Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
jacquesmattheij.com
Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
1–10 of 588 posts
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#2"then the internet came around and things changed overnight" except it came around while software was still distributed on floppies and it took a decade or more before online distribution was the norm.
That said, I agree with the article! I'd much rather not have updates, unless they bring fixes to bugs that I actually experience, which happens somewhere between seldom and never.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#3I think in an ideal world, updates would be either optional major updates (UI changes, workflow changes, etc.) and minor updates (bug fixes, tweaks, etc.).
Then a company can maintain those multiple major versions until they phase out support.
CD software had this down pretty great. You could actually rely on a program not being pulled out from under you with an update.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#4Some automatic updates should really just be different products. The most obvious one at the moment is Android Firefox is getting a big automatic update that, for a lot of people, will be a very big downgrade and an unfriendly UI change.
But Mozilla doesn't want to maintain security patches for X different products. And that's true of most vendors. This model of computing where all users are always on the latest version makes security patching and bug fixing a lot more straight forward.
If you use a web application, this is the model you've always had.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#5I think in an ideal world, updates would be either optional major updates (UI changes, workflow changes, etc.) and minor updates (bug fixes, tweaks, etc.). Then a company can maintain those multiple major versions until they phase out support. CD software had this down pretty great. You could actually rely on a program not being pulled out from under you with an update.
> Then a company can maintain those multiple major versions
That sounds completely unrealistic and inefficient for everyone involved.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#6Some automatic updates should really just be different products. The most obvious one at the moment is Android Firefox is getting a big automatic update that, for a lot of people, will be a very big downgrade and an unfriendly UI change. But Mozilla doesn't want to maintain security patches for X different products. And that's true of most vendors. This model of computing where all users are always on the latest vers…
Is that why Mozilla sent notification spam to announce that the app will be updated?
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#7> should never update a user interface without allowing the previous one to be used as the default
I don’t understand why people are so precious about their UI and workflow. They obviously managed to learn and adapt to the current UI. Why can’t they adapt to a new one?
If you’re super sensitive to something as trivial as a change to a menu location maybe that’s a sign you should be automating whatever your workflow is.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#8As a user of software, I couldn't agree more with the OP that automatic updates:
> should always keep the user centric
> should be incremental and security or bug fixes only
> should never update a user interface without allowing the previous one to be used as the default
> should never be used to install telemetry or spyware or to re-enable it if it was previously switched off
> should never be used to install other software packages without the users explicit consent and knowledge
> should never change the format of data already stored on the system
> should never cause a system to become unusable or unstable
> must allow a revert to the previous situation
> must be disablable, in an easy and consistent manner for instance on mobile devices
> should never cause the system to become inaccessible or restarted without user consent
> should always be signed by the vendor to ensure that the update mechanism does not become a malware vector
> should never cause commercial messages or other fluff to be included
> should never cause configuration details to be lost
> should always be backwards compatible with previous plug-ins or other third party add ons
I agree: Software vendors "should" and "must" do all these things when updating software on my computer without my permission.
But often they will NOT, because their economic incentives are frequently stacked AGAINST it.
For them, it's often cheaper or more profitable in the short run not to do any of these things.
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#9I think in an ideal world, updates would be either optional major updates (UI changes, workflow changes, etc.) and minor updates (bug fixes, tweaks, etc.). Then a company can maintain those multiple major versions until they phase out support. CD software had this down pretty great. You could actually rely on a program not being pulled out from under you with an update.
> Then a company can maintain those multiple major versions That sounds completely unrealistic and inefficient for everyone involved.
[deleted]
Re: Why Johnny Won't Upgrade
#10[deleted]