So, is it a console or a PC? If it's a console, I don't want it, it won't have any of the Steam/PC advantages (the library is of course included in this) in order to conform to people's expectations for a console, plus they're not going to have a pull bigger than Microsoft's in that space which makes me question the market potential. While if it's a PC, again I don't care, unless I can get nice parts cheaper than elsewhere with it, but it still won't really affect anything in the grand scheme of things imo, when people can just as well buy any PC, stick Linux on it and install Steam, why pay for the brand on top (again unless it's cheaper than elsewhere). Using the term Steambox doesn't shed light on what they intend to do, unless the guy said console, I wish they'd clear that up. But right now I just can't see how this could be anything truly significant whichever route they take, PC or console, since they can't do both in one like some people seem to think you can have a console a la Xbox yet run the whole Steam library or even just the Linux library, yet absolutely none of what they think is too complex or annoying about PC gaming, ie, settings, performance, need to upgrade, etc. PC and console are mutually exclusive approaches. I guess it might be a little innovative if it's the first fully digital distribution based console (then again, PSP Go) but that's the extent of the appeal I can see coming, and the other companies can easily adjust to match, put more focus on having every title available digitally etc, and maybe adjust pricing if the Steambox does it cheaper and seems like it could evolve into a significant threat.