Steam: alternative installation locations now available

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Steam on C, Counter Strike on C, Skyrim on C, Farcry 3 on D.

That's what's new.

I know what's new ;) I was never discussing that nor saying it isn't a good advancement. I was in a reply chain as to why it took so long.

[spaceelf]

Modern file systems are perfectly capable of handling such data loads. If I want to play any game then I just launch it from Steam and it's up and running - no downloading, no delay.

Yes, however the Master File Table and related bits grow to accommodate the workload and become slower to get what they need. Steam also has to check for updates on that many more titles, and your games and file system data are far less likely to be defragged so I question the 'no delay' part.

As to why what you said fits the definition of 'hoarding' well I'll let you figure that one out. But alas, I'm not actually trying to insult you so do what you will. :) Just weirds me out that people actually do that....much like my friend who rips every DVD he's ever owned even though he'll never actually use 99% of them.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Yes, however the Master File Table and related bits grow to accommodate the workload and become slower to get what they need. Steam also has to check for updates on that many more titles, and your games and file system data are far less likely to be defragged so I question the 'no delay' part.

As to why what you said fits the definition of 'hoarding' well I'll let you figure that one out. But alas, I'm not actually trying to insult you so do what you will. :) Just weirds me out that people actually do that....much like my friend who rips every DVD he's ever owned even though he'll never actually use 99% of them.

Fair enough, but to me the convenience outweighs other concerns and I've never noticed performance issues. Steam handles the number of games installed pretty well - though it's certainly not perfect - and I'll often see 5-10 updates downloading at the same time, which is fine as I have a 40Mbps connection. To put that in perspective, if I wanted to download a game like Max Payne 3 - which is 30GB - I'd have to wait between 1?.5 - 2hrs with my connection. To me that simply isn't convenient.

[redfish]

Would be cool if Microsoft just changed all of their system storage to library-based systems, so you could have an Applications library that aggregated folders from across your hds.

[spaceelf]

Would be cool if Microsoft just changed all of their system storage to library-based systems, so you could have an Applications library that aggregated folders from across your hds.

Well, when using WinRT apps, you've kinda got that already.

Sadly, not many WinRT apps yet.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Would be cool if Microsoft just changed all of their system storage to library-based systems, so you could have an Applications library that aggregated folders from across your hds.

Indeed. The trouble is that a lot of advanced users are more comfortable knowing the physical locations of their data, while casual users aren't informed enough to properly utilise such a system. It's one of the reasons the Library functionality introduced in Windows 7 hasn't really taken off. I consider Storage Spaces to be the better technology and that should be enabled by default, as that would protect against the failure of any single drive and it allows multiple hard-drives to appear as a single drive in Explorer.

Well, when using WinRT apps, you've kinda got that already.

Sadly, not many WinRT apps yet.

The trouble with WinRT apps is that the are hugely limited in terms of functionality and there is also a requirement to distribute them through the Windows Store, which means giving 30% of revenue to Microsoft. That's not an issue for mobile-style app markets but it's bad for the traditional PC software market, which is used to being open and flexible. For WinRT apps to take off Microsoft is going to have to expand the APIs considerably - including a 'full power' mode for desktop systems so that unlimited numbers of apps can run in the background - and allow for software to be distributed through third-party app stores (? la Android).

[spaceelf]

The trouble with WinRT apps is that the are hugely limited in terms of functionality

How are they limited in functionality? They're no more limited in functionality than Win32 apps are.

The current crop may not be all that impressive but that has nothing to do with WinRTs capabilities.

[theyarecomingforyou]

How are they limited in functionality? They're no more limited in functionality than Win32 apps are.

They are limited in how they can run in the background, in how they can access the filesystem, in how they share data with other applications, in screen dimensions, etc. The platform offers some advantages but Win32 apps are more powerful and less restricted.

[spaceelf]

They are limited in how they can run in the background, in how they can access the filesystem, in how they share data with other applications, in screen dimensions, etc. The platform offers some advantages but Win32 apps are more powerful and less restricted.

They are certainly restricted, but none of that makes them any less powerful, especially considering the enhanced programming languages available in WinRT. Your average win32 app in use today doesn't even use the capabilities Windows has had available for years.

[theyarecomingforyou]

How are they limited in functionality? They're no more limited in functionality than Win32 apps are.

They are certainly restricted, but none of that makes them any less powerful

Does. Not. Compute.

But seriously, there are lot of restrictions and limitations surrounding WinRT apps as they currently stand. For starters, the inability to run in a window is pretty significant as it means applications can't be spanned across multiple displays; it's also not possible to run more than two WinRT apps simultaneously and then one would have to be side-snapped, which is limited to 320px in width. The WinRT ecosystem will continue to expand and evolve but it is not a replacement to Win32 as it stands because of the aforementioned limitations.

[Crisp]

YES!!!

[spaceelf]

Does. Not. Compute.

But seriously, there are lot of restrictions and limitations surrounding WinRT apps as they currently stand. For starters, the inability to run in a window is pretty significant as it means applications can't be spanned across multiple displays; it's also not possible to run more than two WinRT apps simultaneously and then one would have to be side-snapped, which is limited to 320px in width. The WinRT ecosystem will continue to expand and evolve but it is not a replacement to Win32 as it stands because of the aforementioned limitations.

If you really want to get into semantics...

WinRT apps still require Win32 code as I understand it, so no, it certainly isn't a full replacement yet and I wouldn't recommend everyone switch to it (especially before MS adds an installer for them outside of the Store) but otherwise we're just arguing because we disagree on some minor details heh.

So I'm done now, at any rate.

Back to Steam, it seems weird it took them this long to allow this. About damn time, at any rate.