PC Gaming

pcgaming@lemmy.ca

15,897 readers

5,909 active

630 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 3 years ago

moderation log

moderators

EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca

UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca

KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Valve on the Steam Frame: 'I wish we could have shipped it at the price that we were at last year' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 1 month ago by inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca

174 comments fedilink hide all child comments

t's certainly been a journey for Valve. A week prior to the Steam Frame's launch, we spoke with two engineers at Valve about the project: Joy Lyons, hardware engineer, and Jeremy Selan, software engineer. The memory crisis and the price were a big part of that conversation. From that chat, we can confirm that Valve had aimed for a lower price point than the one it's launching the Frame for today.

Here's Lyons on the memory crisis:

"We set out to design this hardware with one particular price in mind, but we've made choices to make sure that we're making a product that is choiceful, that people can purchase, they can upgrade with different features later. But we wanted to make sure we had a base product with really great performance. Then that price target shifted due to the ongoing RAM crisis around the world."

Lyons also said that forecasting for the cost of certain components used in the Steam Frame is an ongoing challenge.

Not exactly boding well of the Steam Deck 2.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] eurodyne@piefed.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

First of all, ARM is not owned by Apple, and if it weren’t so open, so open source friendly, Apple would not have been able to create Apple Silicon chips in the first place.

Secondly, lol, Asahi Linux proved that, not only could apple’s apple silicon chips be reversed engineered, but that it was both a worthwhile enterprise and that Apple wouldn’t come after them. Because Apple officially stated that they just do not care. Apple intentionally designed the chips to be capable of booting and running alternate operating systems. They, themselves, created a very clear and open development pathway.

Oh, not to mention that it is definitely Linux.

So… That’s what the fuck I’m talking about. Again, what the fuck are you talking about?