6 ms·

Web browser versions are dead – automatic updates is the future

21 points by rondevera 16y ago

Florin_Andrei 16y ago
The vast majority of non-technical users, if asked, would say "all software should be like that."
melling 16y ago
I installed both Chrome and Firefox from their respective dev channels and they're on auto update. A few hundred thousand alpha testers could really help.
protomyth 16y ago
My big problem with this is that many web service vendors (particularly in education) do not play well with the latest version of any browser. I currently need to keep IE8 on the lab machines for all the student online class software. We actually delayed our WinXP to W7 jump because it took so long to clear anything over IE6. For consumers, this is fine, but for IT this is a nightmare. I really don't want to come into work and find all of the machines updated and none of the software working.
- k7d 16y ago
  Having had worked on browser-based enterprise applications I can only say that there's deadlock situation. As a vendor you need to provide compatibility with old outdated browsers because enteprise doesn't want to upgrade because that would break a number of other applications they use. The functional gap between something like IE6 (which is still an enteprise standard in a lot of places) and a modern browser is so wide that you almost end up creating two separate versions of the frontend. And eventually some vendors figure that it's not even worth supporting the modern browsers, so they don't. And so it goes... I now honestly believe that web browser is a bad platform for entererise apps.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    Yeah, its a deadlock, but it is a consequence of the economics of these things. > I now honestly believe that web browser is a bad platform for entererise apps. Yeah, I am starting to think the same thing. I expect that we might have to go to a traditional application with web services (ala iTunes or maybe TurboTax-like).
- tlrobinson 16y ago
  It might be a painful transition, but a critical mass of auto-updating web browsers will pressure vendors to build their web apps with forward compatibility in mind. At this point that basically means they just need to test against multiple browsers and don't rely on bugs. Browsers also need to be extra careful about maintaining backwards compatibility. The compatibility rule of thumb I've heard (I think the context was ES5) is that if more than two of the major browsers support a feature or bug then future versions must be backwards compatible. In the end it should be better for everyone (well, except for browsers that try to lock-in users with non-standard features/bugs, but I think those days are mostly behind us)
  - protomyth 16y ago
    What is the solution when a version of the browser gets updated that doesn't work with the web service? Do you expect no bugs in the actual browser to be introduced? Will Google rollback a version if it only affects less than a % of users?
- kjksf 16y ago
  The problem, however, is not the browser but web service vendors. If workarounds for buggy web services become more painful, there will be more pressure on those vendors to fix their software. It's not that the pain isn't real, but the pain already exists and you can either choose a future where more browsers are better leading to more web services being less buggy or a future where browsers stagnate because web services are buggy and their vendors unwilling to fix them.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    I think I want a future where we get to choose when to upgrade so as not to disrupt the lives and education of people. I don't want to tell a classroom of people (who pay for our service) that they cannot have class today because of an upgrade.
englishVoodoo 16y ago
As a new Windows user, the hassle of updating software often make me sit on older versions and I can see why people use older versions of internet explorer for example, which makes my work writing html/css a pain some times. I'd welcome automatic updating. Should make the web more up to date.
locopati 16y ago
That's a great idea in general. Not so much in a corporate environment where there may be a piece of older software that is still in use but that no longer requires active development. In that case, you want to lock the version - you don't want it to suddenly break because of a browser update and don't want to devote additional dev time to a finished product that was working just fine. It'd be nice if browsers automatically updated but could also be forced to run as a specific version (e.g. IE8's Developer Tools lets you run as IE7). Like version control for software (when loading website X, run as browser v2).
- maxxxxx 16y ago
  I think the compatibility with older browsers has always been a cheap excuse. It shouldn't be too difficult to have a setting that forces certain URLs to run as a specific browser version as you mentioned.
nimrody 16y ago
What happens when the latest version is not the greatest? With automatic updates you don't get to decide when to upgrade and you usually have no way back. See the latest version of Skype. Google chrome also had a few less-than-perfect versions (for OS X, at least).
- billswift 16y ago
  The user interface for FF4 sucks, I had to uninstall it and re-download FF3.6. Most of the differences were merely irritating - like the right click menu changing the places of Open in New Tab and Open in New Window, which was totally stupid, but I could have gotten used to that. The one change I could not do without and could find no way to restore was their eliminating the Recent Pages button - some sites take forever to click back through with the Back button alone.
  - samfoo 16y ago
    Click and hold on the back button brings up the list. This works in chrome too.
    - IChrisI 16y ago
      Right-clicking on the back/forward buttons also works, as it did in Firefox 3.6. I wish Chrome supported middle-clicking to open a previous page in a new tab.
- aboodman 16y ago
  Autoupdate is a responsibility that application developers should take seriously. If the latest version is not better than the previous for users, they will leave. That is as it should be.
jim_h 16y ago
I'll take automatic updates IF there is an option to prompt before update. I get daily builds of Chrome (under Ubuntu) and 1 day there was an update that caused Chrome not to start up. After that day I don't blindly do updates if I really need the browser to work.
spartas 16y ago
From the article: "But with the advent of IE10, Firefox is the only web browser who haven’t reached a two-digit version..." Safari, anyone?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
agentultra 16y ago
At least make sure users can turn it off. There are a plethora of reasons why someone would not want the absolute newest version of a browser every time a developer releases a single patch to the code. Users should have control over their own computers and what they install.

