The title is a bit misleading, as the article lists diverging analysts’ opinions, ranging from Valve willing to sell at a loss or low margins, to high prices due to RAM and SSD price volatility.

  • Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I’m calling $700 US price. Valve’s the only company that can get into the console space with console prices since the real revenue source is the game store they run.

    Edit: I slept on it and decided $750 is a safer bet, at least on the base model

    • reev@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      The problem is that it makes less sense for them to sell at a loss than for example Xbox or Sony. It’s just a capable PC, corporations could buy hundreds or thousands and they wouldn’t make a cent off of game sales.

      • Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not impossible, however, have you seen what corporations buy for their employees? Saving on upfront cost isn’t really part of the equation, it just has to say “dell” and/or “workstation” on it. A large company values long-term support and supply way more than what they’d save by getting a gaming machine.

        And besides all that, it’s not like the best selling console of all time didn’t make money because a (objectively large) minority of owners only used it as a DVD player.

      • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t think most corporations would be interested in buying a computer that doesn’t include a windows license. Unless they intend to use it for like… server stuff, but they’d be way better off buying like… actual server hardware… if only for the operating cost.

        • Natanael@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Even as a Linux desktop it would mostly just be interesting for devs and people doing relatively lightweight 3D design work (especially because it will take a while before other distros support it), I don’t see it competing against regular desktops.

          Any company who depend on their employees having a decent GPU will likely want to be able to upgrade/reconfigure new orders at will, and will prefer a tower, and they will prefer the quick repairability of a tower. Those who don’t are increasingly ok with using mini PCs.

    • Rooster326@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Uh the same could be said for Sony, Xbox and to a greater extent Nintendo but they’d rather make oodles of noodles money at every interaction.