If they were to release the tools as closed source, then you could have a case. But as it is, they're just donating money to help Linux as a project.
to bring in a new potential userbase all the better.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Ben Franklin 1755
Being unfree proprietary-involved or not, it is still a contribution. And a sign that they are serious about Linux. So I'd say welcome Valve. And of course welcome HSA club and welcome whatever cloud-stuff it was.
Even if the games on their platform are normally commercial it will give a push to Linux hardware support. Definitely. Suddenly it will be interesting and cool to support Linux. Of course there will be growing pains, because a lot of mistakes will be made until enterprises understand how the Linux thing works. It is acceptable to me to play an unfree game (if it is halfway good) and to pay for a game. I recognize the work in it. (Or in other software.) Of course free as in freedom would be even better but hey, it's a start if things run on Linux. I also understand that multimillion projects are a bit hesitant about releasing their work from the start under CC and GPL/BSD/MIT.
I don't care about any DRM platform myself, but if Valve writes FOSS software and gives money to fund Linux development, it's not an issue. They should be encouraged to do so (and discouraged from using DRM). Also, do realise that large companies are made of different parts. You might not like what one part does, but that doesn't mean another part is bad. If they have a FOSS development team and a DRM development team, you shouldn't just assume the FOSS development team is somehow tainted, just because they are paid from the same budget. As well you shouldn't assume the DRM team is doing anything better just because there is a FOSS team under the same company. Again, I can draw a comparison with Microsoft – their software division makes horrible products, but their hardware division makes pretty solid PC peripherals. Both divisions deserve their own reputation to be judged separately.
Meanwhile, Linux users/gamers like myself have been seeing this like a dream come true. Once Steam for Linux came about, I no longer had a reason to keep Windows around. I'm 100% Linux these days and I aint complaining.
Even those of you who reject using Steam, will benefit from improved graphics drivers etc (already have, too).
well, thank god we don't play 24/24 7/7 and other software houses might be interested in supporting Linux. Like, adobe providing photoshop. This will force the software houses to invest in already-in-place-tools that are gpl or similar, so that the whole OS infrastructure will benefit same as the software house. And they will see that to support Linux it will be easier if instead of recreating the tools you just SEND the code, and if the code is good will be accepted. Think about the process they have to go now thorugh with Microsoft and Apple, to modify/insert/whatever inside their OS functions and support for thing that they could build all togheter to support each other and share costs..
There. You've nailed it. Congratulations.
You see, now we are now longer dependent on the inferior OS which costs money.
And by the way, this may come as a shock, but most "normal" end users who are interested in the GPU, are only interested in the driver software that comes from, or is recommended by, its vendor. Be it open source like in Intel's case or fully proprietary like Nvidia's, that doesn't matter at all for the folks who just want a product that is guaranteed (by its vendor) to actually work.