But it's the magic circle of trust where all the open source fairies and unicorns live and dance and frolic all the day long!
sng
· 1 year ago
Of course. To a freetard freedom is the right to play by their rules.
Ted
· 1 year ago
Amen brother, amen.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
The really funny part is this: "With that change, I think I'd be pretty happy to let the Apple Software Update service back on my Windows machine."
That makes it personal. Instead of "Windows users are so fucking confused by a checkbox that they can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser," it becomes "I, Aza, am so fucking confused by a checkbox that I can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser."
David S.
· 1 year ago
Nope, not at all. The principle is simple, it's like when you sign up at a website - the "receive our weekly newsletter" checkbox should be unchecked by default (it often isn't but it should be). People shouldn't be tricked (or defaulted) into receiving optional stuff (software, email, etc.) they don't want or require. If they want it they can check the box and make a hopefully informed choice to accept it.
Pierce
· 1 year ago
After reading a lot of the comments floating around the interweb, I have come to the conclusion that the real issue is there should be no check boxes whatsoever, anywhere. According to the Windows users on the forums, everybody just clicks through screens without spending the time to digest what exactly it is they are updating or installing.
So I think Apple should revise the Software Update again, but this time it should just be a window with a big progress indicator and no words except "Done" when everything has finished installing. If they want to include an advanced view that lists what is going to be installed they should hide it in the menus where no average Windows users can stumble on its confusing nature.
This issue of "To be checked, or not checked." is really a moot issue. What Apple defines as "new and separate" and "just an upgrade" is up to Apple. If you don't like it, get a refund.
Adam
· 1 year ago
This amuses the heck out of me. I can see Asa's point, it probably shouldn't be defaulty checked. However, it's not the end of the world and considering what Apple already did, I'd say that's more than what most companies would do.
However, if you want to get nit picky, we could walk thru Firefox and see where things are defaulted to checked...cause apparently they don't trust me to make such choices as "Always checking to see if Firefox is the default browser on startup".
Evil? perhaps :D
david
· 1 year ago
Oh,...cause your "angry", I get it now.
Simon
· 1 year ago
@Adam Reading Asa's post, he's definatly not treating it like it's the end of the world either.
Gabriel Schröder
· 1 year ago
I actually agree with Asa. The thing is called "Software Update", so you expect it to update your software in default mode. Can do other things if you ask it, but in default mode, it shouldn't mess with your system and install other things.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
David S.
Nope, not at all. The principle is simple, it’s like when you sign up at a website - the “receive our weekly newsletter” checkbox should be unchecked by default (it often isn’t but it should be). People shouldn’t be tricked (or defaulted) into receiving optional stuff (software, email, etc.) they don’t want or require. If they want it they can check the box and make a hopefully informed choice to accept it.
So you agree that, as other's have pointed out, the checkbox to always check if FireFox is the default browser, is "tricking" users. Because I sure as hell have seen users bounce back and forth between IE and FF, selecting each as the default every time one launches.
GearsofWar
· 1 year ago
It has been seriously hilarious watching the Firefox guys the last several months. From the embarrassed reaction to revelations of how much the "free browser company" makes from Google each year (A LOT), to the "Acid3 is useless now that we can't meet it, besides, we are busy with Firefox 3 ", and now this whole snit about an Apple browser's checkbox on Windows machines...its great entertainment!
Alex Reid
· 1 year ago
Note also that when loading Firefox (or any other browser, for that matter) blindly clicking through the dialogue boxes that pop up results in Firefox being set as the default browser! Perhaps we should demand that Mozilla remove this dialogue box immediately, lest someone not know how to click the 'no' button.
Joel
· 1 year ago
I fail to see what about Asa's post is worth such poisoned outrage.
boz
· 1 year ago
Joel:
The Angry Drunk is both inebriated and choleric.
Duh.
He's also right on!!!
Ryan Cannon
· 1 year ago
Don't you think the whole default browser question is slightly smaller in scope than installing an application which may or may not affect the performance or security of your machine?
The real question: what does the user *intends* to do. When opening a browser that must be downloaded from the Internet to install, I think it's pretty safe to assume that the user also wants that browser as their default.
Look me in the eye and tell me that, by updating QuickTime or iTunes, the user also *intends* to install a Web Browser.
I'm as big a fanboi as the next, but Apple's wrong here.
telos
· 1 year ago
Apple's behaving like a real fucking pusher here. Funny how the very drunk defending this practice also had a go at Mozilla for not competing on merit. Blatantly, shoving a browser down people's throats isn't exactly competing on merit. I may be a Mac/Safari user, but I'm not a sycophant. Apple's wrong here.
Jim Bennett
· 1 year ago
You all realize that this isn't Apple trying to pull some grand conspiracy to make Safari everyone's default browser, right? I
detritus
· 1 year ago
I agree with Asa Dotzler, Apple needs to stop checking Safari's box on Software Update, if the box is checked you can inadvertently download Safari along with the QuickTime or iTunes update du jour. A large percentage of people will just click the Install button without noticing, because they trust Software Update. And the name is pretty much self-explanatory, it's supposed to update previously installed software. Now, to avoid downloading new software you don't want, you have to remember to uncheck the darn box. Every goddamn time. Of course you can click on the Tools menu to ignore the selected update but the solution is not that straightforward. I happen to know the trick because I use a Mac, Windows users are not supposed to know the ins and outs of Software Update. The update mechanism should be straightforward and worthy of their trust.
