Steam machine - i'm really confused

I have been out of pc gaming for about 3 year's now after my last pc packed in. However recently i have had the urge to to get back into it and build my own. However at the same time i saw the announcements for the steam machine and os. However i'm confused with who this is actually aimed at in the first place.

I have heard it stated numerous times that it is aimed solely at steam user's, but how can it be, surely they already have built pc's running the steam client just fine as is, not needing to upgrade.

The second part that confuses me is that it is being thrown out there that it is the pc to make pc's more like a console in the home. The trouble i have with this however , is that the people who would want a pc to be more like a console, already have that in the ps4 and X1. Yes they don't have the potential power advantage as pc or steam box do, but if they want the simplified access to them they already have that and at a relatively cheaper price without the scare of needing to manually upgrade later on.

And the last statement leads directly into my last point. If these machines are going to be bought out as smaller pc's, what happens when the inevitable upgrade has to happen. Take the gpu as an example, every year they seem to be getting bigger and bigger, and from what i have seen so far from the released beta version's if they become the size on release, how are we supposed to upgrade if we are already pushing the cases space to the limits.

I like the idea behind the concept, i just really don't understand the way it has been done at all.

If you play at a desk, build a normal PC (or buy prebuilt) and put normal Windows on it.

Steam Machines have yet to prove they are worth investing in.

I was already leaning towards the traditional pc build anyway, but i must admit the steam machine did perk my interest, but i just wanted to no what they are actually for, but i suppose if i have to ask in the first then it isn't for me in the first place.

I just don't get why valve would put so much effort into something like this in the first place.

They are for people who don't know how to build their own pc and just aren't pc savvy. Its meant to reduce the barrier of entry to the PC market in terms of knowledge

This is value screw windows move and for stupid folks who can't be bother to build pc's or can't figure out how to use a part picker on a website.

Steam machines are geared towards the people who DON'T build PCs and are looking for a console-like gaming experience.

I look at it as a console system with the flexibility of PC hardware. Any PC can become a Steam Machine by installing the OS, and getting the controller. I know that Valve wants to divorce itself from Windows, and this is the early steps of that. It will take years for this system to build up popularity, but the potential is huge. As this generation of console hardware ages, the Steam Machines will only get more popular.

It is too early to tell where all this is going, but the potential is definitely there.

Do the opposite of this.

Opposite of what?

Are you suggesting to him to invest in a Steam Machine?

pretty much this

The whole point of the Steam Machine is to promote SteamOS and Linux support for gaming. I don't see Valve risking anything with this when 3rd party manufactures are investing in it and not Valve, Valve just has the controller and Big Picture/SteamOS to develop.

Just a prebuilt PC mini-itx build with Steam logo slapped onto it.

Steam machines are for consolites that have a pc gamer in the house. The release of Steam family sharing with Steam machines is not a coincidence!

You can also dual boot SteamOS with Windows in a new build if you really want a gaming operating system.

So it comes down to prices (of the OS and the games).

@PfizersaurusRex: SteamOS is free. All Linux based OS's are free.

Ah cool :)

I would be willing to try the OS to see the difference in gaming performance, but I bet its minimal. Also the streaming feature would be cool, but I mainly just want the controller lol....

@Arthas045: It most likely will improve performance, but it all depends on what you're running anyway. If you have a good GPU you're laughing anyway, so it won't make any difference really. If you have an ageing rig, it could make a difference potentially.

I'm looking forward to the controller as well. I can only presume it will be compatible with any PC, like the 360 or PS controllers. I think there might be quite a few people buying only controllers.

They are for people who are too intimidated, or lazy, or uninterested in working on PC Hardware. Right now, I don't see how it will make it easier for people to know how powerful their PC is with so many different Steam boxes coming out. So, it's not going to be nearly as simple to use as a console, at least at the start.

They could build that in if they have a custom performance rating system though to make it easier.

Once they are released to extensive testing and such, maybe we could see performance improvements over playing in Windows, which would be good for us all.

@guynamedbilly: The idea of building a computer to the uninitiated must be daunting. I remember when I was younger I thought building a PC involved some handyman skillset, rather than just buying parts and sticking them in a box.

Valve is doing a good job of engaging new potential PC users via Steam Machines. The big problem as I see it is that they just announced 13 new Steam Machines, which I think would only confuse people on a different level altogether.

@RadioGooGoo: I believe I would pay money even if they released a beta controller or something not complete.

it kind of does require a skillset. i dont know anyone besides me that can build a complete pc (in person)

i'm also confused. it's not a PC (no Windows) and it's not powerful enough to run any proper games either. what is it for? playing Minecraft?

your just as confused as everyone else. i think it is valve take on trying to get into the console like market. they are doing anything they can to expand their OS

No they aren't.

That's probably the best argument I've heard against the Steam machine.

@lilkarlh666: This is the shortest and most apt description of Steam machines:

Imagine paying $700 for a computer that can't run Windows and can only play maybe about a dozen not very famous indie games.

Revolutionary indeed.

@IvanElk: That's news to me. I know some distros charge for extra features, but even those ones have a free version of the OS.

I'm confused too. I'll be buying a new PC in 2 years or so, and hopefully we'll know by then where Steam machine stands.

I'll likely be doing a budget build, so it might be a good alternative if the price is right.

Anyway, I'll see....

Computers and consoles are not investments. I bet you think cars are investments. I spend more money on scotch every year than computers. Steam machines are dope.

The GPL requires that they are.

I don't know entirely how the Linux Licenses work, but I know some versions are NOT free.

For example Red Hat Enterprise: https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html

I still don't get what you mean by dope? As in they are good?

Why would you buy a Steam box now? I have yet for someone to explain to me something it does better than Windows.

RHEL is indeed free.

For starters, it isn't part of the microsoft botnet. It doesn't spy on you better.

Ummm....did you see the link?

@lilkarlh666: Some of them are dual booting with Windows 7. You can also install it on your own and just attach your keyboard and mouse.

Where did they say it wasn't free software?

Ehh.... where the prices are I guess?

Who told you that charging for free software makes it proprietary?

Eh, no one.

I was just responding to PfizersaurusRex post that all Linux OS are free. To use Red Hat you have to pay for example.

Red Hat is free, whether you pay for it or not.

Ok. I always thought you needed to pay for Red Hat Licensing. Hence that link I posted before.

The status of cost of red hat doesn't affect the status of it being free. That being said you can download RHEL without paying for it (legally). But that isn't what makes it free.

Some of the server distros cost money (Novell for example sells an enterprise server distro). I know there used to be some other ones but I can't think of the names off the top of my head.

Also I thought that Red Hat enterprise distro did cost money? Unless that changed recently.

Do you guys not know what free software is?