Valve releases Steam Deck shell CAD files

Cool. Now imagine if the very operating system the thing ran on was open source too . . . oh wait. Um, and what if the 'secret sauce' it used to run Windows games was . . . oh, it is too, huh?
Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

This is seriously cool of them. Not like a huge thing (they have already done plenty of those), but still a display of goodwill and openness that is completely uncharacteristic for a big corp releasing their own console.

I don't have a 3D printer, but if I did, that Portal themed shell would be the first thing I'd make

I know that Steam is a DRM...but damn.
It's now been 10 years, yes, 10 years that Steam support Linux.
That support is real, with lots of interesting and useful projects.

Take my money Gaben, and again, thank you :)

I know that Steam is a DRM...

Not really. You do need to download the games through the client, but after that it's entirely down to what the publisher chooses. If a game doesn't make use of Steam features (which need the Steam client) and hasn't included any other DRM, you can just run the games however you like. There are lots of games on Steam like that.

It should be noted that there is no single "Creative Commons license". Creative Commons is a suite of licences with various clauses to choose between: From Creative Commons Zero (CC0), which is about as close to Public Domain as one can legally get; to Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC-BY-NC-SA), which has a bunch of conditions attached.

FTR, it seems Valve has chosen the latter: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0.

ShareAlike gives it a GPL-like quality (no proprietary modifications), but the more important clause is probably the NonCommercial...

dbrand replied with "So... no C&D then?" (C&D being Cease and Desist) since they announced their Project Killswitch case.

So yeah, about that commercial operation you've got going there dbrand...

Though really, since dbrand have already been working on a case, they've probably already reverse-engineered a physical device so don't need these CAD files, and should probably avoid them from a legal standpoint.

I think Valve using gitlab is more interesting. Does this mean they will move everything they have from github to their gitlab instance? Would be nice.

Of course, it might not be so useful to open these CAD files in Blender as screenshotted, since Blender is a mesh modelling system, not a precision CAD modelling system. However, there are some addons that can make simple CAD possible in Blender, such as CAD Transform and tinyCAD.

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Of course, it might not be so useful to open these CAD files in Blender as screenshotted, since Blender is a mesh modelling system, not a precision CAD modelling system. However, there are some addons that can make simple CAD possible in Blender, such as CAD Transform and tinyCAD.

This comment is completely irrelevant and unnecessary. Opening in a 3D app is great for looking at it and making renders. And that's what most people will likely do, not frickin' CAD. Plus it's not inaccurate in Blender. Every vertex will be in the exact same place, no matter what you open it in, unless the application you open it in is broken. I think people who want to use it for manufacturing etc. will not be using Blender anyway, but actual CAD software.


Last edited by rustybroomhandle on 12 February 2022 at 11:19 am UTC

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Comparing private (game related software and limited hardware) company with few billion in pocket and few hundred employees with mega software and hardware (hundreds working on input devices alone) corporations with hundred of billions and counting employees in hundred thousand plus...

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Apple is a mixed bag on their love of open source. They bought CUPS... then just left it to languish. They use Webkit... but forked it for their own use. So now we have multiple webkit based engines and they all are incompatible. They hate GPLv3, so some software stays far out of date on their newest systems (it is the bit about modifiable binaries, or something.)

Microsoft is also a little strange. They do commit some stuff to Linux, though of course a lot of that is fir their own benefit. Same with VSCode being open source, but the normal binaries have telemetry turned on.

Valve does open source contributions 'the right way'

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Comparing private (game related software and limited hardware) company with few billion in pocket and few hundred employees with mega software and hardware (hundreds working on input devices alone) corporations with hundred of billions and counting employees in hundred thousand plus...

Ha, yeah was going to mention in my previous post, the key here is Private Company. They can do whatever they want, and don't have shareholders to please.

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Comparing private (game related software and limited hardware) company with few billion in pocket and few hundred employees with mega software and hardware (hundreds working on input devices alone) corporations with hundred of billions and counting employees in hundred thousand plus...

Ha, yeah was going to mention in my previous post, the key here is Private Company. They can do whatever they want, and don't have shareholders to please.

I guess it really makes sense for the stay that way. It's not like they need extra funds in order to be able to do stuff.

Comparing private (game related software and limited hardware) company with few billion in pocket and few hundred employees with mega software and hardware (hundreds working on input devices alone) corporations with hundred of billions and counting employees in hundred thousand plus...

They're just the tip of the iceberg & known for their closed products.