“So you agree that, as other’s have pointed out, the checkbox to always check if FireFox is the default browser, is “tricking” users.”
If you want to use Firefox as your default browser, the “Always checking to see if Firefox is the default browser on startup” thingy won't be an annoyance.
If Safari is your default browser, and you happen to launch Firefox, it will pester you (“hey, how come I'm not the default browser?”). Most likely it will happen just once, you are presented with a dialogue, you can uncheck the box and click yes/no. I don't see this as a problem, Firefox is not tricking users, it's easy to avoid and no new software is installed without the user's consent taking advantage of a moment's inattention.
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
Considering the way Windows deals with the "default browser", that's actually a pretty major issue.
However, it is hypocritical in the extreme for Asa to point fingers at Apple when they pull the same kind of shit. Firefox's default is to suck all the personal data out of IE.
Why do I now HAVE to install Firefox's crash reporter? It's not part of Firefox, and I hate the fucking thing, it means that FF crashes take longer to recover from. How is that okay, especially in its current completely invisible form, when Apple's now clearly-marked install of Safari isn't?
I guess Asa will make this all clear, as to why their "opt-out" is okay, and Apple's isn't.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
telos:
Apple’s behaving like a real fucking pusher here.
Wait, what? Did you just actually compare Apple with a drug dealer? I thought the "malware" line was retarded, but that takes the fucking cake. What's next, "Steve Jobs imports Peruvian sex slaves." Well, to be fair, that one is true; but you didn't hear it from me.
Jim Bennett
· 1 year ago
Sorry, hit enter prematurely there.
As I was saying, Apple's not "in the wrong" here because they probably didn't even realize this would be an issue.
I doubt it ever occurred to them to put Safari in its own category. Likewise, I doubt it occurred to them to uncheck it by default, because, unless my updater is broken, *everything* is checked by default.
Also, you should learn to fucking read before you click on something.
But hey, that's just me. I think stupid people should be killed, and I think that while, yes, it's probably the "right thing to do" to make it unchecked by default, I also think anyone who bitches about it extensively is, in fact, stupid.
lkm
· 1 year ago
As a UI Designer, I can assure you that Windows (and Mac, for that matter) users are indeed so fucking confused by checkboxes that they can't be trusted to figure out that they have to uncheck a by-default checked box to not get Safari. Apple, of course, knows this, which is why the box is checked.
Andrew
· 1 year ago
Here's how it goes. I downloaded a product by a particular company. That I use once in a blue moon to watch videos on the web. For that I get a big pop-up in the middle of my screen asking me to download 2 pieces of software I don't want at all, and maybe an update for that particular program. To get the update to my program I actually have to uncheck boxes to avoid installing two massive programs that may alter how my system functions (a different media player comes up when I play media, and a different web browser comes up when I open an HTML file). The fact I don't like this makes me confused in some way? What else do Apple fan boys put up with?
Jim Bennett
· 1 year ago
I have never once had the updater open without me clicking on it, and I use iTunes and Quicktime with regularity. Maybe my updater is out of date, Iunno, but that's never happened for me.
John C Welch
· 1 year ago
Andrew, you mean Apple makes you UNCHECK A FUCKING BOX??!!!!111
OMGWTFKHAAAAN!!
justme
· 1 year ago
See, what I think 99% of the mitchers and boners on the net don't get, is that iTunes is built on Webkit... The majority of what makes Safari work is ALREADY ON THEIR PC IF THEY HAVE iTUNES!!!!!
Apple's doing nothing wrong here... Some people just seem to have WAY too much fsckin time on their hands.
not a fanboi.. just someone that values common sense and sees very little in this idiotic argument...
telos
· 1 year ago
drunkard:
p>Wait, what? Did you just actually compare Apple with a drug dealer?
Well yes. The fact that there are huge differences between Apple and drug dealers doesn't preclude the two from having points of similarity. In this case, Apple is forcefully and rather unpleasantly trying to get people to use its products. Sort of like a drug dealer harassing someone to buy gear. Far from being "retarded", I think my comment was rather apt.
Jim Bennett
· 1 year ago
You're an idiot.
Just saying.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
lkm, Seeing as how you argue that .dmg drag installs are broken, your opinion is essentially worthless. You're dead to me.
Steven Fisher
· 1 year ago
@26justme iTunes is based on WebKit now? It never used to be.
But I agree that this is a non-issue. It isn't like Safari, say, automatically runs after installing, imports all your data from Internet Explorer, changes your home page and sets itself as you preferred browser by default. That would just be uncouth.
(Yes, a fresh install of Firefox just did all of those things.)
Ken Pierson
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk
So you agree that, as other’s have pointed out, the checkbox to always check if FireFox is the default browser, is “tricking” users. Because I sure as hell have seen users bounce back and forth between IE and FF, selecting each as the default every time one launches.
No, not at all. Without touching the checkbox, you can choose "No, but ask me next time" or "Yes, and ask me if it changes". The other options are "No, and never ask me again" (in which case, most people would want to uninstall the program) and "Yes, but I don't care if it changes" (which doesn't make much sense).
The choice is presented on its own. It has nothing to do with updates to Firefox, much less other programs. And "no, stop asking" is an option.
Also, they're following convention, at least on Windows. Like you pointed out, IE presents basically the same dialog. So does pretty much every other web browser, mail program, etc.
Would you really think it was OK for Firefox to default to installing Thunderbird at every update? Would you want Adobe, Microsoft, Sun, etc. all to do the same thing with their products?
