Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文（簡体字中国語）
繁體中文（繁体字中国語）
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština（チェコ語）
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia（インドネシア語）
Magyar（ハンガリー語）
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português（ポルトガル語－ポルトガル）
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română（ルーマニア語）
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
ルールとガイドライン
この投稿を報告する
Been suggested numerous times and the answer doesn't change. The odds of steam maintaning multiple browsers just because some people don't like how it looks is basically 0.
It had things like:
* List View, which had a spreadsheet-like interface that allowed for high information density (displaying metadata related to one's games) and also very easy sorting.
* No absolute need for images to be loaded as part of a fully-functioning library view. List View even be made into an interface that only required plaintext, thus obviating any loading of images. Unlike the current UI, which just has to load images (aside from Small Mode, which lacks a variety of options/features).
* Grid View, which used the landscape-style game art rather than shoehorning landscape-style banners into portrait-style frames (or depending on needing game devs/pubs to make new art), and which were able to display game names in plaintext if they didn't load.
* No need for browser rendering, which is less efficient.
* No need to wait for things to load, and as a result, less choppy scrolling.
* Significantly better keyboard navigability, with less need for hitting Tab like twenty times to get anywhere, and for that matter, even the ability to launch games by pressing enter.
* Better compatibility with Steam skins. (To be fair, it was already pretty bad, but that's not a reason to make it worse.)
Heck, it even had an easy display of Steam Cloud availability and status...which this new UI only very belatedly (very recently) added.
Frankly, Steam prided itself on offering convenience to consumers, and that's what gave it its initial success, but at this point it's a liability for me to get games on Steam since I have to put up with the Steam client in order to access them.
And, for those of you who've been here for a while and have seen me comment on this before, yes, I still haven't bought anything on Steam since October 2019. I've also used Steam itself a lot less, because it's just more of a pain to use now. If and when Valve improves the Steam client's interface, I may reconsider.
Not so much a "policy" as much as "they just didn't bother". And "they've never done it before" is not itself a reason to not start doing something; everything that they did for the first time was something they'd never done before.
They shouldn't have developed the new one in the first place; that was their mistake. They should have stuck with improving the old one. The old one wasn't perfect, but it was a hell of a lot better.
I've mentioned stuff like adding more column options to List View, like achievement progress and friends playing and even badge progress, along with separating out size on disk from drive letter as two separate columns. And they could add a portrait option to Grid View, if they want to offer game devs a way to show off their portrait-style cover art. There are many improvements possible for the old UI, without needing to scrap it altogether.
I know some people like the new UI, so that's why it should be an option to use the old one -- ideally an improved version of the old one, which uses the same architecture rather than just relying on browser-rendering to do all this stuff.
It lags on a 11700 with a 3070ti on an M.2. Can play games butter smooth on ultra, yet the library lags behind the mouse.
In your opinion. No UI or system is perfect. Which one is better is subjective.
Users opinions make up a huge spectrum and everyone is convinced they know best. I'm pretty tolerant of changes. They're going to happen. Things will be different and that's OK. I can still launch and shop for games very similarly to what I've always done and that's good enough for me.
Again, managing two different versions of the UI is not something many businesses are keen on doing. I mean mobile and desktop is bad enough. But having everyone's favorite legacy UI (and apparently, implementation too) be maintained indefinitely is a bit silly. Wishful thinking even. But the heart wants what the heart wants. And you don't have to do the work, so it's a simple request for you.
More importantly, any security vulnerabilities that they do have are solvable problems, if someone were to go solve them.
If Valve doesn't want to work on it anymore, it could make the old client (or at least its Library interface) open-source, so other people can work on it.
And that's why I said that the older-style structure should be offered as an option. So you don't have to use it if you don't want to.
Valve made the big switch to a new UI codebase and so it's on them. They didn't need to do this.
Also, like I said, Valve could release the source code for it so that other people can work on it, if they don't want to work on it anymore.
No issues lagging here on a 1070, so might not be an issue with the store as much as your rig....
Yeah you've never worked in IT that is for sure. Can tell you no company in the world wants to expose their databases to numerous vulnerabilities connecting to old unpatched software........
No one is solving them, hence the why its based on old DISCONTINUED technology. You do grasp that discontinued means the developer aka the one able to solve them is no longer solving them and is only providing security fixes for their UPDATED software, the one that valve is now using........
Yes, i'm sure Valve is going to run and make their software that connects to their internal servers that store all their data OPEN SOURCED so every hacker in the world can get a heads up breaching their security
Yes, people were complaining about the archaic old fashioned look of the old UI that looked like something out of DOS. So they upgraded it and a miniscule fraction of people don't like it, and Valve continues to get record breaking numbers of users using their site, while those who whine about every change will always continue to do so.
Seems like they made the right call by ignoring those who would still have Steam looking like a dos program
If you actually read update notes on Steam you'll notice that the vast majority of issues are not security-related.
Here's the update notes page, for your and everyone else's convenience: https://store.steampowered.com/oldnews/?feed=steam_client
Doesn't have to be all of it. Just has to be the part that's the user interface. You do realize that software can have different and separable functional parts, right? Or have you really never worked with software before?
Are you one of those people who think that the old interface looks like a DOS program?
Well, it doesn't look like a DOS program. Not at all. Unless you think the ability to display a bunch of metadata in a plaintext table is "looks like DOS".
Not to mention, what exactly is wrong with it even if it does look like a DOS program? Nothing.
Oh, also, the number of people "complaining about the archaic old fashioned look of the old UI that looked like something out of DOS" was also minuscule.
Anyways OP, you don't like it, hate to break it to you but plenty of others do, many of the updates to it such as dynamic collections are incredibly popular. So time to suck it up and get used to it because its not going anywhere.
And either you haven't either or you're the kind of person in IT for whom the 10 years of experience means repeating the first year 10 times over.
You never directly connected the client to the database. Ever.
Because that would require the client to know the database credentials.
And that means the credentials, no matter how securely protected, could be exfiltrated and be used by malicious actors to set up their own connection to the database.
Connections to databases should always flow through some kind of middleware that limits the operations possible on the database to a few precooked scenarios catered to what an application needs. The modern-day version of that is a thin-layer web API, which would ideally be communicating in either JSON or GRPC protocol buffers but could also still be using something bloated like XML, I suppose.
Regardless: the client should be connecting to such an API which should already sanitize input and limit possible query scenarios, and leave the database itself unreachable by direct means; protected; and out of harm's way.
And whether you use an old full-of-holes client or a modern patched-shut client matters not to the security of that API. If it's publicly reachable over the internet; it needs to be secure against all possible clients connecting to it. Never trust the client.
I found one that said they’d “rather scoop my eyes out with a spoon than use vgui again”
https://twitter.com/GranPC/status/1486297899587751939?s=20
Which was suitably graphic enough to make the point. It’s going because it’s a dead-end technology that everyone hates to work with.
They’re not going to open-source the full Steam client, just not gonna happen. They could, theoretically, open source just the UI with that talking to the core client over an API of some kind, which I believe is more-or-less how Steam is actually architected.
But expanding the API surface area you expose is a gigantic pain, at least if you give even a tiny ♥♥♥♥ about not causing churn for the people consuming your API. And neatly breaking Steam in half like that would undoubtedly be a huge amount of work. I’d be really surprised if it ever happens. But I’ve been wrong before; my guess was that they’d replace VGUI with Panorama from Big Picture Mode.
Anyway, it does seem reasonable to me to bring back something like the old list view in the new UI, though.