4 ms·

I humorously think that when Microsoft does bad hires, it puts them in the Windows Update team (Google makes them work on Google Keep, instead). I've always wo

I humorously think that when Microsoft does bad hires, it puts them in the Windows Update team (Google makes them work on Google Keep, instead). I've always wondered (seriously, not rhetorically) which are the technical grounds that make Windows update so bad. In addition to reboot loops: - WU has a long history of hanging; it took I think a couple of years to release the "final" patch for update hangs. I'm not even sure if it works; I wouldn't bet that a machine with Windows 7 would be able to download all the updates without hanging or taking days (we're talking about around 100 updates; apt, for reference, manages a pool at least 2 orders of magnitude bigger) - the workflow is not deterministic; updates may or may not succeed - the UX is abysmal: the status descriptions are unclear; the progress percentage doesn't reflect the actual time, or is disbalanced towards stages which don't make evident why they take so much time; the error messages are completely unhelpful. - it's also completely unclear why some updates need to be applied both after shutdown and before startup. "Thankfully" they gave the option to download them once a month, which all in all, equals to choose between usability and security.

romed 8y ago
Damn, that was harsh on Google Keep. It was basically written by and operated by a single person in his spare time.
- threatofrain 8y ago
  Especially in light of the fact that one of Google Keep's competitors on the iOS context is Apple Notes, which presumably has more than one person working on it through spare time.
- bertjk 8y ago
  Is this still the case? I would be very interested in reading more about the person/team behind it.. Are there articles/blog posts you can point to?
freditup 8y ago
I actually quite like Google Keep. Curious why you view it as so bad?
- sbr464 8y ago
  Same, I was thinking they’d put them on google plus.
- pizza234 8y ago
  OK, as a sibling comment points out, it's been a harsh judgment (although I make it humorously). In general terms, I think it's subpar in terms of usability, at least, when talking about "Google standards". Going down to details: 1. the web interface uses a sort of "dark pattern": it enforces delayed updates, to the point of ignoring user requests for refresh; when the user clicks on the refresh button, s/he'll see the spinner in action, but when it stops, there's no guarantee that the updates have been sent - in fact, attempting to close the browser at the point frequently shows a browser alert, then the spinner will spin again for the "real" update. It's a matter of seconds actually, but it gives the impression that the program is "lying" to the user. 2. the automatic recognition is extremely annoying when a note includes numbers and symbols that don't represent phone numbers/email adresses - Keep will forcefully recognize them as such, so that when one clicks on an auto-recognized string, a dialog will pop up, forcing the user to click Cancel, then hope that the landing character is the right one, otherwise, when clicking on another character, the popup will show again. 3. the reminders workflow is bizarre; it assumes that the main use case is the user setting alarms at four semi-fixed (fixed but customizable) times of the day. this doesn't really make sense to me, and adds one extra stage in the setup 4. at some point it seemed they introduced a clever reminders workflow - when the user would add one, the default would be around three hours from creation (with the exception of the night). this is not stable though - sometimes, the three hours interval is not respected. 5. I recently hit a bug where, when I select it from the Android task manager, the window closes. Point #2 is definitely the worst for me; it really bites me on notes that include numbers and are frequently updated (eg. a gym schedule); I think this is a legitimate use case. Point #1 may be a bug, although it's in a core functionality, which makes me think that it's intended. News flash! I've just found a bug. There are four semi-fixed times of the day; but in the settings, one can only customize three. Practically speaking, I think there isn't (enough) dogfooding in its design. More abstractly, I really doubt that it's up to standards with a company that is supposed to have the best IT professionals in the world.
chrisper 8y ago
They sped up the Windows update part in build 1803. It's also in server 2019 now.
- setquk 8y ago
  Brilliant. We can get broken stuff quicker!
illumin8 8y ago
Great list, but you missed one (probably more): - some updates launch several CMD.exe windows that pop up for a second, steal focus, then disappear.
- sbr464 8y ago
  I noticed this yesterday when building a custom machine, was very odd, it was like it stole in then was programmed to intentially put it back.
- MrEldritch 8y ago
  Oh, it actually does that on other people's machines? That's a relief. I'd been genuinely worrying if that was actually some kind of malware symptom. Glad to know it's just Win10 being Win10.
btschaegg 8y ago
On the UX thing, I'd argue it's even worse than that -- by design. The main problem I have with it is that they seemed to want to make it more "user friendly" and ended up constructing a nightmare because of it. The rationale goes like this: If you confront users with error messages, they get confused. The more technical the message, the worse the confusion. Now what Windows does is to hide everything, ignoring that to be able to do that, your systems must never ever have any errors, lest you throw away useful information. I've got a Windows 8 installation I can't upgrade to 8.1 because all the update system does is not install the updates. There's no telling why -- the next time it still sits there telling you "by the way: there are updates you should install". Contrast this with "user unfriendly" linux updates: They tell you loud and clear that things didn't work and give you a message you can google, if nothing else. OTOH, the Windows side of things involves reading tea leaves, clearing obscure chaches, wondering if mercury is in retrograde, deleting or adding random registry keys and in the end doing a totally new installation anyway.

