XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10   
   From: Newyana2@invalid.nospam   
      
   "J.O. Aho"  wrote   
      
   | > The   
   | > whole approach is a ridiculous mess. How could quality control   
   | > possibly be carried out on so many constant changes?   
   |   
   | Quite simple, most open source projects can get free static code   
   | inspection (this can be automated say when a pull request is made), a   
   | review is always needed before code are merged (how good it is depends   
   | on the maintainers, all from sloppy microsoft standard to BSD high   
   | standard) . This is the same way as most closed source projects also are   
   | done.   
   |   
      
     I don't see it as a closed vs open issue. Microsoft   
   now do the same dripfeed updating. Essentially, the   
   SOHo customer base are now an unpaid beta testing   
   army.   
      
     I've had to make efforts to block these unknown updates   
   in both Win10 and Suse. (And yes, it is in the 100s. I had   
   my firewall down briefly after a week or two when Suse couldn't   
   call home. It told me I had 360 updates waiting. What are   
   they? Who knows. Most of the ames are not informative, even   
   if I wanted to look through 360 updates. It's nuts. I didn't   
   agree to be a beta testing volunteer for programmers who   
   can't stop fiddling. I'm guessing they may spend more time   
   rebuilding the install package than actually writing the software.)   
      
     The way it used to work is that software was thoroughly   
   tested before release. Then another version might come out   
   in maybe a year. At that point people might try it out, or they   
   might wait for reviews. And one could easily find a list of   
   actual changes in the new version. Most of my Windows software   
   hasn't been updated in ages and still works fine. But Microsoft and   
   Linux are now both guilty of seat-of-the-pants updating. If it   
   isn't stopped, Windows will show a message at boot every few   
   days: "Please wait. Installing updates."   
      
     Apple is a different thing. They serve a consumer-only audience,   
   updating periodically with stable releases and quickly dropping   
   support for older products. Their aim is to sell a lot of very   
   dependable devices to a tech-illiterate customer base, which is   
   a different business model.   
      
    If someone screws up and needs to issue a fix, that's fine.   
   But it shouldn't happen very often. An OS on a computer that's   
   actually in use shouldn't be getting dripfeed updates. It should   
   be getting updates rarely and then with good reason. MS know that.   
   That's why they let corporate customers update periodically and   
   test out the changes before rolling them out.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)