Just got a steam deck and immediately checked out the desktop mode, and I was somewhat surprised to see KDE and pacman as opposed to GNOME and apt, I have nothing against the former though a strong preference for the latter, anyone know why Volvo went in this direction?
Rolling release, quicker updates for gaming, and pacman is an extremely fast package manager, which is why OpenSUSE Tumbleweed wasn’t chosen. KDE probably because touch screen works better on it and maybe they found switching between desktop and big picture mode to be a better transition
KDE because it looks like Windows? So gamers will have a familiar interface instead of Gnome
Maybe? As much as I hate that statement it’s probably true, cause windows does look like kde since they copied a bunch of stuff from plasma
And Plasma copied a bunch of stuff from Windows.
TW also has the issue of having ‘controversial’ software like the media codecs, etc not being included OOTB due to licensing concerns.
I had no idea it was based on Arch… I thought I read somewhere that Steam was only officially packaged for Debian or Ubuntu.
SteamOS was based on Debian but they changed when they released Steam deck with Arch base
They only support Ubuntu as downstream Distro, while they preinstall it on their number 1 supported platform, SteamOS. They control the complete software stack and even hardware.
They dont support Arch on whatever hardware, they support SteamOS on the Steamdeck.
Arch rolling gives up to date packages quickly. The most important part for Linux gaming is quickest pushing of GPU and performance related kernel code, so that the most optimal balance between battery life and performance is continuously achieved, because Linux gaming is still in its infancy. Every new update or package possibly giving this benefit matters to Valve, and they need maximum amount of time to optimise and push updates.
There is no GNOME hate angle, unlike what a lot of idiots here want to claim and spread the toxicity for it. KDE people, Snap haters, systemd haters are extremely vile people. Valve does not care about working with UI, since they can design a launcher for any Linux distro themselves, hiding the ugly terminal and filesystem well enough for casual gamers.
It was based on debian, but moved to arch.
I think they did it because honestly, arch is better for desktop-usage due to its rolling-release model.
Bugs in debian stick around forever.
Yeah as an Arch user I disagree. Imo a handheld meant to be a plug and play system would hugely benefit from a stable OS with a laid back update schedule. You don’t see PlayStation pushing constant updates the second BSD packages get new versions.
As others have said, Valve has their own immutable release system, so it doesn’t really matter. In this case, the rolling release has even less to do with it. They likely chose Arch due to the up to date packages which benefit gaming.
I don’t think that’s a good point, since they make their own immutable images, so they can use whatever versions of software they want, and you don’t normally get to update them with the rolling release
Yeah but what’s the point of using Debian when you’re going to have to manually package newer versions of a lot of software?
Why would they manually package them? Just grab the packages you need from
testingorsid. This way you keep the solid Debianstablebase OS and still bring in the latest and greatest of the things that matter for gaming.But why go through those hoops? What is the advantage Debian brings when you have to cherry pick packages and their dependencies from Sid? Stability is no longer an advantage when you are cherry picking from Sid lol.
Stability is no longer an advantage when you are cherry picking from Sid lol.
This makes no sense. When 95% of the system is based on Debian
stable, you get pretty much full stability of the base OS. All you need to pull in from the other releases is Mesa and related packages.Perhaps the kernel as well, but I suspect they’re compiling their own with relevant parameters and features for the SD anyway, so not even that.
I suspect KDE because most PC gamers are Windows users and KDE is closer to that while Gnome is closer to macOS (both in design and being restrictive).
I believe SteamOS is also immutable and uses a rolling release model. It’s probably logical to make a custom version of Arch. They can make it immutable and still get the latest packages. Fedora Silverblue (or another immutable Linux distro) wouldn’t be as quick to release packages and was probably in alpha when the decision was made.
I suspect KDE because most PC gamers are Windows users and KDE is closer to that while Gnome is closer to macOS (both in design and being restrictive).
For what it’s worth, when I moved from macOS to Linux I found that KDE Plasma customisation made it less frustrating to get the appearance and multitouch gestures closer to what I was missing on a Mac.
ElementaryOS sounds like a perfect fit for you, if you haven’t tried it already. Superb gesture support and consistent UI across all built in apps
That said, a lot of the gesture support has been implemented in Gnome and KDE now anyway, particularly partial gestures which previously had very poor support IIRC
I know this is silly and I can make KDE do this but at some point, my workflow became a mouse to the top left corner to get an overview and get all the windows so I can swap programs. It started with Gnome 3 years ago, and as far as I know, macOS copied hot corners in a way that’s worse in that it requires changing settings.
The other part of my workflow is pressing a remapped CAPS Lock control or whatever and tilde for my terminal to come out guake style. I use ddterm in gnome.
If I can’t switch windows and call up a terminal guake style, I’ll retire.
