Comments on: Software Updates and How It’s Done Wrong

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:13:50 +0000

ODDie: Yes, Ubuntu’s approach to updating is really good and I have to agree with what Brad says, Microsoft us also pretty good at it, except for forcing me to restart my PC.

Thanks for commenting.

By: ODDie

ODDie — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:00:34 +0000

I like Ubuntu-like (or generally linux-like) software updater. Synaptic for example (in Ubuntu) – the package (software) manager and its updater notifies you about available updates in a tray popup. You can click it at any time and even if you click “update” and start the process, updater works and you can do your work without disturbing. Opened apps (which were updated) remains in their previous versions till you close them – without forcing you to do anything. I think it’s very user-friendly solution.

By: Brad

Brad — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:25:00 +0000

You talk about how auto updates are done poorly, but you failed to say how they should be done. It’s easy to poke holes at the flaws of various systems, but how about giving your ideas of how the process SHOULD work.
If you ask me I think Microsoft does it right if you have auto update enabled (I don’t), Apple (on the PC) does it nice also with their ‘Apple Software Update’ for iTunes, QuickTime and Safari. Grisoft AntiVirus also does a nice job. All of these product at most require a click to confirm the install, some may prompt for a re-boot but I cannot remember any forcing a reboot.

By: James

James — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:57:06 +0000

I am not entirely sure, but I think microsoft installs updates when you switch off your PC. (haven’t used a PC in a while though). Nice site.