And as you're saying: Valve has billions, so it's nothing to them to pay a few developers. (To remind you: $1 billion = $1000 million, a developer will cost something from, I don't know, $100.000 to $1.000.000 per year?).

[…] They hate GPLv3, so some software stays far out of date on their newest systems (it is the bit about modifiable binaries, or something.)
[…]
Same with VSCode being open source, but the normal binaries have telemetry turned on. […]

Please explain why this has anything to do with open source contributions.

Valve makes open source contributions and yet provide a DRM system (in fact, most of their business is based on the availability of, partly invasive, DRM). What's your point here?

[…]
They use Webkit... but forked it for their own use. So now we have multiple webkit based engines and they all are incompatible.
[…]
Valve does open source contributions 'the right way'

Valve uses a forked Wine full of hacks, uses & maintains a D3D implementation outside of Wine with no chance of upstreaming it. What makes this right & better than Apple & Microsoft?

As I was saying: Nothing special, nobody but Linux kids are thinking anything about it.

Valve uses a forked Wine full of hacks, uses & maintains a D3D implementation outside of Wine with no chance of upstreaming it. What makes this right & better than Apple & Microsoft?

As I was saying: Nothing special, nobody but Linux kids are thinking anything about it.

The wine used in Proton is not "full of hacks", it just has hooks into Steam's platform. And the decision to not use vkd3d-proton in wine is not because Valve is grubby about it, it's entirely the wine maintainers' choice.

Valve is paying Codeweavers to work on wine, who will not be doing anything to wine that will not be available to everyone.


Last edited by rustybroomhandle on 12 February 2022 at 5:18 pm UTC

The wine used in Proton is not "full of hacks", it just has hooks into Steam's platform. […]

Valve is paying Codeweavers to work on wine, who will not be doing anything to wine that will not be available to everyone.

hacks @https://github.com/ValveSoftware/wine/
hacks @https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/

And the decision to not use vkd3d-proton in wine is not because Valve is grubby about it, it's entirely the wine maintainers' choice.

Please explain in more detail with an emphasis on 'the right way' of the contribution?

The wine used in Proton is not "full of hacks", it just has hooks into Steam's platform. […]

Valve is paying Codeweavers to work on wine, who will not be doing anything to wine that will not be available to everyone.

hacks @https://github.com/ValveSoftware/wine/
hacks @https://github.com/wine-mirror/wine/

Yeah, they flag compatibility kludges as "hacks"- this is good. It means they are conscious of what is clean and what not.

And the decision to not use vkd3d-proton in wine is not because Valve is grubby about it, it's entirely the wine maintainers' choice.

Please explain in more detail with an emphasis on 'the right way' of the contribution?

vkd3d-proton is LGPL-2.1. Wine project chooses not to use it. And that's fine. They do not have to.

You seem to imply that Proton development is not benefitting wine.

EDIT: Ignore everything I said, I think we have a communication gap here. Can you explain why what Valve is doing is the wrong way? Because from where I sit it's just open source functioning as intended.


Last edited by rustybroomhandle on 12 February 2022 at 6:24 pm UTC

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Valve isn't primarily a software company though. If you write 5% as much software as another company, but contribute 30% as much to open source, and in more key areas, who is more open source friendly?

And of course it's much smaller, but the main thing is just that this is an apples/oranges comparison. Apple and Microsoft do open source contributions mainly when they have no other choice; it's just that they do so much business that revolves around areas that have been taken over, despite their determined resistance, by open source software that the number of areas where they've had no other choice is quite large.
Valve actually chooses to use open source, and do it responsibly, in areas where they would have other choices.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 12 February 2022 at 6:10 pm UTC

Valve is frankly a really weird company. I'm sure all the other companies look at it and think, to quote a certain Dr. from Austin Powers, "Not Evil enough".

Why would they? Valve is nowhere near the open source contributions of other closed source companies (e.g. Apple & Microsoft).

Valve has a market cap of 78 billion. Apple has the highest market cap in the world, 2.752 trillion - some 35 times the size of Valve. Microsoft has 2.211 trillion, Google 1.773 trillion. We are talking about one or two orders of magnitude of difference. Valve are a store that sells games, a super large store in its niche, but those others are world powers comparable to the richest countries in the world. And software is one of their main products, though ever more giving way to "software-as-a-service".

Edit: to make it clearer, Valve is 0.078 trillion, and less than 3% of Apple.


Last edited by eldaking on 12 February 2022 at 7:30 pm UTC