In case you’re out of the loop, the old Steam Deck had Philips screws that screwed into self-tapping plastic holes. This lead to occasional stripped threads and often stripped screwheads.

Valve absolutely did not have to change their screws, and its probably actually against their best interests. While other companies around the world are constantly in search of new ways to screw their own consumers, Valve goes out of their way to update their screws to make them easier to install/remove by changing to torx screws and added metal threads in the backplate. Those who know anything about mechanical engineering know this is not an insignificant amount of effort they put into it.

This is a small change that makes a huge impact, and speaks volumes about the ethos of the company. It says:

  1. We want to make our devices last longer, and be easier to repair.

  2. If you want to buy the cheaper tier and save yourself a few bucks by installing whatever SSD you want, go right ahead.

  3. We trust you to make decisions for yourself.

  4. Most importantly, we respect you, the consumer, and want you to fully own and control the devices we sell.

Valve is by no means perfect, and there’s plenty more they could be doing, but they’ve earned my respect and my patronage and I won’t buy games from anywhere else. I will buy whatever future products they sell, even if I don’t think I’ll use them regularly.

  • helenslunchOP
    5·
    7 months ago

    I really have no idea what this comment is supposed to be about. Do you think companies like Apple don’t make buckets of money from their app store? Or their subscription services? Do you think they “need” to charge exorbitant prices for their hardware? Do you think they “need” to strike partnerships with their suppliers to ensure they can’t sell their parts to anyone else? Do you think they “need” to lock them down so that even if you’re able to obtain third party parts, they still won’t work?

    Corporations don’t care about “needs”. Their goals are to extract as much money from the consumer as humanly possible.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      1·
      7 months ago

      Apple’s business model is to sell hardware, in order to “extract as much money from the consumer as humanly possible” they “need” to protect hardware sales first and foremost.

      Valve’s business model is to sell software, in order to “extract […] possible” they “need” to have as much compatible hardware as possible.

      You can argue that Apple’s business model is antiquated or suboptimal, but you’ll have to prove that freeing their hardware and reducing prices, would mean an equal or higher increase in benefits from their app store and subscriptions.

      • helenslunchOP
        2·
        7 months ago

        Apple’s business model is to sell hardware

        That is incorrect. Apple sells a wide variety of software and subscription services, including ALL apps in the App Store, with a whopping 30% share of any app purchase or in-app purchases, much like Steam.

        Valve’s business model is to sell software

        Valve could just as easily decide they want to profit from the hardware, just like Apple. Especially now that they’ve sold several million of them. They choose not to.

        You can argue that Apple’s business model is antiquated or suboptimal

        It is absolutely neither of those things. They have a brilliant business model. So much so that they’re able to sucker people into paying 100%+ more than any of their products are actually worth while simultaneously pissing in their faces and telling them it’s raining by building in a locked ecosystem, disallowing the users to decide what software they want to use, and making their hardware almost completely irreparable.