Jim Bennett
· 1 year ago
I'd be OK, yeah, as long as I could deselect it. Which, oh my god!, I can do here! It's like I'm not stupid or something!
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Ken Pierson
Would you really think it was OK for Firefox to default to installing Thunderbird at every update? Would you want Adobe, Microsoft, Sun, etc. all to do the same thing with their products?
Actually, if, during the Firefox install it popped up a dialog asking if I wanted to install Thunderbird, with the box checked; I would uncheck it and get on with my life. But then again, I'm not a whiny twat.
Ken Pierson
· 1 year ago
@The Angry Drunk:
Actually, if, during the Firefox install it popped up a dialog asking if I wanted to install Thunderbird, with the box checked; I would uncheck it and get on with my life.
Not the install, every single update. And not just Firefox, every program by anyone with more than one product.
Personally, I like it when updates are updates and I don't have to scrutinize them. But that's me.
But then again, I’m not a whiny twat.
Right, your bitching has bold tags and profanity. That's totally better.
Steve Jobs
· 1 year ago
Didn't anyone think about checking the "Ignore update" button? Never see the evil Safari again. How come there is no cheese served with all this whine?
Daniel Corban
· 1 year ago
There is nothing malicious about Apple's decision here. It is simply part of the modern corporate culture to make assumptions in favor of the corporation and require the individual to expend effort if they wish things to be otherwise.
Bryn
· 1 year ago
detritus make an important point about trust. In this current climate of needing to regular install security update to software, we need the average user to trust Apple, Microsoft etc. and install updates when they are released. If some one runs software update and as a result ends up with some new piece of software installed on their computer, that they did not want, next time software update pops up they may just hit "cancel" and miss an important security update.
Percent
· 1 year ago
90% of the nerd rage on this issue would turn to vapor if the Windows uers complaining would admit that it's mostly because they see Apple as "the enemy". It's anti-fanboyism at it's worst.
Or, they could just note that the application is "Apple Software Update", not "iTunes Update". If you don't want other Apple software, then don't fucking run Apple Software Update.
mike
· 1 year ago
"Apple is forcefully and rather unpleasantly trying to get people to use its products. Sort of like a drug dealer harassing someone to buy gear. "
DRUG DEALERS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY. They sell you what you fucking ask for. Also, I don't know what "gear" is. I don't think drug dealers even sell "gear." Usually, someone goes to a drug dealer for marijuana or cocaine, but goes to the mall if they want a new pair of skis.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Percent
90% of the nerd rage on this issue would turn to vapor if the Windows uers complaining would admit that it’s mostly because they see Apple as “the enemy”. It’s anti-fanboyism at it’s worst.
Bing Bing Motherfucking Bing. Percent wins the gods damn prize. To expand, for any of you fuckers who thinks that I actually care one way or another what Apple, or Mozilla, or Microsoft for that matter does with their software updates; listen carefully, I don't.
What does get my bile up is the breathless rush to bang out an anti-Apple or anti-fucking-anybody blog post just to show your ant-whoever-the-fuck cred.
One of the most annoying aspects of the average Mac "fanboi," and the aspect that rightly garners the most derision from rational people is the instant assumption that anything that Microsoft does is "evil." Microsoft, Apple, hells even your precious fucking Google are not evil. They are corporations that have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profit.
I'm sorry that that reality gets you all weepy, but them's the facts. And the other truth is, Asa Dotzler doesn't give a shit about you little fucks. His job is to evangelize Firefox. Sadly he chooses to do so by posting retarded fucking screeds about Safari. Really, all I can do is pity you twits who buy into it.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Ken Pierson
Right, your bitching has bold tags and profanity. That’s totally better.
But yet you're here, so I guess I win. Tell you what, when you get the balls to add a link to your blog I'll play by your rules. Until then, you're in my house, you deal with my style.
LKM
· 1 year ago
Darby,
If you think people actually know how images work or intuitively figure it out when they encounter one, or that they actually read the text next to preselected checkboxes, I suggest you get to know some people who aren't geeks. Just because something works for you does not mean that it works for everyone, or that other people are dumb if it doesn't work for them.
I don't "argue" that .dmg installing is broken. I know it's broken, from many observations of how "normal" people try to use them and expect them to behave.
I suggest you sit in on a usability test. It's eye-opening how many things we take as granted simply don't work for many otherwise perfectly intelligent humans.
Jesper
· 1 year ago
"Again, the take home message here is that Windows users are so fucking confused by a checkbox that they can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser. "
No, the take home message is that with the checkbox selected, Software Update degrades from "software that makes your life easier because you can just click to install anything it asks for and it'll actually Update your Software" to "software that may or may not install new crap in addition to being useful".
That new crap has now been isolated to a new list to facilitate easier deselecting is progress, don't get me wrong. But the angle you describe people like me as pushing is "people is stupid and can't uncheck checkboxes". That's not it. People just don't read. People have to deal with tons of text every day when they use a computer, and when annoying dialogs come up they read as little as they can to get the damn thing out of their faces. (This is why "Don't Save", "Cancel" and "Save" are better labels than "Yes", "No" and "Cancel"; one set makes you read the message, one doesn't.)
And no matter what you think of it, a fucking software updater application has definitely been tossed in the pile of "I don't need to read this, and it is good for me if I click Install". I'm not drawing a picture of clueless morons thinking this, we all do this every day so we'll have time to read (or write) essays on checkbox semantics with all the time we save, unless we happen to be terribly interested in one of the particular updates which I assure you is rare.
