3 ms·
That's good to know, but the burning question is: why? Is this a critical but otherwise background part of the update? A clever time saving choice that didn't p
by NBJack 2y ago
That's good to know, but the burning question is: why? Is this a critical but otherwise background part of the update? A clever time saving choice that didn't pan out well?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Zambyte 2y agoDon't worry about it. They just care about your experience and want to keep you informed.
- xethos 2y agoI thought "Don't worry about it, because you won't get an answer. Also if you don't do it a specific way, things will break" was Apple's methodology. I miss the old Google way. The geeky engineers that said "What if we delivered internet via hot-air balloon?" and "Verizon sucks ass. Let's start our own ISP". Current Google is comparitively locked the fuck down, and I hate it. EDIT in time to say oh my god I thought you were joking. Their stance literally is "We care about your experience and want to keep you informed". What... corporate-friendly language
- garaetjjte 2y ago>We understand that factory resetting isn't something many users do regularly, but because we care about your experience [...] Sounds like they are apologizing not for buggy software, but for telling you about it.
- steelbrain 2y agoTalking uninformed but considering how there’s an A/B update pattern, maybe 15 minutes is the arbitrary threshold after which an update is considered stable enough?