21–30 of 423 posts
I would also put into question if you _really_ need to check for updates every 5 minutes. Once per startup is already enough, and if you're concerned about users who leave it on for days, it could easily be daily or even less often.
I would also put into question if you _really_ need to check for updates every 5 minutes. Once per startup is already enough, and if you're concerned about users who leave it on for days, it could easily be daily or even less often.
Not to mention the cost users paid to download 250 MB every 5 minutes.
The title should have been: "how a single line of code cost our users probably more than $8000"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Capital_Group#2012_st...
440m usd
I would also put into question if you _really_ need to check for updates every 5 minutes. Once per startup is already enough, and if you're concerned about users who leave it on for days, it could easily be daily or even less often.
IIRC, Every 5 minutes used to be the standard interval between email checks, back in the days of dialup and desktop email clients. How the times have changed ..
It would also be nice if the update archive wasn't 250MB. Sparkle framework supports delta updates, which can cut down the traffic considerably.
I would also put into question if you _really_ need to check for updates every 5 minutes. Once per startup is already enough, and if you're concerned about users who leave it on for days, it could easily be daily or even less often.
A 5 minute update check interval is usage-reporting in disguise. Way fewer people would turn off a setting labeled “check for updates” than one labeled “report usage statistics”.