3 ms·
There are reasons behind updates and auto-updates. Bugs, features, users which did not consistently update and were left with insecure or buggy software. Then a
by yyyk 5y ago
There are reasons behind updates and auto-updates. Bugs, features, users which did not consistently update and were left with insecure or buggy software. Then again, updates are also a mess.
I think this is a problem which should have a mostly technical solution: If most software was updated as today and users could rollback at will, most problems would be solved. That's a better way than making updates illegal.
- rurp 5y agoCompanies could unbundle security patches from UX updates if they wanted to. For the software I use regularly, I pretty much always want security updates and never want UI/UX changes. Of course the incentives are totally out of whack, since bundling the updates is cheaper and many UX "improvements" exist to make the company more money, at the expense of the user. Once users are conditioned or forced to auto-update why wouldn't a profit maximizing company make changes to increase its bottom line, regardless of how it helps or hurts users?
- Sebb767 5y agoIn a lot of software I worked with, unbundling core and UI would've been an immense amount of effort. You basically have the option to either maintain two GUIs side-by-side - including integrating new concepts (think, for example, supporting OTP and creating the workflow) and updating both for datastructure changes - or you never update your UX at all. At worst, you end up in a situation where your two GUIs support a distinct set of features. You can correctly accuse companies of a lot of things, but decoupling the UX really is a very hard problem.