| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Valve’s Gabe Newell: Windows 8 will be catastrophe for PC space |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-07-26 00:28:40 |
| Valve's Gabe Newall on Linux and Windows 8: "We want to make it as easy as possible for the 2500 games on Steam to run on Linux as well. It's a hedging strategy. I think Windows 8 is a catastrophe for everyone in the PC space. I think we'll lose some of the top-tier PC/OEMs, who will exit the market. I think margins will be destroyed for a bunch of people. If that's true, then it will be good to have alternatives to hedge against that eventuality." |
|
| RE[3]: Gabe's sky is falling |
| By moondevil on 2012-07-26 16:59:20 |
|
> The great saviour to the PC industry is consolidation and each vendor developing their own in house operating system - with an ecosystem around that operating system which gives the customer a uniquely HP, Dell or Lenovo experience. When the vendor can control the experience they can ensure that the customers are happy and become repeat customers rather than viewing their products as interchangeable with any other product out there. Somehow I have the feeling this will mean HP Linux, Dell Linux, Lenovo Linux, OEM Vendor XYZ Linux, all with its own quirks and bloatware. Or some other cheap alternative OS. Because having a standard OS distribution regardless of which OS, is no different than the actual situation with Windows, in differention terms. The only way to properly differentiate, like it used to be before the IBM PC was introduced, leads to bigger development costs. |
 - Score: 4 |
| RE[5]: Interesting but wrong |
| By bassbeast on 2012-07-26 17:08:52 |
|
Tell me something friend...how much money has Ballmer REALLY pissed away on "bad acquisitions"? 20 billion? 30 billion? The simple fact is we don't know how much they've lost because Ballmer can play 3 card monty with the profits from various divisions and cover his failings. I mean look at the X360 for example, can you tell me whether they've made a profit yet or not? Oh they SAY they've been in the black for a couple of years, but did that include the 2 billion plus writeoff from the RRoD fiasco? What about the R&D costs? The costs of the Xbox 1? That is the problem with MSFT in a nutshell, you simply can't tell WTF is going on in a giant monolith of a company like that. In a way they remind me of the old AOL when dialup was dying, they had all these products, some did great like WinAMP, some did poorly like Netscape after V4, but since they tried their damnedest to tie everything into "the service" you couldn't separate the good from the bad until the company was practically DOA. Ballmer has been spending money like Charlie Sheen on a coke binge at a porn convention but now that PCs are a mature market he simply doesn't have the revenue to cover it up anymore. How much was the final bill for the Zune? The Kin? Sidekick? Maybe now that he can't play 3 card monty and hope the Windows and office divisions can cover his gambling maybe we'll see him have some fiscal restraint, but I doubt it. Be prepared for more "technical losses' from now on as Ballmer refuses to quit blowing cash trying to be Apple. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[4]: Interesting but wrong |
| By bassbeast on 2012-07-26 17:22:50 |
|
But you see that is where you and the pundits are wrong. its not that "desktop computing is becoming less important" its that everyone and their dog and their dog's rubber bone has a PC and since the rise of multicores frankly users simply can't come up with enough useful work to stress even a 5 year old chip. I have many a customer on first gen Core duos and Phenom I triples and quads and frankly they just can't redline even these 5 plus year old chips, they just can't do it. There hasn't been a "killer app" in years and frankly the jobs most people use a PC for will feel the same on that Phenom I triple or the latest Intel monster, so why buy a new one? It certainly won't "feel" any faster, or let them get more work done when they aren't even pegging the chips they have, it'll just cost money. So while I believe Win 8 is MS Bob the second coming I seriously doubt computers are going anywhere. Its just that the OEMs got spoiled by the crazy money they were making during the MHz wars, where a 2 year old PC would struggle to run the latest software. That just isn't the case anymore and without the thermal cycling that comes with pegging the chips these desktops and laptops are lasting longer than ever, that's all. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[3]: Gabe's sky is falling |
| By bassbeast on 2012-07-26 17:59:42 |
|
Apple commands the margins they do because its fashion friend, nothing more. Look up the numbers and their failure rates are no different than anybody else and they simply tack on a new feature like Retina (which frankly PC vendors have had high end HD screens for years, its just a niche most never looked at because it was more expensive) and people WILL buy because its not cool to have last year's Apple anymore than it is to wear last season's clothes. Not that there is anything wrong with that, Nike has made a mint off fashion with the Air Jordans, Gucci, Prada, there is high margins and good money to be made in fashion. But you look at the chips in their X86 line and they are always behind the curve, and you always pay more for less than what you get from the other vendors. So please don't act like its some "sterling reputation for excellence" that lets Apple charge what they do, its because that Apple logo tells the world you spent more money than the other guy, no different than the "I Am Rich" app that would have never sold in a million years on android or WinPhone. The mistake the Windows OEMs are making is thinking they can slap out a $1500 laptop and anybody will care. Its just not cool to have a Dell or HP logo on the top like it is to have the Apple logo, just like those Payless sneakers aren't cool like having a pair of Jordans. Its like slapping a higher price on Mickey D's and thinking that means they can compete with Olive Garden, or thinking a $100,000 sticker on a Mustang means it can compete with a Ferrari, it just don't work that way. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[4]: Interesting but wrong |
