Like someone else has commented, the main thing that seems missing that is important is accessibility. Apparently people that need screen readers or other aids are just hosed as I understand it.
It might be a chicken-and-egg situation though, where nobody focuses on Wayland in this area as X11 is familiar and (still) working, so more display managers moving over might also eventually shift the (probably very limited) Dev resources over. At least I hope so.
I understand that isn't possible for everyone and/or everywhere, but the biggest saving is not even having a car in the first place. Not just the actual price of the car (and it's depreciation), but the monthly/yearly costs associated with owning one. Insurance, taxes, maintenance and possibly repairs.
It has been a very long time since I actually owned one, but at least here (EU) it can easily be like 150€ a month and you haven't even driven a single kilometer. I'm pretty sure it's physically impossible for me to use up 150€ in electricity with an eBike in a month, and there isn't even any fuel accounted for.
It's the opposite for me. Taking a car would add like 15% of distance to my commute with an eBike.
As I understood the news so far, it'll be open source, so anyone can use it. Cloud hosted or self hosted or hybrid.
I do appreciate the ability to download a fully offline installer from gog and the requirement that games be drm free. But people keep making statements similar to yours as if steam games have to include some form of drm. There is no such requirement. Steam can simply act as a downloader and patcher. Integrating stream services and failing to start if there is no steam or the active account doesn't own the game is completely up to the developer.
So if they have a drm free build on gog, but the steam hype includes drm, that's cause the developer actively decided it should be like that.
Popular game examples that do not include any drm in the steam version are Factorio and (the original) Kerbal Space Program. Once downloaded, you can freely copy the installation around, and just start the exe. These games start just fine.
The service part only applies to copies sold that include steam keys and therefore use the steam-API related things (workshop, cloud saves). I haven't read about this specific case in detail, but as long as that use of steam for copies sold is part of what they wanted to leverage but essentially not pay for, that's obviously bull.
This honestly is somewhat unexpected and I had to re-read the comment I replied to to understand it correctly, hence my misunderstanding of that aspect. It's unexpected cause ubisoft in particular for the longest time had their own "store" and games required at least their own launcher. I haven't played Ubisoft games in at least a decade, so I don't know/remember if the games reuired your own ubi-account, or if the games relied on Steams systems (workshop/cloud saves/...). I would've assumed no, and that they only use it as a downloader cause players essentially wouldn't buy it outside of steam (or at least not enough).
Top be clear: if steam allows copies of a game listed on steam to be sold at an arbitrary price as long as that doesn't include a steam key, this is perfectly fine. Actively thinking about it now I would assume it does, as I'm pretty sure I bought games without steam keys for less than the listing on steam was.
if you have a separate non-steam version you can charge whatever you want.
This is the part that was unclear from the original comment. If that's in fact the case, that's obviously fine (and different from the Amazon case).
why wouldn’t they?
it's called "competetive pricing". If I'm a customer and have a steam account holding most of my games (like most PC gamers), why would I even consider buying it anywhere else if it isn't even cheaper and now I got games in like 3-5 stores with at least 2-3 launcher/downloaders/apps. No, this most likely won't make them more money but much much less with fewer people buying it there.
Amazon got slapped with a substantial fine (in the EU) for having basically the same "rule" in their contracts, that forbid cheaper listings elsewhere. So yes, in the EU hanging that rule is illegal. But if it applies to digital licensing is another matter.
You do know you're only renting access to the game with a one-time fee, not buying it, right?
Edit: the original comment left it unclear if the price rule only applies to copies sold that include a steam key, or if copies that work completely without steam can be arbitrarily priced. If the latter is the case, it's obviously fine. If it includes any game version, it isn't OK.
I am somewhat disappointed that it isn't Brian bringing the brain cell. Missed opportunity, really.
What would be the point in this PC parts economy? There would be like 7 people buying it.
The specification reaches is 1.0 release. It can now be implemented. Until this can actually be used and I'm a consumer friendly easy will be years. Not to mention when hardware acceleration will be available. We only relatively recently got that for AV1.
You sure that's anchored down properly? If a strong wind from the right direction pulls on that, are the panels gonna stay put? I mean all the connectiona in between the panels and the ground. Is just a single picture, kinda hard to tell how it's constructed. But panels going flying in a storm isn't exactly a fun time...