I think you'd see a lot of folks here rationalizing it.
I've been on Slashdot long enough to know that unless Linus accepted the CEO spot, whoever got it was going to get a lot of hate here.
The only thing I can say is that Microsoft is in dire need of engineering, and they promoted an engineer to the top spot. I think that's refreshing. What happens from here on out depends on what the roadmap looks like, but if the Surface Pro 2 is any indication, they are actually going down a good path on the hardware end of things. Time will tell on the software end.
This is excellent -- did not know about this extension, but it's great for my purposes. I use TeamViewer for most things as I can install a client on a remote PC and it does everything, so this is a nice alternative to help out family and friends.
Same here... I'm rather convinced he made the Dell more expensive in his head to justify his Apple purchase. You don't buy a PC for more than a Mac with similar hardware specs, unless it's an Alienware or something.
Having a 450w PSU vs 1500w PSU doesn't mean that your computer will actually consume that much electricity.
That said if you're insistent on buying the Apple is rather proves the point that intelligence is really not a required attribute of the buyers of that system.
Nokia still maintains a very strong brand name, one that Blackberry lost years ago.
That people reference Nokia as a failure due to Elop, as if it was doing so well in the smartphone arena before he took over? Have a sense of reality folks. Nokia was dying fast, and while the MS integration may or not have been a great idea, something had to be done. I will let history judge the actions, but in many parts of Europe, Nokia is overtaking the iPhone in sales... so there is that.
Was looking for this comment, though you're already modded down.
Shuttleworth has had limited success with Ubuntu in terms of a monetary return, so showing himself as an "innovator" (and we all love the new UI don't we?) is kind of laughable.
Gas tanks yes -- cars, no. Sorry for not being as specific
Pressure + small contained area = boom.
No, they don't.
I have, actually -- I'm not a terminal expert by any means, but I know it well enough to realize that it's not a huge benefit for what I do on a day to day. Server side -- sure, the LAMP stack makes a lot of things easy, but on a desktop for an end user, the benefits of Linux are really small.
Unlike many folks here, I manage to be very productive in Windows... I don't mind it at all. SteamOS isn't going to offer me a good office suite, OO.o sucks for productivity, and while its not ideal, I honestly use it as a tool. For my needs, and most other folks, it does this fine.
And it's why SteamOS I think, doesn't really have a huge draw towards it. Yea on Slashdot it will -- Linux OS made for gaming? What's not to love? But in reality PC gamers prefer the mouse/keyboard combo to play their games, and taking games that work *perfectly fine* in Windows and putting them into a dedicated box to play with a controller (which I still think won't work as well as KB/M) doesn't really have any allure to most 'mainstream' (ie, not technical -- just give me my goddamn game and let me play) type of gamers.
The only way SteamOS and Steamboxes take off, is if there are SteamOS EXCLUSIVES. That's why people choose Xbox vs PS, because of exclusives in many cases (though now the argument can be made for the achiements, friends list, etc). And while Valve might be crazy enough to release Half Life 3 as a SteamOS exclusive, I don't think all the other development companies out there are going to do that. Steam will still work on Windows *just fine*. It will continue to have a "big picture" mode that if you are so inclined, will work *just fine*. So why would you want another box to do something you can already do just fine?
I don't get the allure -- but that's just me because not all of my games are on Steam, and by going to a SteamBox I would actually have less options and games available to me (and often, with worse FPS and performance since not all my games are Valve games and would presumably be a Wine port or something like it), than I would than sticking to Windows.
This is nice in theory, but HL3 would have to be a SteamOS exclusive in order for Steam Machines to take off at all... and if he's not a total moron, he won't do that. It will be released from Windows.
While I understand this buys people OPTIONS, most people are not technically inclined, nor will they see a benefit to getting a Steam Box. They have a Windows PC and they can play all their games -- on Steam -- on that. The Steam Box will offer them exactly the same capability, but less games, because games that don't work on Steam (ala Battlefield and Origin games) won't be available. Will SteamOS have a lot of games supported? Sure they will -- but they will still be supported in Windows as well. So why would you plunk down more money to buy a dedicated machine whose catalog of games can be played on a machine already?
Granted I do think there are some possibilities in terms of gaming via "big screen" and this can be resolved by MS releasing a similar set of software (RemoteFX comes to mind here as a technology) and possibly hardware to do exactly what the SteamOS can do around streaming games into the living room. SmartGlass is a platform that also could help here, and using the Xbox One as a medium to serve up PC games through the console interface via RemoteFX and Smartglass is actually doable and probably a good idea. Granted I won't put it past MS to fail to see the opportunity here, especially since that's the only component that SteamOS offers other than what is currently offered via Windows.
Time will tell, but SteamOS at this point isn't really interesting enough for me to move, and if I still have Steam on Windows, then I'll be just fine staying there. nVidia and ATI may provide driver support to Linux but realistically the performance is always better on the main platform -- Windows. I don't see that changing any time soon.