Given many new handhelds coming on the scene and general disinterest of Microsoft to support the market, do you think SteamOS will take place of default OS the same way Android did on phones some time ago?
Given many new handhelds coming on the scene and general disinterest of Microsoft to support the market, do you think SteamOS will take place of default OS the same way Android did on phones some time ago?
And realistically Microsoft has a very good moment coming up in the next few years to effectively kill Steam: Valve only delivers pre-compiled files and does not have access to source code. Therefore Valve is not only stuck with a “Windows-like environment”, they are also shackled to x86. With Apple’s M-processors reigning supreme in the laptop space with insane values for performance-to-powerdraw (and in turn heat radiation and cooling requirements), the days of x86-by-default laptops are probably numbered and more manufacturers may want to switch to ARM, to avoid unfavorable comparisons to MacBooks. With Windows for ARM Microsoft can finally kill of all traces of Win32 in WinRT, as they tried for years and force everyone to use UWP-apps from the store exclusively on ARM. Apple does leave apps behind, when updating their operating systems on a regular basis, a similar move by Microsoft wouldn’t look totally unreasonable. The switch could even happen gradually, like Apple’s Rosetta translation layer, which runs x86 apps on arm great right now, but I don’t think it will be maintained forever and support for x86 apps on macOS will end one day. Microsoft could do the same for Windows for ARM. If this happens Valve will probably have the opportunity to install games as UWP-apps, but their back catalog of Win32 .exes becomes effectively worthless. But if Win32 .exes run great through some translation layer on linux, valve can continue to sell and support their back catalog on current hardware.
Why are they shackled to anything? They will sell whatever the market supports. Linux doesn’t care what CPU it runs on and software can be compiled for anything. Valve isn’t stuck with anything, all of their stuff is virtual.
If we move to ARM, MIPS or whatever the flavour of the day will be, they’ll just follow the trend.
OTOH, Microsoft has to deal with an insane amount of legacy software in the corporate space. That’s probably the main reason Windows still sucks so much (although it did manage to get much better) when Mac OS managed to make a clean cut and start over.
Technically you are right when saying:
But in practice software is compiled from source for the environment it will run on and Valve does seldomly have access to the source code of third parties. They generally have pre-compiled .exes and the accompanying files. If the developer chooses to recompile for different architectures, then valve will probably get a new compiled binary. But what about defunct developers or publishers who don’t want to invest any more development time in old software? Additionally: No, software as complex as games cannot always be compiled for anything without throwing ungodly amounts of errors. In these cases additional development would be needed, even if Valve had access to the source code and the rights to use or recompile it, which they probably don’t have for proprietary third-party software.
This is specifically a problem for valve’s immense back catalog, brand new games will probably release as a compatible binary.
I think this is a misconception.
M-processors are not amazing because they are ARM, or because they are Apple.
They are pretty much where everyone else is al well, just one node shrink ahead, because Apple is the first in Line, because they can pay for it.
for example, Apple M1 GPU vs Steam Deck GPU, Apple has a ~60% GPU lead (in performance measured in TFLOPs fp32). On the CPU side it’s ~70% (in a fairly bad comparison, as there are notable differences between the analog used here). But the thing so many people ignore is that the M1 is on TSMC N5, whereas the Steam Deck GPU is built on the N7 node, (and there was the N6 node in between those two!)
The A12 is Apples N7 SoC, and draws up to ~6W, and the GPU has roughly 1/3rd of AMD Steam Deck compute, pretty in line with power draw.
Watt for Watt, Node for Node pure performance seems just good to me, not really surpassing anything else by a lot.
I partially agree for the GPU-side of things. But while there have been iPads without active cooling for over a decade now, there has never been a competitive, high performance laptop like the current MacBook Air build on x86. I know you are right theoretically and maybe it is a solvable challenge and the priorities were just different, but whatever ARM does, it seems to run cooler than x86. Even if it is only bigLITTLE or some other shortcut.
That bit is easy to explain. Apple (again) is on the latest node, so they do currently have the highest performance per watt SoC out there.
So it seems unsurprising that it’s hard to compete with the latest. But the N5 is starting to get out. AMDs 7840U should be comparable, but of course is out roughly a year later. And that’s going to be true for a while, because Apples markup allows them enough profits on the latest node and Apples vertical integration means they can be quicker to release a new device with their own new SoC, whereas for the competition they have to wait until AMD releases their products, and then build their product (the Laptop) around that.
I feel like MacOS could also be more efficient than Windows, especially in daily use but I may be wrong on that feeling, Apple is not making it easy to tell.
And of course there have been plenty of passively cooled x86 devices, but they’ve not been “good enough”
And finally, none of this is meant to knock Apples Achievements with ARM.
The native extensions for x86 translation they put in are pretty genius.
Being able to compete with AMD/Intel/Nvidia on their first out is really impressive as well.
M1 M2 etc. are great products, they’re just not magic, and unfortunately intentionally very limited (no Vulkan, no DirectX etc.).