Steam drops Windows 7 and 8 support with the latest client
tomshardware.com
tomshardware.com
Even though GOG's own client (GOG Galaxy) has been requiring Windows 10 for even longer, you could always just download the games from their website and manually install them no problem.
But even then, GPL + Commons does not give you trademark rights, only the ability to reuse the assets under a different name. So unless you have GPL + Commons + Trademark, do you really have ownership?
But hold on, in Japan and in the US, game mechanics can be patented. So who cares if you have the code, assets, and trademark, if you don't have patent rights? I suppose you need GPL + Commons + Trademarks + Patent Assignment; or maybe you swap out GPL with Apache2.
Now hopefully whoever made the artwork doesn't sue for unpaid royalties. You're relying on the declared licenses, but it's still possible that whoever made the game, lied in one way or another. It's also possible there are applicable patents owned by other companies, which weren't disclosed.
The point is: Even with GPL code, it's still a long way from being "your game." I didn't even mention the middleware like Havok Physics or Unity Engine; which would render your GPL game code pretty useless without a proprietary attachment, if using the GPL license at all is even legal with such a combination.
there’s misaligned incentives between the people writing the game and the people wielding c compilers as political weapons.
i swear every time i can’t compile code it is not clear which aspect of c failed— the dynamic linker working around gpl limitations as technical debt, the kernel itself using a more advanced c with backwards breaking changes, the code being written for the wrong architecture triple, or the code was written for a different c compiler altogether
i don’t actually try and fix it because bit rot only gets worse if i notice the problem.
linux has appimage, but containerization also falls prey to gpl.
exe, appimage, containerization are ideologically opposed to the gpl—- errr the other way around. gpl essentially requires compiling from source, which is great, but the intention behind that is to disrupt software supply chain distribution and most people want to be able to upgrade their computer, which is architecturally challenging with gpl, which is where nix, guix and the like can politely solve the compilation and distribution problem
but the core problem is my mom wanted a picture of me to know i’m alive, which is now entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
GPL requires the source to be available.
EXE’s are not containers more than any other program file
I don't demand GPL rights over the movies I watch, or the books I read, so I'm not sure why I'd require that for games. Of course source-available would be better than not but it's not a hill I'm willing to die on. I'd rather play some good games.
People have been saying this about Windows since Vista or earlier. If you really want to communicate with someone and not just score points for your team, you should say what the malware is, and why you're calling it that.
The existence of the adverts is very widely reported in the technical press.
(This is my experience in the EU, so presumably the relatively polite version.)
It seems reasonable to call this malware. It's what software like browser toolbars did 20 years ago, and they were widely criticised for it.
Some highlights:
"Windows 10 nagging users with Bing advertisements (push alerts)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27337382
"Why can an ad break the Windows 11 desktop and taskbar?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28404332
"Microsoft accidentally reveals that it is testing ads in Windows Explorer" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30711277
EDIT: And to finish the throughline back to XP, every version of Windows since then has included more "telemetry", which a perfectly reasonable person could describe as "spyware".
You have to look at microsoft and windows from the perspective of an actual software product. Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download candy crush. Let that sink in. Either you accept that candy crush itself is malware preying on an innocent microsoft or there is a significant and hostile attempt by microsoft to push unwanted and distracting software onto consumers. Which is practically the definition of malware. You could add the countless other examples of advertisement and other unwanted behaviour that is not fit for an operating system and you'll find they fit the description of malware. If you happen to disagree then I would like to ask you what fits the description of the candy crush saga on windows really is.
It's whatever Dell and HP preloading McAfee is; which they've been doing in one way or another for decades.
Your argument wasn't really based in reality. Windows didn't have Candy Crush actually installed; it was a shortcut to get it from the store.
And even then, we could rephrase that. Change "candy crush" to "mahjong titans" or "3D pinball" or "minesweeper" or "hover" or "hearts" or "solitaire" or "reversi", all games that were actually installed on a fresh install of Windows instead of just being a link to install it separately. Why aren't you then complaining about Reversi or Hover? Where was the outrage in the 1980s over this? Why is it such a big deal that its "candy crush"?
Microsoft has been bundling in games to its operating systems since 1985. I don't get why people suddenly made a big deal about it when it became a shortcut to Candy Crush.
Lots of these pack-in games were developed by outside studios and were sometimes published by different companies as well, so that it's a King game instead of something developed in-house by Microsoft also doesn't seem different from the past. Microsoft had already included games with social networks and online aspects such as Internet Hearts and Internet Backgammon. Those bundled Internet suite of games even pushed people to make an MSN account.