The macOS version of it also sucks because you can’t close windows from “Mission Control” or whatever they call they call their Gnome clone. Put an X on each window whereas Gnome lets me do that and clear old shit out the way when I need to.
The bottom line is that when I really need macOS, it’s built into the settings. Gnome is effortless. Windows is a constant battle.
macOS does have a setting to remap the caps lock key and game has to recognize game sometimes. They stole the good ideas from Gnome. But if I can’t hit CAPS Lock+tilde and have a real terminal slide down, your operating system is dead to me.
I’m sure I can get there on Windows if I cared to but I’m too busy deleting Candy Crush or whatever.
Hot corners were in OS X before gnome 3 even existed
I stand corrected. I didn’t really use macOS until a few years ago.
I originally got a MacBook because my work life is all Linux and I was working from home and needed that psychological separation. Like, “This computer is for work. MacOS is for watching basketball.”
You can get the switcher in KDE, but you can’t get a real equivalent to gnome’s view. In gnome you can press super to get the overview, but you can also type to open programs. There’s no way to do that in KDE afaik. It’s the main thing keeping me from KDE
Games need to live closer to the bleeding edge than a lot of other software.
Also, for wine/proton, and the other customisations built into the deck, it makes sense to pick a starting point that is more built for customisation. By that I mean there was probably less things they needed to add or remove at the start.
As mentioned, it’s also likely there was personal bias internally. But even that can be a valid reason as they need to be familiar/comfortable with the starting distro.
Not saying that Debian cannot do it, but doing it this way probably made valve’s employees lives easier.
The popular opinion is that it was easier for them to get up-to-date packages that way.
My opinion: It’s just what the people working on the Deck were using at the time themselves.
Other reason might be that they had SteamOS 2 based on Debian and probably had some problems with it that they could solve on Arch more easily.
Arch packaging is also significantly easier to work with in my experience. I’ve packaged for both for some years and I’ll take the Arch build system over wrangling dpkg every chance I can.
Totally agree. Arch is actually a really good, simple system. That’s why so many people pick it as their main distro. Once you have installed it a few times, it’s just very simple how it works. There is no magic.
The difficulty with arch is not get it up and running. It’s about keeping it up to date. Do you have selinux enabled? I like selinux and among other things that’s what fedora bundles for me. I could do everything myself but not only do I have to know the state of the art today, I also will have to know what’s up tomorrow. I have to keep up with it. That is the difficulty with arch. Selinux is just one example but probably a prominent. I bet many people running arch have not installed it.
How is keeping Arch up-to-date hard? Because there are a lot of updates?
I found Arch to be easier to maintain than any other distro I use. Everything is managed by the package manager ( no snaps, no flatpaks, no PPAs ). Updates are frequent but small and manageable. There are really no update “events” to navigate. And everything is current enough that I never find myself working around missing features or incompatibilities. I found it to “just work”.
I am not sure how your first point relates to SElinux. SELinux is part of the Red Hat ecosystem which is why Fedora uses it. It is not new ( SElinux may pre-date Arch Linux ). Whether you have it installed or not has nothing to do with how hard the system is to maintain. Default Debian installs do not use it either. Most Linux distros don’t. Ubuntu and SUSE use AppArmor instead.
I do not use SElinux on desktop but it makes sense for a server. The Arch kernel includes SElinux support so all you have to do is install the package if you want it. Generally, Arch gives you a newer version than Fedora does.
Flatpak is another good example besides selinux. You as a user have to be up to date how to install packages. You have to install flatpak yourself. I trust that you are up to date enough, but many people lack time and especially interest in how the system works. Many people don’t care as long as it works. On arch you have the freedom to do everything but you have to take care of a lot of thing on your own. E.g. fedora makes a lot of decisions for you. You do not have to read about firewalls, you can, but you don’t have to. On arch I highly advise evryone to read what a firewall is and then decide which firewall to use and set the right settings. Arch is not bad but it’s not for the average person who doesn’t read readmes and guides and that’s ok
You can also install “app stores” on arch, if you so desire. I believe the most famous one is
pamac.You can configure the firewall with the KDE GUI, you don’t need additional knowledge than the one you’d already need for any other system.
I wouldn’t recommend Arch for newbies with no technical background but I feel like EndeavourOS is very simple to install and use.
True, I have not installed it. I ran Fedora for a while long time ago and selinux was causing tons of headaches. So I never wanted to have it on my system after that.
+1 to this. I built a few deb packages at a previous company. It was a solid packaging suite but good lord was it a pain to work through
I have only ever packaged for RPM (the company I work for has our own RPM-based distro). How does it compare? I find RPM to be pretty easy, but I have nothing to compare against.
