>Same thing for Valve, their money printer is so loud that they barely bother to make games anymore and let the Steam client languish for years (how did they let Discord/Twitch happen?).

Not sure that's a fair criticism.

Alyx was widely praised. Artifact... Wasn't. I don't know about Dota Overlords. And that's just the last couple of years.

They've also developed hardware like SteamLink, Steam Controller, some high-end VR gear...

They develop a LOT. They just don't release a while lot.

I agree there should be a lot more work and effort in the client. And they constantly fuck up handling their esports.

But I don't think "barely bother to make games anymore" isn't one of them.

It's fair. They are not a games developer anymore. Alyx was good but a boutique game made by a behemoth games marketplace company and before it came out, almost a decade had passed since Portal 2...

Valve released Dota 2, and then ported it to a brand new engine, they've been consistently adding updates to that game for 10 years, they've been working on CS:GO, with similar effect, I think you lot forget that the majority of Valves developers were working primarily on team-fortress and counter-strike as mods before they hired them, they're primarily a multiplayer house.

Valve unlike most companies maintains their games for more than 10 years.

Just because they haven't released anything obvious to the casual observer like new single player titles that is easily marketed is only showing your ignorance of Valves entire catalog of games, and attitude to development.

Look at sharepoint. It's a total nightmare of a platform to develop on, but the people just adapted and built their businesses on it

I suspect sharepoint is the platform version of excel & VBA. You & I might hate it, but it gets powerful capabilities into the hands of regular people.

sharepoint is probably many non-engineer's very first exposure to actual version control with checkouts, checkins, version history, and merge.

Sharepoint has version control? I thought it´s mostly a poorly functioning Dropbox copy.

This comment is absolutely hilarious to me, because the main selling point for SharePoint (for the longest time) was that you could version control Microsoft Office documents. Then intranets happened, someone wanted to build a Turing machine with it, and now it's the monstrosity we know now.

What makes it a nightmare? Can you share a few issues you've run into?

The JS API is total crap. One has to use it to develop anything that gets a bit more complex, but MS chose to ignore things that exists in the ES standard (like normal iterators, wtf) for quite some time to preserve backwards-compatibility with IE. This make neither debugging nor any further exposure to the API any fun.

SP, like any standard platform (think i.e. SAP) invites the systems integrators to customize the crap out of it, which tends to impact the bad performance even more.

I see. Thanks for sharing your experience!

In my experience, Sharepoint is stupidly slow, and it feels like it's trying to be everything.

Like...I don't need it to notify me that I have new e-mail. I already have either Outlook or an Outlook tab running.

Sharepoint is a shining example of feature creep run wild.

I've never seen search work properly (where "properly" = 90+% of searches return desired document in first 2 results)

I see. We have some internal facing stuff that our IT has done using sharepoint. Its not pretty/modern by any stretch, but it works just fine. Was curious what the world looks like from the other side.

Isn't the search issue more of a indexing engine problem though? Can you plug in other engines?

I still have no idea what Sharepoint even is. The way I’ve always seen it used is a way to host sites with file hosting tied to them. It feels like an over engineered CMS.

Some parts of it are some sort of list based CMS with poor naming

What does Valve / Steam have to Discord?

In addition to other comments, Steam Chat had significant in-roads with the gaming audience that would eventually form the foundation of Discord. It is quite plausible, had Steam improved chat earlier, that Discord might have never gotten the traction it got.

Nowadays, I find Steam Chat is a ghost town.

Valve only recently implemented a semi Discord-clone(with way better quality voice chat, give it a try some time if you haven't yet).

Their chat system has been famously bad and mostly unchanged since the early 2010's, and only very recently was reworked into this.

>(with way better quality voice chat, give it a try some time if you haven't yet).

Well, I'm using VoIPs basically for >decade everyday and voice quality was never something I cared about (I mean that all soft that I've used was somewhat decent in that matter)

the most important thing is - how to get all people on the same program? and I'm finding it not so realistic to get all friends to Steam

I think the parent was implying that steam groups could have improved to the point where Discord would not be necessary.

Steam is not a standalone chat product. I mostly use discord for non gaming chats.