romed 8y ago

Damn, that was harsh on Google Keep. It was basically written by and operated by a single person in his spare time.

threatofrain 8y ago
Especially in light of the fact that one of Google Keep's competitors on the iOS context is Apple Notes, which presumably has more than one person working on it through spare time.
bertjk 8y ago
Is this still the case? I would be very interested in reading more about the person/team behind it.. Are there articles/blog posts you can point to?

freditup 8y ago

I actually quite like Google Keep. Curious why you view it as so bad?

sbr464 8y ago
Same, I was thinking they’d put them on google plus.
pizza234 8y ago
OK, as a sibling comment points out, it's been a harsh judgment (although I make it humorously). In general terms, I think it's subpar in terms of usability, at least, when talking about "Google standards". Going down to details: 1. the web interface uses a sort of "dark pattern": it enforces delayed updates, to the point of ignoring user requests for refresh; when the user clicks on the refresh button, s/he'll see the spinner in action, but when it stops, there's no guarantee that the updates have been sent - in fact, attempting to close the browser at the point frequently shows a browser alert, then the spinner will spin again for the "real" update. It's a matter of seconds actually, but it gives the impression that the program is "lying" to the user. 2. the automatic recognition is extremely annoying when a note includes numbers and symbols that don't represent phone numbers/email adresses - Keep will forcefully recognize them as such, so that when one clicks on an auto-recognized string, a dialog will pop up, forcing the user to click Cancel, then hope that the landing character is the right one, otherwise, when clicking on another character, the popup will show again. 3. the reminders workflow is bizarre; it assumes that the main use case is the user setting alarms at four semi-fixed (fixed but customizable) times of the day. this doesn't really make sense to me, and adds one extra stage in the setup 4. at some point it seemed they introduced a clever reminders workflow - when the user would add one, the default would be around three hours from creation (with the exception of the night). this is not stable though - sometimes, the three hours interval is not respected. 5. I recently hit a bug where, when I select it from the Android task manager, the window closes. Point #2 is definitely the worst for me; it really bites me on notes that include numbers and are frequently updated (eg. a gym schedule); I think this is a legitimate use case. Point #1 may be a bug, although it's in a core functionality, which makes me think that it's intended. News flash! I've just found a bug. There are four semi-fixed times of the day; but in the settings, one can only customize three. Practically speaking, I think there isn't (enough) dogfooding in its design. More abstractly, I really doubt that it's up to standards with a company that is supposed to have the best IT professionals in the world.

chrisper 8y ago

They sped up the Windows update part in build 1803. It's also in server 2019 now.

setquk 8y ago
Brilliant. We can get broken stuff quicker!

illumin8 8y ago

Great list, but you missed one (probably more): - some updates launch several CMD.exe windows that pop up for a second, steal focus, then disappear.

sbr464 8y ago
I noticed this yesterday when building a custom machine, was very odd, it was like it stole in then was programmed to intentially put it back.
MrEldritch 8y ago
Oh, it actually does that on other people's machines? That's a relief. I'd been genuinely worrying if that was actually some kind of malware symptom. Glad to know it's just Win10 being Win10.

btschaegg 8y ago

On the UX thing, I'd argue it's even worse than that -- by design. The main problem I have with it is that they seemed to want to make it more "user friendly" and ended up constructing a nightmare because of it. The rationale goes like this: If you confront users with error messages, they get confused. The more technical the message, the worse the confusion. Now what Windows does is to hide everything, ignoring that to be able to do that, your systems must never ever have any errors, lest you throw away useful information. I've got a Windows 8 installation I can't upgrade to 8.1 because all the update system does is not install the updates. There's no telling why -- the next time it still sits there telling you "by the way: there are updates you should install". Contrast this with "user unfriendly" linux updates: They tell you loud and clear that things didn't work and give you a message you can google, if nothing else. OTOH, the Windows side of things involves reading tea leaves, clearing obscure chaches, wondering if mercury is in retrograde, deleting or adding random registry keys and in the end doing a totally new installation anyway.