Wait, If Windows is 96.21% and Linux is 1.96%, then MacOS is 1.83%?
Wouldn't that make Linux 2nd place?
Before opening the comments, I spent several seconds contemplating if I should mention this, or if people would think I was some pedantic nerd dickhead and downvote me to hell. Glad someone else already covered this.
Yeah, I contemplated mentioning it too, knowing I might come off as pedantic, but figured what the hell. Others must have noticed too, right?
Dude you are "root", you can do anything here! So don't waste time thinking next time, just (su)do!
This is a post from the future, after MacOS temporarily jumps to a whopping 2% after it gets its yearly single port of a 5 year AAA old game.
I guess people just trying to do things with what they have. I had a friend who plays LoL on a Mac. She also used Steam on it but there were very few games.
I was in that camp as well. Personally, if gaming got better on Mac I'd go back in a heartbeat. If you have a specific title you like that's support it's really nice, but anything else is a layer of compromises to get things up and running :/
ARM isn't the problem. Some games have native ARM ports, and x86 games can be run by Rosetta. It's not as fast as native, but broadly comparable with the performance of the previous gen Intel chips they replaced.
A bigger problem on macOS is that they dropped support for 32-bit software a few years ago in Catalina. Not a problem with newer games, but it decimated Mac users' Steam libraries.
And the biggest problem is that Apple just doesn't give a shit about gaming. Every few years, they claim they're going to do games, but quickly forget about it. They've never put decent video cards in Macs, and never hesitate to throttle hardware if proper cooling would mean a larger enclosure, so AAA games typically arrive on macOS years late, when second-rate or integrated video cards can run them.
If they actually cared, they'd have their own Vulcan implementation. Instead, they're focused on their own proprietary Metal API.
Basically, Apple and AAA game studios have been ignoring each other for decades.
so AAA typically arrive late
that's IF they arrive at all. Many studios/publishers just don't care about lower hardware anymore. If it doesn't run on current day hardware they don't release it for it. Especially with Linux and Mac. The best time to get a release for the the two would be release day, after that it's diminishing results
I firmly believe that with the move to ARM, they gutted macos gaming capability past the point of no return. You used to be able to say that you could run compatibility layers on it but, the new architecture makes it super hard to do so. Even virtualizing it via VirtualBox is a pain in the butt on the new system. I've just been telling customers if you want any type of gaming support, choose anything but the new macs.
It depends, actually. You can stack translation layers to take things from x_86 -> Arm and stuff intended for Windows -> MacOS. Depending on your solution sometimes you need to use Microsoft's x86 translation layer and some times you use Apple's.
This takes a pretty big hit tho. And for a long time DX12 was an issue, but with Apple's release of the GameDev porting kit (intended for developers) you could now do play those titlss through a WineBottle. Many users did this (myself included) and I think commercial products like CrossOver are able to have the same functionality. Playing D4 on my base m1 was kinda wild.
It's honestly kinda fun if you like tinkering, but not ideal if you care about raw performance. Ultimately tho, my Linux system is just easier now, but if I get curious if I can run a game on the thinnest laptop I own I reach for my Mac.
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/mobile https://topgameslists.com/mobile-games-on-steam/ https://www.androidpolice.com/android-games-on-pc/
I could keep doing this. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of games on Steam that started on mobile.
Not that this matters because the entire fucking point is that NO, Macs aren't "unable to run games because ARM" when almost all mobile games run on ARM and they get ported to non-ARM processors ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
Are Linux users just unable to think beyond what's literally in front of them?
True though point being here Steam is a PC platform so it doesn't have ARM games, it has ports of them. So yes, unless you use some kind of emulator, ARM Macs won't run Steam games let alone Steam.
...are... you... fucking trolling?
Do you not know what a port is? Are you not aware that numerous modern game engines don't even need to be ported, they just run on multiple platforms?
Macs being ARM based has FUCKING NOTHING TO DO with there being few games for the platform.
Apple has never courted game developers. They have never been about absolute gaming power. They're about developers, media production, and general use audiences. They do not build gaming computers. Any gaming capability is ancillary to their actual business model.
If a developer doesn't see a potential ROI on porting a game to Apple silicon, they won't. It's that simple.
Even if it's Steam Deck, this just goes to show that desktop Linux is totally viable; it just needs more commitment from companies
Man I remember when KDE came out and us young naive kids thought "this is it... It's virtually identical to win95/98... But without the bsod"
I feel old.
