you do not even know what my position is on Microsoft on this story.

also, why would anyone think opening up DirectX to mulitplat would help windows sales? that is idoitic

It's pretty clear dude. You want Steam Boxes to succeed, and MS to be left out of the gaming scene. If it goes that way hopefully it doesn't kill PC gaming all the way.

Again, have a chat in a couple of years.

#93 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

Dude, I said "I agree there's no better chance than now for Linux, since Valve is backing it up." Did you even read that?

And Valve ISN'T a small part of the story. The ONLY way for linux to really take off in gaming is to have Valve pushing it.

I feel that you do not even know what my position is on Microsoft on this story.

also, why would anyone think opening up DirectX to mulitplat would help windows sales? that is idoitic

It's pretty clear dude. You want Steam Boxes to succeed, and MS to be left out of the gaming scene. If it goes that way hopefully it doesn't kill PC gaming all the way.

Again, have a chat in a couple of years.

what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank. I think PC is by far the better choice for games as well movies and TV. I also want people to get away from consoles because they are innovation killers.

However, given the what is currently in the market and about to be in the market I do not think PC gaming will grow and yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed because if they dont we will all be stuck with innovation killers

See in you a few years

#94 Edited by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

It's pretty clear dude. You want Steam Boxes to succeed, and MS to be left out of the gaming scene. If it goes that way hopefully it doesn't kill PC gaming all the way.

Again, have a chat in a couple of years.

what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank. I think PC is by far the better choice for games as well movies and TV. I also want people to get away from consoles because they are innovation killers.

However, given the what is currently in the market and about to be in the market I do not think PC gaming will grow and yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed because if they dont we will all be stuck with innovation killers

See in you a few years

You want everyone to be gaming on PC yet you want the biggest gaming OS of PC to stop supporting games or fade away? that makes sense.

And what guarantee Steam Machines will make innovation? Nothing. It's just another platform, the innovation has to come from the developers, be it on DirectX or OpenGL, Windows or Linux. Doesn't matter if it's consoles or PC, there have been plenty of innovative games on consoles.

Saying that, we've had the most innovative PC games in the last 8 years of all time compared to the last 40 years, so I don't know what you mean.

#95 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@FelipeInside said:

It's pretty clear dude. You want Steam Boxes to succeed, and MS to be left out of the gaming scene. If it goes that way hopefully it doesn't kill PC gaming all the way.

Again, have a chat in a couple of years.

what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank. I think PC is by far the better choice for games as well movies and TV. I also want people to get away from consoles because they are innovation killers.

However, given the what is currently in the market and about to be in the market I do not think PC gaming will grow and yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed because if they dont we will all be stuck with innovation killers

See in you a few years

You want everyone to be gaming on PC yet you want the biggest gaming OS of PC to stop supporting games or fade away? that makes sense.

And what guarantee Steam Machines will make innovation? Nothing. It's just another platform, the innovation has to come from the developers, be it on DirectX or OpenGL, Windows or Linux.

Saying that, we've had the most innovative PC games in the last 8 years of all time compared to the last 40 years, so I don't know what you mean.

what kind of power to you think I have?

I am laying out what I think will happen in the future...not what I WANT to have happen in the future. There is a huge difference. I dont have some hidden agenda to sway the gaming market and if i did I wouldnt have that kind of power to make that kind of difference anyway.

8 years is less time then Android has existed. That should tell people things in this industry can change very quickly.

#96 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank. I think PC is by far the better choice for games as well movies and TV. I also want people to get away from consoles because they are innovation killers.

However, given the what is currently in the market and about to be in the market I do not think PC gaming will grow and yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed because if they dont we will all be stuck with innovation killers

See in you a few years

You want everyone to be gaming on PC yet you want the biggest gaming OS of PC to stop supporting games or fade away? that makes sense.

And what guarantee Steam Machines will make innovation? Nothing. It's just another platform, the innovation has to come from the developers, be it on DirectX or OpenGL, Windows or Linux.

Saying that, we've had the most innovative PC games in the last 8 years of all time compared to the last 40 years, so I don't know what you mean.

what kind of power to you think I have?

I am laying out what I think will happen in the future...not what I WANT to have happen in the future. There is a huge difference. I dont have some hidden agenda to sway the gaming market and if i did I wouldnt have that kind of power to make that kind of difference anyway.

