Why would the company that sells most PC games want people to stop needing Windows? That is the question Gamers Nexus's Steve Burke puts to Wendell of Level1 Techs in a long, loose conversation about Linux, SteamOS and Microsoft. Their answer, laid out over half an hour, is that SteamOS is Valve's insurance policy. Everything below is their argument, attributed to them; it is opinion from two experienced hardware commentators, not a statement of Valve's or Microsoft's plans.
The passenger problem
Wendell's framing is an analogy about a car. Valve, he says, has spent two decades as a passenger in Microsoft's vehicle, and SteamOS is its exit plan (00:35). Staying purely on Windows carries long-term platform risk for a company whose entire business sits on top of someone else's operating system (01:17). The pair debate whether that is fear of ending up like GameStop if platforms shift (01:23), and Wendell argues that for Microsoft to actually supplant Steam it would have to change its whole mindset toward giving customers real value (02:37).
Lessons from Microsoft's history
The second strand is history, and both men have long memories. They walk through Microsoft's past PC gaming efforts, from the original Xbox to the Windows Store and Games for Windows Live (10:00). Wendell's view is that the Windows Store failed because it was designed around platform lock-in rather than a good experience for players or developers (10:33). Wendell adds a story of his own: he once had to pirate a game he owned because Games for Windows Live rejected his legitimate disc (11:18). They also recall the pre-Steam era of juggling compatibility across Windows 95, ME, 2000 and XP (05:32), the problem Steam arguably solved for developers.
Looking forward, Wendell suggests Microsoft's long-term direction is turning Windows into a cloud operating system hosted on Azure (13:08), and they discuss Microsoft's acquisitions and Game Pass economics (13:48). That, in their telling, is precisely the future SteamOS protects Valve from.
Why open source helps
Burke asks the obvious worry: is it risky to trust a big company inside open-source projects? Wendell's answer is that trust doesn't depend on Valve's goodwill but on the licences, which are enforceable and keep the code open whoever contributes it (07:18). He also describes how corporate incentives and short-term shareholder value would change Valve's strategy if it were a publicly traded company (08:31).
The uncomfortable part
They don't let Valve off entirely. The worst long-term effect of Steam and every digital storefront since, they argue, is that players' expectations shifted from owning games to licensing them (17:41), and they compare that with DRM-free stores. On a more practical note, Wendell points out how much easier SteamOS makes things like moving games between devices on an SD card than Windows does (24:20), which handheld players will recognise.
Why it matters
None of this is news in the sense of an announcement. It is two people who follow the industry closely explaining a strategy they see in Valve's moves, and it is a clear, opinionated account of why Linux gaming has become a serious project rather than a hobby. Whether Microsoft feels the pressure is, by their own admission, a matter of reading the signals.
Viewers loved the format. Many said they enjoy hearing two knowledgeable people simply talk shop, several shared frustration with Windows features they dislike, and a few made the point that Valve only looks good because its rivals set the bar so low. Linux users chimed in that the things they want to play now just work.
From the creators
Watch the video
Reporting notes