3 ms·
It depends on what you mean by "customer". The chrome team has traditionally viewed end-users as the customers. Normal people who just want to use the web and h
by aboodman 11y ago
It depends on what you mean by "customer". The chrome team has traditionally viewed end-users as the customers. Normal people who just want to use the web and have it work well. Those people could care less how the program is updated ... the less they have to worry about, the better. And having Chrome automatically update means that they are always safe from malware, the browser continually gets better, and works with the newest websites, without them ever having to do anything at all.
If you instead view IT departments as the customer, then yes, they care and want to have control over the deployed version of the software on their networks. Chrome does have some controls for this. I'm not that familiar with them, though.
- qznc 11y agoThere are certainly end users who are confused when the UI changes. Those users are usually incapable of using the bug tracker or complain otherwise. Kongregate currently tells you chrome broke Unity with its current version and you should use Firefox instead. If previous versions are not available, switching browsers is an alternative workaround.
- aboodman 11y agoSure. There are downsides to continuous updates too. Engineering is about tradeoffs. You can't implement everything someone might want. The desire to have the product continuously improve is in direct conflict with the desire to have the product never suddenly break. In this case the team believed the positives dramatically outweigh the negatives and I agree. Continuous silent updates are one of the best features of Chrome. All consumer software should have it.