If you were to throw all Windows users onto Linux starting tomorrow… the vast majority will be running the version that was first installed, forever.
Windows update was, long ago, a manual process. The majority of users literally never updated. The current method of opt-out-with-effort is honestly the best solution out there for these types of users.
And I guarantee you, if the majority of Linux users weren’t power users, the same would soon be the case for popular linux distros.
See, you said it yourself, the majority never updates anyway. The problem here is security updates. I’m not sure, but probably Windows has a lot more of those then Linux itself. So Windows users should update to keep themselves “relatively” safe (telemetry doesn’t go anywhere). But on Linux if there is a kernel update, then you can run an update in the background and restart whenever you need to. The will be no additional time waisted after you restart the machine (unlike some other OS).
It depends on the user. My machine is on non-stop, because I always need that instant ability to do anything (I am a dev). It is a hustle if you have some work going on and your OS tells you that it will be forced to update itself (restart the machine) no matter what. This is the default behavior on Windows and without trickery you can’t disable it.
What, so you do not sleep? Why not reboot the moment you go to bed?
It is bad practice to keep any sort of computer on all the time.
It is the default behaviour because otherwise there will be people who never install updates or reboot their computer, but then complain to Microsoft that their computer broke.
You see, all non-root things start to work after you log in (including Android). So, not only that I have to restart my machine, but also wait for the login screen and authenticate myself. Then lock the user to see the big clock (I need it). That’s why it’s not just reboot and go to sleep.
A lot of the time I can’t finish my stuff before bed so I have to leave everything as it is. It’s normal for developers, but it’s not common for regular users (I think).
Again, even if I need to reboot, it will take 1-2 minutes and I can continue to use my machine. You cannot expect such a quick update-reboot from Windows.
If all they ever use it for is internet, and email within their browser, why would that matter to them?
My parents turn their computer on maybe once a week? They sit down, use the browser to pay bills, maybe answer an email, then turn it off. They have not installed anything for years. They would virtually never run into something forcing them to update. Hell, they wouldn’t even know if their browser was out of date.
Hackers discover new vulnerabilities in old software every year. The moment an E-mail comes in that uses an E-mail exploit that hiijacks the domain for their bill payment site, they get screwed. Even if they don’t have anything worth stealing, hackers may then use their relatively unused computer as a bot in their global botnets. 1 million of those users, and it can be used to, say, DDOS Lemmy.
The only time it’s okay to give up on updates is if your computer is never connected to the internet.
I don’t understand your sentence. Who is talking about intentionally installing any software?
I am not referring to them opening an E-mail and reading a request to “Please install this important but suspicious package”. I’m talking about them opening a strange but possibly normal E-mail, and BAM - the content of the message abuses a Z-Sort Address Buffer Exploit invented in the year 2018, patched in the year 2018 by Windows, but not downloaded by them, ever. This exploit then remotely installs whatever without them ever knowing. Even if they never put useful information in that computer, they’re at least part of a botnet that victimizes DDOS targets.
Installing relevant dependencies is part of package installation. I mean the installation is initiated by user, he doesn’t really care how many packages will be installed.
What’s bothering people is when user is being forced to update when user didn’t have the intent to do it.
Pop os does give you a fairly visible pop up that there are new updates and you Just need to Click on it and then Click update. If it works on android it should work here. In theory. Like you said too many power users to realisticly check
Thats apps not system upgrades we are talking about and even then there is a little number on the shop icon with the Number of updates Available.
But Yes typing sudo apt update(or upgrade im not realy sure right now ) followed by flatpak update is way easier, but much less clear for non technical users who are extremly scared of cmd for some reason.
If you were to throw all Windows users onto Linux starting tomorrow… the vast majority will be running the version that was first installed, forever.
Windows update was, long ago, a manual process. The majority of users literally never updated. The current method of opt-out-with-effort is honestly the best solution out there for these types of users.
And I guarantee you, if the majority of Linux users weren’t power users, the same would soon be the case for popular linux distros.
