Skrzeczek: I don’t use GOG Galaxy anymore because it no longer works on Windows 7. I also don’t use Windows 10 regularly, even though I have it installed. My daily systems are Windows 7 and Linux (specifically Kubuntu), where Galaxy doesn’t work either. This means I have no way to monitor installer updates — if GOG makes changes, I find out after the fact, if at all. I have no way to back up the version that worked on my system, and that makes it hard for me to protect my purchases. That’s what worries me.
Hi, just a note under the assumption that you are unaware. Like stated in post #29 above mine, there are possible alternative clients or feasible workarounds, so here is another for your consideration. If you insist on wishing to use GOG Galaxy and should it be to your liking, you could manually install an older version that still functions on Windows 7. It may not have all features when compared to the most recent version and some functionality may not work (i.e. achievements), but perhaps it will suit your needs.
For instance:
-
1.2.67.58 (associated post);
-or
2.0.42.21 (associated post.) p.s. sorry for the awkward formatting, this seemed to be the easiest to get this forum to comply.
toroca: TL;DR - This is a very long post. I am well aware that I tend to be long-winded (especially when I'm replying to multiple people), but if you can't be bothered to extend me the courtesy of reading and considering my thoughts on this topic even if we disagree, then I'm not interested in reading and considering yours, either. ;)
Thanks for the TL;DR. But I must say, most venerable of fellows... you didn't utilise it to summarise your position, so I still have to read the whole bloody thing! Thankfully, it isn't that long.
Timboli: I'd love for GOG to provide access to an archive of old versions, but in reality it is no doubt tricky.
Some seem to be making assumptions about how well off GOG are. There are telltale signs that they haven't been doing all that well ... cuts to cloud services, slow download speeds for many, offline installers taking a back seat, etc, etc. Big promotions recently, that should have been done years ago. There seems to be a smell of desperation in the air.
toroca: I've been in agreement with you on many issues, but here we diverge. :) What we're asking for is something that
already exists, unless GOG has deleted the older files in question. Which I doubt. The only new thing being asked for is ACCESS. Not support for these files, not continuation of development of them. Just access.
As you have stated above, to a certain and very unsatisfactory degree (specially from your position), this is a service which GOG currently offers; so access is probably the more correct term. There would be an amount of labour involved in producing the required installers, hosting the files on the appropriate server, classifying them, maintaining them, and what have you. Judging by your lamentations this would suit you splendidly, but whether or not its worthwhile or if GOG can be bothered... eh.
If GOG still retain and could reasonable grant public access to these files without additional prohibitive costs... my instinctual and therefore likely flawed thought is simply that they should. Supposing it is as you have outlined and a small percentage of GOG (potential) users, say ~3-5%, use something other than Windows 10/11. Would that not allow GOG, if it were at little to no expense, to have the ability to more effectively retain these customers' loyalty; where prior they were unable due to the uncertainty of not offering this? But perhaps there are still better options on the table for customer acquisition and retention for GOG at this juncture.
