4 ms·

> Once a day would surely be sufficient. Weekly or monthly would be sufficient. I'd also like "able to be disabled manually, permanently" as an option, too.

• ryandrake 2y ago
  How about never? If I want to update my software, I'll update it. I don't need the application itself to hound me about it, at any frequency.
  • mgkimsal 2y ago
    Hrm... might depend on the purpose of the update. "New feature X" announcements every few days... I hate and disable. "Warning - update now - security bug"... I want to be notified of those pretty quickly.
  • pixl97 2y ago
    Because historically your average user will not update the software and then some worm is going about causing massive damage all over the internet.
    • EvanAnderson 2y ago
      This is overblown fear mongering, especially for desktop apps. There are only a few applications with exposed attack surface (i.e. accept incoming requests from the network) and a large enough install base to cause "massive damage all of the Internet". A desktop screen recorder app has no business being constructed in a manner that's "wormable", nor an install base that would result in significant replication. The software that we need the "average user" to update is stuff like operating systems. OS "manufacturers" have that mostly covered for desktop OS's now. Microsoft, even though their Customers were hit with the "SQL Slammer" worm, doesn't force automatic updates for the SQL Server. Likewise, they restrict forcing updates only to mainstream desktop OS SKUs. Their server, embedded, and "Enterprise" OS SKUs can be configured to never update.