Anyway. My point is still "when the checkbox is preselected, you actually have to give a crap about Software Update". It's much easier to give a crap about Software Update now since the new software package isn't drowning in QuickTime security updates or iTunes revisions that improves stability and adds support for the new hooloovoo iPod shuffle, and maybe that's enough. This isn't really about Firefox developers being mad because they can't hitch a ride for autoinstallation (don't Firefox come preinstalled with Dell or HPs, I forget which?), and I'm guessing you know that, but it's expedient to frame the issue as invented by the disgruntled competition, because otherwise it's just people arguing about checkboxes.
Jesper
· 1 year ago
For completeness, let's say "people is stupid and can’t uncheck checkboxes" was an intentional and completely unembarrassing typo, meant to amplify the point that people are indeed stupid, instead of me forgetting the basics of English grammar for a split second.
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
@Jesper I'm not framing the issue. I'm also not the Mozilla foundation employee who won't drop this non-issue; and who's spending far more time on his blog defending his comments than I am here.
You're right though, in the end this boils down to a disagreement over a freaking checkbox in an app that no one even needs to use. I think that some people are under the impression that I have skin in this game. I don't. I neither agree nor disagree with Asa's position. What I have a problem with is the blogosphere's psychotic need to whip every Apple related non-issue that it comes across into the second coming of Elvis.
justme
· 1 year ago
my bad.. I guess it's a common mis-statement that I picked up on, as I've even seen it referred to in, um, places that should know better I guess...
Bucky Slingshot
· 1 year ago
@Jesper:
"But the angle you describe people like me as pushing is “people is stupid and can’t uncheck checkboxes”. That’s not it. People just don’t read."
I'm not following. Not reading is a stupid behavior. So, how does this argument that they "just don't read" indicate that they aren't stupid? It proves the point.
Dave M.
· 1 year ago
All I can say Mr. Angry Drunk.... AMEN brother!
Just wait though, there is going to be a whole new round of whining about this update.
What really rankles me is, where are all the Microsoft is evil people when Microsoft updates their computer without even giving them a warning or even a message until after the deed is done.
After I updated QuickTime on one of my Windows boxes and rebooted. I was informed that Microsoft had updated my OS without my prior knowledge or consent. So where are all the enraged blog posts about how Microsoft is evil and such? Sheesh!
Leo
· 1 year ago
Actually, to coin 'Windows users' as confused and not to be trusted with a checkbox is a bit of a...well very weak point.
I don't know the software update on OS X, but if that also defaults to offering new softwarem, I bet many Mac users just click through blindly as well, installing new software without them knowing. It's just that there are more Windows users, thus more possible complainers. I think there are more Windows novices with a weblog than Mac novices.
Plus of course, it's Apple software update on a Windows Machine. Say you installed Office for Mac; after a few weeks the update thingy runs, and by default it also offers to install Windows Media Player and Windows Movie Maker for Mac (if those existed). If that day ever came, your, Grubers and many other Mac-bloggers head would probably explode in the process of loathing Microsoft.
Matt
· 1 year ago
Can we remember that the user in this situation is not necessarily joe computer user, but someone who at least has the bare minimum computer competency to buy a separate copy of Windows, and follow the Boot Camp instructions to install it on their Mac? And, like, they probably already use Safari on the Mac side? So maybe they can understand the checkbox?
Russell
· 1 year ago
To quoth an angry drunk, "Again, the take home message here is that Windows users are so fucking confused by a checkbox that they can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser."
But this is true. Only they're not confused; they're just idiots. They're using windows for God's sake.
Jesper
· 1 year ago
@Angry Drunk:
Fair enough. To clarify, I didn't ever think you had skin in this game, but it seems to me that Asa's not allowed to have an opinion on any level simply because he has skin in this game, because then he's just whining about the hard knock life of competition. You're not bound to any standards of journalistic obligations I or anyone else might hold to you, you're a guy with a weblog, going by the name of "The Angry Drunk", for fucks sake. If Asa was doing it to promote a Firefox that was starved for it, I'd agree that it'd "reek of desperation". But Firefox is not exactly in a bad place right now, and there are other (non-"freetard") people making the same exact argument and the same exact observations of the change being made, and you choose to return to Asa having the gall to retain interest in something he was previously interested in. That's what I meant by framing the argument. Without a lot of hand-waving, I just don't see it.
@Bucky Slingshot:
Yes, you can argue that not reading is stupid behavior because in some cases that'll be the point, but they are not the only options on the table. Mainly, people don't read everything they confront on their computer all day long, and as a software developer you can try to change people into making an exception for your awesome executable manna from heaven or you can work with the cards you're dealt.
(I fully appreciate that you may not be a software developer, and are just proclaiming this behavior to be stupid, which is OK. But I don't think that if we put you in a lab and measured your computer usage during a day, we'd find you to be acting extremely differently beyond what's to be expected on account of you being able to follow this level of UI design conversation (or people getting upset with the attention that this level of UI design conversation somehow generates) to begin with. PEOPLE SKIM CHUNKS OF TEXT PRESENTED IN DIALOG BOXES. SOMETIMES THEY DON'T READ IT AT ALL. YOU DO IT TOO. GET USED TO IT!)
