Re: Jaunty's update notifications
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Oli Warner wrote on 23/04/09 10:32: ... I'm running very much a non-standard install these days. I've tinkered with things. I say that because I want to make sure what I'm seeing (as a user) is by design and not by some random compound of mistakes. So please put me right if I'm describing something that isn't true of a fresh install. - Apt is still scheduled to update at ~8am every day. Daily, yes (I don't know the exact time). - Update Manager will open if it has standard updates 7 days old or security updates 2 days old No, it's more about when you last installed updates than about the age of the uninstalled updates. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NotifyOSD#Update%20Manager defines the exact behavior. - This is done (and I paraquote) to tidy up the Notification Area Correct. So firstly there's the random window usability argument. New users, especially those who have migrated from an infected Windows computer suffering pop-up hell tend to be incredibly wary of things that just appear. If I arrive at my PC (with the aim of doing something specific) I'd probably ignore the update screen. I might not even know what it is and close it. Having it just spring up is setting a dangerous precedent for annoy-ware and might result people turning off the automatic updates to live an easier life. https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2009-February/027568.html That paired with the time delay might lead to occasions where everybody has worked really hard to get a security update out and it isn't applied for days. There is no time delay for presenting security updates. ... What is the default update procedure? Would a fresh install of Ubuntu install security updates without confirmation as soon as it gets them? No. If not, why on earth not? That's something we need to discuss further. There are benefits to installing security updates automatically, but there are also costs, especially with updates to programs such as Firefox that malfunction if you are running them while they are being updated. ... What I'm suggesting is we go all-out to ensure people know there are updates and they know what to do. Think an animated, spinning version of the update notification, balloon pop-ups explaining why installing the updates is a good idea and if they close that balloon, leave the icon in the notification area, spawning fresh balloons at increased frequency. You could argue that it's equally annoying as just spawning the update window and I'd probably agree, but I think it's that important to make sure users do their updates. ... I don't understand why you think that would be better than opening the updates window. Cheers - -- Matthew Paul Thomas http://mpt.net.nz/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAknxf1YACgkQ6PUxNfU6ecqMzgCgse+ND50eC+ronk9ofobcAb3Q P/kAoMf4su2/7d72ZSsHKmW6sBGAT5QR =0H1t -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Jaunty's update notifications
Pardon the duplicate Matthew, I forgot to click reply to all. Just re-sending for the sake of the conversation. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Oli Warner o...@thepcspy.com wrote: Thanks for getting back to me. If not, why on earth not? [regarding security updates being installed instantly] That's something we need to discuss further. There are benefits to installing security updates automatically, but there are also costs, especially with updates to programs such as Firefox that malfunction if you are running them while they are being updated. Yes I can see that being an issue that needs engineering. Firefox does have session saving but I suspect that would still leave some users with data-loss (eg filling out Flash powered forms). And yes, services are another issue. ... What I'm suggesting is we go all-out to ensure people know there are updates and they know what to do. Think an animated, spinning version of the update notification, balloon pop-ups explaining why installing the updates is a good idea and if they close that balloon, leave the icon in the notification area, spawning fresh balloons at increased frequency. You could argue that it's equally annoying as just spawning the update window and I'd probably agree, but I think it's that important to make sure users do their updates. ... I don't understand why you think that would be better than opening the updates window. Well I presume it's not called the Notification Area for our health =) So from a desktop-unification point of view, it's obvious why, I hope. Popping up balloons demanding some action (even if they choose to click ignore) is a much better way for the user to understand that they have updates that *need* installing. Analogy time. Imagine installing updates is like paying your bills. I'd much rather have a letter come through the door when a bill was due. That's how I receive all sorts of other notifications. The current update notification (update manager popping up) is like waking up in the morning to find an agent of the company sitting in your kitchen asking for payment. It's intrusive and confusing. My suggestion is more intrusive than than the old behaviour but only because I know several people who just didn't understand what the orange update icon meant. An actionable balloon doesn't get in the way like a window does but it lets the user know that something needs doing. The extension to my idea would allow trivial updates to be done *from the balloon* which I think would make things even easier for non-power users who don't need or want to know what updates are going to be installed. But as I said before, before any changes are made, there needs to be a system in place so we can track how successful any given update model is. Very hard to guess how non-power-user treat the current methods. They might be ignored even more than the little orange icon. They might be a raving success. Who knows?! -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Jaunty's update notifications
