Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 876 posts

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#491

Post by lmm »

galleywest200 wrote: post #471
lmm wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think they could totally ride the current gamers "Switching to Linux instead migrating to Windows 11" wave. Those users would definitely appreciate better compatibility with Windows apps. Sure, but how much are they realistically going to pay for it? I guess improving compatibility with general-purpose Windows apps might help them sell a few more Steam Machines, but it's hard to think that it's really going to mo…

> Sure, but how much are they realistically going to pay for it? Nothing? Valve makes it money selling the games on the store. SteamOS is presumably free to install on your own hardware once it has a general release.

> Nothing? Valve makes it money selling the games on the store.

Right, so my question is how does better compatibility with (non-game) Windows apps help them make more money?

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#492

Post by taftster »

InvisibleUp wrote: post #457
xbmcuser wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The major reason is they are a private company with good business. The don't have a need to keep adding to shareholder value ie stock price instead just need to generate a yearly income. We have reached a point where the shareholders are a companies real customers and that is who they all try to attract.Everytthing else a company does is just to attract shareholders

I find it a touch strange, in the abstract, that a corporation being public is a bad thing. On paper it should be a good thing; being publicly owned should mean that your corporation has turned from a private business venture into effectively public infrastructure that's impossible to boycott and depended on to some extent by everybody. As a result, financial statements should be (and are) public and transparent, and…

Yes, exactly. It's kind of a wink-wink nudge-nudge at this point. A company citing "public good" under the guise of "shareholder value" is not actually supporting the public good at all.

Not that I condone capitalism, or socialism, or communism, or fascism, or any ism for that matter. Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an ism, he should believe in himself.

But a private company, at this point, can arguably affect the greater good just as much as a public company. The rich are getting richer, and the corporate model is just there to support that transfer of wealth.

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#494

Post by petterroea »

For an understanding of what Valve are doing, here is a 1 hour talk by Gabe Newell (CEO):

Gabe Newell: On Productivity, Economics, Political Institutions, and the Future of Corporations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td_PGkfIdIQ

TL;DR:

* The most skilled workers are the most undervalued

* Make products to serve the customer

* Management is a skill, not a career path

* The only people they consider themselves to be unable to compete with are their customers, so enabling the customer to produce better content in their ecosystem is the most efficient way of producing things.

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#495

Post by lvass »

InvisibleUp wrote: post #457
xbmcuser wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The major reason is they are a private company with good business. The don't have a need to keep adding to shareholder value ie stock price instead just need to generate a yearly income. We have reached a point where the shareholders are a companies real customers and that is who they all try to attract.Everytthing else a company does is just to attract shareholders

I find it a touch strange, in the abstract, that a corporation being public is a bad thing. On paper it should be a good thing; being publicly owned should mean that your corporation has turned from a private business venture into effectively public infrastructure that's impossible to boycott and depended on to some extent by everybody. As a result, financial statements should be (and are) public and transparent, and…

>On paper it should be a good thing

Not really. Most people have terribly low time preference. Democracy for example is a very bad idea when you account for that (read Hoppe for a detailed explanation). Public company ownership is much better because it doesn't suffer from one vote per person, but still susceptible to much of the same management problems, specially in a society that already favors lower time preference by other means.

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#496

Post by faidit »

InvisibleUp wrote: post #457
xbmcuser wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The major reason is they are a private company with good business. The don't have a need to keep adding to shareholder value ie stock price instead just need to generate a yearly income. We have reached a point where the shareholders are a companies real customers and that is who they all try to attract.Everytthing else a company does is just to attract shareholders

I find it a touch strange, in the abstract, that a corporation being public is a bad thing. On paper it should be a good thing; being publicly owned should mean that your corporation has turned from a private business venture into effectively public infrastructure that's impossible to boycott and depended on to some extent by everybody. As a result, financial statements should be (and are) public and transparent, and…

The wealthiest 10% of Americans own like 90% of stocks, and the top 1% own 50%. While the poorest 50% of the population own about 1% of the stock market.

So "publicly" traded (the term public ownership can be confusing because it can also mean state control) just means it's open for the elite to invest in.

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#497

Post by iknowstuff »

positron26 wrote: post #470
ghurtado wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not unique to AI though. That's very common for tech startups. If they keep doing it, it must be because sometimes it works.

What doesn't work are the predictions of Uber's collapse, of which there were many, cheered on by a great deal who still gather here looking for the next things to see through.

I am personally betting on Uber’s collapse for the obvious reason: it won’t compete with robotaxis and AV companies would rather have customers on their own apps rather than Uber’s platform.

Just unsure about the timing

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#498

Post by komali2 »

> and that’s when the Fex compatibility layer was started, because we knew there was close to a decade of work needed before it would be robust enough people could rely on it for their libraries.

In a recent Linus Tech Tips video, Linus Torvalds (original Linus) was asked, "if you could go back in time and start the Linux project from scratch, what would you do differently?" He had two answers, one was "nothing," and the other was "if I knew how much work this was going to take, I never would have started this project."

It makes me wonder, is there some kind of blissful ignorance required to kick off a project that will take you years to see through? How many times have I self limited myself, stopped myself from starting something, because I put on my lead hat and did some estimations and thought eh, not worth it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfv0V1SxbNA

Re: Valve reveals it’s the architect behind a push to bring Windows games to Arm

#500

Post by _aavaa_ »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #488
_aavaa_ wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Valve is doing this because they don’t want to have the OS vendor exert total control over them and the gaming industry. Apple is a terrible choice by that metric.

It'll never happen for a whole bunch of reasons, but a phone with Apple's hardware, Valve's OS, and Nintendo's game library would be amazing.

You can get 2/3rds of that with a steam deck.
Post reply on HN