Making the checkbox unselected by default so that in any case, clicking Install *never installs any new fucking piece of software, you know, like every other legitimate fucking updater app on the planet* just wouldn't be that hard. Unlike some other people in this comments thread, I couldn't care less about the average IQ of Windows or Mac or Linux or ENIAC users or the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. Apple just chooses to sell the most likely way in which people use Software Update out to distributing their applications and inflating a downloads statistic, hoping people won't be annoyed when new software shows up on people's desktops.
That's what gets me.
JGowan
· 1 year ago
Asa is just mad that they don't have an "iTunes" to backdoor their browser onto millions of computers.
Honestly, does it really matter that people have Safari on their computers? In my opinion, it should be added to Windows Vista and Windows XP as part of the whole non-monopoly thing. That goes for Firefox and any other major browsers. If Windows users have a choice of IE then they should easily have a choice of other browsers.
Bottomline is this: the Windows users that think IE is the gateway to the internet (and only IE) then they'll just overlook Safari completely. If they know what browsers are and that there are many different ones, then they might try Safari. What's wrong with that? Competition, I thought, was good for business, the economy, the end user... it's just not good for 2nd Place, 3rd Place, 4th Place... Asa doesn't want Windows users to possibly try Safari, even by accident because they might actually like it and then never try anything else.
Lame, if you ask me.
slaws
· 1 year ago
I always thought the big battle over "web portals", whose browser would be the de-facto on your desktop, whose website your browser would default to when it launched was ridiculous. I'm mean who didn't realize you could just change your settings and use whatever browser you wanted. Change another setting and have your browser go wherever you wanted it to on launch. Now, however, I see the world truly is populated by people that have no clue and must be protected from the ravages of those who know they are clueless. This all goes a long way towards explaining how Windows remains the dominant operating system on earth.
Jesper
· 1 year ago
@JGowan:
Jesus god. If someone out of Apple and Mozilla has trouble getting people to download their browser out of their own free will, it's definitely Apple. Safari's a good web browser on any platform, but Firefox (3, admittedly) is definitely the better of them on Windows at the moment. I really don't think Asa's worried that they don't have enough ways to magically teleport their software onto people's computers.
Melangell
· 1 year ago
The Angry Drunk is absolutely right. It you are so much of a 'tard as to not actually pay attention to what you are doing... Arrggh!! Take some frelling responsibility for yourselves!
J. Dunner
· 1 year ago
I can't believe this kind of crap gets linked to from Grubers site...
Just someone
· 1 year ago
Why has nobody bothered to point out that for Windows users using the bloatware that is firefox, or the crapware that is Internet Explorer, Safari actually IS an update.
It an update to your entire browsing experience, bringing you a speedy, light, well designed web browser that won't piss you of and doesn't look like its interface was designed by a committee of blind bricklayers (I'm looking at you, Firefox)
You should be fucking THANKING Apple for offering you the chance to update to something half decent.
Whining pricks..
John C. Welch
· 1 year ago
I want someone to explain to me why FF decided "Fuck, people don't need to have a choice about our crash reporter app, so we'll stop asking them, and just install it without any notification whatsoever and screw what they want"
Because, as long as they keep doing that, they can just STFU about Apple and Safari, since their behavior is, you know, WORSE.
Jonny
· 1 year ago
Apple don't understand that, if you start doing stupid stuff like this, you brake the circle of trust on updating software, only for security reason. If they continue stunts like this then people stop updating then everyone has unsecured systems, more viruses and worms... Bad move Apple
The Angry Drunk
· 1 year ago
Sigh. I was going to respond some more, and I realized that I'm wasting my time. If you really think that there is some magic "circle of trust" that Apple has somehow violated; then you are terminally stupid and I don't have any more time for you. Babble amongst yourselves.
Rob Moir
· 1 year ago
It's funny that because it's Apple doing something it's OK. I think we'd never hear the end of it if Microsoft dropped something onto your Mac that behaved the same way.
The point to me is that regardless of whether or not you think it makes people "terminally stupid", they think in a certain way, and either Apple are ignorant of how users interact with their computer or they're all too aware and are exploiting it on purpose for some reason.
And either explanation worries me.
Travis
· 1 year ago
@John C. Welch: That's sounds like a fantastic place! Is there some way I can visit it?
Partners in Grime
· 1 year ago
Maybe the whiners should read before they click?
Zo
· 1 year ago
Best fucking comment thread *ever.*
josef
· 1 year ago
Step 1. Read of Asa's comment on Daring Fireball Step 2. Check Darby's counterpoint, also via Daring Fireball. Step 3. Read comments. (Cheeks hurt from laughing so hard.) Step 4. Fall in love with this blog and wonder where it's been all my life. Off to spelunk the Angry Drunk for more gems!
joecab
· 1 year ago
Paranoid little me says this was Apple's plan all along, because if they started off by offering Safari in the update window as an alternative, people would bitch and moan about that as well, and they'd have no lesser evil to go back to aside from removing it all together. You can't ever underestimate the public's ability for misplaced indignation and stupidity.
Darren Meyer
· 1 year ago
Asa isn't whining about Apple doing exactly what he asked for -- he originally asked to have Apple make new software more clear (they did now), *and* to have the box unchecked by default. Apple did part of what he originally wanted: now he's saying "good job, but please don't stop there."
It's a pretty simple issue. If you're using something to update existing software, that's what it should do. If it's going to offer to install *new* software, fine -- but users should have to accept the new software if they want it, not reject it if they don't. Google Apps does this very right, Apple doesn't.
