They won't make more money by making 64-bit client.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not like it's hard to simply compile for x64 instead of x86...
Comment has been collapsed.
why have a x64 when some people are still on x86 and x64 emulates x86? they may switch only when x86 no longer exists.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, it's not a big problem. But on Linux it's already 64 bit, since it doesn't have the winWOW64
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't think its necessary, nor would it change anything since the steam program runs perfectly fine for its limited use.
Still, the prog. itself is kinda useless for most of my applications - therefore: steam-app < browser/chrome+steam addons.
The only thing i use it for is > start a game, run it for idle-master, run it to view notifications, see the tags in friendlist ...
since they don't show in ones browser, run it to evade steam in firefox which is miserable for steam loaded with
addons, bookmarks + esp. inventory.
http://www.howtogeek.com/194119/why-are-most-programs-still-32-bit-on-a-64-bit-version-of-windows/
Comment has been collapsed.
It runs perfectly fine? It's the slowest launching/loading application on my entire computer. I highly disagree that it runs perfectly fine. They need to do some optimizations of some kind.
Comment has been collapsed.
It runs fine for me. The problem with the client is that it uses an internet connection. So if you have a shit connection, steam will run shit.
Comment has been collapsed.
I doubt my 92mb connection is what is considered "shit". Steam has ALWAYS been slow for me ever since I was a kid no matter whose computer/connection I used. Slower than internet explorer.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm, I guess I got lucky then. It probably depends from machine to machine how it will run. Games also have that issue. Some monster pc's can run some games just terrible, while other lesser pc's run it just fine. They probably haven't fully optimized it for your pc.
Comment has been collapsed.
But I've had this issue across 4 or 5 of my own PCs, and 2 of my friends' PCs. All with differing brands and manufacturers for parts and different internet connections. So it is hard for me to believe that it loads at a modern speed for anyone with that evidence. I'd actually have to see it with my eyes to believe it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Try to use it in offline mode, and you'll see )
Mine is much faster in offline
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes I have noticed that. Since it never has to update anything and I am never accessing the store It runs much faster. But it doesn't make sense that every time it has to load new information it takes longer than IE takes for me. If GoG, Origin, Uplay, and Desura can load things near-instantly for me, then why is steam so slow when connected to the Internet?
Comment has been collapsed.
It used to be slow for me (huge library) until the... "reduced startup time with huge library" changelog entry. :D Now it's fairly fast. Maybe the fix/improvement is still in beta?
Comment has been collapsed.
that's when you log-in - your connection won't change a thing when its on their side,
and steam checks a thousand times for updates while doing so ... it even gets stuck
regularly while checking when for updates > once its up and running its perfectly fine ...
Comment has been collapsed.
I was including when it was up and running. It never runs perfectly fine for me or anyone I game with. Always slow.
Comment has been collapsed.
thats weird ... but "perfectly fine or not" isn't exactly a scale one can measure the use of the app objectively
what i'm referring to is browsing your own inventory loaded with items or market place with 1500+ listings/market history,
setting buy orders and stuff, viewing the store/friend-list/community/viewing your games/starting one < works more than
fine as i know how fast it is with chrome
using win7-64b, a hdd + ssd myself / steam is not even on the ssd nor the games are on the ssd
Comment has been collapsed.
It should be 64-bit because there is a security hole in 32-bit interpreter in all x64 Windows versions. So you can attack the user via 32bit applications: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/03/32bit_software_to_beat_emet/
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, yeah, we should have a x64 client, but this is not a reasonable reason for them to do it, If anyone's fault, it is microsoft's fault.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a valid reason, because more security aware users try to use only pure 64-bit applications. Microsoft allowed this because people need backward compatibility - for example there is no x64 STEAM client, so the 64-bit OS would be unusable to gamers and so on. Valve could easily use the 64-bit Chromium fork and update their client, but they didn't for some strange reason.
The problem with this WoW64 security hole is complex and will be problematic to fix. In my opinion they will never patch it, because the "older" apps would not work anymore, and that would be disastrous to many end users. Probably 80% of the popular software would be unusable. People don't like changes, but also many developers don't have resources to rewrite their code or the application is entirely abandoned by them.
Comment has been collapsed.
As the Client is a very simple game-launcher with a integrated browser and a very low ram-usage, there is not really a high demand on a 64-bit version. but maybe they should upgrade their servers to 64 bit....cause those at least still feel like something form the 90th :P
Comment has been collapsed.
maybe it would help a bit.....when i need to do a lot of search on market, it is faster to use internet browser than a steam desktop client
Comment has been collapsed.
every browser is faster than the steam client.....but if they would just use the same design in a 64-bit code it would not change. A new client with better features, more optimized is a different case...but even then it does not matter 32 or 64
Comment has been collapsed.
What makes you think making the client 64-bit makes it better ?
It won't magically make things perform better. Main benefit of going 64-bit is to make it possible to use larger amounts of memory (over 2gb), but Steam client shouldn't need that much to begin with - If it does, it's because the devs behind it are incompenent fools who don't know how to manage memory usage and/or plug memory leaks.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, as people have said, I don't feel the pressing need for this even though I've been exclusively on 64-bit machines for years now. If there's not the demand, Steam's unlikely to dedicate the effort. Offhand I can think of five or six improvements that I'd rather see (most of which would also be easier to code): more customization UI for game launcher and folders to organize my wishlist come to mind.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd rather see them use 64-bit servers so they don't crap out as often.
Comment has been collapsed.
