The SteamOS is a long term thing. Yeah, no one is going to wake up tomorrow and Windows is gone. That ain't happening. But what is a very real possibility is that 2-3 years down the line that Windows is no longer the "gaming OS" and Xbone is the secondary/tertiary target for developers. SteamOS uses OpenGL, which means it's going to be piss easy to port too, since you know, the PS4 uses OpenGL. The battle here is Windows vs SteamOS for the PC and Xbone vs PS4+Steambox for consoles. It's that in 2-3 years that every major game is now available for SteamOS, which basically guts the only real advantage Windows has for gamers. That's what SteamOS plan is.
That's why they have the streaming feature is for. Right NOW if you give shit about PC gaming, you probably have a PC capable of playing current AAA games. SteamOS isn't meant to replace that. What it is meant to replace is your NEXT pc, which could be a Steambox/SteamOS PC thats capable of playing all the new AAA games, all of which are capable of being ran on SteamOS. The streaming feature is just a fix in the meantime until Valve can get all the AAA developers on board.
All that is left is to see if they can get AAA developers to port to SteamOS or develop native games for it. Given that PS4 is getting support and uses the same graphics API(opengl), it's easy jump.
The one compelling reason to fully switch to SOS is not something that will happen anytime soon: i.e. MS completely closing Windows and making it work like iOS.
Until THAT happens...
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
I'm curious if Valve will actively drive hardware development of a steambox themselves, or they will leave it up to customers to choose whichever computer they want to make into a steambox by slapping Steam OS on it.
I will soon need to buy a new computer - either a desktop, a mini PC or a laptop. I would love if I could just buy a mini PC and slap Steam OS on it and use it for both casual computer stuff (surf, media center etc...) and also for gaming.
The problem is that a (somewhat) capable gaming PC, especially one with small form-factor is very expensive compared to what a PS4/Xbone costs - I will in that case have to settle for an equally expensive box, which would be limited to older games and smaller indie releases, or pay 2-3x times what a next-gen console would cost me.
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The one compelling reason to fully switch to SOS is not something that will happen anytime soon: i.e. MS completely closing Windows and making it work like iOS.
Until THAT happens...
They're definitely heading in that direction though, so it's not like some crazy tinfoil hat (or pie in the sky if you want that) idea.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
The one compelling reason to fully switch to SOS is not something that will happen anytime soon: i.e. MS completely closing Windows and making it work like iOS.
Until THAT happens...
They're definitely heading in that direction though, so it's not like some crazy tinfoil hat (or pie in the sky if you want that) idea.
I don't think they are heading in that direction as much as you think.
I think they are working at building an iOS like system into their normal Windows environment without dropping some of the more open aspects of Windows because that helps them sell copies too.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
+1
kaliyamaLeft to find less-moderated foraRegistered Userregular
They fixed the "Windows only" stuff by allowing you to stream it from your computer to this OS.
But... that's not really solving a problem. Well, not the problem I'm thinking about. I mean, having to have a Windows box and a Steambox in order to stream to your TV still requires you to have a high-end Windows box, so not really moving forward there. You would still build a high-end Windows system and just stream the content over your network or whatever, so that's not opening any avenues.
Granted, I still look forward to being able to have a Steambox to stream game stuff to a lounging-friendly TV, but that's just a convenience thing.
Watch for announcements in the coming weeks about all the AAA titles coming natively to SteamOS in 2014.
I'm guessing you'll have to wait and see. If they get WINE working in this SteamOS then I am willing to say then you can abandon your Windows box for this SteamOS because then you can run all your steam games in it.
Presumably, this will only work if steam can develop quality and consistent emulation for windows-only games. Which I assume they can do, especially if this nudges hardware makers along.
Valve is not known to be stupid, so either they have thought through their strategy and use cases very carefully here, or this will be the first example of valve overreaching. We'll see!
I don't think they're really interested in emulation, they want things that will natively run OpenGL, like pretty much everything released on the PS4 will have to.
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
With SteamOS, “openness” means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they’ve been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want.
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
With SteamOS, “openness” means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they’ve been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want.
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
Keyphrase here is "they want". Users can modify it IF THEY WANT. I have absolutely no doubts that out of the box SteamOS will run great and allow you to play games without thinking about hardware/software/etc.