And yes, Firefox has some default behaviors that are unfortunate as well ("always check" should default to off, and the initial "set me as default?" dialog should have "Yes", "No", and "No, and don't ask me again" as choices ).
The question here isn't whether someone else in the browser market is doing a better job than Apple, the point is that Apple is doing something that undermines users' trust in software updaters. If people don't trust their updaters not to give them new software, they'll just turn them off, thus leaving security holes all over the place -- and that's worse for us all.
Heart_Man_2000
· 1 year ago
I can't understand all the fuss. If you don't want Apple software on your Windows machine, don't install it in the first place. It's called freedom of choice.
jonah
· 1 year ago
Yeah, this is all a big fuss about nothing. However, opt-out is the tactic of the spammer. Just sayin'.
Medela metro bag
· 7 months ago
Interesting read, thanks for posting, bookmarking it, will surely be back again.
All Comments
That makes it personal. Instead of "Windows users are so fucking confused by a checkbox that they can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser," it becomes "I, Aza, am so fucking confused by a checkbox that I can’t be trusted with the horrible responsibility of installing a browser."
So I think Apple should revise the Software Update again, but this time it should just be a window with a big progress indicator and no words except "Done" when everything has finished installing. If they want to include an advanced view that lists what is going to be installed they should hide it in the menus where no average Windows users can stumble on its confusing nature.
This issue of "To be checked, or not checked." is really a moot issue. What Apple defines as "new and separate" and "just an upgrade" is up to Apple. If you don't like it, get a refund.
However, if you want to get nit picky, we could walk thru Firefox and see where things are defaulted to checked...cause apparently they don't trust me to make such choices as "Always checking to see if Firefox is the default browser on startup".
Evil? perhaps :D
Reading Asa's post, he's definatly not treating it like it's the end of the world either.
So you agree that, as other's have pointed out, the checkbox to always check if FireFox is the default browser, is "tricking" users. Because I sure as hell have seen users bounce back and forth between IE and FF, selecting each as the default every time one launches.
The Angry Drunk is both inebriated and choleric.
Duh.
He's also right on!!!
The real question: what does the user *intends* to do. When opening a browser that must be downloaded from the Internet to install, I think it's pretty safe to assume that the user also wants that browser as their default.
Look me in the eye and tell me that, by updating QuickTime or iTunes, the user also *intends* to install a Web Browser.
I'm as big a fanboi as the next, but Apple's wrong here.
“So you agree that, as other’s have pointed out, the checkbox to always check if FireFox is the default browser, is “tricking” users.”
If you want to use Firefox as your default browser, the “Always checking to see if Firefox is the default browser on startup” thingy won't be an annoyance.
If Safari is your default browser, and you happen to launch Firefox, it will pester you (“hey, how come I'm not the default browser?”). Most likely it will happen just once, you are presented with a dialogue, you can uncheck the box and click yes/no. I don't see this as a problem, Firefox is not tricking users, it's easy to avoid and no new software is installed without the user's consent taking advantage of a moment's inattention.
However, it is hypocritical in the extreme for Asa to point fingers at Apple when they pull the same kind of shit. Firefox's default is to suck all the personal data out of IE.
Why do I now HAVE to install Firefox's crash reporter? It's not part of Firefox, and I hate the fucking thing, it means that FF crashes take longer to recover from. How is that okay, especially in its current completely invisible form, when Apple's now clearly-marked install of Safari isn't?
I guess Asa will make this all clear, as to why their "opt-out" is okay, and Apple's isn't.
Wait, what? Did you just actually compare Apple with a drug dealer? I thought the "malware" line was retarded, but that takes the fucking cake. What's next, "Steve Jobs imports Peruvian sex slaves." Well, to be fair, that one is true; but you didn't hear it from me.
As I was saying, Apple's not "in the wrong" here because they probably didn't even realize this would be an issue.
I doubt it ever occurred to them to put Safari in its own category. Likewise, I doubt it occurred to them to uncheck it by default, because, unless my updater is broken, *everything* is checked by default.
Also, you should learn to fucking read before you click on something.
But hey, that's just me. I think stupid people should be killed, and I think that while, yes, it's probably the "right thing to do" to make it unchecked by default, I also think anyone who bitches about it extensively is, in fact, stupid.
OMGWTFKHAAAAN!!
Apple's doing nothing wrong here... Some people just seem to have WAY too much fsckin time on their hands.
not a fanboi.. just someone that values common sense and sees very little in this idiotic argument...
Well yes. The fact that there are huge differences between Apple and drug dealers doesn't preclude the two from having points of similarity. In this case, Apple is forcefully and rather unpleasantly trying to get people to use its products. Sort of like a drug dealer harassing someone to buy gear. Far from being "retarded", I think my comment was rather apt.
Just saying.
Seeing as how you argue that .dmg drag installs are broken, your opinion is essentially worthless. You're dead to me.
But I agree that this is a non-issue. It isn't like Safari, say, automatically runs after installing, imports all your data from Internet Explorer, changes your home page and sets itself as you preferred browser by default. That would just be uncouth.
(Yes, a fresh install of Firefox just did all of those things.)
No, not at all. Without touching the checkbox, you can choose "No, but ask me next time" or "Yes, and ask me if it changes". The other options are "No, and never ask me again" (in which case, most people would want to uninstall the program) and "Yes, but I don't care if it changes" (which doesn't make much sense).
