[Ayatana] What most people would find useful (was: Re: Updates on Login )
Joshua Blount wrote: It may be a good idea, as David suggested, to look past our personal user stories, and look for what most people would find useful. Most useful here is probably somewhat synonymous with least surprising. If the target default Ubuntu end user comes from a Microsoft Windows background, then the Windows XP SP2 style is what that user is probably familiar with: (a) At installation or first use, there is a screen indicating that auto update will be enabled; (b) Daily automatic updates in the background at 3am; (c) The user can alter this, but very few do. I'm not sure that is going to win many hearts and minds, and clearly it is not innovative... but it is what many users have come to expect their computers to do, because bug #1 is not yet fixed! One problem is that this behaviour is not what current Ubuntu users expect, so some existing Ubuntu users (power users???) probably *will* be surprised, and (perhaps as evidenced by this discussion and the 300+ comments on a single bug) they are likely to be vocal about their unhappiness. Another problem is that automated updates by default are bad for some users -- those with slow or expensive Internet connections. If the primary issue being addressed is many users rarely or never update their systems; how can we get more users to update more often, then an automated update by default is probably the most effective and most convenient solution. If we accept that, then how to best address the slow or expensive Internet connection issues for the minority becomes a secondary question. Important, but secondary. All the update on login vs logoff vs pop-under vs where-do-we-put-the-icon or how exactly do we notify or prompt the user about updates debate is *only* relevant for the users in this minority, if the default for the well-connected majority is a fully automated background update. (I don't know of statistics on the fraction of Ubuntu users with slow or expensive connections vs those with fast-enough and unlimited-enough ones -- does anyone have such info?). BOTTOM LINE: Default to fully automated updates, unless circumstances are exceptional. Further thoughts: Are there ways the system can try to determine I'm on a slow connection (ping latency to a Ubuntu server? Test throughput for a small file download?) and so defer an automated update in those circumstances? Or just let the user specify this per interface? I don't think there's a way to automatically determine I'm on an expensive connection, so users would (presumably) need to provide info on that when a network connection is first configured. Would it make sense for users to specify whether or not a given network connection is expensive (and/or slow), so that an automated updater can do the right thing? Are there other network applications that would find knowing whether a given network connection was slow or expensive useful so they could adapt their behaviour (BitTorrent? Streaming audio/video players?) ? One last (perhaps weirder) thought: for those with mobile devices that generally have a slow/expensive wireless connection, having a home/office PC or NAS box act as a Ubuntu mirror, so updates from it are really fast when the mobile device is home, might be worth exploring. For notebook + smartphone + home media server type households, this could be very convenient. Right now, local Ubuntu mirrors (or just Ubuntu *update* mirrors) at home or in the office are for the techie few only... is this something we could or should be looking to make significantly easier, to help with the whole update issue? Jonathan ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] What most people would find useful (was: Re: Updates on Login )
This discussion has grown big enough for it to deserve several wiki pages about several points, so it'd be really great to stop splitting it and changing its name, cause i just can't follow anymore. PS : sorry for the offtopic :) ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] What most people would find useful (was: Re: Updates on Login )
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:45:39 -0700 Jonathan Marsden jmars...@fastmail.fm wrote: Joshua Blount wrote: It may be a good idea, as David suggested, to look past our personal user stories, and look for what most people would find useful. Most useful here is probably somewhat synonymous with least surprising. If the target default Ubuntu end user comes from a Microsoft Windows background, then the Windows XP SP2 style is what that user is probably familiar with: (a) At installation or first use, there is a screen indicating that auto update will be enabled; (b) Daily automatic updates in the background at 3am; (c) The user can alter this, but very few do. I'm not sure that is going to win many hearts and minds, and clearly it is not innovative... but it is what many users have come to expect their computers to do, because bug #1 is not yet fixed! One problem is that this behaviour is not what current Ubuntu users expect, so some existing Ubuntu users (power users???) probably *will* be surprised, and (perhaps as evidenced by this discussion and the 300+ comments on a single bug) they are likely to be vocal about their unhappiness. This is about how updates are presented and some orthogonal to when/if users should be asked. Another problem is that automated updates by default are bad for some users -- those with slow or expensive Internet connections. If the primary issue being addressed is many users rarely or never update their systems; how can we get more users to update more often, then an automated update by default is probably the most effective and most convenient solution. If we accept that, then how to best address the slow or expensive Internet connection issues for the minority becomes a secondary question. Important, but secondary. All the update on login vs logoff vs pop-under vs where-do-we-put-the-icon or how exactly do we notify or prompt the user about updates debate is *only* relevant for the users in this minority, if the default for the well-connected majority is a fully automated background update. (I don't know of statistics on the fraction of Ubuntu users with slow or expensive connections vs those with fast-enough and unlimited-enough ones -- does anyone have such info?). BOTTOM LINE: Default to fully automated updates, unless circumstances are exceptional. Further thoughts: Are there ways the system can try to determine I'm on a slow connection (ping latency to a Ubuntu server? Test throughput for a small file download?) and so defer an automated update in those circumstances? Or just let the user specify this per interface? I don't think there's a way to automatically determine I'm on an expensive connection, so users would (presumably) need to provide info on that when a network connection is first configured. Would it make sense for users to specify whether or not a given network connection is expensive (and/or slow), so that an automated updater can do the right thing? Are there other network applications that would find knowing whether a given network connection was slow or expensive useful so they could adapt their behaviour (BitTorrent? Streaming audio/video players?) ? One last (perhaps weirder) thought: for those with mobile devices that generally have a slow/expensive wireless connection, having a home/office PC or NAS box act as a Ubuntu mirror, so updates from it are really fast when the mobile device is home, might be worth exploring. For notebook + smartphone + home media server type households, this could be very convenient. Right now, local Ubuntu mirrors (or just Ubuntu *update* mirrors) at home or in the office are for the techie few only... is this something we could or should be looking to make significantly easier, to help with the whole update issue? Every time you update a working system there is a risk. For myself, I don't apply anything except critical security updates when I'm travelling. I think the biggest problem with automatic updates is that it puts systems at some non-zero risk for the sake of fixing something that probably isn't relevant to their systems. Non-security updates only help people who were experiencing that particular problem. Most security issues only relate to local security problems and tend to be much less relevant on single user systems. Other issues may be quite severe, but still unsuitable for automatic updates because of unavoidable side effects. An example of this is last year's openssl bug. If that had been delivered automatically, it would have caused people to be locked out of systems. If we want to deliver updates automatically (I think this merits serious consideration), then we will need a new scheme to mark updates as appropriate for automatic delivery. These would also probably need some additional QA to reduce the risk for users installing the update with no chance to consider if it would be a good update for them. Scott K
Re: [Ayatana] What most people would find useful (was: Re: Updates on Login )
I think the biggest problem with automatic updates is that it puts systems at some non-zero risk for the sake of fixing something that probably isn't relevant to their systems. Wonderful point. I don't upgrade my system at all while I'm traveling. Stefano ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] What most people would find useful (was: Re: Updates on Login )
Il giorno gio, 18/06/2009 alle 18.25 -0400, Scott Kitterman ha scritto: These would also probably need some additional QA to reduce the risk for users installing the update with no chance to consider if it would be a good update for them. I will trust no human on that :) If you have a way to prove that I can get rid of an unwanted side effect it's ok. E.g: just find a way (unionfs??) to install the upgrades *and* allow me to boot a system *without* them. It may be difficult or easy but provable safety is the only way to go. For security upgrades, that do not typically induce file format change (like e.g. major updates of evolution), using an unionfs with the updates seems viable. That'd open the way to automatic security upgrades and stop the whole thing. For bug fixes, it may even be every six months. That way, perhaps, it would not become an option to release things broken. Vincenzo ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana Post to : ayatana@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Re: [Ayatana] Updates on Login (was: Re: [Fwd: Update manager])