| By BushLin on 2012-07-26 18:17:21 |
|
I'm not arguing the crux of what you've written but MS only made a $500m loss due to writing off $6bn from a failed advertising venture. Also, if you're measuring total CPU load across all cores then it's not surprising that your Dad's mostly single threaded software doesn't stress all the cores. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[5]: Interesting but wrong |
| By Soulbender on 2012-07-26 19:29:14 |
|
Yes good point. It's not becoming less import as much as it is becoming stable and people aren't buying new PC's every other year. The money previously spent on PC's are now going to other markets. Either way, it's bad news for MS. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[5]: Xbox is the way to go for Ms. |
| By Morgan on 2012-07-26 19:31:34 |
|
> Sales of the Vita and 3DS have been terrible in comparison. Which is why those two devices were released with a lot of smartphone-like features built in. Unfortunately, those touch screens, cameras and built in programs didn't seem to help the sales any. As for gaming on the go, well there's a reason I still have my ancient (by gaming standards) Gameboy Advance SP. No matter how compelling the games for smartphones get, nothing beats a dedicated device with 12+ hours of battery life, instant on, and physical buttons. Instead of bringing my phone's battery to its knees after two hours of gaming, I can keep it alive all day to receive texts, calls and emails -- you know, what it was designed for -- and still get my game on. |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE[3]: Not bothered |
| By danger_nakamura on 2012-07-26 19:39:49 |
|
Amen and hallelujah!!! +100000 |
| - Score: 0 |
| RE[4]: Gabe's sky is falling |
| By kaiwai on 2012-07-27 03:19:43 |
|
Where did I raise any issues relating quality? how about next time, if you're going to reply, actually read what I post rather than scanning through it in 5 seconds than coming to some off-base conclusion that never addresses a single thing I said. What makes Apple different is the entire package where as you have this fetish of focusing on one aspect - and you are the perfect example of the kind of mind set of those who run the PC industry, your inability to look at multiple things and ask what is the cumulative effect of all these things combined into a single coherent product. What makes Mac's different is the operating system itself or to quote Steve "the heard of a Mac is Mac OS X". That is the biggest differentiating factor hence the reason they guard it so jealously from it being put on non-Apple hardware - it is the one differentiating factor that makes their computer stand out from the rest. Yes, the looks might grab the eye but there has to be something beyond looks to keep a person a repeat purchaser - oh, and calling them 'morons' or 'idiots' or 'sheep who follow fashion trends' simply shows what a superficial moron you are when it comes to understanding purchasing trends. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[4]: Gabe's sky is falling |
| By kaiwai on 2012-07-27 03:29:01 |
|
> Somehow I have the feeling this will mean HP Linux, Dell Linux, Lenovo Linux, OEM Vendor XYZ Linux, all with its own quirks and bloatware. Or some other cheap alternative OS. Because having a standard OS distribution regardless of which OS, is no different than the actual situation with Windows, in differention terms. The only way to properly differentiate, like it used to be before the IBM PC was introduced, leads to bigger development costs. The bloatware is a byproduct of the race to the bottom rather than the cause - if they have their own operating system with a uniquely HP/Dell or Lenovo experience then the customer will see that yes they're paying more but they're getting a superior experience. Right now customers go in, they see a row of laptops that are all running Windows so can you blame them just going for the cheapest one? they all run Windows, they all pretty much look the same so what makes one stand out from the others apart from price? what makes the NZ$400 laptop visibly different than the NZ$600 or NZ$800 one? Regarding different operating systems, why not a FreeBSD based distribution with work done by HP? A Linux based one from Dell? a NetBSD distribution from Lenovo? As for the cost of development - given the volume they sell the per-unit cost would be minuscule especially when you consider that they can easily create open/closed source hybrids that take an open source core such as FreeBSD, graft a ground up proprietary display technology then work with something like KDE to integrate the desktop into the underlying operating system. Personally I can't see it costing an astronomical sum for the operating system itself but the biggest challenge would probably be getting an ecosystem up and running which would cost a bit at least in the short run by long term it would halt the race to the bottom which would allow them to make back any money from the initial investment. |
| - Score: 1 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |