Because they wanted to use a protocol created by a monolithic tech giant that was explicitly designed to feature algorithmic feeds and interaction monitoring (read: monetization).
I and my group are all just on matrix.org. We didn’t want the risk of dealing with potentially less reliable servers or federation.
Absolutely a strong way to go.
Yea, there are some historical reasons for the integrations, but they could do a better job evolving the UI to match the current state of things for sure.
I run a Matrix server and it's deffo YMMV based on the server admin and how good they are at maintaining things.
Getting the federation to work can also be a chore and a half. Otherwise it works super well. The clients often implement features on top of the protocol (looking at Element and their weird jitsi integration for instance).
The problem here is that who owns a data center isn't a matter of breaking the law. It's only if the data center starts breaking the law, and only then can the lawmaker share that the law is being broken and by whom. It wouldn't give them carte blanche to go out and say "Microsoft owns that land".
I think the best way to respond to this is pointing out that you have pointed out, I think, the only way the Mirror Universe might not be as bad as some of the other options...
If you look here, you'll find the answer to your question. I actually answered two different questions here, both of which will tell you my opinion on if it is too soon to speak on the matter. Given that I spoke on the matter.
Win the console generation? In terms of computing flexibility, having a console that does more than play a walled garden’s worth of games, and actually contributes to competitiveness in a market dominated by players who are intent on making each of themselves a monopoly? Yes, absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt. The same way Valve “won” the handheld PC market, Volvo “won” the automotive safety market, and Johannes Salk “won” the vaccination market by not patenting the Polio vaccine.
I consider that “winning”, but my outlook on what is good for an ecosystem and market is built on the principles of true market economics, growth potential, benefit to all consumers (not just those who purchase a specific product), and having computing devices that aren’t abysmally stuck in one mode despite having a substantial amount of power that could be used for other things.
Will it have the most sales? Probably not, but having the most sales generally means you sacrificed some morals here and there, and Valve doesn’t have a tendency to do that.
Win the console generation? In terms of computing flexibility, having a console that does more than play a walled garden's worth of games, and actually contributes to competitiveness in a market dominated by players who are intent on making each of themselves a monopoly? Yes, absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt. The same way Valve "won" the handheld PC market, Volvo "won" the automotive safety market, and Johannes Salk "won" the vaccination market by not patenting the Polio vaccine.
I consider that "winning", but my outlook on what is good for an ecosystem and market is built on the principles of true market economics, growth potential, benefit to all consumers (not just those who purchase a specific product), and having computing devices that aren't abysmally stuck in one mode despite having a substantial amount of power that could be used for other things.
Will it have the most sales? Probably not, but having the most sales generally means you sacrificed some morals here and there, and Valve doesn't have a tendency to do that.
Not in it's actual class, no. It's going to be far more powerful and useful than the VCS, Evercade, and Polymega. With a fairly low count to compete against looking at Steam Deck sales.
Against the Console giants? Maybe, but it entirely depends on markets and like products. Something you have been so keen to point out. That said, it will absolutely have more computing flexibility than any of the big console makers, it's the only one compliant out of the gate with the EU Rights and Cybersecurity Resilience acts. Moreover given that there are There are 135 million Monthly users of the Steam services, 123 million on Playstation Network, it's going to prove that a consumer console company with more users than the Playstation Network has the ability to comply with these regulations.
In at least that metric they're already doing better than Playstation is. So, I'd say too early to call definitively, however not too early to say it's going to do better in at least several metrics.
I think it will bring Valve to dominating the console market in their class, a concept that you should be well familiar with, given your clear explanations of how like things should be compared.
Will it outsell the Ps5? Probably not on release, no. Will it be better than the Ps5? Probably, if only because it has broader flexibility.
Will the Steam Box outsell the Atari VCS, Evercade, and Polymega? Almost certainly, but hey, I'm only trying to compare like to like.
Will the Steam Frame outsell the Meta Quest 3 and the HTC XR and Vive Focus? It definitely has the potential to be super competitive if not on top.
Will the Steam Controller be the dominate PC-Console type controller? Maybe, the memory of the Old Steam controller is going to die hard and slowly.
"Nothing flies over my head, I'm too fast. I would catch it!" <3
Happens to everybody! I hope you have a good day, friend!