You might want to read this http://lifehacker.com/5295449/disable-ubuntus-annoying-update-manager-popup Alex Launi wrote: I figured I should start a new thread for this, so that you can all continue your icon vs. pop-under debate, which is still relevant for the auto-login case, although it becomes much less important. I've copied and pasted the relevant posts from the previous thread into this one. Have at it. === On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Alex Launi alex.la...@gmail.com mailto:alex.la...@gmail.com wrote: I had meant to chat with Martin Pitt after his plenary, but never managed to catch up with him. I forgot about it until I was going through my notebook the other day. It would be really great if when update-manager presented itself, some bugs (ones that you reported/subscribed to on LP) had a nice messsage that made you really excited to update because your bug was fixed! Make updates fun! David Siegel also had a really great idea for making updates fun (and it also solves the issue of how to handle updates- notification icon or pop-under window) at the install updates on shutdown discussion. Let me preface this with these are his ideas and not mine, I think they're great and he deserves the credit. His idea was to do updates at login. We could do the checking while you're using, and then if we find them on reboot show them in gdm with a nice present icon, like we're giving you a gift. This way if an update requires a restart, you don't have to save your state, restart, blah blah blah and interrupt your entire workflow, you haven't started yet. It might not be possible now, but when the clutter gdm finally lands we could do it really beautifully. -- -- Alex Launi On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:06 PM, tacone tac...@gmail.com mailto:tac...@gmail.com wrote: Good intent, bad idea. When you turn on the pc it's because you needed. Windows shows the update notification on shutdown, which makes much more sense (and if you just installed some reboot requiring update, even more). I wouldn't oppose to a well done, good designed entry on shutdown: Updates available ! Keeping your system up to date is important. [x] Install the updates before logging out. [ Open the update manager ] - Stefano On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Alex Launi alex.la...@gmail.com mailto:alex.la...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:06 PM, tacone tac...@gmail.com mailto:tac...@gmail.com wrote: Good intent, bad idea. I disagree, let's imagine this scenario, together... blur and wiggle dream sequence style scene change It's Tuesday morning, you get up and turn on your computer. Whilst you were fast asleep dreaming of sugar plums and sexy librarians Ubuntu packagers were hard at work packaging updates for your favourite operating system. Now that it's morning, these updates are available, for you! You boot up and arrive at the slick new GDM. But what's this message? New updates available! Click here to install Some days you're very busy, and need your computer right away so you chose to ignore them and log right in. That's ok, they'll be available when you're ready. Update Manager shouldn't go away, you should be able to launch it yourself manually if you want to update once you've logged in and found out that DST was this weekend and you've got some extra time. But today you decide to click. The interface changes nicely into a screen displaying what updates are available, and asking for your username and password to authorize install / log in. If you're not an administrator we will politely tell you that you can't perform an upgrade, and that you should let your administrator know that your system needs some updates. At this point we just finish the login, since you just gave us your info. Awesome. Now let's say you are an admin, this update requires no reboot so we log you right in, and when the desktop is loaded there is already a dialog waiting giving you the progress of your update. You may continue working, you weren't cost much time, and your system is fully secure because you're up to date. But next time there might be a kernel upgrade, which will require a restart. In this case we should ask the user what they'd like to do. In some cases the estimated time to finish (which we will show) may only be 2 minutes, and we can afford that so we just halt the login and modally install the upgrades, or we allow them to say ok i recognize that this update will need a restart to apply, but I need my computer- so lets continue like there are no updates that require a reboot, and I will reboot when I'm ready. blur and wiggle dream sequence end style change Awesome, right? -- --Alex Launi On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Charlie Kravetz c...@teamcharliesangels.com mailto:c...@teamcharliesangels.com wrote: What about those who use an autologin? They
