PDA

View Full Version : Apple to Revamp Software Update?


MacRumors
Dec 5, 2003, 10:17 AM
ThinkSecret revives (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/softwareupdate.html) rumors that Apple will open up software update to certain developers to allow 3rd party software updates to be delivered through Apple's Mac OS X Software Update Control Panel.

The rumor first reported (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/01/20030119203742.shtml) in Jan 2003, but has not made its way into Mac OS X yet.

hobbes3113
Dec 5, 2003, 10:20 AM
This would be a welcome upgrade to an otherwise perfect program...

mainstreetmark
Dec 5, 2003, 10:24 AM
I've been wanting this for a while now. I like running the latest stuff, but don't like constantly checking.

macnews
Dec 5, 2003, 10:25 AM
This would be a nice feature on the pro end. I hate having to go to adobe's site and be checking if they fixed the latest Illustrator or Photoshop bug.

ratspg
Dec 5, 2003, 10:26 AM
I guess we'll have to call it VersionTracker Plus Plus. heh

ITR 81
Dec 5, 2003, 10:27 AM
Sounds good. Now lets see it happen.

pgwalsh
Dec 5, 2003, 10:30 AM
about friggin time.

cgc
Dec 5, 2003, 10:31 AM
Or they could call it Software Update Extreme.

AirUncleP
Dec 5, 2003, 10:37 AM
I think we have all been waiting for this.

pgwalsh
Dec 5, 2003, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by cgc
Or they could call it Software Update Extreme. haha... right and it will be added to .mac - so you'll have to pay for it. :eek:

kuyu
Dec 5, 2003, 10:41 AM
great idea. This further separates pc complexity and mac simplicity.

pgwalsh
Dec 5, 2003, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by kuyu
great idea. This further separates pc complexity and mac simplicity. Well sort of.. You can get some 3rd party driver updates through windows update.

The real gold would be patches, drivers and notification's of newer versions.

stoid
Dec 5, 2003, 10:46 AM
Since Apple has apparently spent hundreds of man hours developing this, it will label every update as 'critical' just like every Windows patch to give the programmers a feeling of accomplishment. :D :D :D

wdlove
Dec 5, 2003, 10:49 AM
I hope that this revamp will allow for greater access and improved software for all of us. They could call it iUpdate.

JohnGillilan
Dec 5, 2003, 10:53 AM
It will be funny to see "Software Update" appear as an update in the current version of it.:D

supertex
Dec 5, 2003, 11:02 AM
I don't know, call me ignorant (which as a criminology major, I could easily be concerning computing issues), but would releasing access to Software Update be an easy way for any kind of attack on a system, pretend you're an update to Chess or something and then all of a sudden WHAM! kernel panics galore? I imagine Software Update gets root level access to install stuff once you give it your password. Makes me feel warm and cozy knowing Apple is the only one I'm gonna hear from in there...

NO!! Even worse!! People spamming my Software Update offering cute little apps that put dancing girls on my desktop... <shudder>

Then again, maybe I don't know what the crap I'm talking about, it's been known to happen before...

johnnyjibbs
Dec 5, 2003, 11:04 AM
You could have a point. I suppose it would only be available to licensed developers, maybe even just Adobe to begin with.

supertex
Dec 5, 2003, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
You could have a point. I suppose it would only be available to licensed developers, maybe even just Adobe to begin with.

All the same, I don't know that I trust anybody but Apple with it, I'd have to watch my back... some crazy cracked-out windozehead decides he wants to drag OS X down into the pit along with them...

hobbes3113
Dec 5, 2003, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by supertex
would releasing access to Software Update be an easy way for any kind of attack on a system, pretend you're an update to Chess or something and then all of a sudden WHAM! kernel panics galore?

I imagine that this is something that will be carefully monitored by Apple. I'm sure they would never allow something like this to happen. I agree with johnnyjibbs in that only licensed developers would be allowed access, the rumor even hints at this.

Flowbee
Dec 5, 2003, 11:15 AM
And there would hopefully be a way that the user could choose which vendor they would like updates from. Plus, you would certainly still be able to choose which updates to download and which to ignore.

applekid
Dec 5, 2003, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by pgwalsh
Well sort of.. You can get some 3rd party driver updates through windows update.

The real gold would be patches, drivers and notification's of newer versions.

Allowing the next batch of Mac users to call "Software Update" spyware. That's what happened to the Windows updating program. Anything that phones home is considered spyware it seems, even if it is for a reasonable cause.

As long as the downloads and updating stay reliable, I'm not going to say anything.

supertex
Dec 5, 2003, 11:17 AM
Oh I'm sure Apple will monitor it closely, don't get me wrong, but all the same it gives me the creeps...

robotrenegade
Dec 5, 2003, 11:18 AM
That's sounds awesome!!! I hope Adobe and macromedia jump on the wagon.:D

dguisinger
Dec 5, 2003, 11:24 AM
Microsoft recently updated Windows Update and marged functionality with Windows Bug Reporter.

For example, when Developer Studio crashed while working on an HTML page last week, I submitted the bug like normal thru the popup dialog. Instead of just saying thank you for reporting the bug, it said Microsoft had released a fix to the problem, and let me click directly into Windows Update to download the Internet Explorer fix.

It would be awsome to see Apple utilize the same technique, allowing you to report bugs, and then be told that hey, the bug which caused this crash has been fixed, don't be lazy, go install the update.

JoeRadar
Dec 5, 2003, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by pgwalsh
The real gold would be patches, drivers and notification's of newer versions.
A roll-back option (which XP already supports) would be nice. If an update screws something up (like when people had problems with 10.2.8), being able to roll-back to a previous point is important.

