> But I think your underestimating the significance of standing up Proton

I don't think I'm underestimating it at all. Proton and SteamOS were huge, they were extremely well-timed, and they've been a boon for everyone involved (except M$ shareholders, I guess).

However, none of that necessitated whatever the Steam Box release was. It's not like it moved a significant number of units and that's why Valve invested in Proton/SteamOS; Steam Box was long discontinued before the first public release of Proton (2018, IIRC).

> Simply put, there's no Steam Deck without the Steam Machine

Agreed, and I call that out in the article, but that doesn't make its original release not a flop. Hence my lemonade comment -- you don't make lemonade from apples; you have to have a lemon first.

I think there is something to be said for companies putting their money where their mouth is. Getting behind Gaming on Linux with a hardware launch is pretty substantial and Valve have been explicit since 2013 that they think it's the way forward.

They also continue to have first class support for BOTH windows and Linux without forcing it down anyone's throat which is not the strategy for literally every tangent related market. There are no super annoying layers to this strategy Valve could have done a number of things to force users to use Linux such as. - Linux game exclusives and Linux discounts. - Preventing the steam machine from running on a windows machine by dropping certain hardware - Making windows users second class by not releasing the latest updates and features. - Making other hardware incompatible with windows e.g. Valve Index, Steam Controller etc