21 points by rondevera 16y ago

The vast majority of non-technical users, if asked, would say "all software should be like that."

I installed both Chrome and Firefox from their respective dev channels and they're on auto update. A few hundred thousand alpha testers could really help.

protomyth 16y ago

My big problem with this is that many web service vendors (particularly in education) do not play well with the latest version of any browser. I currently need to keep IE8 on the lab machines for all the student online class software. We actually delayed our WinXP to W7 jump because it took so long to clear anything over IE6. For consumers, this is fine, but for IT this is a nightmare. I really don't want to come into work and find all of the machines updated and none of the software working.

k7d 16y ago
Having had worked on browser-based enterprise applications I can only say that there's deadlock situation. As a vendor you need to provide compatibility with old outdated browsers because enteprise doesn't want to upgrade because that would break a number of other applications they use. The functional gap between something like IE6 (which is still an enteprise standard in a lot of places) and a modern browser is so wide that you almost end up creating two separate versions of the frontend. And eventually some vendors figure that it's not even worth supporting the modern browsers, so they don't. And so it goes... I now honestly believe that web browser is a bad platform for entererise apps.
- protomyth 16y ago
  Yeah, its a deadlock, but it is a consequence of the economics of these things. > I now honestly believe that web browser is a bad platform for entererise apps. Yeah, I am starting to think the same thing. I expect that we might have to go to a traditional application with web services (ala iTunes or maybe TurboTax-like).
tlrobinson 16y ago
It might be a painful transition, but a critical mass of auto-updating web browsers will pressure vendors to build their web apps with forward compatibility in mind. At this point that basically means they just need to test against multiple browsers and don't rely on bugs. Browsers also need to be extra careful about maintaining backwards compatibility. The compatibility rule of thumb I've heard (I think the context was ES5) is that if more than two of the major browsers support a feature or bug then future versions must be backwards compatible. In the end it should be better for everyone (well, except for browsers that try to lock-in users with non-standard features/bugs, but I think those days are mostly behind us)
- protomyth 16y ago
  What is the solution when a version of the browser gets updated that doesn't work with the web service? Do you expect no bugs in the actual browser to be introduced? Will Google rollback a version if it only affects less than a % of users?
kjksf 16y ago
The problem, however, is not the browser but web service vendors. If workarounds for buggy web services become more painful, there will be more pressure on those vendors to fix their software. It's not that the pain isn't real, but the pain already exists and you can either choose a future where more browsers are better leading to more web services being less buggy or a future where browsers stagnate because web services are buggy and their vendors unwilling to fix them.
- protomyth 16y ago
  I think I want a future where we get to choose when to upgrade so as not to disrupt the lives and education of people. I don't want to tell a classroom of people (who pay for our service) that they cannot have class today because of an upgrade.

englishVoodoo 16y ago

As a new Windows user, the hassle of updating software often make me sit on older versions and I can see why people use older versions of internet explorer for example, which makes my work writing html/css a pain some times. I'd welcome automatic updating. Should make the web more up to date.

locopati 16y ago

That's a great idea in general. Not so much in a corporate environment where there may be a piece of older software that is still in use but that no longer requires active development. In that case, you want to lock the version - you don't want it to suddenly break because of a browser update and don't want to devote additional dev time to a finished product that was working just fine. It'd be nice if browsers automatically updated but could also be forced to run as a specific version (e.g. IE8's Developer Tools lets you run as IE7). Like version control for software (when loading website X, run as browser v2).

maxxxxx 16y ago
I think the compatibility with older browsers has always been a cheap excuse. It shouldn't be too difficult to have a setting that forces certain URLs to run as a specific browser version as you mentioned.

nimrody 16y ago

What happens when the latest version is not the greatest? With automatic updates you don't get to decide when to upgrade and you usually have no way back. See the latest version of Skype. Google chrome also had a few less-than-perfect versions (for OS X, at least).

billswift 16y ago
The user interface for FF4 sucks, I had to uninstall it and re-download FF3.6. Most of the differences were merely irritating - like the right click menu changing the places of Open in New Tab and Open in New Window, which was totally stupid, but I could have gotten used to that. The one change I could not do without and could find no way to restore was their eliminating the Recent Pages button - some sites take forever to click back through with the Back button alone.
- samfoo 16y ago
  Click and hold on the back button brings up the list. This works in chrome too.
  - IChrisI 16y ago
    Right-clicking on the back/forward buttons also works, as it did in Firefox 3.6. I wish Chrome supported middle-clicking to open a previous page in a new tab.
aboodman 16y ago
Autoupdate is a responsibility that application developers should take seriously. If the latest version is not better than the previous for users, they will leave. That is as it should be.

jim_h 16y ago

I'll take automatic updates IF there is an option to prompt before update. I get daily builds of Chrome (under Ubuntu) and 1 day there was an update that caused Chrome not to start up. After that day I don't blindly do updates if I really need the browser to work.

spartas 16y ago

From the article: "But with the advent of IE10, Firefox is the only web browser who haven’t reached a two-digit version..." Safari, anyone?

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

agentultra 16y ago

At least make sure users can turn it off. There are a plethora of reasons why someone would not want the absolute newest version of a browser every time a developer releases a single patch to the code. Users should have control over their own computers and what they install.