From your perspective maybe...but on Win 10 you have no right to privacy! Are you aware of it? Do you understand what privacy is?

you already know thats bs

Windows 7 is light years better than w10, that is why Microsoft had to give w10 away free for a year at the beginning. Windows 7 has better compatibility with software and the interface is way better due to it being more consistent/cohesive. w10 has forced updates you have no control of among many other issues.

I rather use xp than 10.

What really confuses me is that Cyberpunk 2077 is being tested on, and will officially support Windows 7, yet the client to launch the game doesn't support Windows 7?

Yes, I know DRM free so client isn't needed and such, but I just don't get why one thing supports Microsoft's best recent OS, but the other, much simpler thing doesn't.

One of the dumb things about the Windows 10 vs 7 arguments is that all the Windows 10 proponents are all complaining about things that literally don't affect them.

Maintaining windows 7 compatibility doesn't require some crazy expense. I mean, literally the only thing you need to do is not use windows 8/10 specific API calls. Hell, after GoG makes a linux client, they'll ideally port the linux client to windows and have all the API calls wrapped up in portable libraries, off loading the whole "expense" of supporting multi-platform.

Who cares if someone who isn't you gets a virus? NO ONE!

Why is it that what someone else is doing drives you windows 10 users crazy so much?

Just ignore that up-to-date stats indicate that Win7 accounts for more than 1/4 of all Windows installs and almost 1/4 of all OS installs worldwide, including more than every version of Linux and MacOS put together, and more than double either of those two OSes on their own, while counting every iteration of each. Also WIn10 only barely hit the point this year where it's actually more than double the install base of Win7.

It isn't getting ongoing primary support, but it's far from dead in terms of userbase.

Maybe so, but from a security perspective, all users should be taking into account the fact that Windows 7 has reached its end of life. So the question is, should GOG be putting its resources into ensuring that GOG Galaxy remains compatible with an operating system that is probably more vulnerable? There are enough vulnerabilities to contend with already when GOG Galaxy is operating within Windows 10 for me to say that this course of action would be unwise.

worldwide ≠ gaming. Majority of your 'worldwide' stats are old office computers.
Hare are some up-to-date data from Steam survey:
Windows 10 64 bit / 88.32% / +0.44%
Windows 7 64 bit / 5.21% / -0.39%

Steam ≠ Gog although i would agree, that the truth is somewhere between your numbers and the ones from Obliviondoll.

In any case the current numbers aren't the ones Gog saw when they decided to drop Win7 compatibility since this isn't something that happened yesterday in some kind of spontaneous decision, but something that was probably decided during the design phase, some time ago.

I strongly assume that Galaxy's release (well if you like to call it that way) came later than it was originally planned (hence the unready state it is in), so the prognosis about the possible user base on release when they originally planned it was probably also a bit more in favor for win7.

WTF? Good Old Games was thé NAME once!

And I have a 486 with DOS 6.22, A K6-III with Win98se.
AND an Opteron 180 with XP.

NONE of them are DEAD. 'FirstMover'!

Windows 10 is 5 years old and completely obsolete, why you would use that outdated piece of junk is beyond me... it's 5 years old!

See, the "blah blah years old" argument sounds completely absurd. Besides, windows 8.1 is 6 years old (only 1 year older than that prehistoric windows 10) so they should support windows 8.1 (which, by extension, tends to resolve much of the windows 7/10 compatibility issues)

2 things.

1. "Steam" is also not an accurate representation of all PC gamers. I, for one, have been actively avoiding the use of the platform for almost a year (just over 10 months to be accurate) as a result of it being turned into an active health hazard, and the company knowingly refusing to address the problem and actively blocking the only safe workaround that existed in the past 3 months. A significant number of gamers more interested in older games, or in DRM-free platforms, also actively avoid Steam and use GOG or itch.io or other platforms instead of Steam. As mentioned previously, a platform called "Good OLD Games" is more likely to see support from users running an OLDer operating system. For what should be obvious reasons, particularly given recent trends with both Microsoft and the gaming industry as a whole getting worse at backward compatibility.

2. Even just counting the 64 bit version of Windows 7, it's got easly more than twice the install base of both Windows 8 and 8.1 combined when using the numbers you're using, so supporting them and not Win7 doesn't look any more sensible than it did with my numbers. It also has a larger install base on Steam than the sum total of every version of MacOS and Linux combined. So yeah, if you exclude the ONE SINGLE OPTION which has a larger install base, Win7 jumps from just over 5% to almost 50% and that's counting MULTIPLE NEWER OPERATING SYSTEMS which it easily outranks in popularity by those numbers.

Wait WHAT? what are you talking about?

It's been causing migraines for myself and others, as well as affecting some users with epilepsy and vertigo, since the end of October last year. Valve has not just failed, but actively refused to address the problem, up to and including knowingly blocking the only safe workaround that previously existed and taking steps to prevent users from implementing new workarounds for the problem. They've also been deleting and locking discussions about it in many places, and refusing legally-mandated refunds for affected customers who live in regions where such refunds are a valid protected right under applicable laws.