There was another huge legal issue when microsoft decided to push their own web browser over crome and firefox. The EU decided to rule against microsoft for doing so despite edge and windows both being from the same company. Why? Because windows is an operating system.
>Your argument wasn't really based in reality.
>Why aren't you then complaining about Reversi or Hover?
You're out of your mind. Are you suggesting that my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical? Just because not every infraction gets punished does not mean that no infraction should get punished to remain 'fair'
>Where was the outrage in the 1980s
My age lacked positive digits back then. I guess that's when any criticism failed to achieve merit in your eyes.
Sure, but did you check the "installed size" of the app? 1KB? Really think that game shipped as 1KB? You didn't even bother understanding what happened before you got enraged about it. Nice.
> my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical?
No, just that every version of Windows included games but somehow everyone makes a big deal over Candy Crush as if including a game in Windows is somehow a new thing.
> My age lacked positive digits back then.
Ok then, so you were outraged about Hearts? Space Cadet Pinball? Internet Checkers, pushing MSN accounts on people? Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download Purble Place. Or were you negative digits old when Windows Vista and 7 shipped?
> Are you suggesting that my absence of disagreement with every unknown transgression proves that I'm hypocritical?
I'm arguing your extreme selection of what to be upset about makes you seem either pretty ignorant or hypocritical.
> hostile attempt by microsoft to push unwanted and distracting software onto consumers.
One could argue Solitare was one of the most distracting pieces of software in the 90s. Imagine how many hours people spent playing that and Hearts. People didn't choose to install that, it was "pushed" upon them. Acting like its a new thing with Candy Crush is once again ignoring history.
Replace every instance in your argument of "candy crush" with "solitare" and see what that sounds like. "Who in their right mind would find it acceptable if their program/operating system decided to automatically download solitare. Let that sink in. Either you accept that solitare itself is malware preying on an innocent microsoft or there is a significant and hostile attempt by microsoft to push unwanted and distracting software onto consumers." Someone so angry that Microsoft bothered bundling in a card game in their OS, oh my! A distraction application came bundled into an operating system, dear lord what ever is this world coming to.
>People didn't choose to install that, it was "pushed" upon them
So we're on the same page? Or are you being sarcastic? I'm not sure what your stance is at this point.
Did you also find Windows XP to be malware? Windows 95? Windows 7?
Is Chrome malware because it's got a hidden game Easter egg in it as well?
Is some Linux distro that defaults to having cowsay malware?
There's lots of things Microsoft has started doing in the past few years which can be considered user hostile in certain lights. Having a pack-in game isn't something they only recently started doing though, so yeah I'll continue to consider people making a massive deal about a Candy Crush shortcut as being hyperbolic and ignorant. Acting like distractionware being bundled into Windows as a new thing (or even advertisements for their services or even third party services) is an ignorant position to take.
Now I understand where our miscommunication is coming from. I just want to say that I never held that belief, I never stated that. The various games, third parties, ads and various other tactics fall in line with what's been said to be microsofts overarching theme of extend, embrace, extinguish. You are far more knowledgeable about the history and slippery slope windows is going down. So in that respect, I would agree that I am ignorant. I take no issue to that. Though in my ignorance, I reserve my right to let, an evidently minor issue, be the last drop in the bucket to call windows not just an operating system but also a tool for malicious intent towards the user to extract monetary gain beyond the provision of an abstraction layer for developing the programs we use today.
The only bright side to windows is that we're finally getting a truly dystopian cyberpunk machine that will stop at nothing to control their users while the the common folk are left with no options and no awareness of what those Ghz processors are actually used for. That is true ignorance and I'd hope you can see we're on the same team.
>It's not entirely out of characte
check my username
> a tool for malicious intent
> truly dystopian cyberpunk machine
> claims to not be hyperbolic
Yeah sure friendo.
And they've been 100% correct in doing so since Vista or earlier.
But sure, a loss of support for 7 and 8 indeed doesn't mean much for those of us who've already migrated away from Windows.
- displaying a full screen dialog on login asking me to enable OneDrive with options being: yes/remind me in 3 days/remind me in a week;
- ads in start menu;
- using MS Edge + bing for searches from the start menu, disregarding the default browser;
- ditto but for Outlook links (at least this one can be disabled)!