The choice is presented on its own. It has nothing to do with updates to Firefox, much less other programs. And "no, stop asking" is an option.
Also, they're following convention, at least on Windows. Like you pointed out, IE presents basically the same dialog. So does pretty much every other web browser, mail program, etc.
Would you really think it was OK for Firefox to default to installing Thunderbird at every update? Would you want Adobe, Microsoft, Sun, etc. all to do the same thing with their products?
Actually, if, during the Firefox install it popped up a dialog asking if I wanted to install Thunderbird, with the box checked; I would uncheck it and get on with my life. But then again, I'm not a whiny twat.
Not the install, every single update. And not just Firefox, every program by anyone with more than one product.
Personally, I like it when updates are updates and I don't have to scrutinize them. But that's me.
Right, your bitching has bold tags and profanity. That's totally better.
Or, they could just note that the application is "Apple Software Update", not "iTunes Update". If you don't want other Apple software, then don't fucking run Apple Software Update.
DRUG DEALERS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY. They sell you what you fucking ask for. Also, I don't know what "gear" is. I don't think drug dealers even sell "gear." Usually, someone goes to a drug dealer for marijuana or cocaine, but goes to the mall if they want a new pair of skis.
Bing Bing Motherfucking Bing. Percent wins the gods damn prize. To expand, for any of you fuckers who thinks that I actually care one way or another what Apple, or Mozilla, or Microsoft for that matter does with their software updates; listen carefully, I don't.
What does get my bile up is the breathless rush to bang out an anti-Apple or anti-fucking-anybody blog post just to show your ant-whoever-the-fuck cred.
One of the most annoying aspects of the average Mac "fanboi," and the aspect that rightly garners the most derision from rational people is the instant assumption that anything that Microsoft does is "evil." Microsoft, Apple, hells even your precious fucking Google are not evil. They are corporations that have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profit.
I'm sorry that that reality gets you all weepy, but them's the facts. And the other truth is, Asa Dotzler doesn't give a shit about you little fucks. His job is to evangelize Firefox. Sadly he chooses to do so by posting retarded fucking screeds about Safari. Really, all I can do is pity you twits who buy into it.
But yet you're here, so I guess I win. Tell you what, when you get the balls to add a link to your blog I'll play by your rules. Until then, you're in my house, you deal with my style.
If you think people actually know how images work or intuitively figure it out when they encounter one, or that they actually read the text next to preselected checkboxes, I suggest you get to know some people who aren't geeks. Just because something works for you does not mean that it works for everyone, or that other people are dumb if it doesn't work for them.
I don't "argue" that .dmg installing is broken. I know it's broken, from many observations of how "normal" people try to use them and expect them to behave.
I suggest you sit in on a usability test. It's eye-opening how many things we take as granted simply don't work for many otherwise perfectly intelligent humans.
No, the take home message is that with the checkbox selected, Software Update degrades from "software that makes your life easier because you can just click to install anything it asks for and it'll actually Update your Software" to "software that may or may not install new crap in addition to being useful".
That new crap has now been isolated to a new list to facilitate easier deselecting is progress, don't get me wrong. But the angle you describe people like me as pushing is "people is stupid and can't uncheck checkboxes". That's not it. People just don't read. People have to deal with tons of text every day when they use a computer, and when annoying dialogs come up they read as little as they can to get the damn thing out of their faces. (This is why "Don't Save", "Cancel" and "Save" are better labels than "Yes", "No" and "Cancel"; one set makes you read the message, one doesn't.)
And no matter what you think of it, a fucking software updater application has definitely been tossed in the pile of "I don't need to read this, and it is good for me if I click Install". I'm not drawing a picture of clueless morons thinking this, we all do this every day so we'll have time to read (or write) essays on checkbox semantics with all the time we save, unless we happen to be terribly interested in one of the particular updates which I assure you is rare.
Anyway. My point is still "when the checkbox is preselected, you actually have to give a crap about Software Update". It's much easier to give a crap about Software Update now since the new software package isn't drowning in QuickTime security updates or iTunes revisions that improves stability and adds support for the new hooloovoo iPod shuffle, and maybe that's enough. This isn't really about Firefox developers being mad because they can't hitch a ride for autoinstallation (don't Firefox come preinstalled with Dell or HPs, I forget which?), and I'm guessing you know that, but it's expedient to frame the issue as invented by the disgruntled competition, because otherwise it's just people arguing about checkboxes.
I'm not framing the issue. I'm also not the Mozilla foundation employee who won't drop this non-issue; and who's spending far more time on his blog defending his comments than I am here.
You're right though, in the end this boils down to a disagreement over a freaking checkbox in an app that no one even needs to use. I think that some people are under the impression that I have skin in this game. I don't. I neither agree nor disagree with Asa's position. What I have a problem with is the blogosphere's psychotic need to whip every Apple related non-issue that it comes across into the second coming of Elvis.
"But the angle you describe people like me as pushing is “people is stupid and can’t uncheck checkboxes”. That’s not it. People just don’t read."
I'm not following. Not reading is a stupid behavior. So, how does this argument that they "just don't read" indicate that they aren't stupid? It proves the point.
Just wait though, there is going to be a whole new round of whining about this update.
What really rankles me is, where are all the Microsoft is evil people when Microsoft updates their computer without even giving them a warning or even a message until after the deed is done.
After I updated QuickTime on one of my Windows boxes and rebooted. I was informed that Microsoft had updated my OS without my prior knowledge or consent. So where are all the enraged blog posts about how Microsoft is evil and such? Sheesh!