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
With SteamOS, “openness” means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they’ve been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want.
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
Eh, all that stuff seems like it's optional crap the user can seek out. I'd suspect that if you're a bog standard kind of guy, you can use SteamOS in a bog standard kind of way. Any good developments that come out of the openness of the platform can be filtered through regular SteamOS updates ala Dashboard updates on the 360.
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
With SteamOS, “openness” means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they’ve been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want.
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
Eh, all that stuff seems like it's optional crap the user can seek out. I'd suspect that if you're a bog standard kind of guy, you can use SteamOS in a bog standard kind of way. Any good developments that come out of the openness of the platform can be filtered through regular SteamOS updates ala Dashboard updates on the 360.
The best way to think of it is similar to Android. It's an OS, it's intended to be used with specific hardware (just like a phone, or a console), it works out of the box, but if you want, you're welcome to fuck with it.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Windows 8 is 99.99 on new egg...so yes?
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Windows 8 is 99.99 on new egg...so yes?
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
You cannot transfer an OEM license to a brand new machine that isn't OEM.
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
With SteamOS, “openness” means that the hardware industry can iterate in the living room at a much faster pace than they’ve been able to. Content creators can connect directly to their customers. Users can alter or replace any part of the software or hardware they want.
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
Keyphrase here is "they want". Users can modify it IF THEY WANT. I have absolutely no doubts that out of the box SteamOS will run great and allow you to play games without thinking about hardware/software/etc.
If it's optional, then yay.
If people are going to have to sit around and make up their mind which one of the various Steamboxes with specs that read like cats on keyboards they'll have to buy, as opposed to one model of Steambox, then that undermines the concept.
The one compelling reason to fully switch to SOS is not something that will happen anytime soon: i.e. MS completely closing Windows and making it work like iOS.
Until THAT happens...
They're definitely heading in that direction though, so it's not like some crazy tinfoil hat (or pie in the sky if you want that) idea.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Windows 8 is 99.99 on new egg...so yes?
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
You cannot transfer an OEM license to a brand new machine that isn't OEM.
No, not OEM builders, i mean user-builders like me and so many others. So people who buy premades already got their windowses included, and people who build their own machines only need one license per version.
I personally go through several part-swaps for every Windows there is. So no, it's not 100$ a pop, in practice.
This is drifting off-topic, but I wonder if Microsoft gave truckloads of Windows licenses to the various PC makers for a song in order to say they sold an impressive number of Windows 8 licenses. Which would explain how they could say that but Windows 8 adoption in general, as read by OS measurement of web surfers and overall sales of modern PCs, seems to be crap.
I'm pretty sure Microsoft has sold all versions of Windows to PC manufacturers at a deep discount. It's their typical business model: you build the hardware and we'll provide the software and OS.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Windows 8 is 99.99 on new egg...so yes?
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
You cannot transfer an OEM license to a brand new machine that isn't OEM.
No, not OEM builders, i mean user-builders like me and so many others. So people who buy premades already got their windowses included, and people who build their own machines only need one license per version.
I personally go through several part-swaps for every Windows there is. So no, it's not 100$ a pop, in practice.
You can't build a fresh machine and just transfer the license from an OEM machine to a new machine.
I bought Windows 7 and when I built a new computer I used the same install disc - my plan was to restore the old PC to its Vista OEM, but it stayed running on 7, so...?
The Steam OS thing is cool, but if it's only capable of streaming the majority of games on the Steam library then it's no good as a replacement yet.
I guess I just don't understand what this brings to the table. I feel like I should be their ideal target: gaming is a huge hobby for me, I own a gaming PC and a console, and I'm tech savvy enough to have messed around with Linux in the past. All that being said, what does this setup change? I can build/buy an additional PC so I can... play PC games that I could already play anyway? Except now while slogging through a brand new OS?
There seems to be a lot of neat ideas regarding things that could be done. I just don't know why I should do/care about any of it. And if you can't sell me on the idea, I have no idea how you're going to convince Joe Blow Madden.
rndmhero on
+1
AchireIsn't life disappointing? Yes, it is.Registered Userregular
You can only sell Metro programs on the Windows store. Had Metro not been an unpopular piece of shit, this would have been a major step towards Microsoft getting a 30% cut on every single Windows program sold. Which would more or less be the death of Steam, hence Valve's Plan B.
