5 ms·

OS updates (or any update that potentially takes more than 2 minutes) shouldn't ever be forced. It's just terrible. Sure, there should be some prominant prompts

OS updates (or any update that potentially takes more than 2 minutes) shouldn't ever be forced. It's just terrible. Sure, there should be some prominant prompts saying "Plz update me" from time to time (so the average joe's computer isn't terribly out of date). But don't force me to update in the middle of prez. Because clearly, I'm best placed to know what's the best time for my computer to become an expensive paperweight.

acdha 10y ago
The problem is that if you don't make them automatic, people won't install them. Microsoft spent most of the Windows XP era with people being bitten by problems which had been patched in many cases years before. The approach they've taken of making things mandatory is clearly not universally popular but most of the arguments about it tend to ignore the fact that it was designed to solve a very real problem which affected millions of people.
- roblabla 10y ago
  And yet macos doesn't have forced updates. They just prompt the user (with a very in-your-face message) and people DO update. Same with linux. Same with android. Same with IOS. If you prompt the user to update, they generally will.
  - acdha 10y ago
    That's technically true but not true in real life for most people. Yes, you can ignore the notice for awhile but fairly soon you'll reach the point where something like iTunes requires a newer release or you need to upgrade iOS/Android because an app developer made the business decision that using a new API offers more benefits than supporting legacy devices. There are two reasons why this works out better. One is that the non-Microsoft world isn't dominated by enterprise IT departments demanding binary compatibility with antique code; the second is that those platforms have spent many years building trust that major upgrades won't prevent you from working. In the case of Windows, that was complicated by charging for updates and the broken IT culture which resisted them amplified with the rough Windows Vista release cycle causing many people to avoid it for a decade.

acdha 10y ago

The problem is that if you don't make them automatic, people won't install them. Microsoft spent most of the Windows XP era with people being bitten by problems which had been patched in many cases years before. The approach they've taken of making things mandatory is clearly not universally popular but most of the arguments about it tend to ignore the fact that it was designed to solve a very real problem which affected millions of people.

roblabla 10y ago
And yet macos doesn't have forced updates. They just prompt the user (with a very in-your-face message) and people DO update. Same with linux. Same with android. Same with IOS. If you prompt the user to update, they generally will.
- acdha 10y ago
  That's technically true but not true in real life for most people. Yes, you can ignore the notice for awhile but fairly soon you'll reach the point where something like iTunes requires a newer release or you need to upgrade iOS/Android because an app developer made the business decision that using a new API offers more benefits than supporting legacy devices. There are two reasons why this works out better. One is that the non-Microsoft world isn't dominated by enterprise IT departments demanding binary compatibility with antique code; the second is that those platforms have spent many years building trust that major upgrades won't prevent you from working. In the case of Windows, that was complicated by charging for updates and the broken IT culture which resisted them amplified with the rough Windows Vista release cycle causing many people to avoid it for a decade.