I think Djaron read "[Y]ou know that you can press END to reach the bottom page immediately, right?" as sarcasm. I'm around the forum enough to know the general tone of your posts, but Djaron hasn't posted that much, to judge by rep, so s/he might not know that's not who you are around here.

Maybe it,s your internet, I've never had a single problem with the downloader, at all.
This, stop hiding the downloader and if user choise was so important, you'd continue support both the downloader and Galaxy and let us actually choose, which to use.

I understand that Galaxy is designed to compete with Steam.
That's fine, but applying most of those "optional" changes to the site layout makes the "optional" disappeer, they turn into forced changes.
Apply all the changes to Galaxy and if truly "optional", those who want some or all can and will use the client to get them.

Many of us dislike Steam and everything about it, we want no Steam Clone at all "optional" or not.
That's where the so called choice fails, when both the site and Client are the same their is no choice at all.
Which is the reason we who don't want Galaxy complain we have no choice.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

Apologies, i thought on 1st read that you used the "little box" expression to point me at the url box of my browser... seems i was mistaken, as i could see with the other message a bit below. Anyway, using end/home keys are only weak workarounds as they choose to display something like 90 items on each page... Usually the think you need (murphy's rule) is at the middle page, or last, and in the middle of it.

in fact i noticed it was not "pages" in a web/html meaning of the word, it is all part of a javascript or stuff.

though, about missing the point, indeed i confirm: the nav links are just one issue among many i so far am unconfortable with in the new gog design, as stated in my picture (everything in "red" was issues... nav links were small portion)
indeed... i am afraid i rarely came on forums so far and so i wasnt accustomed to the usual tone of the person and it looked as sarcasm at first reading. And that is the kind of misunderstanding i would have rather clarified through PM than in middle of a thread (for the example of missing PM system)...
I could read many entire threads yet didnt feel the need to speak myself so far (because the old gog was a bit outdated and cozy compared to web 2.0 madness, suited me). I was what one would call "happy silent majority". It takes much to make someone happy and silent to finally rage aloud...

That is yet one other "issue" i would point out in the new design of gog: is it as in facebook or anywhere else. Everyont is just friend or is nothing/stranger. Nothing inbetween !
While for me there can be regular interesting active folk to read from on this forum (even by PMing) yet on different level than "friends". So for me the permissions and privacy settings lack steps in the scale.

I do not want for example strangers to "chat" with me, yet i wanna be able to chat (as no PM anymore) with someone that raised an interesting point on forum and i would reply without polluting the initial thread, but to do that i would have to add that someone on "friends" list. that doesnt make sense to me. "Friends" are friends, with different degrees of friendship (from buddy to bff), yet "interesting people" are different from strangers AND from friends.

Jesus ! GOG is turning into something as superficial as facebook to me; wasnt that much active in the communauty so far (never felt the need to talk much here) but now they are doing dumber and dumber things (i was just "away" when the "unbundling" thing occured, else i would have been far more active, believe me ! :))

Lets just wait untill they are out of beta before we spell doom and gloom.
Im pretty sure they have taken note to at least some of the issues raised.
Rome wasnt built in a day and all that.

I like some of the new features but some stuff can be better.
i woud have prefered to have the manual sorting still intact but maybe it has to do something with server load since they cant include it.
No idea.

The new account system on the site was not rolled out as a beta, at least it was not labelled as a beta; forcing your entire userbase to beta test something is unprofessional and unacceptable, yet, here we are.

Galaxy is supposedly beta (and optionnal)
Website is live (and rather mandatory...)

If they were to apply live on website the look and design of galaxy, maybe it would have been wise first to let galaxy goes out of beta yet...

I would even say it's alpha, because it mostly isn't about fixing bugs, but fixing a whole bunch of its functionality.
A closed beta with some of the forum regulars would have saved GOG and the community quite some trouble as well.
For a product that is all about user interaction, why hasn't anybody at GOG's ever thought about asking the user base? When software is done for any client, the first thing is to check their demands. Not so with GOG, they live in a bubble believing they know best what's good for "their" website. Here's a surprise for you GOG, you don't, yet, here we are indeed.

GOG is always beta, it's just Galaxy that is clearly marked as such XD

Well, if you mean that such a site and company as gog is always improving itself and always has room for further finetuning... maybe as any other would.
On a philosophical point of view, we all are beta our entire life as we always travel throug time towards the final "us"... Much as Sylvia Plath would say we are all dying slowly. (if i'm right, not sure i am not mistaking for another poet).

Though when i first registered here long ago, it was then clearly labelled as beta, then it officially "ended" beta status a year or a year and a half after that.

of course there is the microsoft angle of view when one revision of the system out of two is the beta of the later one, but yet being sold as a finished product... (hmm, i'm digressing)

For me, removing years long working (and used/praised) features, and replacing them by others not filling same needs or functions yet being flawed when launched... i wouldnt call it beta, i would call it a bad move. Would i joke around doing this in my job, then i would be rather in a bad situation.

From the OP [emphasis added]: The order in which the arguments are presented is quite telling, isn't it?

Still works ok for me, but things are breaking left and right (see the "what did just break?" thread) so I wouldn't be surprised if that goes soon too.

Just logged in, saw there was one new item under "Account" -> "Library". When I loaded the library page, I clicked on "My Library" button and wanted to select "Updated", but it was greyed out and I couldn't select it.

It is nice to see that the bugs that are there like forever just got ported to the all new gog library view! Great work.

Nice fail, but not surprising. The more complicated you implement things the more likely you screw them up.

Obviously GOG expects hundreds of pages to appear in the user library when they implement such a complicated mechanism to switch pages instead of adding a few numbers with links like in the forums. GOG wants to grow real biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig. ;)