My petty gripe: forced software updates just make everything worse
Technology
62
Beiträge
41
Kommentatoren
2
Aufrufe
-
Ok whatever dude, you need to provide more details than “go ahead.”
I think I'll continue to enjoy my pseudonymity for the time being. Besides, I could link you to some rando's modules, claim to be that person, and you'd have no way of verifying anyhow since this nick has no resemblance to the handle I used. But let's just say, I shipped well-tested, thoroughly documented modules with very high "kwalitee" used by fortune 100 companies.
-
On the other hand DoS attacks frequently depend on systems that haven't had security updates to build up their zombie army.
Yet updates on commercial platforms* rarely allow you to separate between security upgrades and everything else.
-
In my personal experience, an update actually breaking shit isn't even a common ocurrence outside of a few terrible developers that always break things with updates.
AFAICS the author is talking about UX getting worse, not actual breakage. He describes a classic case of platform decay.
-
No one remembers how vulnerable windows server and windows desktop OS’s were before they revamped updates?
Forced updates are great. The internet is safer.
Debian: am I a joke to you?
(security upgrades are separate from everything else)
-
This post did not contain any content.
If you have an asshole that does a bad job for a handyman, you will learn to fear the fixes.
It's not the regularity that is the problem, is the people delivering the fixes. Change manufacturers and software providers. I promise you there is software that is reliable, doesn't get worse over time, respects your freedom, and treats you like a human being instead of a conduit from your bank account to theirs.
You can enjoy software and computers actually.
-
You can’t maintain security and feature changes separately long term.
And why not ? Care to explain ?
In a sane development model there is not any technical problem to do it.
-
Processors change? Non-sequitur. Spectre an its ilk arrived on the scene at least a decade after MS had developed a reputation for shipping shit code.
Libraries become deprecated or vulnerable? Non-sequitur. Whose libraries? Who deprecated them? Remember, this is a company that personified Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. If they picked shitty vendors for libraries and did no due diligence on that source code, why are the externalities foisted upon users? Also, libraries don't "become vulnerable" through some magical process. Either the bug was there from the beginning, or a shitty change was introduced and not caught.
Design paradigms shift? And this is an excuse for writing shitty code? I don't buy it.
New integrations require new code and that means taking into consideration the new shape of the system. Sounds like they did a really shitty job of that and they make it the user's problem.
Should we blame the old house builders for using asbestos? Unequivocally, yes. Those shitheads knew or should have known. Don't believe me? Here is a handy link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224003623
Do note the decades between when it was understood the shit was dangerous and when the decline as a building material happened.
So, no, MS still does not get a pass.
Should we blame the old house builders for using asbestos?
Unequivocally, yes. Those shitheads knew or should have known. Don’t believe me? Here is a handy link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500224003623
Do note the decades between when it was understood the shit was dangerous and when the decline as a building material happened.
I suppose he was referring to the ones that used it before it was understood.
-
includes a much broader library of softwate than Microsoft has ever maintained.
This is true, but isn't what I was referring to. The problem MS are facing is not what they themselves have built, but the huge number of apps that other businesses have built over the years which prevent MS from rewriting or deprecating many parts of the bloated zombie that is now Windows.
Except for the fact that linux is even better at running those old apps from other vendors by now. Try running Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 software under linux with wine.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I have to say, I don't think this has ever happened to me. I don't buy smart devices, I use few commercial apps. Forced updates are not that common in open source world. Just look for products made by people with passion. Those might be a bit more expensive but you will see it's worth it in the long run.
-
No one remembers how vulnerable windows server and windows desktop OS’s were before they revamped updates?
I remember how much it sucked when ignorant users ignored updates forever and MS didn't really seem to give much of a shit about security anyway, yes.
Nowadays MS is a great choice if you want to borrow a computer that someone else controls. Less so if you want a computer that is actually yours.
For most people it won't matter, they just want something that works.
-
For most people it won't matter, they just want something that works.
Thanks, been reading those words from various commenters, in various contexts, in a browser window on my Linux desktop, for longer than some people at Lemmy have probably been alive. But it's always nice to hear familiar phrases again.
-
No one remembers how vulnerable windows server and windows desktop OS’s were before they revamped updates?
Forced updates are great. The internet is safer.
Yeah, I remember, now we still have Windows being vulnerable, but in addition we also have untested changes pushed automatically to paying customers.
Forced updates are great!
-
Except for the fact that linux is even better at running those old apps from other vendors by now. Try running Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 software under linux with wine.
I'm sure all those enterprise clients are positively champing at the bit to switch to Linux
Can I have a conversation about computers here without it being about Linux? And I say this as somebody who uses Linux full-time on all their computers. -
This post did not contain any content.
Remember the early 2000s?
Updates would regularly add shitty bloat and break features. Upgrading to the latest version of anything was always a bad move.It's only maybe the last ten years or so that we have expected updates to fix shit and not break it....
-
The solution isn't being able to stay on old versions. Software should improve over time, not fuck you over
Software should improve over time, not fuck you over
Gotta remember most lamestream software is controlled by capital. Fucking you over as much as possible is the primary goal.
-
No one remembers how vulnerable windows server and windows desktop OS’s were before they revamped updates?
Forced updates are great. The internet is safer.
Forced updates a shitty solution to a much bigger problem: proprietary software.
-
Processors change, libraries become deprecated or vulnerable, design paradigms shift, and new integrations become possible that weren't there when the application first launched. Should we blame old house builders for using asbestos when they didn't know how poorly that would end up?
We should blame a shitty company for not being able to maintain their code.
Seriously if the world depends on some dumb company with some tiny number of people relative to the planet, then the world is dumb and fucked.
-
I'm sure all those enterprise clients are positively champing at the bit to switch to Linux
Can I have a conversation about computers here without it being about Linux? And I say this as somebody who uses Linux full-time on all their computers.Enterprise clients are paying for legal liability not for security, quality, etc. It's pure theatre.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This person has no sense of security.
-
When is this fad going to end?!
When capitalism ends. Or the planet... Whichever comes first.
