Steam adding non-gaming software

 @WolfGrey Not true. You're assuming that people want apps and have no place to get them right now. There are numerous places to get apps already, so to say its the only all in one is simply false. 

I could see them using it as a step towards a console though. I can see them using it to lay down the groundwork for an app store that they then would use to make a console like an android. There were rumors of them in talks with Apple, if that fell through then it would make sense that they are testing whether or not they could use their own app store.

 @jrabbit99 Becoming a platform that can literally give you anything you need for a PC program and game wise is bad?

Cash grab or not it means less things we have to deal with in order to get what we need.

And as the first guy said, honestly your just "bitching for the sake of bitching".

 @TohouAsura

 Thank you. You said what I wanted to say in a more succinct manner, though with a bit stronger language against MS than I am brave enough to use. :)

 @Unfallen_Satan You are a gentlemen and a scholar, and I strongly agree with everything you said.

Diversity and competition is a must, a monopoly is bad.

Yes, Windows is indeed the leading system. This also deluded Microsoft to believe they can do whatever the f*** they want. That kind of mindset has led to Vista and Windows 8.

A competitive edge needs to be kept in order to keep companies in line. Valve may be good now, but to throw your money at them like you just don't care is selfish and narrow minded, you have to think of the egneral state of a market whenyou do that.

Steam is a great platform, and had a great part in raising PC gaming from the dust, but it must NOT rule PC gaming and marketing. An alternative always has to be there, for when the day comes when Valve may decide to change the rules of the game, those same selfish and narrow minded people who refused to look at the truth may now find themselves powerless to do anything but keep using Steam.

 @IMPACT_17

 I completely agree. Just as Steam provided a sharp contrast to the insanity (maybe not the best word, but I like it) of more draconian DRM, I want other DRM that are not significantly worse to stay and continue to provide competition that consumers can see. One may even become better than Steam, perhaps returning to the old days of CD check, but one that's not so easy to crack.

EDIT: By CD check analogy I meant an off-line tool that can verify the ownership validity of a program, be that physical or digital based.

 @maxwell97  Because Steam DRM involves simply login into an account and downloading your purchased content. All it needs to be. Nowadays, many DRM services are extremely aggressive; from limiting your installs to requiring a constant internet connection to play (which is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard about anything), with some also being pretty unstable.

 @Zhyr_

 True, and I hope it stays that way. The only thing I can do is to discourage any development that will lead to Valve's justifiably feeling that Steam is the only viable choice in DRM. My feeling extends to keeping it non-dominating as a social platform as well, but that's a discussion for another time.

@maxwell97

Microsoft Windows could be thought of a harmful monopoly for while there are other options, those other options are realistically incompatible for most people.Macs require you to buy their own systems, and both OSX and linux do not have wide spread software support. 

@Unfallen_Satan

Steam as DRM is fairly unobtrusive considering all the other options that have come and after it.

 @maxwell97  @Unfallen_Satan  @poopinpat

 I strongly agree with purchasing goods and services at the best possible value, but DRM is not something I need. Because I see DRM as inherently antagonistic toward my position as a consumer, though only as a byproduct of business self-protection instead of ill will, I want constant competition between DRM providers as a way to dilute their combined power. Furthermore, DRM is a very unique product in that it deals with enforcement and is yet almost completely unregulated. I see far greater potential for abuse and far greater obstruction to additional competition from an entrenched dominant DRM business than any other digital enterprise. I approach DRM not as a product but as a cost. Though I try to get what I want at the lowest cost, sometimes I specifically buy goods of less than best value to promote or harm indirectly other business practices. It's a bit ironic, but the practice that I want to harm in this case is DRM.

Of course, to many users Steam is more a social platform than DRM. For my singular purpose in this instance, I restrict myself to discussing Steam as a DRM provider. I also have no problems with Valve's releasing its own productivity software via Steam. Finally, I am not promoting any specific DRM over Steam or advocating people leave Steam en mass for the same reason I don't need most consumers to agree with me. I just need enough people to agree for anti-monopolistic sentiment to be a constant thorn in Valve's side and enough support for other similar products to always be a threat to Steam.

On a side note, I want to mention something speculative and tangential to our current discussion. Even if you consider DRM to be a product and Steam to be the best value in that category, my feeling is it's not. There are already games on Steam that use both Steam DRM and 3rd party DRM. Because many productivity softwares require yearly licensing fees, I feel the danger of dual DRM for those programs is even higher. As for what ideas might such fees engender in Valve's mind and the mind of other game publishers, especially after the concept reach mass acceptance via Steam, I leave that to the individual reader.

@Unfallen_Satan @poopinpat That's an interesting outlook, and an understandable position to take. However, I tend to disagree. In economic terms, the best way to promote good business practice is to purchase whatever product or service best meets your needs, regardless of the relative strength or weakness of the company in the market. I see no value in promoting diversity, if it means deliberately supporting companies that are providing a relatively poor product; that would simply encourage bad practices. To be honest, I don't actually believe in the concept of a harmful monopoly in a developed free market, as there are simply too many players and too much capital ready to jump in once the dominant company stops providing value. The danger of harmful monopolies comes where free markets do not exist, for example in education and (to a lesser degree) healthcare and related industries.

 @poopinpat

 You brings up an important point. There are many Valve supporters out there, and you all potentially benefit from Steam's expansion of service. Even if Steam become a monopoly of DRM/digital distribution, many users may only experience benefits and no drawbacks. Practically, I have to be exceedingly arrogant to try convince you not to embrace the these benefits.

However, unpoular as my position may be, I feel compelled to question every news that indicate a possible loss of freedom, in this case the inextricable binding of Valve's fate with consumer's ability to use software Valve doesn't even make. Even if Gabe Newell can keep the rein of Valve indefinitely, I cannot trust that his consumer-friendly attitude will persist. History has shown that many tyrants and despots started as idealists with good intentions, but prolonged exposure to any form of unchallengeable power inevitably corrupts their initial ideal, not out of malice but out of a misplaced sense of destiny to bring their form of justic and reform to all.

Fortunately, chances are good that none of the danger that I worry about will come to pass, and I will simply be categorized as a baseless naysayer. That will be for the best.

 @Unfallen_Satan  This is a very smart outlook on things.  But steam is the best!  I'll support them and their awesomesauce service now and by the time they become massive conglomerate tyrants I'll be losing interest in their increasingly borish and derivative products like the other major players. 

We can only hope that Gabe Newell integrates himself into a robotic body rather than retiring/dieing and Valve and their steam service remain awesome forever.

The end of the story is that CS:GO is $15 on all platforms and you know the tech they shove into that game will be more important to gaming than every CoD game since the first modern warfare for the price of one dlc.  Valve = Win

 @maxwell97  @Unfallen_Satan  @IMPACT_17

 It is against my nature to associate with a monopoly; it's not specific to Steam or extends beyond business. Though on occassion a particular person or institution may prove itself to be above the pack, it can't last indefinitely; therefore, I defend the seeds of diversity in everything all the time as a matter of principle.

@Unfallen_Satan @IMPACT_17 Why?

 @vault-boy Oh I don't have a problem with it. Its the entire point behind companies and why they exist. Its just that some put Valve on a pedistal as some kind of divine being which walks among men to spread good. They don't they're here to make money. Naturally that's great because that's growth for the economy.

 @vault-boy Slight overreaction, no?  He simply explained the reality of the business.  That companies do it for the profit.  If anything, he complimented them.  So calm down and quit being so defensive for no reason.