I understand the point you are trying to make, but Windows has many MS-related services always running and various Internet-aware services as well. Heck, with Windows 8 they seriously try to hide from you the fact that you can create a local account, instead forcing Microsoft Accounts on you that are associated with email addresses. The actions you are talking about are already common on most operating systems.

Ad-trackers that report the user's activity to market anolysts are common too, so I eradicate them. I don't invite their creators to provide me an operating system.

Do you use Windows? Congratulations, you use the OS of an advertising company!

https://bingads.microsoft.com/

http://advertising.microsoft.com/

BTW: Valve isn't an advertising company. They just have a store. Microsoft has both http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/apps and http://content.microsoftstore.com/en-US/Home.aspx stores.

And if by chance you are referring to Steam having an (optional) anonymous statistic collecting feature, so does Microsoft Windows and Windows Phone!

Now I'm no fan of Steam, but everything you're painting SteamOS with, Microsoft has been guilty of for much longer and in much worse ways for years.

Shrug. Google has ads, Yahoo has ads, everybody has ads. But their ad trackers aren't running on my hardware in background while I play games. I make sure of that. Unfortunately some game publishers have been duped into making people allow Valve's ad tracker to run as a prerequisite to playing their games...and they paid Valve for the privilege.

While Microsoft has used some pretty underhanded and even illegal marketing tricks, they have never gotten away with the kind of stuff Valve has, so I personally have Valve listed higher on my current hazard list...so I do hope the SteamOS falls flat as a pancake under a bus tire.

The ol' PC gaming is dead mantra..lol. There are more games available on PC than on any of the consoles, by a substantial margin. Most AAA games continue to be multiplatform. Matters little to me that more people play a dumbed down corridor shooter like Ghosts on console - that's where those kind of games belong.

Windows sends Microsoft anonymous data statistics by default, but can be disabled (same for Valve with Steam)

Microsoft had their own Games platform that was much more intrusive than Steam

Microsoft's console platform, the xbox family, also sends data and usage statistics to Microsoft.

Microsoft periodically checks your PC to make sure it is genuine, collecting user and installation info AND THIS CANNOT BE DISABLED. Valve has no similar counterpart.

I could go on, and on.

So either you are turning a blind eye to Microsoft or you have something personally against Valve.

Also, Yahoo doesn't have ads anymore. Microsoft supplies all of Yahoo's ads.

But what exactly leads you to believe that at some point Microsoft is going to completely limit the OS and funnel everything through the app store and not let people install programs outside of that? And do you really see them ever doing that?

Nothing personal. But I also don't see any logic in 'well we have one monopolistic monolith in operating systems so we should allow one in game distribution' as if that would somehow turn out better.

If Valve showed any sign (other than in their rhetoric) that they were interested in making a better OS and possibly reducing the monopoly power of Microsoft I'd maybe show a glimmer of interest even though I think Microsoft would crush them like a bug if they tried.

But their entry in the OS field is far more likely to be just like their entry in the DRM field. They aren't interested in making an OS that's good for users. They aren't interested in making an OS that's good in any way save one. They just want another good tool to expand their leverage as game distributors, which is already at a dangerous level.

Again, nothing personal against them, I just see no reason to think better of them. Do you?

You're tech illiterate. You're asking "What will replace these programs on SteamOS" which shows your ignorance.

Open Office, GIMP, Yukon or RecordMyDesktop. You know, programs that run on Linux.

And speaking of your hate of DRM. Your beloved Photoshop is moving to a subs payment model. Do you think you can use that with no internet? Stop being a hypocrite.

It's simple: they are legally FORCED to submit at least some of their patches upstream due to their choice to use Linux. These patches will include latency, graphics, sound, etc improvements and all of Linux will benefit from them. Valve has no choice in the matter, the GPL license is very specific on this. Even if they did have no interest in making a better OS, they will be forced to, which will weaken Microsoft's OS hold.

Is the digital distribution platform monopoly a problem? Yes, except Steam is far from a monopoly. There's GoG, Origin, and the costs for a startup to form in this arena re minimal. Valve will incorporate some implementation of the LSB (as otherwise patch management for them will become a nightmare) so installation of third-party software on the SteamOS should be relatively easy.

Hey! A true fan of Steam. Bad things are being said about the beloved Valve, better jump in with some name calling and see if I can get the thread locked!

The world is full of unsurprising things.

Y'know, there was a time when Microsoft was far from a monopoly and nothing to worry about. How'd that turn out?

When Valve leveraged the success of Half Life to promote their entry into the DRM market how many people do you think anticipated that they would be able to dominate that market with their not really very good product (Steam DRM really isn't good, and at the time it was obviously not really good)? Who would have thought that they would be able to use that DRM to leverage themselves into the largest market share in digital distribution?

As far as the competition...costs of a start-up are minimal, but the capability of a start-up is non-existent. Try approaching a publisher with 'hey we haven't distributed anything but we're really great' and see how far you get. And the existing competitors are getting creamed so momentum is well established. They already face the difficulty of telling their customers 'thanks for buying from us, now go sign up with our competitor because the publisher uses them for DRM services...by the way, you can remove our client and reinstall it for your next purchase or just leave it installed...but theirs you not only can't remove but it will be in your face just waiting for your next purchase'. This is being said by at least one digital distributor that actually has a much better DRM themselves!