I think it's a multifaceted plan with a few hooks for different types of people. For those that have only done consoles, a Steam box could be a good transition into PC gaming. Having the ability to stream games to your TV from a Windows machine allows an existing PC gamer a way to easily play games in their living room. Basing it on Linux allows Valve to not have to worry as much about the walled garden that Microsoft and Apple are going for.
None of these features by itself is a huge reason to be interested or excited, but together they are a great foundation that could have some huge impacts on the industry for consumers and developers.
Of course, it could also end up becoming nothing.
It seems like Valve is trying to takes the best parts of consoles, Steam, and Ouya into one idea.
Right. As far as Valve (especially Gabe) is concerned, this is a way to try to divorce themselves from Windows.
We'll just see if the various pieces are attractive enough to get folks who aren't already PC enthusiasts to jump on board.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
He's doing it in a really smart way, though - by basically offering some nice options for people building HTPCs, he's hoping to get the OS to run as part of the base Linux that runs said HTPCs. And then.. well, you're off to the races.
$100 dollars every time I get a new computer is pretty compelling to me. The fact people make a big deal out of PS4's $400 to Xbone's $500 should tell you that $100 is a big enough deal for consumers.
But is it really $100 a pop?
I think he's referring to the cost of getting Windows
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Windows 8 is 99.99 on new egg...so yes?
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
You cannot transfer an OEM license to a brand new machine that isn't OEM.
No, not OEM builders, i mean user-builders like me and so many others. So people who buy premades already got their windowses included, and people who build their own machines only need one license per version.
I personally go through several part-swaps for every Windows there is. So no, it's not 100$ a pop, in practice.
You can't build a fresh machine and just transfer the license from an OEM machine to a new machine.
I think he's referring the retail version of Windows which you can transfer. But that version costs $200 retail, so unless you transfer the license more than once(something I've never seen anyone do), it's the same or more expensive. You also end up with no OS on the old machine(s) too.
Far more common in my experience for older machines to passed down(either as a whole unit or piecemeal) to friends or family for cheap rather fall in complete disuse. In most of those cases, you're still going to want an OS, which puts it back to $100 each.
More importantly, the far most common practice is just buying the OEM version in general. Even reputable sites like Tech Report and Anandtech list the OEM versions in their build guides, which should tell you what's the more common practice. So yes, most people who build their computers spend $100 on it each time they get a new machine.
Posts
That's why they have the streaming feature is for. Right NOW if you give shit about PC gaming, you probably have a PC capable of playing current AAA games. SteamOS isn't meant to replace that. What it is meant to replace is your NEXT pc, which could be a Steambox/SteamOS PC thats capable of playing all the new AAA games, all of which are capable of being ran on SteamOS. The streaming feature is just a fix in the meantime until Valve can get all the AAA developers on board.
All that is left is to see if they can get AAA developers to port to SteamOS or develop native games for it. Given that PS4 is getting support and uses the same graphics API(opengl), it's easy jump.
Until THAT happens...
Bonus points if it's Valve themselves.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
I will soon need to buy a new computer - either a desktop, a mini PC or a laptop. I would love if I could just buy a mini PC and slap Steam OS on it and use it for both casual computer stuff (surf, media center etc...) and also for gaming.
The problem is that a (somewhat) capable gaming PC, especially one with small form-factor is very expensive compared to what a PS4/Xbone costs - I will in that case have to settle for an equally expensive box, which would be limited to older games and smaller indie releases, or pay 2-3x times what a next-gen console would cost me.
They're definitely heading in that direction though, so it's not like some crazy tinfoil hat (or pie in the sky if you want that) idea.
I don't think they are heading in that direction as much as you think.
I think they are working at building an iOS like system into their normal Windows environment without dropping some of the more open aspects of Windows because that helps them sell copies too.
Presumably, this will only work if steam can develop quality and consistent emulation for windows-only games. Which I assume they can do, especially if this nudges hardware makers along.
Valve is not known to be stupid, so either they have thought through their strategy and use cases very carefully here, or this will be the first example of valve overreaching. We'll see!