I feel like this is the answer. if you’ve ever had to maintain a build pipeline or repository for .deb or .rpm, it’s not exactly pleasant (it is extremely robust, however). arch packaging is very simple by comparison, and I really doubt they’d need much more.
In early Steam Deck showcase videos there were talks with Valve guys like Lawrence Yang, and IIRC they simply said that it is easier for them to build the system that way, not that they couldn’t continue using Debian.
I think the reason for that might be that Debian has pretty strict package and dependency policies and sometimes it’s not easy to put cutting edge solutions on top of the „stable” base, so they would end-up using unstable/sid anyway, which still isn’t ideal as there is some freezing happening every now and then. Also Debian packaging system feels quite dated and strict comparing to PKGBUILD format, and it’s simply easier to build custom packages, having single build instruction file is super convenient and unlike with Debian at times, replacing whatever core system packages without breaking half of the dependency tree is usually easily doable on Arch.
I’ve packaged on both distros, and PKGBUILDs are truly amazing
I assume because it’s more customizable.
the deck isn’t some server that needs > 100% uptime for years. Debian is poopoo for bleeding edge game releases, especially any alpha/beta/early access stuff
All of the things others have said are excellent points, I would also like to point out that if you go to the steam hardware survey and select Linux only you’ll see that Arch is the most used distro (after SteamOS), and that was also the case when the Steam Deck was announced in July 2021 https://web.archive.org/web/20220806051441/https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
And from my personal experience there’s a reason for that, other than the I use Arch btw meme, despite most ports having Ubuntu in mind, and despite Ubuntu being the more user friendly distro, games just work on Arch. It’s a weird thing where gaming on all of my arch machines is very painless, but gaming on the Ubuntu ones is frustrating, there’s always something not right, it feels like the machine is chugging, or the driver decides not to work, or the game shows a black screen, or prime decides not today, etc, etc. I admit this is personal experience, and others might have the exact opposite, and that this is kind of biased because as a general rule people who use Arch tend to be more knowledgeable about Linux than people who use Ubuntu, but from replying on several Linux forums it’s generally people with Ubuntu that have problems with games and people with Arch usually report that “it just works” for them.
Reminds me of the time I had a nvidia GPU laptop and was distro hopping like a rabbit on crack trying to find something stable. Surprisingly enough it was Arch that proved to be the most stable and what I ended up sticking to.
Yup, been using Arch for around 16 years, never had a problem with an Nvidia card and the vast majority of my GPUs were Nvidia. Every time I hear the horror stories of prime and bumblebee I really couldn’t relate because everything just works for me… A couple of years back however my company gave me a laptop with a company approved OS (Ubuntu), and while I don’t know who’s exactly to blame here (but I have my suspicions), I’ve had to use prime-select to set the OS to work always with the Nvidia GPU, otherwise external monitors work like shit.
It could be that ThinkPads are shit compared to Acer (and every other brand I’ve had in the past) laptops, it could be that the i7 on that laptop has a shitty GPU and can’t handle the external monitors. But I’m 90% sure that if I put Arch there it would just work, and I wouldn’t almost burn myself with a 99°C laptop that’s constantly running a GPU that’s not meant to.
Another point for KDE might be that it works much better on a small screen that may be partially obscured by an overlaid keyboard. I used Bazzite Gnome for a while on the Steam Deck and I much preferred Plasma on there after switching back, despite using Gnome on my main system.
Arch gets faster driver updates, KDE is faster at developing Wayland protocol implementations.
Edit: Valve gets their desired stability by turning Arch into a point release distro through image based releases. And, the system is practically unbrickable since it’s immutable. So, in summary it’s the best of both rolling release and point release models. By best, I mean for gaming.
Wayland
🤮
I understand your comment if you have an Nvidia GPU and/or if you don’t do any gaming, but if you have an Intel or AMD GPU and you play games, Wayland is just better. VRR, HDR, Fractional Scaling, Nvidia Reflex (for all GPU brands), in GameScope (wayland compositor made by Valve) you can have FSR, upscaling, on all games. It’s even better than on Windows. And if you use Bazzite, all is set up for you out of the box, you don’t need to be an experienced Linux user to use all of the above tech. Just like on the Steam Deck.
Debian was planning on dropping 32 bit support and Steam is still a 32 bit application so valve freaked out.
For KDE, Valve found it easier to work with KDE devs than GNOME devs.
My hair is a bird.
Doesn’t kde work on debian? I haven’t used it on the desktop in ages, but that seems odd.
On second thought, they may not have the most up-to-date version. So maybe it’s that.
And if steam could make a Qt client while they’re at it…
Of course it does. OP asked multiple questions, this was sipposes to answer why they used KDE instead of Gnome. I personally think Arch would have the advantage of having the newewst drivers, Proton version etc. available.
Big surprise.
deleted by creator
But Gnome devs are notoriously hard to work with.