Windows 10 has support into next year. Personally I use Linux and Windows but I'm sticking with gaming on Windows until support runs out. I think next year will be the year of linux
.. Yes, but realistically the work to make the Linux ABI "more stable" can probably go to use elsewhere
Yeah! That thing almost nobody touches because it's literally just there to run a proprietary storefront and act as a translation layer for games is totally going to win the desktop!
Just next year!
For the last twenty-five years or so.
commitment from companies
The biggest of big tech refuses to accept Linux as a desktop OS. They need to port their software for Linux to get people over.
desktop Linux is totally viable
I think this shows the opposite.
If a FREE option that claims to be more efficient/faster (but usually isn't in real life) is less than 2% of the market, something is wrong. Very, very wrong. Since when do people turn down free stuff, unless that free item is that bad?
Because the vast majority of computers come with Windows preinstalled, and the vast majority of users can't be bothered to update their OS unless they're forced, let alone reinstall something else. I'm fairly certain the numbers would be very different if there were a significant number of blank laptops on the market, let alone ones shipped with Linux.
I'm 100% certain there would be little difference because people need an OS that can run the software that they want, and just as importantly they need to be able to actually install and use it and Linux has never even tried to make that process anything but a nightmare. And I'll stop you right there with your various flavors of Mint or Ubuntu or Elementary or the dozens of other distros. Users don't care about endlessly tinkering. They want something that just works. Linux doesn't offer that.
But if you turn to science / engineering software, most stuff will work out of the box on Linux/ Mac, but is a pain in the ass to set up on Windows. Ease of installing software isn't an OS thing; it depends on the developer of the software in question.
That's simply not true. The vast majority of CAD, CFD and FEA software is run on Windows (with many not even having Linux versions) and that has been the case for decades. The installation process on Windows is almost universally a straightforward process, and the times it isn't, is usually because that software has (or had) Unix roots from ages ago and the clunky nature of anything related to Unix comes through.
Someone's been feeding you bullshit.
CAD is an exception, yes. Also a lot of stuff related to commercial aviation, because of the regulations. I was talking about comp sci, statistics, big data etc.
that software has (or had) Unix roots from ages ago and the clunky nature of anything related to Unix comes through.
It's the other way around. It is extremely easy to make simple UNIX scripts. And it is extremely easy to string together a bunch of such simple scripts to make larger software. Windows does not follow the UNIX philosophy, making it difficult for different programmes to talk to each other.
Someone's been feeding you bullshit.
I'm talking from personal experience. I write R, python and bash scripts to take data from machines, analyse it and draw graphs and charts based on it. I use three languages and multiple machines. But thanks to the UNIX emphasis on modularity, I can connect all of this into one automated pipeline. And if tomorrow one machine is replaced, I will only have to change a few lines of the script, again thanks to modularity.
Don't get me wrong, Windows has its advantages - better gaming support, 'safety rails' that prevent you nuking your system, better drivers for peripherals, and so on. But software installation is not one of them.
Lol steam Deck is already on the edge of not being able to play new AAA console titles. There will be a few ten thousand left who will feel like there is value in buying a second.
This is the new Steam Link. They've probably lost millions internally.
Maybe 10 years from now if they keep pumping massive money into it but it's certainly not even close to comedically viable.
Valve sold out of steam decks for multiple production runs now. And other companies are now investing in handhelds after seeing the success of it. Steams intention with the Deck was to kick start the handhelds market and make SteamOS the default operating system for that form factor. I don't know if they profit from the deck directly but i definitely have bought more games since owning one.
Not to mention that most people have a favorite game they go back to that runs on older hardware, AAA certainly makes up a very small percentage of my gameplay
tbh most AAA game are not worth playing the last AAA game i bought was cyberpunk. i'd rather get a game with good performance, gameplay and story than one that just looks pretty and is buggy as hell
I dunno if it's because i played cyberpunk later than everyone else or something but i quite liked it
it seems i got really lucky i played it at release and had bearly any bugs and since i don't jump onto the hypetrain i to enjoyed it
If you try to run any new AAA title on any current handheld you're going to have a bad time and bad battery life IMO. I think you could even extend this to modestly old gaming rigs that already struggle badly with poorly optimised new titles.
I see the Deck praised often for its emulation capabilities and indie game performance - and to be honest those aspects are appealing enough to me if I was interested in buying another portable computer.
