@blackothh Exactly. In my situation, I've got a gaming PC in one room that is also used for general PC stuff, like actual work, and it is shared between all the members of the household. Moving that machine to the living room means no one can watch TV or play games if I'm working. Similarly, if someone is already playing a game or watching TV, I will need to kick them off to do my work. Moving the current PC is not an option at all, under the circumstances.

However, since we don't really need or want a full Windows PC connected to the TV just so we can play games, something like a Steam Machine is perfect. I've already got around 200 games through Steam, so unlike a traditional console, buying one of these doesn't also mean buying new games to play, making the initial investment cheaper. Plus, if in 5-10 years the hardware improves, I don"t have to buy a whole new console just to play the latest games, I only need to upgrade a part or two, making the long term costs also cheaper. It's really a win-win for someone like me.

Of course this is all dependent on Valve living up to the hype. If the Steam Machines and SteamOS suck, I'll just buy another console and keep my PC gaming off the TV.

@MidNightStrikes Its going to be a Valve/Steam branded game controller with a built-in touchpad (like the PS4 controller) to bridge the gap on those games that only have partial controller support.

@St0Ne4Ge Not everyone has the option of moving their current gaming PC to their living room and connecting it to their TV, but would still like the option of playing their PC games on a TV. Nothing dumb about it, sometimes a console like these Steam Machines is just more practical.

Also, who said anything about expensive? AFAIK, no Steam Machine prices have been released at all. Given that the OS is free and has much lower overhead than Windows, meaning you don't need as much hardware muscle to get the same performance, the prices are likely to be in line with other consoles. That's not really all that expensive and it could be even cheaper if you DIY a PC or practically free if you already happen to have an old unused PC you can throw the OS on.

Lastly, "punch them in the face"? Really? I think you might have some misdirected anger issues you meed to work on. I strongly recommend seeking therapy.

@jski I agree, it won't compete with other OSes, but then I don't think it is actually intended to. Its a gaming-specific OS, not a general purpose one. Releasing the OS as a standalone is just a way to test and develop it for use in what is essentially another home console, the "Steam Machine". For the future, the OS will allow those that want to the ability to build their own console with the specs they want or just buy one off the shelf from any number of manufacturers (competition! it's a good thing). The difference for this console as compared to the XWiiStations of the world is I won't be locked to a specific storefront and environment (though it does come with a great one by default), it will be far cheaper than a console or a new PC (the OS is free and you can DIY a great PC for far less than a console or a PC with Windows), all my games are playable across multiple devices and screens instead of being tied to specific device and screen, I won"t be forced to buy a new console every 5 years or so just to keep playing the latest games, and, on a related note, I will be able to upgrade the individual parts of the console when I want or need to as the technology improves or if something breaks. This machine and OS combine all of the best advantages of a console and a PC in the same gaming/media device. I don't see this at all as a replacement for the desktop or something to have in addition to an existing console, quite the opposite. This will replace a console and be a very complimentary addition to my desktop PC.

@jski I would suggest that you are the exception,not the rule, when it comes to living room PC use and that is coloring your conclusions. Most people who do have a PC connected in their living room aren't using it for gaming or most other PC uses, they are using it for media purposes; the so-called "home theater PC". Obviously SteamOS is not for you and others like you, but that doesn't mean it is not for everyone.

I also think you missed my point completely. Let me try to illustrate this for you: in my own household, we have me, my wife and my son. We have one high-ish end desktop PC in the "home office" (really just desk in the corner of a room) that is for both work and gaming. In a whole different room is our TV. At any time, one of us is likely to be using the PC for work or play. Lets say another one of us (probably my son) suddenly gets the itch to play a PC game; nope, can't do that, I've got work to do, the PC is mine until I'm done. By the same token, if that PC were already connected to the TV, me doing my work would prevent everyone else from watching TV or playing a game. It's an annoying inconvenience. Having a machine with SteamOS on it connected to that TV relieves that inconvenience relatively cheaply and easily. SteamOS is definitely something for me and others like me.

PC gaming is doing well enough, but I never said it wasn't. However, PC hardware sales are falling off rapidly as people are replacing their PCs with mobile devices. PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. are already starting to hurt from it. SteamOS can give them another avenue for hardware sales, without any real up front investment. That could be enough to revitalize the entire PC hardware industry, only time will tell.

