• Godort@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    It is very reasonable. No one forced Valve to build their business model this way, and they are one of the most profitable companies per employee, ever.

    Literally every software company built their business model this way. Go open a support case with any software vendor complaining that their product won’t run on Windows 98 and see how many help you out beyond “Buy a computer from this millennium”

    It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it.

    You are failing to understand just how much has changed since Windows 98. It’s a completely different environment that requires specialized knowledge to develop for. They can’t just dust off some old source code and re-release the client. The entire back-end has changed. It would be a massive undertaking that would appease about 12 people total.

    Gabe would still be a billionaire.

    Sure, but I would argue that there are a lot of better things that Valve could be doing with those resources than supporting Windows 98

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      The entire back-end has changed.

      Literally. People miss the fact that Steam is still a 32-bit app just to support older games. The rest of the world has moved onto 64-bit operating systems and applications. It’s shocking they still support 32-bit in 2025. So the argument that they aren’t supporting older titles is a little misleading because that’s the whole reason they still run a 32-bit client.

      Most operating systems are no longer even offered in a 32-bit variant, 64-bit only.

      I haven’t had a device with 32-bit hardware in almost 15 years. The last device I can even think of that was still 32-bit within the last 15 years was a Google Nexus 6 in 2014. All the Pixel line have been 64-bit.

      Steam is literally one of the last 32-bit holdouts. Everything else has moved on. Even Discord dropped 32-bit support last year.

      EDIT: Also, for reference, since Windows 98 is heavily mentioned in the arguments, those operating systems included 16-bit code. We’re talking about dropping 32-bit code, 16-bit code is deader than a doornail. Windows 3.11 was the first introduction of 32-bit code. Windows XP seems to be where they dropped all 16-bit code in 2001. We’re talking over 30 years of hardware changes.

      All versions of MS-DOS and the below versions of Windows had 16 bit code:

      MS-DOS (all versions)
      Windows 1.x/2.x/3.x (all versions)
      Windows 4.x or 9x (Windows 95/98/Millennium Edition) (all versions)

      • Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        The steam client has nothing to do with the games it launches.

        Process.Start() works on 32 bit or 64 bit processes…

        They are on 32 bit because they don’t need to upgrade to 64 bit and it’s likely too complex to upgrade.

        Visual Studio, which actually benefits from 64 bit, just recently upgraded because these massive software stacks are difficult to update.

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          They keep a bunch of 32-bit libraries for backwards compatibility with older games that they launch. You can find numerous discussions about this in the Steam forums as well as on sites like Hackernews.

          If you want, I can give it to you from a Valve employee:

          https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/179#issuecomment-267790879

          We will not drop support for the many games that have shipped on Steam with only 32-bit builds, so Steam will continue to deploy a 32-bit execution environment. To that end, it will continue to need some basic 32-bit support from the host distribution (a 32-bit glibc, ELF loader, and OpenGL driver library).

          Whether the Steam client graphical interface component itself gets ported to 64-bit is a different question altogether, and is largely irrelevant as the need for the 32-bit execution environment would still be there because of the many 32-bit games to support.

          Maybe do some cursory research before talking out of your ass.

          • Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            You just proved my point.

            Runtime environment != the steam client.

            Starting a 32 bit process (ie, process.start()) means nothing to the 32 bit steam client.

            They can upgrade the steam client to 64 bit without affecting the launched games. that’s the point I was making.

            They just haven’t.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Literally every software company built their business model this way. Go open a support case with any software vendor complaining that their product won’t run on Windows 98 and see how many help you out beyond “Buy a computer from this millennium”

      No, they didn’t. I can install the software I bought back in the day on the computers I bought it for, using the license key provided. GoG also famously uses a model where GoG does not care what OS you’re using.

      You are failing to understand just how much has changed since Windows 98. It’s a completely different environment that requires specialized knowledge to develop for. They can’t just dust off some old source code and re-release the client. The entire back-end has changed. It would be a massive undertaking that would appease about 12 people total.

      Lol, I’m a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

      Sure, but I would argue that there are a lot of better things that Valve could be doing with those resources than supporting Windows 98

      I don’t care. They have the resources to support it.

      Either strip the DRM out and pay whatever you have to to the publishers to do that, or keep supporting the systems you sold your software for.

      The idea that Valve is blameless for shitty behaviour because other tech companies also do that shitty behaviour is nonsense. They have been the dominant platform forever, and have had an insane amount of resources available to them.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Lol, I’m a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

        Oh, so this whole situation is to a significant degree, your fault.

        =P

      • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Lol, I’m a software developer that started by writing legacy windows software, I know exactly how much (little) has changed.

        It is this perspective that exposes your bias and colors your perception.

        We live in a post-Heartbleed world. We live in a post-UAC world. We constantly find new bugs and vulnerabilities, and they cannot always be patched without massive changes to the architecture. We cannot forever maintain old systems that cultivated bad habits in it’s users.

        Not all change is good, but all change is inevitable.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          No that perspective is what makes me understand that when corporations talk about obsceleting things for security reasons, it’s almost always not actually because of security, because it would be a little less profitable to continue support.

          And Valve didnt have to build a business around always checking in DRM if they didn’t want to support old clients, and they have more than enough resources to continue support.

          • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Can I hold you to the decisions you made 20 years ago? I bought that program you built decades ago, that means I’m entitled to your continued support. And don’t you even think about getting paid, your support should be free. You shouldn’t have built and sold the software if you can’t support it…

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        GoG also famously uses a model where GoG does not care what OS you’re using.

        I could have sworn their model was keeping old games updated to work functionally on newer hardware.

        https://www.gog.com/en/gog-preservation-program

        The GOG Preservation Program ensures classic games remain playable on modern systems, even after their developers stopped supporting them. By maintaining these iconic titles, GOG helps you protect and relive the memories that shaped you, DRM-free and with dedicated tech support.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          Yes, and thats literally completely irrelevant.

          The fact that their games are DRM free means that doesn’t matter one iota. If you buy a game from them on a set of hardware you’ll be able to play it on that hardware forever, regardless of whether their desktop client changes.

          • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            But if they keep it updated for modern systems that means as time goes on the files they are offering to install… won’t work on old hardware because they’ve been updated to the modern era.

            Sure if you grab a file from them and never get a newer, more maintained version, it will play on exactly the hardware and software you had when you bought it… But if you lost the install file somehow and went to grab a new copy five years later the updated ones may no longer run on your old hardware

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Sure if you grab a file from them snd never get a newer, more maintained version, it will play on exactly the hardware and software you had when you bought it…

              That’s literally the entire point.

              Also, they can still offer the olde versions of the file for download.