Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Jul 2008 21:56 UTC, submitted by peskypescado
I have written about if before: updating programs on your computer - if you're not using a Linux distribution, that is - is a total and utter mess. On Windows and Mac OS X, there are roughly four ways of updating applications. The application notifies of new updates, and then downloads them when you click 'yes', the application updates from within the application itself, or the application requires a special update program running in the background. These are all quite annoying, since they interfere with your workflow (as opposed to, say, running "apt-get upgrade" every morning). The fourth method is the official vendor channel, Windows/Microsoft Update in Windows and Software Update in Mac OS X. Paul Ellis argues that to alleviate the mess, Microsoft should open up Microsoft Update for everyone else - and similar arguments are made concerning Apple's Software Update.
Permalink for comment 325118
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2007-03-04
I don't see the problem... Microsoft just has to implement into Windows a table that any software vendor could use to list an update URL. Then each time you get connected to the Internet, Windows checks each update URL that is listed in the table, and check for available updates from third-party vendors. No need to charge or to verify anything. Microsoft wouldn't have to support third-party apps, if it's a standardised framework, any vendor could add an update entry. It's not less secure than what we have now. Currently, if you have a virus, it doesn't need such a system to download further remote malicious code.