- different pop up/dialogs that prompt you to switch to Edge/Edge+copilot every few weeks
And yes, some aspects were better in older windows versions. MS itself decided they won't remove the control panel as advertised, because the settings app is just shitty or dysfunctional.
This is beyond the level of shittyness that was Vista or Windows 8.
Besides being extremely opinionated, remember the time Linux users were trying to say this about systemd? Now systemd is widely accepted except for the luddites at Devuan.
> Devuan GNU+Linux is a fork of Debian without systemd that allows users to reclaim control over their system by avoiding unnecessary entanglements and ensuring Init Freedom.
which, okay, points towards that direction but I can't find what they exactly consider "unnecessary entanglements" nor what exactly means "Init Freedom".
I'm genuinely curious, what exactly are people saying about systemd being "malware"?
Some vocal users claimed Systemd was being forced upon them, or was taking over too much of the systems functions, or represented a loss of flexibility or choice, etc. (My opinion isn't relevant to your point.)
No one was claiming it would maliciously interfere with the computer's security or the user's privacy.
Among other things, I'm meaning updates to Win 7 like this one:
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/213183-once-more-with-...
If you really don't want to use Windows 11 (and I don't blame someone for that) Linux and Proton is truly amazing.
Hearing it gets even worse in 11 made me realize I want very badly to get off the dark pattern carousel. I sat down and really evaluated what ties me to windows. Not as much as in the past, it turns out.
Unity/Godot have linux editors. I'll give Rider a try. Krita/Blender have first class linux support.
Of the software I use regularly, the only things that are probably dead in the water are Embergen and Worldmachine. I don't even know if I want to maintain a win10 dual boot or a vm. I'm thinking I'll make a token attempt to get them running in wine, and if there's no play, I'll change my workflow. Both are great software packages, but such is life.
This is always the question when "drops support" comes up: Will users be able to at least stick with the older version of Steam, and just not take updates, or will users get hit with the usual shitty modern software catch 22: You can't use the software because it's not the latest version, and you can't get the latest version.
I hate to say it but I think we really need some kind of basic regulation in this area. Companies should not be able to just decide to remotely stop you from using your software just because they consider it old and icky.
I totally agree, but also disagree.
I worked at a large corporation that designed and built lawn maintenance equipment. It sold both commercial and retail products.
I worked there as a front-end developer. This was in the mid aughts when it had already been 5-6 years since companies had dropped support for it and developers were already migrating to Chrome and Firefox. I was told everything I coded had to have backward compatibility with get this. . . . .IE 6. They said they had several vendors in China and overseas and the only way they could order their stuff was on a site that still worked in IE6. It was more or less just an order form they would print out, fill in, and then fax to our office for fulfillment. It was probably the most mind numbingly stupid experience I was put through and it felt like torture telling your dev friends you're still dealing with having to code stuff for IE6.
So yes, I agree, but we should at least have some kind of limitation on how long a company needs to support their software since it eventually ends up costing the company a lot of time and energy. The company I worked for had spent a lot of money to deal with all the issues associated with supporting IE6. Developer churn was pretty high because devs would get there and think they were having to work at some clown show because this company had made the decision to stick with this very outdated technology.
So yes, I agree we need regulation, but we also need some decent guard rails so what happened to me at the above company doesn't continue to happen.
I used to use the "FlightAware" app on my iPhone to look up information about airplanes, airline flights and stuff. Last "update" they pushed out was a single modal dialog that essentially says "You can no longer use this application on your device. You need to buy a new phone." The software was working perfectly one day, and then bam, sorry not sorry. That's what FlightAware means by dropping support: Pulling the rug out from under existing users who would be happy to just continue using their older version.
I would honestly switch from linux to windows 7 if they provided support.
That said, given the stats I agree with their prioritization. OSX makes up 1.39% of their market share: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Softw...
Linux has a higher market share than OSX (likely due to the Steam deck, but still I was surprised by this).
I actually think this is something Apple should be taking the lead on, rather than Steam. It's clear that they value gaming on their devices, they just invest so little in it. Input latency is still poor and there are still big hiccups in frame rates which make competitive games on OSX a non-starter. If Apple invested more here and partnered with Steam, they could make some significant headways. Apple seems to want to avoid partnership here though (ie the prior vulkan vs metal issues).
It feels sort of crappy that those users are no longer able access the titles they paid to access.
I would say that is a long stretch of support by any measure.
> Service Pack 1 with January 2023 monthly update rollup (6.1.7601.26321) / February 8, 2023; 21 months ago
which isn't super recent but is pretty close.