8 years is less time then Android has existed. That should tell people things in this industry can change very quickly.

....

"I am laying out what I think will happen in the future...not what I WANT to have happen in the future. There is a huge difference"

....

"what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank."

"I also want people to get away from consoles"

"yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed"

....

And you wonder why people get confused with your posts?

#97 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank. I think PC is by far the better choice for games as well movies and TV. I also want people to get away from consoles because they are innovation killers.

However, given the what is currently in the market and about to be in the market I do not think PC gaming will grow and yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed because if they dont we will all be stuck with innovation killers

See in you a few years

You want everyone to be gaming on PC yet you want the biggest gaming OS of PC to stop supporting games or fade away? that makes sense.

And what guarantee Steam Machines will make innovation? Nothing. It's just another platform, the innovation has to come from the developers, be it on DirectX or OpenGL, Windows or Linux.

Saying that, we've had the most innovative PC games in the last 8 years of all time compared to the last 40 years, so I don't know what you mean.

what kind of power to you think I have?

I am laying out what I think will happen in the future...not what I WANT to have happen in the future. There is a huge difference. I dont have some hidden agenda to sway the gaming market and if i did I wouldnt have that kind of power to make that kind of difference anyway.

8 years is less time then Android has existed. That should tell people things in this industry can change very quickly.

....

"I am laying out what I think will happen in the future...not what I WANT to have happen in the future. There is a huge difference"

....

"what I want personally is for everyone to be gaming on PCs to be frank."

"I also want people to get away from consoles"

"yes I dearly hope Steam Machines succeed"

....

And you wonder why people get confused with your posts?

I am not sure how any more explicit and clear I can be their bro...

what appears to be the problem understanding that?

let me try again...

I WANT everyone to play games on PC.

I PREDICT Steam Machines will become more popular than Windows.

Is that really hard to understand?

#98 Edited by AlexKidd5000 (1733 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@AlexKidd5000 said:

@SEANMCAD said:

let me ask this simple question.

If you could play all your PC games on a Steam Machine and the Steam Machine performed better than your PC and cost less would you buy one?

I probably would.

That's the thing, probably only you two would. See what I mean by market?

If you wanted to buy a Steam Machine, then why not just buy a console, that's basically what it is?

And what things can perform better? All my games perform perfect on my Windows machine, and on top of that I can do another million things on it. Why would I consider a Steam Box?

It all comes back to square one. If you have two options, one which is limited and the other which has the limited options PLUS a thousand things more, and cost roughly the same... why would you consider the first?

The only reason I'm not completely sure, is because I already have a Linux box, it's my main PC, so I'm concerned about Linux as a whole as well. Now someone who only has Windows might be more certain about buying one. And if enough gamers buy Steam Machines, more games will come to SteamOS/Linux, and thats alll that really matters to me. And that Steam Machines will hopefully make PC gaming easier for non tech-savy people.

#99 Posted by FelipeInside (25043 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:


I am not sure how any more explicit and clear I can be their bro...

what appears to be the problem understanding that?

let me try again...

I WANT everyone to play games on PC.

I PREDICT Steam Machines will become more popular than Windows.

Is that really hard to understand?

You WANT Steam Machines to become more popular than Windows, not just predict. In your mind it's even a given, not just a possibility.

Didn't you say you worked for IT in a Windows environment? Do you want your bread and butter to start losing money and customers really?

The greatest thing about all this long chat is that you've never used SteamOS or any Linux, lol.... yet you want something which you don't know about to replace something you are fluent with. You're weird, lol..... but whatevs.

#100 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:

@SEANMCAD said:

I am not sure how any more explicit and clear I can be their bro...

what appears to be the problem understanding that?

let me try again...

I WANT everyone to play games on PC.

I PREDICT Steam Machines will become more popular than Windows.

Is that really hard to understand?

You WANT Steam Machines to become more popular than Windows, not just predict. In your mind it's even a given, not just a possibility.

Didn't you say you worked for IT in a Windows environment? Do you want your bread and butter to start losing money and customers really?

The greatest thing about all this long chat is that you've never used SteamOS or any Linux, lol.... yet you want something which you don't know about to replace something you are fluent with. You're weird, lol..... but whatevs.

no I am sorry, they are two different subjects.

I have the ability to understand what I want vs what I am predicting. I am not a 14 year old child.

You most likely think all predictions is just a reflection of what the person wants.