64-bit client? I'm sorry I'm really bad with computers so could someone explain this?
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok so after taking a quick look at that wiki page you gave me I do have one last question...
What would change if valve made the 64 bit steam (I am assuming the current steam is 32 bit)? Just better processing?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure exactly, but I don't think it will make a huge difference. The speed on which steam runs also depends on your internet speed, since it uses a connection. And I doubt steam uses enough memory to make a noticable difference. Maybe if you are doing a lot at the same time it might be faster, but then you'll need to run enough to take up most of your memory (which also decreases the speed a lot).
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok I think I kind of get the difference between 32 and 64 bit a little bit better now lol so thanks!
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem! I know computer related stuff can be hard to understand, so I'm glad to help. (even learned stuff myself)
Comment has been collapsed.
I think, they have 64 bit overlay executable so it could work with 64 bit games.
Also, they tried once make Half-life 2 native 64 bit and it didn't work out, so they discontinued it.
Comment has been collapsed.
You thinking right, but I guess Valve need just optimise it. Very optimise. Never liked client - looks like sh*t (tnx for custom skins), run very bad (use 100% of my old HDD for over 2 min every time I launch it and all other program worked bad or stoped working, coz client overload my hard drive) and working unstable (I tired when this WebHelper crashing). I checked how many files client have in folder and... I was shocked!!! Over 18k files!!! And its without SteamApps folder. Volvo, are you kidding me??? Bad architecture, I guess its from far 90's, lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
2016 here already and I need be thankful for non optimise old code? No tnx
Comment has been collapsed.
Was referring to "looks like sh*t" not how it runs.
I agree that there's probably quite a lot they could do on the performance front.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ahh, oke than. I always use PixelVison2 skin, didnt like standart skin.
Comment has been collapsed.
What custom skin do you have? I have an ssd too but yeah Steam just feels sluggish compared to other programs. Is that due to it being 32 bit?
Comment has been collapsed.
it's not due to it being 32 bit. 64 bit on windows only helps over 32 bit when you're doing a lot of math or you need a lot of memory for that one application. the steam client usually uses less that 100 MB RAM for me. it might help in-home streaming to encode a little faster if it was 64-bit, but most likely the network is the slowest part there anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you for explaining that so well, I feel enlightened :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't care for 64 bit. What they should really add is tabs.
Comment has been collapsed.
The same reason Dota 2 has a 64-bit version but no option to launch it unless you open it manually from the folder. With other words- I dunno. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Because Valve never finishes anything. Why is there no mobile authentication app for Windows Phone?
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly am curious: why would you want or need a 64 bit client?
or putting it differently: what do you think you would gain from it?
Cause realistically it wouldn't really give much if any worthwhile improvement if they made it.
Which means it's a waste of time and better spent on improving the client in stability, optimization and extended functionality.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because 64-bit client would have no advantages.
64-bit applications are not faster.
64-bit applications require more memory.
64-bit applications can address more memory.
As you can see, there is only ONE advantage of 64-bit apps. And that's what steam does not need - It never have lack of memory itself.
That's why.
Comment has been collapsed.
64-bit applications (in case of x86_64) also have access to double the amount of registers. This can make compute-heavy application, like image processing, a good bit faster. This would probably do nothing for the Steam client though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam client only like what? 100 MB per instance? It doesn't need 64 bit version.
People are typing 64 bit like pro when they know nothing about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It would be nice, but I'd imagine it's low on their long list of priorities. The priorities that lead to more money, directly or indirectly, are more valuable. A 64 bit client won't affect profit, but it's a nice quality of life improvement for the consumer. I'm certain we will see it eventually.
Comment has been collapsed.
As others have said, a 64-bit Steam client wouldn't provide any advantages.
They could simply streamline the app to make it "faster" if they wanted.
I'd much rather they use their resources on more, faster, and more reliable servers.
Comment has been collapsed.
I figured there would be advantages as steam adds more features to steam. I'm not a computer science guy, but would in-home streaming or broadcasting not benefit from more memory in certain scenarios? I'd agree that as a game launcher and store browser it doesn't seem to have much merit though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Streaming uses your system RAM and VRAM, and a compression algorithm (which uses your CPU and RAM). It shouldn't increase Steam's RAM usage much at all, and definitely not beyond 2GB anyway. You'd max any internet connection out before it would increase Steam's RAM footprint to any great degree.
Obviously it couldn't hurt to have a 64-bit Steam, but it wouldn't be much (if any) improvement over 32 bit Steam.
Faster and more responsive servers would be the best bet to improve Steam's end-user experience (as well as possibly stream-lining the client some). The connection between your PC and Steam's servers are more often than not the real bottleneck.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes they really need to do improvements to their servers. That would probably have the most impact on the client's performance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Really given what it is for,i see no real use for 64bit but i suppose that does not change the fact it most likely not hard to update it to X64...
Though what kind of speed boost it would get is a toss up though i do not see a huge boost but one never knows.But i did see someone saying it is the slowest app they have...though not sure why given my connection sucks and is slow and i still load Steam just as fast as i did when i was on a faster connection so i guess that is a mystery....
Also i must add there more to how good your internet is then just by how fast the speed is...there are other factors then can play a role in speed,so i laugh at those that say my internet is such and such speed so my internet is not the issue lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hello!
Maybe someone has an idea. Or even better, an official Valve statement. Although I'm using a custom skin which is a bit faster (As well as my SSD), I still miss 64-bit awesomeness.
What do you guys think?
Comment has been collapsed.