Olá Matthew e a todos. On Friday 24 April 2009 09:59:08 Matthew Paul Thomas wrote: If not, why on earth not? That's something we need to discuss further. There are benefits to installing security updates automatically, but there are also costs, especially with updates to programs such as Firefox that malfunction if you are running them while they are being updated. And because, some may require services to be restarted, which is never a good idea. -- Hi, I'm BUGabundo, and I am Ubuntu (whyubuntu.com) (``-_-´´) http://LinuxNoDEI.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB http://BUGabundo.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Jaunty's update notifications
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/904#Change%20in%20notifications%20of%20available%20updates On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 17:06, George Farris farr...@cc.mala.bc.ca wrote: I agree this is a real set back for me. Please at least give us the choice of window or notification, maybe window first with a check mark to move to notification. Having a window pop up is horrible. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Jaunty's update notifications
From what I gather (reading forum and brainstorm posts) the topic of update notifications may have already been discussed ad nauseum in devel but I missed that discussion and I find the current update method a mammoth step backwards for usability and security. I'm running very much a non-standard install these days. I've tinkered with things. I say that because I want to make sure what I'm seeing (as a user) is by design and not by some random compound of mistakes. So please put me right if I'm describing something that isn't true of a fresh install. - Apt is still scheduled to update at ~8am every day. - Update Manager will open if it has standard updates 7 days old or security updates 2 days old - This is done (and I paraquote) to tidy up the Notification Area So firstly there's the random window usability argument. New users, especially those who have migrated from an infected Windows computer suffering pop-up hell tend to be incredibly wary of things that just appear. If I arrive at my PC (with the aim of doing something specific) I'd probably ignore the update screen. I might not even know what it is and close it. Having it just spring up is setting a dangerous precedent for annoy-ware and might result people turning off the automatic updates to live an easier life. That paired with the time delay might lead to occasions where everybody has worked really hard to get a security update out and it isn't applied for days. The speed that remote flaws are converted into exploits is disgustingly fast and it should be the principal concept that when we have security updates, we make sure users get them installed. Leaving them to stew for days isn't abiding that idea. What is the default update procedure? Would a fresh install of Ubuntu install security updates without confirmation as soon as it gets them? If not, why on earth not? If you think they don't need to be enabled, please just go and look at the mess not enabling them has caused the world. Windows XP SP0, pirated around the world without automatic updates has contributed to the rapid rise of botnets. Let's keep Ubuntu safe. *Now, what was wrong with the old update behaviour?* Was it too subtle? I think it was. Plenty of people who I've installed Ubuntu for have managed to ignore it completely and it takes several reminders from me to get them using the updates as intended. Does that mean the notification icon was a bad idea? No. It just didn't go far enough. What I'm suggesting is we go all-out to ensure people know there are updates and they know what to do. Think an animated, spinning version of the update notification, balloon pop-ups explaining why installing the updates is a good idea and if they close that balloon, leave the icon in the notification area, spawning fresh balloons at increased frequency. You could argue that it's equally annoying as just spawning the update window and I'd probably agree, but I think it's that important to make sure users do their updates. My final idea is adding another group that allows users to install security updates (only) without becoming root. I have no idea how it would work but if an update balloon popped up giving me the option to install updates now, I know I'd be more inclined to install them on a regular basis if I didn't have to stick my password in each and every time. I lied. *This* will be my final idea: are you using any data collection methods to analyse how people are using the updates? I'm sure the changes that have been made so far have been done to increase uptake but how will we know either way if there isn't a metric to track? I would suggest submitting an upgradable packages over one day old for both security and other patches (as two values) when apt does its morning upgrade. Of course you'd need to ask the user permission for that data collection but that's the easy part as it's just an extension of the popularity contest. I hope that all makes sense. Please argue for or against any of it. Oli Warner. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