Another configurable feature I would like to see is being able to specify how long an update has been out before my system downloads the update. For example, I would like to wait a week before upgrading, letting other people take the early risks.

coolbreeze
Dec 5, 2003, 11:41 AM
So we should see software update in our software update when the software is updated?:D

Say that three times in a row...

pgwalsh
Dec 5, 2003, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by JoeRadar
A roll-back option (which XP already supports) would be nice. If an update screws something up (like when people had problems with 10.2.8), being able to roll-back to a previous point is important.

Another configurable feature I would like to see is being able to specify how long an update has been out before my system downloads the update. For example, I would like to wait a week before upgrading, letting other people take the early risks. I agree. The roll-back option is a good thing. I've had to use it only once, but I'm glad it was there.

I'd also like to see a preference pain for removing applications. I know it's simple as pie, but some people just don't get it. Like my sister and she's a lawyer... go figure.

JoeRadar
Dec 5, 2003, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by supertex
would releasing access to Software Update be an easy way for any kind of attack on a system, pretend you're an update to Chess or something and then all of a sudden WHAM! kernel panics galore?
Couple of solutions: (1) The approach would be pull, not push. That is, if I don't have Chess already installed on my machine, then my machine would not check to see if Chess updates are available, nor would it accept any.

(2) As in the MS world, updates would be cryptographically signed by the vendor. Thus, my Chess program will only accept appropriately signed Chess updates from the original vendor.

(3) The site from which I pull down the patch can be authenticated through appropriate certificates.

Steps 2 & 3 still require the vendor to protect their private keys, but if they cannot do that, then they probably cannot protect their code base any ways (e.g., attacker could inject a trojan horse), at which point the game is over any ways.

TomSmithMacEd
Dec 5, 2003, 11:56 AM
I'm just with all of you. That sounds like a smart way to make life easier.

jettredmont
Dec 5, 2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by applekid
Allowing the next batch of Mac users to call "Software Update" spyware. That's what happened to the Windows updating program. Anything that phones home is considered spyware it seems, even if it is for a reasonable cause.

As long as the downloads and updating stay reliable, I'm not going to say anything.

Who's calling Windows Update spyware? I haven't heard that one ... WMP, of course, but never Windows Update ...

IMHO, if Software Update were to contact developers of software directly to see if there is a newer version available, it would be hard to accuse Apple of gathering information (although it would make it easier for third-party developers to gather information on who's using their product ... but not information on anything else that's on your system except perhaps the OS ...)

Trowaman
Dec 5, 2003, 12:43 PM
ahh, this is just what we have all needed. I could finally see updates for FCP, Adobe, AIM (wait I don't use that anymore, thanks iChat AV)and whatever programs I use, MPlayer?

dho
Dec 5, 2003, 01:09 PM
sounds great

I hope this doesnt turn into something that is designed to bring in money. I will be pissed if the companies are required to pay a large amount to take advantage of apples software update.

Gymnut
Dec 5, 2003, 01:55 PM
Well, some applications I run have occasionally check for new updates everytime they are launched, but for the ones that don't, this new software update is a welcome.

singletrack
Dec 5, 2003, 02:08 PM
If they do open it up to 3rd Party developers it'd be as powerful as the old BeOS Software Update. ;-)


I'd like them to update it to allow you to purchase and install updates to commercial software, at a discount hopefully also.

SiliconAddict
Dec 5, 2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by JoeRadar
Couple of solutions: (1) The approach would be pull, not push. That is, if I don't have Chess already installed on my machine, then my machine would not check to see if Chess updates are available, nor would it accept any.

(2) As in the MS world, updates would be cryptographically signed by the vendor. Thus, my Chess program will only accept appropriately signed Chess updates from the original vendor.

(3) The site from which I pull down the patch can be authenticated through appropriate certificates.



(4) Apple would handle authentication and distribution from their servers. Adobe, etc could pay Apple for their bandwidth. I mean it's got to eat at a company's bandwidth costs every time they roll out a new patch, right? Not to mention that they must get a number of tech calls with results in the user installing a patch to fix the problem that too is wasted time for tech support staff.

How about this. Apple rolls out a Apple Provided Patches (APP) program that revolves around certifying a patch is clean of virus/Trojans/worms/etc and doesn't blow up the app on a vanilla install of a program it gets the App seal of approval and is allowed on the Software Update. I'm also willing to bet Apple has some embedded APIs for the Software Update util that allows programs to check and see if there are newer versions. This program would allow developers direct access to these APIs
Call it a DEV APP KIT. You get the tools to utilize Apple's service. Make it reachable to the common guy. (e.g. Don't screw developers over with overpricing the kit.) and I'd bet Apple could make some nice coin off of this.

PS- You get a upward sliding scale on how much disk space you get for your application and how much bandwidth you are given. You get, maybe, 30MB to start out with and its goes up from there. Iím no developer but imagine .MAC typeÖmaybe .APP tools that come with OS X development tools that allows you to submit updates right there. Allows you to monitor your iDisk Software Update quota? Allows you to monitor the number of downloads? Sorry Iím rambling.

billyboy
Dec 5, 2003, 06:05 PM
They have a 3rd party software updater with .mac which automatically loads macromedia stuff, templates etc into a software folder on your idisk. I dont think Apple take responsibility for any of it though. Or if they do, they let a really slow version of Contribute and a buggy iBlog get through their quality control.

Sunrunner
Dec 6, 2003, 06:06 AM
I think this Idea sounds great, as long as Apple restricts such indtegrated update availiability to the top software manufacturers (like Adobe, etc...) otherwise it could quickly get out of hand. I don't necesarilly want to have to sift through updates to every shareware thingamajiggy on my computer. VersionTracker does have a service like that, but it is also pay-to-play... not that user-friendly either.