Apple to Revamp Software Update?

[coolbreeze]

So we should see software update in our software update when the software is updated?

Say that three times in a row...

 

[pgwalsh]

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]

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]

I'm just with all of you. That sounds like a smart way to make life easier.

 

[jettredmont]

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]

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]

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]

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]

BeOS

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]

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. I’m no developer but imagine .MAC type…maybe .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 I’m rambling.

 

[billyboy]

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]

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.