In my home all the machines are 20+ years old and work perfectly fine (oven, washing machines, vacuum cleaners, irons...) not to mention things that don't need electricity, which are 30 or sometimes more than 80 years old (furniture but also cookware, etc.)
A bike that's 20 years old feels ok and modern; a bike starts to really look ancient at maybe 50 years old? We can still drive cars made in the 80s and 90s (and they're often better than newer ones).
Windows 7 works fine, why should it go to waste, and the machine it run on, and why should people be forced to upgrade and change or abandon all the little customisations they have set up that makes their lives easier? Don't we have better things to do with our time than relearn a new way to do the exact same thing?
I understand the motivation of vendors to try and sell new things; what I don't get is why we put up with it.
If you apply the same test to other things you mentioned then often they are the same. They will continue doing the same job if you want them to, but they won't meet new requirements placed upon them, and the only realistic option is complete replacement.
For instance, cars over 20 years old are no longer allowed in central London because they lack emissions filters for particulates which are hazardous to health in high concentrations. These cars are considered ancient and it's acceptable to ban them from one of the most important cities in the world. They're not better, and in this specific case you literally can't still drive it(if you live London).
My 20 year old DVD player cannot play BluRay discs. It's considered ancient, and it was acceptable to create a new incompatible standard. If I want to play the latest discs I'll have to buy a new one.
My dwelling has no gas supply. I have an induction cooker, which heats far faster than either gas or thermal electric whilst also avoiding the dangers of flame and uncovered heating elements. 80 year old pans would not work with it. They're ancient.
For a ton of people the demands of what they're expecting from their software change pretty radically in 15 years.
These days I'm needing more modern hardware support than what Windows 7 offers. I'm managing Bluetooth devices and swapping audio devices much more often. I'm far more connected than 15 years ago. The security threat landscape is pretty different today than 15 years ago. I'm using much larger screens (and vastly different aspect ratios) than 15 years ago and prefer to use the built-in snap layouts rather than just the basic left/right/center in 7. Dozens of more things that just end up making the experience of going back to 7 pretty painful in the end.
At least Windows 7 could claim that it resolved most of the permissions bugs that came from upgrading security to 1970s standards, so it was actually an upgrade to XP.
Windows 10 released on July 29, 2015 or almost 9.5 years ago.
While I'm sure there are people gaming with Steam on 7/8/8.1, I doubt it's very many (Valve's own statistics I'm sure would support this).
I would also point out that Steam on Linux only officially supports the latest LTS release of Ubuntu, which means they support old versions of Windows far longer. Of course, Ubuntu is free, and the kernel hasn't introduced any draconian hardware restrictions, but I think Valve has done a good job with their Windows support.
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Softw...
Windows 11 64 bit 50.51% +1.26%
Windows 10 64 bit 49.12% -1.13%
Windows 7 64 bit 0.29% -0.03%
Other 0.08% -0.02%I've been playing the new Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered and haven't had any major issues. The only reason I keep Windows around in a dual boot setup is because of Fortnite
I've been running most of my games through Proton, and the experience is flawless. Only game that hasn't worked for me is Rust because of some EAC requirements.
It'd be nice if SteamOS had more recent versions for normal PCs. Arch Linux is sufficient for a developer or power user, but for the average person is too painful.
Debian Stable (most recent update) should be a generally good experience for any PC that ran Windows 7 naively. Though I do worry about some specific hardware, mostly nVidia GPUs retaining support for that long, at least the old drivers will probably work?
95? Pretty ok. Idk, I didn't use it, I just watched my dad install it via like 25 floppy disks so we could play Tom Clancys SSN game. Worth it.
98? Kinda bad. Wasn't this the one to BSOD during the MS demo? Or was that ME?
2000/NT? Good. I know I kinda jumped between desktop and server OS's here, but hey, thats what I was doing with my life at the time.
ME? Bad. Might have BSOD'd during a MS demo.
XP? Good.
2003? Not great. Another server OS, but come on, it really helps the pattern, and what did 2003 bring that we didn't already have in 2000? Plus, 2003 really hated the upgrade path to 2008/R2 so I'm counting it.
Win7? Good.
Win8/8.1? So, very, very bad.
Win10? Good-ish. At least, after like, 12 months of updates and if you tear out all the nonsense ads + fix the start menu.
Win11? Cancer.
Also, you should replace Windows Server 2003 with Windows Vista, as it is generally considered an unmitigated catastrophe.