| ▲ | dmix 5 hours ago |
| > A faster startup is certainly appreciated, but steam's 10 second cold launch time is hardly a big deal. When I hear about a game on social media I often want to add it to a wishlist on Steam but I dread opening the app because I know it will take forever to open on MacOS. I don't mind a game launcher taking time, but the store is a part of that which makes it annoying I avoid the native app for that reason. |
|
| ▲ | a1o 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| It’s been a little while since I used Steam but you used to be able to do that from their own website, I think it was store.steampowered.com (I am guessing the website from memory). My game PC wasn’t my main PC so I didn’t even had Steam on that pc and it was what I used to buy the games - don’t really remember if I wishlist too because I use bookmarks in web browsers and folders for the bookmarks. |
|
| ▲ | Gigachad an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The Steam client on macos is the slowest program I've used. I just uninstalled it and use the browser for store/community pages because the steam client is unusable. I get people hate Epic, but the Steam client is not particularly well made or snappy. And I'd love to see competition kick their asses in to improving it. |
|
| ▲ | Sharlin 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| A launcher is a parasite mostly used to collect stats. Having it take five seconds before you even get to the point of actually starting to load your game is preposterous. Whereas who cares if it takes five seconds for a store to load? At least I play games more often than buy new ones. |
|
| ▲ | kllrnohj 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't have a MacOS comparison point, but steam for me is pretty equivalent to the numbers in the article. ~10 seconds for a cold start, half a second for a warm start. Unless you have a very different definition of "take forever"? What are you seeing on MacOS? |
| |
| ▲ | dmix 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | I tested the latest Steam build on MacOS and it took 7 seconds to load on an M4 Max and I had to close a popup when it opened. In the web world and 7-10 seconds for a pageload is forever. Same with mobile, if you tapped an app icon and it loaded that slow it would never be tolerated. | | |
| ▲ | crtasm 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Thankfully you can turn off that news popup in the settings. | |
| ▲ | the_af 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > In the web world and 7-10 seconds for a pageload is forever. But a game client is not a web page. You open it once (some people, on boot) and then it's just sitting there. You don't randomly start it from scratch whenever you run a game... And even if you did, 7-10 seconds waiting for a game to start is not the same as waiting for a page to load. You can wait for the game. | |
| ▲ | sleepybrett 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | m5pro 64gb, 3s to get to the first 'loading window', 5s to get to the store page. But honestly who gives a shit. If you are the average working joe who comes home from work and fires up the pc to play a game, a 5s load of steam is not even a piece of gravel in the road let alone a speed bump. It's not like i'm opening and closing steam 100, 50 or even 5 times a day. It's a useless metric. | | |
| ▲ | dmix 37 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Standards are so low these days. > If you are the average working joe who comes home from work and fires up the pc to play a game My usecase was wanting to add a game to a wishlist > It's not like i'm opening and closing steam 100, 50 or even 5 times a day. I've opened Steam app about a thousand times and it's always felt like clunky dated software. |
| |
| ▲ | simoncion 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > In the web world and 7-10 seconds for a pageload is forever. Given that its primary purposes are to start video games that take anywhere from five to thirty+ seconds to start and to download video games and their patches which range in size between many hundreds of MBs to a hundred+ GBs, the client taking roughly ten seconds to start is no problem. Optimize where it makes sense, yanno? I'd much rather have to "deal with" the Steam client taking ten seconds to start than to have to deal with the Epic Games Launcher's download rate being limited to 100->150 mbit/s. [0] [0] Last I checked on this was a few years ago -like twelve months after Sea Of Thieves stopped being widely popular- so it may have improved. The absurdly slow download speeds [1] are one of the bigger reasons why I stopped using EGS. [1] Sure, many people don't have connections any faster than that. I do. Steam saturates it, and -at the time- EGS absolutely did not and occupied 100% of one logical CPU while failing to do so. | | |
| ▲ | dmix 42 minutes ago | parent [-] | | ? I already addressed in my original comment that I wouldn't care if it was just a game launcher but the Stream app is more than that. It opens to the store page for a reason, not to your library page. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | bakugo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I highly recommend just using your normal browser to navigate the store. Using it within the client doesn't really provide any advantages at all. |
|
| ▲ | mrdependable 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| My computer in the 90s used to take 30 minutes to boot. Now we complain about 10 second load times. What a world. |
| |
| ▲ | nubinetwork 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | A modern computer runs circles around your 90s computer... if the code was the same, it should be crazy fast. Instead, everything is a web browser, and each of them need to load 1gb of junk into memory each time you click on them. | | | |
| ▲ | platevoltage 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's excessive even for the 90's |
|
