Hopefully?!?
As long as 32-bit games maintain good compatibility, I see no problem with this.
I don’t get the hopefully Linux follows statement. I assume it is just for the client? Linux should support everything it can.
I’d prefer if the Steam app uses the 64 bit libraries so I don’t have to install a bunch of 32 bit dependencies too.
Me too. It’s ridiculous they haven’t updated their client.
It’s Steam who supports these things. It costs money to support anything. Do you want that cost added to your game price?
This is a ridiculous argument. Steam isn’t supporting the 32-bit libraries. It’s done through repositories that are maintained to ensure legacy compatibility which is one of the strengths of Linux. There’s no impact on the cost of games.
I wonder if this will cause further drama with that one guy that was mad that Steam no longer supports Win98
Did steam ever support Windows 98?
It sure did. Back in 2003 when it was released.
Well, as the good old wisdom would say: fuck them.
The fediverse is opinionated.
TIL: Steam has 32-bit support.
Not support, on Linux 32-bit is a requirement. Creates a huge problem since it forces distros to still ship 32-bit dependencies to make sure steam can run.
Can’t the dependencies just be installed with the steam client? Yes, it’s ridiculous that steam isn’t 64-bit, but I don’t see the huge problem programs with having 32-bit dependencies. Am I missing something?
Steam doesn’t have the 32-bit library files you need. Every system is different.
Finding 32 bit libraries hasn’t been a problem with any package manager I’ve ever used in Linux for a long time. This isn’t a problem for any modern distribution.
It’s not a problem for users, it is a problem for maintainers: https://www.howtogeek.com/fedora-44-will-not-lose-32-bit-software/
Nowadays there is basically no reason for mainstream distros to have to maintain 32-bit libraries and dependencies… Except steam.
If Linux isn’t still supporting 16-bit, there’s a problem.
Right? If my 8086 can’t run it, I don’t want it. Smh
16-bit computers died off before Linux was even a thing.
why dont they make a steam legacy client for 32bit win7?
nevermind, it would require actuall work
Wah, this company isn’t willing to spend time and money supporting my OS that’s been EOL for over 5 years
Obviously official support for Win 7 is long dead but Steam still runs without issue on 64 bit Windows 7 to this day. What device are you running Windows 7 32 bit on?
Actually it was because of the chromium browser integrated into steam under the hood - it was no longer updated for win7.
Same reason XP got discontinued before that.
and this was totally important, and wasnt possible on some legacy firefox engine. what a load of horseshit. and of course they fucked up steam skin support as well.
So you’re telling me that Valve should create a new branch of the existing steam client using an alternative browser engine explicitly due to dropped support on a platform that (I would argue) less than a fraction of a percent would use in 2025 and beyond? Along with maintenance, security patches (on an OS that will never receive any new official patches for current vulnerabilities) and feature parity for at least the steam library?
If you’re that dependent on hardware/software combinations so far removed from the current development status quo, you should have the technical expertise to install DRM-free games on your obsolete OS that should never be online anyway.
I don’t think anyone at the company nor customers with even a modicum of understanding of software maintenance would endorse that. It would be a gross waste of engineering time and resources. Hell, explaining this to you in such detail should be lesson enough on why software companies filter user suggestions.