See, you said it yourself, the majority never updates anyway. The problem here is security updates. I’m not sure, but probably Windows has a lot more of those then Linux itself. So Windows users should update to keep themselves “relatively” safe (telemetry doesn’t go anywhere). But on Linux if there is a kernel update, then you can run an update in the background and restart whenever you need to. The will be no additional time waisted after you restart the machine (unlike some other OS).
Because the 2 minutes it takes to update after you shut down your computer for the night is such a hassle?
It depends on the user. My machine is on non-stop, because I always need that instant ability to do anything (I am a dev). It is a hustle if you have some work going on and your OS tells you that it will be forced to update itself (restart the machine) no matter what. This is the default behavior on Windows and without trickery you can’t disable it.
What, so you do not sleep? Why not reboot the moment you go to bed?
It is bad practice to keep any sort of computer on all the time.
It is the default behaviour because otherwise there will be people who never install updates or reboot their computer, but then complain to Microsoft that their computer broke.
You should blame them, not Microsoft.
You see, all non-root things start to work after you log in (including Android). So, not only that I have to restart my machine, but also wait for the login screen and authenticate myself. Then lock the user to see the big clock (I need it). That’s why it’s not just reboot and go to sleep.
A lot of the time I can’t finish my stuff before bed so I have to leave everything as it is. It’s normal for developers, but it’s not common for regular users (I think).
Again, even if I need to reboot, it will take 1-2 minutes and I can continue to use my machine. You cannot expect such a quick update-reboot from Windows.
I’m pretty sure that without updating to a decently recent version, you can’t install any new packages on some Linux distros.
If all they ever use it for is internet, and email within their browser, why would that matter to them?
My parents turn their computer on maybe once a week? They sit down, use the browser to pay bills, maybe answer an email, then turn it off. They have not installed anything for years. They would virtually never run into something forcing them to update. Hell, they wouldn’t even know if their browser was out of date.
Because internet.
Hackers discover new vulnerabilities in old software every year. The moment an E-mail comes in that uses an E-mail exploit that hiijacks the domain for their bill payment site, they get screwed. Even if they don’t have anything worth stealing, hackers may then use their relatively unused computer as a bot in their global botnets. 1 million of those users, and it can be used to, say, DDOS Lemmy.
The only time it’s okay to give up on updates is if your computer is never connected to the internet.
You’re missing my point. Why would they care about not being able to install any new software when they don’t install new software as is.
I don’t understand your sentence. Who is talking about intentionally installing any software?
I am not referring to them opening an E-mail and reading a request to “Please install this important but suspicious package”. I’m talking about them opening a strange but possibly normal E-mail, and BAM - the content of the message abuses a Z-Sort Address Buffer Exploit invented in the year 2018, patched in the year 2018 by Windows, but not downloaded by them, ever. This exploit then remotely installs whatever without them ever knowing. Even if they never put useful information in that computer, they’re at least part of a botnet that victimizes DDOS targets.
Read the thread back, the sentence makes sense with context. You’re arguing the same thing I am.
My apologies. I think I overread the statement of “all they use it for is internet and email”, a line often used to justify never updating a computer.
I’m basically with you. The most popular operating system in the world, whatever it is at the time, should force automatic updates.
Installing relevant dependencies is part of package installation. I mean the installation is initiated by user, he doesn’t really care how many packages will be installed.
What’s bothering people is when user is being forced to update when user didn’t have the intent to do it.
Intent/consent, what’s the difference?
Also /s
Pop os does give you a fairly visible pop up that there are new updates and you Just need to Click on it and then Click update. If it works on android it should work here. In theory. Like you said too many power users to realisticly check
Well… my PopOS does not report new updates. I have to go to the “store”(Pop_shop) and install updates manually (which I do every few weeks).
Installing “Operating System Updates” is not always a smooth operation: the window downloads 1 update and crashes (disappears).
Probably the best is just to use command line (sudo apt) but thn i have to type the password which is annoying.
Thats apps not system upgrades we are talking about and even then there is a little number on the shop icon with the Number of updates Available.
But Yes typing sudo apt update(or upgrade im not realy sure right now ) followed by flatpak update is way easier, but much less clear for non technical users who are extremly scared of cmd for some reason.