More like proton makes windows binaries not dependent on windows.

And old ones wouldn't work on windows...

Honestly I feel like it's better for Devs to have a single endpoint of optimisation, and the proton translates that into proper Linux optimisation.

Most of the times a game has a Linux client I need to manually activate compatibility because it's either not that well supported or the proton version just works better.

At this point, I prefer for Devs to optimise the windows game for proton than to make a Linux version.

No, because proton is not Windows. Wine only works on Linux, so it's actually a Linux platform. I consider every developer/publisher who targets proton to actually be targeting Linux, rather than windows. Every single time a windows update breaks something that continues to work on proton I laugh

See also: https://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/8/1734336452576620754/?l=czech

Proton is filling a role until Linux gets popular enough. Once there is enough demand for Linux, devs will start making games with Linux support in mind meaning more well compiled native games. While proton is very good it's far from perfect and devs will want people to have the most seamless experience possible with their game.

Valve is solving the chicken-and-egg problem. For a developer, it is costly to maintain a separate build for Linux without the consumer base to justify the effort. And without games, most people will not leave windows.

Proton offers Valve independence from windows without effort and cost for the developers. And without penalties for the gamers as well.

why doesnt valve demand devs make linux builds?

You mean games aren't listed on Steam unless a Linux build is provided? I know Steam has a de-facto monopoly on PC gaming, but I'm afraid studios would just quit the PC market (or move to another PC store) if Valve were to enforce such a rule.

if microsoft changed their apis wouldnt new games just not work on proton?

It's very unlikely Microsoft would introduce such breaking changes in their APIs. And even if they did, well yes, it would until Proton maintainers add support for these new APIs.

why doesnt valve demand devs make linux builds?

Because nobody would do that. Valve is not PlayStation, Xbox or Nintendo. Every publisher would rather release games elsewhere than spend resources on Linux builds.

Plus, most Linux builds are terrible and Proton works much better. To make this happen, first of all you'd need Unreal to die and for most bottom game developers to either lose their jobs or to learn actual game development.

Think of it as the gaming subsystem for Linux.

I don't understand the logic. Why would Proton make Linux dependent on Windows binaries? It does not make Linux dependent, but enables to use them. I don't see any reason why Valve should demand devs to build Linux builds (plus Valve should not demand it, it should be a decision of the developers, Valve should not have that much power in my opinion).

if microsoft changed their apis wouldnt new games just not work on proton?

The same would happen with changes in Linux. And arguably it is worse on Linux. Windows binaries have a higher chance of working through WINE or Proton, than Linux binaries in the future. Plus developers only need one binary build, instead developing for Linux and Windows. Also if Microsoft changes their API, then only games affected using the new API would be affected. And changes and additions happen all the time and the Proton / WINE devs are working all the time too.

They tried making devs port their games to linux, but most of them didnt bother as the userbase of steamOS was very small, and the userbase did not grow because the game catalogue was very small.

Here’s the thing. You can’t demand developers to anything. Many CEOs have tried, all of them failed. As the owners of the market they’re providing, the best thing they should be doing is make it as easy as possible for devs to do whatever they want on their platform. Proton is exactly that.

Would be pretty funny if Valve demanded that, but I don't see it happening.

It's really up to users and developers to grow some balls and stop suckling the corporate teat.

Microsoft generally doesn't worry about losing market share to Linux over games. They don't even worry about losing desktop share for the public sector. Only businesses matter, and they have heavy vendor lock in there as Microsoft Office, Teams, and to a lesser extent, Azure, keep them subscribed/enslaved.

Microsoft also gives a shit ton of money to the Linux Foundation,along with the rest of MMAANG and many other companies. All these companies know Linux runs the back end servers, and its free for them to use however they want, and they have a vested interest in Linux being around for servers as even they are aware it's superior for that specific purpose.

Microsoft runs the Desktop, Apple runs the phone, Google and Amazon compete for cloud, and Meta owns marketing. Sure, they sometimes compete in other spaces like Android and Azure, but those are generally the established fiefdoms.

And Linux is all of their removed, but also all of their main support beam without which nothing works.

The true underdog is BSD.

I haven't kept up with wine development in many years, but they used to have (and might still) winelib, which allowed you to compile a window app against it to create a native linux binary.

Laughs in JVM (but there's like 1 game using it so...)

No offence but Microsoft is the king of backwards compatibility. Them changing their API is a lot less likely the Linux. I have old windows games I can still play but I can't play my old Loki games.

I think the bigger issue is making sure everything that should gets back upstream into wine for everyone to benefit

because it has been proven time and time again that only insignificant amount of devs actually care until there’s a major adoption. Look at original Steam Machines or on NVDIA SLI or 3D TV, Apple Vision Pro, etc… these things take a lot of time and are very gradual

Linux breaks itself all the time and is a moving target. Even in EPEL land, compatability is lacking. As this blog post said a few years ago, w32 is the only stable ABI on Linux.