This is the new Steam Link
Out of curiosity, what makes you think this?
I doubt this is the case as thin client gaming accessories are a very niche product, and the Deck hardware is grossly overqualified in this regard IMO
It's always hilarious when kids with no knowledge talk about Valve's hardware. Like... none of it has ever been developed to make money. Steam makes so goddamn much money they're literally just pissing around with R&D because it's fun.
No, the #steam deck is just an attempt to secure their longevity if #Microsoft tries to kick them from #windows.
The steam deck is also a way to get people to buy more games.
Kick them from Windows? You mean "piss off literally every game developer, publisher, and player to the point of antitrust lawsuits from multiple entities."
But go on being literally insane with conspiracy horseshit.
I am not saying that it is likely. But Microsoft is trying to push their own store fronts quite heavily.
Besides, valve has been trying to push linux for a long time. Remember the steam machines?
Being the best OS for gaming gives Microsoft a lot of power.
Anything I have a challenge running at a good frame rate, I'll just locally stream from my PC. 60fps all day long with the power of anything my PC can run. Don't sleep on that local game streaming, super handy and sips power.
You mean like those AAA titles the fucking Switch can't run?
That's literally the only thing close to competition that the Deck has, and it skullfucks it in terms of horsepower.
It has those windows portables (I am blanking on the company name) but those also have way worse battery life.
Asus ROG Ally is a prime example. Excellent Windows 11 no BS experience with about 30 mins of playtime on battery.
Oh and I guess steam has also been carefully cultivating their own IP, studios, and games for the past 40 years to ensure a steady supply of the new stuff right? Right?
Because even I hear someone gushing over their switch it's because they are playing some 4 year old game that finally made it there and it's definitely not titles like Mario or Zelda.
What the fuck does any of that have to do with running AAA games?
The Deck is not competing with consoles, genius. Unless you're so stuck in early 2000's fashion that you pants are so ginormously huge that you can fit a PS5 and TV in them.
Stay on topic or piss off.
Math don't add up, Linux would be second because whatever else would only have 1.83.
Second place baby!
I actually feel sorry for that first placed kid on the picture: he formally won but clearly feels beaten by the sheer enthusiasm of the 3rd place one.
Even if it was all gamers, that'd push a lot of companies to care about Linux a whole lot more. Venn diagram of people who spend a lot of money in tech stuff and people who play games is almost a circle nowadays.
I've worked in server-side systems development for over a decade, in all sizes of company, and Linux has been ubiquitous on the server side for ages: it's simply the most problem free way of maximizing the hardware you have, not to mention cheaper (both upfront and TCO).
It's only on the desktop that it's not.
I don't even think Valve really care about Linux. At least not in the same way that Linux users care about Linux.
They just care about getting the costs of Steam Deck down, and don't want MS to go mental and pull the rug from under their business model.
I'm surprised by how much of my Steam library would work on the Deck, tbh. Out of nearly 1300 games, 407 are verified, and 931 are verified and playable. Be nice if you could stream the rest (either from your own PC or an external provider), but Geforce Now showed that was a minefield (I suspect due to exclusive streaming rights already being to sold to someone else) and publishers freaked the fuck out, despite it being none of their business where I run my purchased games.
They care about Microsoft not 100% controlling access to the platform Steam customers use. Valve cares about Linux because they need an escape strategy if Microsoft ever locks them out.
I thought they were going that way with Windows 11 S that prevented you using anything other than the MS Store, but it turns out you can just switch S mode off.
It would be mental for MS to do it. Their desktop dominance hinges entirely on people still being able to run the last 30 years or so of wonky old software.
S mode is in 10 also. I work for a MSP that recommends virtual desktops to our clients, so we often have to help users connect from their home PCs. It wasn't a ton, but enough people were locked in S-mode we all had practice walking them through disabling It, because it blocks our remote control app also if in s made.
Valve has been pro linux and anti-windows way before steam deck... did people forget about the Steam machines?
This, but desktop linux users are on the step for 193rd place while excitedly screaming and holding a third-place sign. Steamdeck users are on the 3rd-place step while calmly playing their deck.
I'm in this comment, and I'm okay with that.
It's the year of the Linux desktop, y'all! Woohooohooo! Yeah! Rock on!
Itβs the year of the Linux
desktop, handheld yβall! Woohooohooo! Yeah! Rock on!
Wait, I think that already happened with Android.
It's the Year of the Linux Handheld squared, then. We win twice.