You don't think Valve will be able to use any traction they get in the OS market just as effectively?

Costs to manufacture an OS are extremely high (which is why Valve went with Linux as the base: they don't have enough programmers to build an OS from scratch), whereas costs to open up a store are extremely low, and as already mentioned, Valve does NOT have anything close to a monopoly. Microsoft, on the other hand, was partnered with IBM until they backstabbed them. On the other hand, the costs to create a search engine or e-store are virtually zero. Your implied conclusion is incredibly naive.

GOG, Direct2Drive, and EA via Origin are already in the market and neither looks like they are going anywhere any time soon. You know who recently got into it too? Amazon. I wouldn't be surprised if Walmart got into it soon too and we know that GameStop has shown interest in it too. Steam has a LOT of competition.

It doesn't matter, because everything they do can be bit-for-bit replicated by any third party. Just like the Red Hat clones of CentOS and Scientific Linux. It's impossible for them to cause harm with this platform.

And guess what? SteamOS is effectively a console. You know who has 100% control over their consoles? Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Valve would be no different in that respect, except for the facts that they would have no control over the hardware and no control over third-party software reposi--- oh wait, I guess they'd have almost no control after all.

You're still approaching it as 'how can Valve do any harm when Linux is limiting them'...but the issue isn't what they can do in the OS market. Everything they do with Linux can be replicated? So what? I'm not concerned about them making a one of a kind OS. My concern is that they will make an OS that is supportively interactive with their store and their DRM...then just hope everyone replicates it...or push them to. Nothing like 'this chunk of Linux code is great for a gaming environment and links to Steam at the same time, and by the way the most commonly used DRM checks for it as a side job' would ever cross their minds. Then they could just give up on the OS market and let the rest of the LinuxOS folks take care of business for them.

Amazon digital downloads...terrific...that's more customers who will experience digital download and wonder why they went to Amazon for it since they end up at Steam anyway to activate. Wal-mart, same thing. And while I may be naive I did know that GameStop's 'show of interest' is exactly who I was referring to when I talked about telling their customers thanks while sending them to Valve. GameStop digital downloads is great, and has the best bar none DRM for digital downloads on the market and if you want true invisibility over swapping disks and don't mind on-line activation it works for hard copy purchases too. It is an absolute crime when a publisher tells GameStop 'yeah you can distribute for us but we are packaging SteamDRM and don't want to use yours'.

So basically your only concern is with digital distribution, since that's the only area where Valve can "do harm"

And then you ignore the fact that third-party repos on SteamOS will be trivial, whereas on platforms like Xbox, Playstation, and Wii, they are ILLEGAL....

If EA wanted to release games for SteamOS (or linux in general) they wouldn't have to use Steam to do it, or anyone else. Heck, they could port Origin to SteamOS if they really wanted to.

More and more companies are showing interests in opening digital-distribution shops... they have the means (connections) to enter and the barriers are low...


So that just leaves the DRM... GoG releases games DRM-free, but that doesn't fly for most developers today for their modern games. We've seen developers play around with their own DRM systems (like Ubisoft), there are many other DRM systems as well, and Steam itself is fine with a distributor adding a different DRM system to the distribution as well... so I don't see the problem (besides the obvious one that you -- and me too -- don't like DRM). Valve doesn't profit from their DRM at all. Valve profits from their stores. If you want, you don't even have to use Steamworks for a game released on steam (many of the games using a third-party DRM don't use Steamworks or at least not the DRM portion of SteamWorks). Valve would be perfectly honky-doory with game publishers releasing games DRM-free if they wanted to, game publishers just choose to include it because they think they need some form of DRM. And that is really why Steam offers it: it's seen as value-added by publishers and makes it easier for Valve to "sell" a publisher on using Steam.

If you want to learn more about the real distribution system for Steam, I suggest this link:

http://www.xonotic.org/2013/10/about-xonotic-and-steam/

it describes what is and isn't really necessary for a game to be released on Steam.

You really don't know much about Linux. You should stop writing feature length articles about things you don't know about and start reading more. Even if SteamOS is packed with DRM so powerful that it kills your grandma if you so much as edit the Readme file for a game it will still greatly benefit the gaming community. You see, any other Linux developer could just copy all the good parts of what ever Valve does and add them into any other Linux distro. Meaning that everyone wins. No matter what.

Listen, I don't really care too much about most stuff with OSs but I will say this... With ONLY Windows 7 Ultimate, I am NOT forced to be connected to the internet, not forced to activate any program/game I install unless it is an internet-related thing (That ONLY requires de' Windows OS), not forced to update said programs, etc...

With Steam I am forced to be connected to de' internet, forced to activated any game I get on Steam online, forced to get all updates no matter, etc...

Therefore, I like Microsoft more than Valve right now since I can do what I wanna do on Windows 7 Ultimate without problems and without being connected online (Really, I'm only online when I wanna do online-specific things. Otherwise, I'm disconnected. That and my internet connection is really bad as well).

