4 ms·

In my dream software updates are not optional but also composite. So I can pick certain components of one update and ignore the others. It's like a tree of upda

In my dream software updates are not optional but also composite. So I can pick certain components of one update and ignore the others. It's like a tree of update components where I can ignore a whole branch of them if I choose so.

michael1999 5y ago
Publishers fail to test interactions enough even with monolithic releases. Introducing an exponential number of component configurations makes it impossible. Ask Microsoft if you want direct experience.
- markus_zhang 5y ago
  I agree with you. Reality is far from my dream :/ They can't even do something even close for subscription products (those who generate a continuous revenue).
- ChrisLTD 5y ago
  Microsoft is trying by moving more and more functionality into apps you get from the store. I think that's the right move. There's lots of bits and bobs in MacOS and iOS that could probably benefit from the same approach.
  - tinus_hn 5y ago
    You know why these store apps are these bloated blobs? Because you have million copies of libraries. Al these libraries have vulnerabilities and now there’s a million parties responsible for updating the libraries in their packages. Your security depends on not a single one of them being lazy or out of business.
lostgame 5y ago
Just a question - are you a developer of any kind? I’m sure if you are / have been / you’ll obviously understand why this is impractical as all hell; if not impossible, right? When everyone updates to iOS x.x, Apple knows every user has all of those fixes who have upgraded. This would result in the support team needing to support potentially dozens more configurations, offers dozens more potential points of failure, fragments the dev team, and complicates the hell out of everything in general. This is not…something you can realistically expect. And part of me thinks you do know that.
- markus_zhang 5y ago
  Yes so that's a dream. But at least one can offer the option NOT to update unless absolutely necessary, which some apps don't even afford or difficult to do so.

michael1999 5y ago

Publishers fail to test interactions enough even with monolithic releases. Introducing an exponential number of component configurations makes it impossible. Ask Microsoft if you want direct experience.

markus_zhang 5y ago
I agree with you. Reality is far from my dream :/ They can't even do something even close for subscription products (those who generate a continuous revenue).
ChrisLTD 5y ago
Microsoft is trying by moving more and more functionality into apps you get from the store. I think that's the right move. There's lots of bits and bobs in MacOS and iOS that could probably benefit from the same approach.
- tinus_hn 5y ago
  You know why these store apps are these bloated blobs? Because you have million copies of libraries. Al these libraries have vulnerabilities and now there’s a million parties responsible for updating the libraries in their packages. Your security depends on not a single one of them being lazy or out of business.

lostgame 5y ago

Just a question - are you a developer of any kind? I’m sure if you are / have been / you’ll obviously understand why this is impractical as all hell; if not impossible, right? When everyone updates to iOS x.x, Apple knows every user has all of those fixes who have upgraded. This would result in the support team needing to support potentially dozens more configurations, offers dozens more potential points of failure, fragments the dev team, and complicates the hell out of everything in general. This is not…something you can realistically expect. And part of me thinks you do know that.

markus_zhang 5y ago
Yes so that's a dream. But at least one can offer the option NOT to update unless absolutely necessary, which some apps don't even afford or difficult to do so.