First off, creating their own Steam OS was pretty much a necessity, since the masses can't be arsed to fart around with Linux. They want something simple that allows them to get to their content quickly and fire up games without hassle. I'm optimistic Valve will build the OS with that simplicity in mind and make it streamlined and attractive.
But then I read this:
...and then simplicity gets chucked right out into the bin. Yay for openness I guess, but the main advantage consoles have is that users don't have to fart around with hardware and trying to figure out what will run and what won't. We tech nerds gripe about Xbox 360 games getting outclassed by PC hardware in this stage of the game, yet console games still sell as well as they ever have (stupid-high standards for profitability aside). I mean, I've got a strong interest in the tech side of things and I built my own computer, but I think back to the fact that fully half of the computer-building process was taken up by researching which one of the numerous video cards with randomized names would be best and it makes me anticipate building the next computer like I would a root canal.
I guess we'll just have to see what the Steambox manages to evolve into, but I get the sneaking suspicion all this will appeal solely to the already die-hard PC gamers.
Exactly. Is it really $100 a pop?
Sometimes more. Yes.
Keyphrase here is "they want". Users can modify it IF THEY WANT. I have absolutely no doubts that out of the box SteamOS will run great and allow you to play games without thinking about hardware/software/etc.
Eh, all that stuff seems like it's optional crap the user can seek out. I'd suspect that if you're a bog standard kind of guy, you can use SteamOS in a bog standard kind of way. Any good developments that come out of the openness of the platform can be filtered through regular SteamOS updates ala Dashboard updates on the 360.
The best way to think of it is similar to Android. It's an OS, it's intended to be used with specific hardware (just like a phone, or a console), it works out of the box, but if you want, you're welcome to fuck with it.
But premade computers most often include a Windows OEM license for much less than that. And builders can just transfer to a new machine. So are you REALLY buying a new, full retail price Windows license every time you get a new machine?
You cannot transfer an OEM license to a brand new machine that isn't OEM.
If it's optional, then yay.
If people are going to have to sit around and make up their mind which one of the various Steamboxes with specs that read like cats on keyboards they'll have to buy, as opposed to one model of Steambox, then that undermines the concept.
I guess we'll find out soon.
No they're not and yes it is
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
No, not OEM builders, i mean user-builders like me and so many others. So people who buy premades already got their windowses included, and people who build their own machines only need one license per version.
I personally go through several part-swaps for every Windows there is. So no, it's not 100$ a pop, in practice.
You can't build a fresh machine and just transfer the license from an OEM machine to a new machine.
The Steam OS thing is cool, but if it's only capable of streaming the majority of games on the Steam library then it's no good as a replacement yet.
But currently it's just a thing to me. For all that people sung it's praises never gave a fig about Linux before, this hardly changes it.
There seems to be a lot of neat ideas regarding things that could be done. I just don't know why I should do/care about any of it. And if you can't sell me on the idea, I have no idea how you're going to convince Joe Blow Madden.
None of these features by itself is a huge reason to be interested or excited, but together they are a great foundation that could have some huge impacts on the industry for consumers and developers.
Of course, it could also end up becoming nothing.
It seems like Valve is trying to takes the best parts of consoles, Steam, and Ouya into one idea.
We'll just see if the various pieces are attractive enough to get folks who aren't already PC enthusiasts to jump on board.
I think he's referring the retail version of Windows which you can transfer. But that version costs $200 retail, so unless you transfer the license more than once(something I've never seen anyone do), it's the same or more expensive. You also end up with no OS on the old machine(s) too.
Far more common in my experience for older machines to passed down(either as a whole unit or piecemeal) to friends or family for cheap rather fall in complete disuse. In most of those cases, you're still going to want an OS, which puts it back to $100 each.
More importantly, the far most common practice is just buying the OEM version in general. Even reputable sites like Tech Report and Anandtech list the OEM versions in their build guides, which should tell you what's the more common practice. So yes, most people who build their computers spend $100 on it each time they get a new machine.
PSN: jrrl_absent
Because at this point, if I was running Valve, I would probably troll people with HL3. Heck, I bet it's a running joke for the people at Valve.
Yeah, but I think having their most anticipated game be released for their new OS would be a pretty smart idea. Hahaha
PSN: jrrl_absent