Linux surpasses the Mac among Steam gamers

> But before you declare this a triumphant moment for desktop Linux, it's important to note that some of these Linux users are not, in fact, using Steam on a desktop. The Linux version "SteamOS Holo" 64-bit is the most popular reported, at just over 42 percent of the Linux slice of pie. That indicates that a huge portion of these Linux users are actually playing on Valve's Steam Deck portable, which runs Linux.

There's such a deep seeded, systemic bias against linux that it actually can never win, to any degree or magnitude, because the moment it starts winning we just move the goal-posts for the flimsiest of reasons to ensure it can't quite claim that victory.

Linux is obviously and clearly the most popular operating system kernel on the planet. Oh, no, that's no good a measure, servers are messy, let's refine it to most popular consumer operating system kernel? Oh... it, could also reasonably claim that title? No no, no Android, that doesn't count. Nope, No Chrome OS either, you can't have that, that's, well, that is linux, but its not. Just nice, pure, desktop linux, yes, perfect, arch linux, kde desktop, that'll never trend up and thus is the perfect new-new definition of desktop linu--wait hold up, I'm getting word this is, not possible, its actually SteamOS? Nope, kill it, that's not desktop linux either, kill it.

I am not sure it's a matter of bias.

Instead, I think it's that "Linux" is an overloaded term. One sense is that someone downloads and installs a "Linux" distro because they actually want to use "GNU+Linux" (wink). The other sense, what you are aluding, to is that linux is foundational to most things IT. If I subscribe to DSL the provider is probably going to send me a modem that runs linux. But that doesn't mean I chose linux. I just wanted DSL. Same for Android. Most people that use Android didn't choose a linux-based mobile operating system. They want Android or are just using whats one the phone they wanted. And indeed, I don't think many "GNU+Linux" people would tolerate the specific essense of Android in their distros.

Now, SteamOS might be the bridge between these two worlds. On the one hand, Steam Deck users also didn't chose Linux. But then, the resources that Valve can spend on enabling gaming on Linux because of the success of Steam Deck means that many more people, like me, can finally consider choosing Linux.

At the same time, the majority of those running Windows have the same relationship to it as you have with Linux on your DSL modem - "It's what the computer I bought comes with" - and yet we are not discounting those Windows users. Same goes for macOS, especially now where Asahi Linux is the only and yet incomplete alternative.

In some comparisons it makes sense to remove DSL modems from the equation and focusing on some more "computer-like" subset of device (otherwise no OS would ever do better than "several orders of magnitude fewer deployments than Linux"), but discounting every device where you did not actively pick the OS would make for an extremely biased comparison.

Plus, we don't care about such distinctions outside comparisons. SteamOS have already driven significant improvements for regular desktop users. Same goes for Tizen, Android and ChromeOS. Even wonky DSL firmwares have positive effects for the rest of us.

> GNU+Linux

no.

Exactly. And MacBook users don't choose MacOS either.

For many non tech savvy users if you give them a Linux laptop with any modern DE, they can't tell the difference.

But it seems these filters are almost always cherry picked against Linux for some reason I sincerely don't know.

They would, as soon as they try to use any software most people on their circle of friends use, CD/DVD coming on the hardware they bought at the mall, or any computer magazine besides Linux Format and similar.

Well, in 2023 a majority of that would be web or electron apps so they might not be able to tell the difference. They would be equally stumped at the sight of a CD/DVD no matter their choice of OS, as machines have not shipped with optical drives in ages.

Most normal people don't buy new software all the time, most of them like to keep their old copies going as much as possible.

Most desktop computers still do, and in alternative there are USB stick variants.

Which doesn't change the fact regarding what drivers, for what set of OSes, are supported out of the box.

Desktop computers are unusual nowadays, despite being a decent option. They are gone from non-gaming retail stores from what I can tell, so it's much more of an active decision to get.

It is true that if you try to reuse your 2003 Office install you will fail, but such unsupported and deprecated software will also cause trouble on a modern PC. Even if it runs, using an old version of Outlook is extremely unsafe...

Common end-user hardware does not require drivers nowadays either (not even printers due to IPPAnywhere and co., even though manufacturers still ship them for some reason).

Things are always hairy outside that though - macOS no longer permit kernel extensions, and you know you are in a dark place if DKMS gets involved on Linux.