dont come here complaining then that software wont be compatible anymore with outdated systems. you chose to live with that

I'm not complaining, it's compatible and it works so it's all ok ;)

Not like trying to run some older games on Win 10, which it is impossible. I'm here because i like older games, so i think that it's coherent what we say, then.

I also like to fully control my own system instead of letting MS to control it and to tell me what's better to me, changing it from one patch to another, breaking or removing something in the process or forcing me to do something different. No, thanks, that's my reason and my decision, indeed.

If GOG can mantein the compatibility, even unofficially, because there's still a good part of the community that uses Win7, why is that a problem to you? You also seem to have the need of telling others that they should change their system, and why. I'm not arguing with you because you have Win10 installed, i think that OS is trash and i try you to roll back to a better and free system, right?

Come on, let's just agree to disagree here :)

I'm going to agree with Bustacap that the paranoia gets annoying.

It'd be one thing if you were sticking with Win 7 because your PC is too old and you can't buy a new one. That would be a reasonable issue.

But there is literally nothing on your PC that MS can potentially access that can be used to harm you in any way unless maybe if you're a criminal or a government dissident. And if either of those things were the case, you wouldn't be using something like GOG anyway versus sticking to a Tor browser and the dark web.

Otherwise, you're basically operating like you feel you're so incredibly important that the people at MS are going to single you out alone for attention out of millions of users just for kicks and giggles. To which I have to reluctantly inform you: You're not.

As i said, there are other reasons apart from those 2 you mentioned. Also, you are using the same arguments some people used to defend a developer that puts things like Red Shell on their software: "But i have nothing to hide so, what's the problem?"

The only other problem you mentioned is older games, and older games that don't run on Win 10 almost always don't run on Win 7 either, so Win 7 won't help you there.

Incorrect analogy. Red Shell's problem was that it was tracking data that was completely irrelevant to actual game performance. In contrast, the anonymous data sent by Windows is useful for helping Microsoft actually work on Windows.

In this case, that literally is the situation: You don't have anything to hide, so you don't have a problem.

Basically, the level of hoops needed to attach the anonymized data to your identity would be significant, so nobody is going to bother unless you've given someone an overwhelming need to know everything you specifically are doing. And if that's the case, then posting here on this forum is just as much of a risk to you.

Since the hard reality for better or worse is that privacy in the modern era is mostly an all or nothing deal. You either have to take steps to essentially retcon your entire existence and work in the shadows, or you do your best to avoid the stuff that would make it easy to moderately possible to hurt you and accept that most people are not important enough for someone to take the hard way to hurt you.

Especially in this situation where removing the tiny risk of loss of privacy opens you up to the much greater risk of security and malware snafus that will no longer be patched, so the tradeoff just isn't worth it. You'd be best off jumping ship to Linux if you truly don't want to run Win10.

And in the long run the better prep work if you're truly concerned is instead assuming that you will get got at some point and limiting how much damage getting got would cost you. Since doing this selective thing of railing at Windows yet still doing things like running gaming platform software and posting on a forum which share other types of data about you anyway, unfortunately doesn't accomplish anything except giving you false reassurance.

I don't think people realize just how much data we get sent about ourselves nowadays by basically everything. Correctly erasing yourself and keeping yourself retgone is practically a full time job where you accept the removal of large swaths of comfortable living because the consequences of the loss of privacy would be even worse. It's not something you can accomplish just by avoiding a handful of sites or programs and calling it a day.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that there's a large contingent of gamers on GOG who still use Windows 7 (myself included) for multiple reasons. GOG should maintain support for these gamers, especially considering that GOG was initially developed as "Good Old Games" with the entire idea being access to older games, and supporting older gamers with older systems.

I wouldn't even be all that upset if there was a decent way to download games through the browser (never liked downloading with Galaxy as my DL speed was always super-slow through it but super-fast anywhere else) without having to click on a million individual download files. Maybe if they split the downloads into two or maybe three files, but some games have a ton and that requires babysitting the download.

As I noted to the other person, while I sympathize with those who genuinely have outdated PCs and struggle with getting older games to run, you're better off installing Linux on the older PCs, and unfortunately Windows 7 generally is equally finicky with older games so you'd need a Win98 box specifically for that.

But in no case is continuing to run a non-supported OS on a modern PC you use for general purposes a good idea. For the vast majority of people the security and malware risks are far worse than any potential privacy ding, is what my essay basically boils down to.

That's also why it'd be difficult for GOG to keep supporting Win7, because it would mean maintaining and developing a test environment that is receiving no security patches or bug fixes and has no official development support. It seems like it would therefore be a logistical nightmare.

This I agree seems like an entirely reasonable request. I admit I've never understood why they split the games since there doesn't seem to be any real rhyme or reason to the resulting filesizes of each portion.

Ok, but how i can disable client update to 2.0 popup, because it is too stupid to detect system version that is installed on... I don't see it in options...

? Today i've launch client and guess what, it upgraded? So i guess, that there is no support on Windows 7, but it works on Windows 7 just fine?.

Here's the thing: it works on Windows 7 for the moment, but there's no support for Windows 7 users. So if a future update to Galaxy 2.0 ends up breaking compatibility or otherwise renders Galaxy 2.0 useless, GOG won't offer any assistance.

By forcing the new client on Windows 7 users, GOG is at least ethically bound to maintain the compatibility to that OS far longer than the eventual day when they pull the plug on the old client entirely by changing their server side security/database format/etc to something that no longer works with it.

So once again GOG shows now competence at properly planning ahead on how to minimize the backlash from their "Good news everyone!" announcements and other changes to their service as leaving the only option to install the new client to Windows 7 be the "extract the contents of the installer to bypass the OS check" trick would have been a much cleaner way to eventually end the support for the old client and Windows 7.

i don't understand why you can't just have the option of keeping the old version understanding no support will be present other than downloading.

It is truly ironic, because original goal of gog store was to fix old games being incompatible with modern operating systems ...

Yes, and now 7 is not a modern operating system. It was released 11(!) years ago.
Supporting old games is one thing, but supporting old systems is another.

I completely agree. None of this would've even been an issue if they'd just kept the Downloader.