I support their ethos but also can't justify the purchase.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
Same and I don’t blame them for it, like I would if Apple or Microsoft did that.
Yeah it's just unfortunate market timing with the hardware shortages
If they don't like closeness, maybe release Steam (both app and server) under open source license?
If they're afraid of somebody coping them, use AGPL license.
I've also read speculation that selling it at a loss could contribute to antitrust lawsuits against them. Basically if they sell gaming PCs below cost, and the gaming PCs incentivize Steam use over other platforms, there would be an argument that Valve was using their 30% sales cut to sell hardware others can't compete against, to further cement their monopoly. This would be partially countered by the open nature of the device, but not fully since it would still "steer" common users towards steam over other platforms.
This isn't an issue for console makers because there are multiple competing consoles with valid market share.
I mostly believe this, but I also believe it isn't a negative for Valve.
The hate towards Valve right now is so fucking weird. Is it perfect? No. Are they actively contributing to projects which can break the M$ coalition? Yes.
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress, and accept the wins. When Valve actually becomes anticompetitive (big when), then speak up. Otherwise you have bigger fish to fry.
Here's one: Microsoft itself. So tired of hearing shit about Valve from people still booting Windows every day.
the hate is artificial and useful idiots
Literally just Lemmy echo chamber shit
I'm certain a lot of bot farms by competitors are involved in spreading Valve hate. And this is happening to other companies, as well. Obviously, this is hard to prove so it's just speculation, but if I were a competitor (and an asshole) I would certainly try to manipulate public opinion using the tools at my disposal. LLMs make this kind of stuff easy enough. And we know that many many bots lurk around everywhere.
i just read this and realized you beat me to my comment
i mean, yea?
the reason consoles are sold under cost is because they are trying to lock you into buying games in their ecosystem.
if valve is not trying to lock you into their ecosystem… then why would they ever sell the steam machine at a loss?
Sony sold the PS3 at a pretty significant loss and had an "OtherOS" feature that allowed people to install Linux on it.
Between that and ots cell architecture, it turned out to be a super affordable way to build supercomputers. Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch, and they got a LOT of flack for it.
Valve is doing the opposite. They're keeping the openness, but charging enough money it's not financially viable to buy a bunch of Steam Machines to build cheap AI clusters.
Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch, and they got a LOT of flack for it.
And also tried to get Youtube to reveal the identities of everyone who watched George Hotz's PS3 hacking video so they could attempt to individually sue them. Don't forget that part.
Sony eventually disabled the OtherOS feature to combat people buying them en masse and costing Sony their lunch
By people I assume you’re talking about the U.S. Navy lmao
The Navy has people too!
Duh - people are shitty and would abuse it.
Buying things at their retail price and using them in a way the manufacturer didn't intend is not shitty, nor abuse.
Most of the business models that enable subsidized pricing for consumer products, on the other hand rely on artificially restricting how people can use those products, which is shitty and abusive.
Not much to abuse. The same way that the subsidizing of consoles doesn't open it up for abuse per se
Valve would just lose money on a lot of sales, as they can't get a guaranteed recoup of the subsidy in the same way that Sony or Nintendo do
I commented here quite some back that I did not expect that Valve would subsidize the console and that it would be for this reason, that subsidizing the console means a razor-and-blades business model, and a razor-and-blades model requires a closed system. They were making an open system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor-and-blades_model
The razor-and-blades business model[1] is a business model in which one article is sold at a low price or even given away in order to increase sales of a complementary good, such as consumable supplies. It is different from loss leader marketing and product sample marketing, which do not depend on complementary products or services. Common examples of the razor-and-blades model include inkjet printers whose ink cartridges are significantly marked up in price, coffee machines that use single-use coffee pods, electric toothbrushes, and video game consoles, which require additional purchases of accessories and software not included in the original package.[1]
Although the concept and the catchphrase "Give 'em the razor; sell 'em the blades" are widely credited to King Camp Gillette, the inventor of the double-edged safety razor, Gillette did not in fact follow this model, nor did it invent the razor-and-blades model, although it did pioneer the production and sale of disposable razor blades.[1][2]
In more recent times, video game consoles have often been sold at a loss while software and accessory sales are highly profitable to the console manufacturer. For this reason, console manufacturers aggressively pursue legal action against carriers of modchips and jailbreaks due to a belief that the resulting possibility of unauthorized or prohibited copying causes a loss in profits. Particularly in the sixth generation era and beyond, Sony and Microsoft, with their PlayStation 2 and Xbox, had high manufacturing costs. As such, the companies sold their consoles at a loss and aimed to make a profit from game sales.[9][10] Nintendo had a different strategy with its GameCube, which was considerably less expensive to produce than its rivals, so it retailed at break-even or higher prices.[11] In the following generation of consoles, both Sony and Microsoft have continued to sell their consoles, the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 respectively, at a loss, with the practice continuing with the concurrent eighth and ninth generations of console hardware.[12][13][14]
Do they at least have a clause in the TOS to not use the Steam Machine to build or use nuclear weapons?
(iTunes had one and that shit will never stop being funny)