I don't believe that there is any real difference between the "console gamer" and the "PC gamer", there are just "gamers". Sure, some will prefer one platform over another at any given time, but SteamOS has the potential to give all gamers, regardless of their current preferences, all they want from gaming and more. What could possibly be wrong with that?

You do realize markets don't start with "tens of millions"? They start with 1, then maybe 10, then 100, then 1000, then multiple thousands and so on until you finally reach millions. All Valve needs is a few to start using this and liking it, then for them to recommend to their friends who like it and pass on the recommendation. Heck, they get the right professional reviewer, YouTube personality or dev/publisher to publicly endorse it and they could have that million strong market in under a year. But it all starts with just a few people willing to try out this new and untested thing. Those are the people Valve is targeting right now. They are not expected to prop up the market, they are the ones who will help build it.

@jski Not everyone wants to keep their personal PC hooked up to their family's TV. I use my PC for much more than just gaming, I actually do work on it. What Valve has now given me is the ability to convert an old PC, or even buy a cheap new one, hook it up to my TV and play all my PC games on my TV without giving up my home office. However, I think Valve's current "target audience" is not really the average game consumer. They are looking for those tech savvy early adopters who are willing to hammer on and enhance SteamOS in preparation for the inevitable release of multiple Steam Boxes. They are expecting that PC manufacturers, who are suffering massive declines in sales right now, to jump on this as a new revenue stream for hardware. Nobody is really buying PCs anymore, but plenty of them are buying consoles and media boxes.

@highlanderjimd That's very debatable. The only games that have DX as the "lead platform" are Xbox exclusives. All cross platform games, PS/Nintendo exclusive games and a significant number of PC exclusive games do not use DX at all or have an option for OpenGL. Combined, that's a large majority of all games. On top of that, every major game engine already supports OpenGL right out of the box and all the good ones like Source, CryEngine, Gamebryo, Unreal, etc. are already on Linux.

@jski DirectX is really a moot point when you consider that most games today are developed for consoles first, then PC second and the only one of those consoles that relies on DX is the Xbox. All the others use OpenGL/AL/etc to interface with the system and hardware, so in reality, half the work required to get most of these games (except the Xbox exclusives) on SteamOS is already done. Really all they have to do is debug and compile the executable code and other binaries for Linux and the games are good to go. Valve is already working with devs and publishers to produce a Linux and gaming specific debugger, so if Valve is to be believed, it won't be long before no PC game is Windows only.

@JLCrogue Netflix relies on Silverlight and its built-in DRM, which has no Linux version, so you can't technically watch it just like on Windows. The only way to watch Netflix on Linux at the moment is via a very hacky "Firefox with Silverlight through custom Wine build" method, though at least on Ubuntu (and its various flavors) there is a pre-packaged version of the hack that is relatively easy to install. When it works (and it doesn't always work), it is a lot like watching on Windows, but for most "average users" it is not the easiest thing to do.

@xXl_z3r0_lXx Despite the huge gains Wine has made in recent years, it's still a crapshoot when it comes to gaming functionality. Additionally, it is not very user friendly, so while those of us who are familiar with things like scripting and terminal commands will readily use it for gaming compatibility, the so-called "average user" is not even going to try. Of course there are Wine front ends that can help, like PlayOnLinux, but we really don't know enough about how SteamOS will work with non-Steam applications to say if POL or even Wine itself are a solution. Based on the (admittedly limited) info we have available right now, the only viable Windows to Linux gaming solution on SteamOS will be the streaming option.

I agree, Valve might successfully push devs into agnostic development (they are already working on things like Linux debuggers specifically for game development), but it is all dependent on the install base. If there aren't enough of us using it, it's not worth it for the devs to pursue it. We already found that out with the release of the Linux Steam client. The only major dev/publisher putting Linux games out in any significant way since its release is Valve itself. None of the big houses are even trying (yet... hopefully). We've even started to see a slow bleed of Linux users dropping Steam, simply because they are sick of having to switch back and forth between Linux and Windows to play all their games (compare recent Steam hardware surveys). I personally dropped it off my dual-boot machine because while I do have something like 20 Linux games through Steam, the other 160-ish in my account are not available on Linux at all and those 20 also have Windows versions. I still dual-boot, but now, as in the past, all my gaming is done on Windows while everything else PC related is done on Linux. Here's hoping Valve can fix that disconnect with this Linux initiative.