Fwiw I'm in it too. I'm not going to say what year was the year of Linux on the desktop for me, but it wasn't a meme yet. And I've continuously run an actively used Linux desktop (or mostly laptop) since, often at work but always at home. I unironically prefer it to Windows and Mac, which I also also daily drive and consider to be worse in most ways that matter to me.
I think desktop Linux gamers are right to cheer for the Steamdeck, as its success translates quite directly to an improved gaming experience on desktop Linux. So yeah, the reason this meme is so clear to me is because I see it in the mirror each morning.
For personal use, I run a Linux PC, but for work I have to use Windows as my daily driver, and I still absolutely cannot stand Windows. Recently, I've had more issues with Windows installations than Linux ones. Which is ironic, considering everyone is always shitting on Linux for not offering the same out-of-the-box usability Windows does.
My God instaling Windows is the most horrific thing that exist. There are arch installers that are more user Friendly. The only reason pepole dont complain about it is beacuse Windows comes preinstaled on everything.
Also weirdly enough i had more problem with my nvidia gpu on windows rather than Linux (where the sensible distributions come with drivers preinstaled)
I use Windows, MacOS, and Linux everyday but my primary desktop has been Linux since I moved from OS/2 in I think 1996 or so. I have been a Linux user since 1992.
I have not really been a gamer since the StarCraft days though.
... since I moved from OS/2 in I think 1996 or so.
Quitters never win. Warp is the OS of the future, we just haven't gotten there yet.
It wasn't a meme yet? So like... 30+ years ago?
- The phrase hadn't been coined yet in 1993.
- I said what I said.
When you get a slice of the pie AND enjoy the mental/karmic benefits of doing the right thing.
Is that before or after Steam Deck users? Would it be higher than 1.96 if we included steam deck in the count?
I think it does matter, from what I've gathered including the steam deck would likely up the percentage significantly due to being essentially a Linux only machine.
Okay, people are uploading videos of their successful Windows 11 install on YouTube, Reddit and the Steam community en-masse, followed by complaining it doesn't run well lmao
So uncanny that in the Ubuntu bug tracker, bug #1 is Microsoft & bug#2 simply does not exist.
Yes, SteamOS does count as Linux. Android does not. The Android and iOS Steam app is just for social features / store, not for playing games so neither show up on the survey.
SteamOS Holo, which is what the Steam Deck uses, makes up 42% of the Linux systems in the survey results.
Does SteamOS count as Linux?
Why wouldn't an Arch branch not be Linux?
How about Android?
Completely irrelevant because Steam games don't run on Android.
The Android and iOS apps don't actually run games, they're essentially just the store and community tabs + SteamGuard. The hardware survey explicitly exists to tally up what kinds of hardware is actually being used to play games on Steam, so that's why it's not counted.
I'd say it counts as general user base, but does not count towards the Steam survey.
If Android share counts towards Linux gaming in general, then I think "Linux" as a whole (not necessarily versions or derivatives of Linux that users have the choice to install on their device themselves, however) wins handily. That's because billions of people are all playing Clash of Legends of Heroes of Genshin Tower Puzzle Blocks Crash Deluxe, or whatever the fuck, on their Android phones.
Why wouldn't an Arch branch not be Linux?
Because it's Valve's own OS. They might consider being first-party sufficient reason to not to lump it in with its third-party cousins.
It's based upon the well established distro Arch, and thus still considered Linux. A distro is basically the Linux kernel with pre-installed packages. SteamOS only adds another layer of packages unto Arch afaik.
I know how Linux works.
The poster asked why steamOS might be considered separately to other Linux sisters, and I gave them a possible reason.
Yes, I know how Linux works.
The poster above asked for a reason why steamOS might be considered separately to other sisters, and I gave them a possible one.
The terminology is off then. Different distro's is not regarded as entirely new OS's, they're still Linux. E.g. SteamOS (if anything) is Steam's distro, not Steam's OS. I'm not trying to nitpick, only explain.
Yes, I know how Linux works.
The poster above asked for a reason why steamOS might be considered separately to other sisters, and I gave them a possible one.
Because itβs Valveβs own OS.
Still a regular GNU/Linux distribution. Even entertaining the idea it being anything else is ridiculous.
Even entertaining the idea it being anything else is ridiculous.
It's their own OS running on their own custom handheld. Treating it separately from other linux machines might be odd, but calling it "ridiculous" is being childish.