Having the ability to do seamless frequent updates means that bad software can cause excess churn. They are not intrinsically linked. The problem with not havi

Having the ability to do seamless frequent updates means that bad software can cause excess churn. They are not intrinsically linked. The problem with not having solid infrastructure for updates is security issues. Of course, there is a class of software where this is not a problem, but determining whether software falls into that category is pretty difficult given the structure of modern OS and the propensity for things like static linking. You have 3 choices: * leave software vulnerable. * track security vulnerabilities is all your software and its dependencies and manually update. * Bite the bullet and have robust auto-update infrastructure. I’d argue the bigger problem is that implementing robust, dependable and user configurable auto updates with easy rollbacks etc. is a complex problem, so every piece of software ends up implementing its own shitty variant that sacrifices user control and doesn’t distinguish between necessity and churn.