> are we going to have to play games in large empty warehouses
Large hamster ball on rollers. Infinite space to walk or run. Also, you don't need to track their motion or feet, you just feed in the data from the rollers, and you know how fast their character is walking or running, and in what direction.
Voting is pointless when you can't trust anyone. If we want improved privacy, we have to do it on our own. That means improved, open source tools for encryption, anonymous browsing and messaging.
I agree, it's a long term play, and their chance of winning over hardcore console users is zero at this time. However, they will be directly competing with consoles for space under the television.
As for solving your problem with hardware confusion, they could have manufacturers ship Steam Machines with some kind of rating system. Remember how Windows had those performance ratings for memory, processor, etc? They could do something very similar. You look at a Steam Machine, it says processor 5.7, memory 4.5, graphics, 5.1. Then you look in the Steam game library and see a certain game recommends graphics 4.5 or greater. Or this indie title plays great on anything 3.4 or higher. You use those numbers to guide your purchase.
Changing hardware will come to their advantage though. Xbox and Playstation will ramp up over the next few years, and we'll see some improvements and major titles heading their way. However, what's happening 5-6 years from now? Xbox and Playstation are dated, Steam OS has the bugs worked out, and Steam Machines are available with the latest advances in hardware. Where are you going to buy Call of Duty now, for your 6 year old console, or pickup a Steam Machine that can run it twice as fast, at Ultra HD resolution? That's going to be a big plus for Steam, and if people are buying in 5 or 6 years from now, they're less likely to jump on the next console launch, since they already have powerful hardware in their living room.
Another huge plus for Steam in the living room is Oculus Rift. If it's released below $300, and exclusive to the PC and Steam Machines, they have a unique experience the consoles can't offer.
Nothing is short term, I think Steam Machines will make a crawl the first few years, but I think they're going to be pushing to replace consoles, and I think they might succeed. Cheap games, big sales, Oculus Rift, low cost or high performance hardware to choose from, and eventually an open store available for anyone to publish towards.
Edit: Oh, one other huge advantage. They're backed by every hardware manufacturer they get involved. Dell is going to be dropping flyers in every mailbox around the world, with a couple of pages showing off their Steam Machine line-up. Dell wants money, and if Steam Machines succeed, they get rich as well. PC sales are down, they'd love another piece of hardware to sell. Get every other hardware company doing the same, and that's a lot of free marketing.
They better be in the game to compete with consoles, because they're going to be, whether they want to or not. If their long term plan is to simply run Big Picture Mode, and that's it, they'll fail, and never be more than a niche device used by a few PC gamers. The average person would much rather buy an Xbox or Playstation since they can use them for watching movies, Netflix, etc. Why buy a Steam Machine, if I need to buy something else to do the rest of the job in the living room? And if I'm spending a few hundred on an Xbox or Playstation, why bother with a Steam Machine for a couple of extra game titles?
They have a chance to make Steam Machines a huge success. If they pigeon hole themselves as strictly being a gaming device, and not a media device that competes with consoles, they should change the name of their UI, because they're missing the big picture.
However, I think you're wrong. Yes, they want a backup plan if they get kicked to the curb by Microsoft. However, if that was the only case, they'd be focusing on making Steam OS an actual operating system. Why spend the resources on a gaming controller, and Steam Machines? Why not go hard on a Linux OS that's a viable alternative for gamers? Their core audience is PC gamers, so why not make an OS for PC gamers, and skip the living room hardware all together?
I'd really like to see someone fire up Quake 3 Arena and play a few rounds with a mouse, 360 controller, and Steam controller. Give them a few hours practice with each device, and let's watch some comparison videos, against the same skill bots, on the same map.
Well, they've overcome the number one challenge, that's getting something launched. Valve does one thing great, and that's rolling out consistent updates and features, so I have faith they'll improve the platform if it gains traction.
In 2014 though, I think the biggest impact on their success will come down to marketing. Will people know what this device is? Will hardware manufacturers be able to get these units selling? Will people be raving about playing Steam games from their couch and telling all their friends to pick one up?
They're going to be a small player in the console world. I can't picture them stealing Xbox and Playstation users. Those Battlefield, Call of Duty, NBA, Madden, etc., fans make up a huge part of the console market, and I think they're incredibly loyal to their console, while being very unfamiliar with Steam. The Steam Machines might have a market with PC users looking to casually game in the living room, and they might have a market if they can offer cheaper hardware and lower game prices than consoles. Offering better visuals would be another huge plus. If someone visits their friend's house, and says, 'wow, why does XYZ game look so much better on your television?', that's going to drive some sales, since you always have a group looking for the best of the best.
It's a long road, and I think everyone is watching to see how this plays out. Valve is probably the only company that can make this happen at the moment, so it's exciting to see them taking a chance, and I applaud them for that.
If someone is looking for a specific name, it's typically because the name is publicly displayed on the service. This presents a couple of major issues.
1. Let's say someone wants your HN username, andrewhillman. You've been inactive for a few months. What do we do with your old posts and comments? Deleting all the data for inactive users seems like an awful approach. If we keep the data, you lost your username, so what's displayed beside your comments? Do we just replace your username with the word, inactive? What about your profile? If I come across your old comments, enjoy them, and want to see your profile, I obviously can't go to https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=andrewhillman any more, so where is your profile moved to?
2. People expect their identity to remain consistent. What happens if you take a season off HN since you're busy at school? Meanwhile, you have links to https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=andrewhillman on your linkedin profile, or your website, or maybe you have business cards or flyers printed with that URL. Uh oh, you come back to HN, and that profile now belongs to someone else. All those great contacts you recently made, and gave business cards to, they're browsing the HN profile for someone else, believing their opinions are your own.
Ok, now printing your HN profile URL is unlikely, but what about your Twitter? Or Facebook? Or Gmail? This could be a disaster if you have hundreds of links to your Twitter account in blog posts and comments around the internet, then you decide to abandon Twitter. Someone else takes the account name, and has a less than stellar reputation. Lots of communities will not allow you to edit posts past a certain date, so you're out of luck, and all your old data is asking people to follow you on Twitter, andrewhillman. Meanwhile, that account now belongs to someone posting NSFW images.
As someone else said, it depends on the service. In some situations you might be able to allow non-unique usernames, so you wouldn't have this problem to begin with. Another solution could be unique usernames, but linking profiles to IDs, instead of specific names. That way old links still function properly and don't change with usernames. Of course, it makes for longer and ugly URLs.
120 days seems incredibly short though. I'd say 1 year minimum before declaring an account inactive.
I made a post the other day, but it got pushed off 'new' in a few seconds. Anyway, I thought someone should setup a simple one or two page site that summarizes the importance of not tracking visitors. Then, it has a few 'this site respects your privacy' images in a variety of sizes that you can copy and paste into your own site, if you agree to respect those rules.
It would need to be a recognizable image and symbol. The image would link to the site above, that informs users how you respect their privacy and do not track them. Personally, I'd add it to my sites, because with all the recent concern about privacy, I think my users would appreciate this change, and it would provide some advantage over competing sites. I'd like to visit a site, see that image in the footer, and feel more confident using their service.
I think it would be a good way to encourage change from developers. Very few are going to pull Google Analytics on their own. However, if they get pressure from their users to follow a certain privacy standard, and by doing so they can drop an image on their site to illustrate the change and potentially increase trust and improve their reputation, we might see some improvements.
Large hamster ball on rollers. Infinite space to walk or run. Also, you don't need to track their motion or feet, you just feed in the data from the rollers, and you know how fast their character is walking or running, and in what direction.