Also, this does mean I do NOT trust Valve with their SteamOS, as what if they do de' same annoying things?

~Edit~

Oh and let not forget... Not forced to create an online account with W7U. With Steam, I am and have to have all my stuff connected with said online account.

I don't think they are going to do any harm to other Linux producers and I don't think they are going to do any harm to Microsoft.

I think they have done extensive damage in the DRM market because they had Half Life leverage to push a bad product hard enough that good products were pushed aside (and you have to imagine how painful it is for me to refer to any DRM as a good product, but as you say publishers demand it so I've accepted that the more transparent the better means that some of them qualify as 'good').

I think that they have done extensive damage in the hard copy market by aggressively using their DRM to dismantle the advantages some people saw in hard copies. "I like hard copies because I don't hook my game machine to the internet"...sorry, meet Steam activation DRM, among others. "Well, at least I don't have to leave it connected and keep all that activation crap on my machine" ...sorry, meet Steam present check DRM, which is absolutely no improvement as far as the silly publishers who buy it are concerned but we've got them buying it anyway...and don't our competitors in the DRM market who aren't forcing people to keep in touch with their stores feeling stupid about that. Hooray, Valve is now leading the way in the wrong direction by becoming even more invasive with their DRM...and the brick and mortar stores are diving out of the PC game market in droves because really if you have to have the internet connected to your game machine all the time anyway what's the point of an expensive hard copy?

And while you continue to point at the ease of entry into digital distribution from a cost of set-up standpoint you continue to ignore the realities of cracking a market with an established giant. GOG has a niche...games old enough to go DRM free...that's a bit self limiting. EA and Ubisoft have the power of a stable of their own published games that they can bully the market with as long as they are willing to not distribute through Steam...and as Steam's market share grows that becomes a less and less attractive option. Companies that 'self distribute' are definitely past that point in most cases. Why bother developing and maintaining your own store when you can just provide a link to Steam, which your customers need anyway since you bought SteamDRM?

And I personally think GameStop is going to get crushed and it won't take long...and since they own the rights to the 'good' DRM that will pretty much be the end of that. They will continue making plenty selling console games and their purchase of those rights will be mocked as a bad idea.

The general sales giants of the internet like Walmart and Amazon are doomed to being one shot stops. The first time anyone buys from them, gets their download, and creates a Steam account to complete the installation there is no possible way for 'why did I bother with that other store' to not bubble to the top of their head. They are hoping to grab digital sales to compensate for their declining hard copy delivered sales, but they will just end up feeding the beast...and in the end hard copies will get even harder to come by for those who just want them. And they will actively feed the beast with both hands, since developers will be saying 'I have to distribute through Wal-Mart and they don't offer DRM, so I have to call Valve'.

Nobody wants to believe it, but Valve is already incredibly dangerous, and this whole OS bit is just another straw on the camel.

Never claimed I did. Couldn't begin to develop DRM either. But I do understand marketing and business, which is what the conversation here is about.

This is very true. And it bugs the snot out of me, too

I liked DOS, where the user had much more control over what was running on their PC. Windows seems to enjoy making decisions for users and running things it wants to without asking.

I do not see SteamOS as an improvement, though. If it is not an improvement, why change?

This is why I will be sticking to Windows 7 Ultimate until further notice.

Which is what I'm sure most of us will be doing. But the day will come where Windows 7 is no longer supported, and you'll need to have a newer Windows, or another option to play the latest games (DRM/distribution issues aside). When that day comes what would you rather do? Not get newer games and maintain a retro system and games library? Update to latest Windows and hope it's no worse than Windows 8? Or would you like to see a transition to Linux systems being viable for gaming?

Or maybe you're just really pessimistic. People used to say the same thing about iTunes for music. Now you have Amazon music, google music, all the online music streaming sites, etc. There was a time when no one could imagine standing up to Apple in the digital download front on music, but that changed almost overnight.

That's the reality of the world of digital content. One day you're the king of the hill, the next day it's a free for all. And quite frankly, I see Steam as already having lots of healthy competition.

I already said before. I'll stay on W7U until a better OS is made. (Windows, Linux, whatever).

So... you're seriously saying that a DRM scheme that requires you to crack a game or beg permission to re-install somewhere is better than Steam? Oookaaaay. I can't even begin to imagine what criterion you're using for that assessment. From a useability, convenience, and player experience standpoint, it's a ludicrous example.

So are you saying I could connect to the store or the forums or download a Steam update when I'm in offline mode? Nope. You have to restart it in online mode to do that. So what's the problem? If this is simple paranoia about having a bit of software on your machine, I'll grant you, Steam would grind your gears. svcks to be you.

I'm realizing from this and your other comments that you think Valve is "dangerous" because they're so successful, so if something is Steam-activated it's bad, if it doesn't involve Steam it can svck mudcrab dung but still be better just because it's not Steam. Therefore anything we say is just going to go in circles. Your entire spiel is based on paranoia and not on the actual performance of the Steam client or Steamworks as DRM.