I don't know the software update on OS X, but if that also defaults to offering new softwarem, I bet many Mac users just click through blindly as well, installing new software without them knowing. It's just that there are more Windows users, thus more possible complainers. I think there are more Windows novices with a weblog than Mac novices.
Plus of course, it's Apple software update on a Windows Machine. Say you installed Office for Mac; after a few weeks the update thingy runs, and by default it also offers to install Windows Media Player and Windows Movie Maker for Mac (if those existed). If that day ever came, your, Grubers and many other Mac-bloggers head would probably explode in the process of loathing Microsoft.
But this is true. Only they're not confused; they're just idiots. They're using windows for God's sake.
Fair enough. To clarify, I didn't ever think you had skin in this game, but it seems to me that Asa's not allowed to have an opinion on any level simply because he has skin in this game, because then he's just whining about the hard knock life of competition. You're not bound to any standards of journalistic obligations I or anyone else might hold to you, you're a guy with a weblog, going by the name of "The Angry Drunk", for fucks sake. If Asa was doing it to promote a Firefox that was starved for it, I'd agree that it'd "reek of desperation". But Firefox is not exactly in a bad place right now, and there are other (non-"freetard") people making the same exact argument and the same exact observations of the change being made, and you choose to return to Asa having the gall to retain interest in something he was previously interested in. That's what I meant by framing the argument. Without a lot of hand-waving, I just don't see it.
@Bucky Slingshot:
Yes, you can argue that not reading is stupid behavior because in some cases that'll be the point, but they are not the only options on the table. Mainly, people don't read everything they confront on their computer all day long, and as a software developer you can try to change people into making an exception for your awesome executable manna from heaven or you can work with the cards you're dealt.
(I fully appreciate that you may not be a software developer, and are just proclaiming this behavior to be stupid, which is OK. But I don't think that if we put you in a lab and measured your computer usage during a day, we'd find you to be acting extremely differently beyond what's to be expected on account of you being able to follow this level of UI design conversation (or people getting upset with the attention that this level of UI design conversation somehow generates) to begin with. PEOPLE SKIM CHUNKS OF TEXT PRESENTED IN DIALOG BOXES. SOMETIMES THEY DON'T READ IT AT ALL. YOU DO IT TOO. GET USED TO IT!)
Making the checkbox unselected by default so that in any case, clicking Install *never installs any new fucking piece of software, you know, like every other legitimate fucking updater app on the planet* just wouldn't be that hard. Unlike some other people in this comments thread, I couldn't care less about the average IQ of Windows or Mac or Linux or ENIAC users or the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. Apple just chooses to sell the most likely way in which people use Software Update out to distributing their applications and inflating a downloads statistic, hoping people won't be annoyed when new software shows up on people's desktops.
That's what gets me.
Honestly, does it really matter that people have Safari on their computers? In my opinion, it should be added to Windows Vista and Windows XP as part of the whole non-monopoly thing. That goes for Firefox and any other major browsers. If Windows users have a choice of IE then they should easily have a choice of other browsers.
Bottomline is this: the Windows users that think IE is the gateway to the internet (and only IE) then they'll just overlook Safari completely. If they know what browsers are and that there are many different ones, then they might try Safari. What's wrong with that? Competition, I thought, was good for business, the economy, the end user... it's just not good for 2nd Place, 3rd Place, 4th Place... Asa doesn't want Windows users to possibly try Safari, even by accident because they might actually like it and then never try anything else.
Lame, if you ask me.
Jesus god. If someone out of Apple and Mozilla has trouble getting people to download their browser out of their own free will, it's definitely Apple. Safari's a good web browser on any platform, but Firefox (3, admittedly) is definitely the better of them on Windows at the moment. I really don't think Asa's worried that they don't have enough ways to magically teleport their software onto people's computers.
It an update to your entire browsing experience, bringing you a speedy, light, well designed web browser that won't piss you of and doesn't look like its interface was designed by a committee of blind bricklayers (I'm looking at you, Firefox)
You should be fucking THANKING Apple for offering you the chance to update to something half decent.
Whining pricks..
Because, as long as they keep doing that, they can just STFU about Apple and Safari, since their behavior is, you know, WORSE.
The point to me is that regardless of whether or not you think it makes people "terminally stupid", they think in a certain way, and either Apple are ignorant of how users interact with their computer or they're all too aware and are exploiting it on purpose for some reason.
And either explanation worries me.
Step 2. Check Darby's counterpoint, also via Daring Fireball.
Step 3. Read comments. (Cheeks hurt from laughing so hard.)
Step 4. Fall in love with this blog and wonder where it's been all my life.
Off to spelunk the Angry Drunk for more gems!
It's a pretty simple issue. If you're using something to update existing software, that's what it should do. If it's going to offer to install *new* software, fine -- but users should have to accept the new software if they want it, not reject it if they don't. Google Apps does this very right, Apple doesn't.
And yes, Firefox has some default behaviors that are unfortunate as well ("always check" should default to off, and the initial "set me as default?" dialog should have "Yes", "No", and "No, and don't ask me again" as choices ).
The question here isn't whether someone else in the browser market is doing a better job than Apple, the point is that Apple is doing something that undermines users' trust in software updaters. If people don't trust their updaters not to give them new software, they'll just turn them off, thus leaving security holes all over the place -- and that's worse for us all.
Debra