It always amazes me when I do Windows updates that Microsoft cannot seem to figure out how to update the computer without using Internet Explorer.
It seems to make sense that if you know -only Internet Explorer can be used to run Windows updates- that you'd bypass the default browser and open IE whenever someone clicks on the Update Windows link in the control panel. It's called prioritizing. Every parent has done it since the dawn of time. The youngest child can't bring home the mammoth for dinner so maybe I'll assign that task to the oldest child instead. Simple.
I'm also shocked that they still do this because I seem to recall, back in the '80s that Microsoft was forced to un-bundle IE and Windows. This seems like a blatant slap in the face to that court order.
I don't really care if they use IE for the updates, but I really despise the fact that they force me to open IE and manually enter the URL instead of simply passing on the URL properly in the first place.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
An open letter to software developers
Please stop trying to subsidize your apps by adding installers for other company's apps. I'm looking at you +Adobe. It creates major headaches for IT support guys when you install +McAfee's anti-virus software on top of the anti-virus software that is already in place.
Yes, the user can click on the check-box and decide not to install the add-on, but the reverse is also true and two decades of support tell me that most end users do not pay close attention to the options given during a software install. By setting the install as a default, a large number of users unwittingly install whatever apps you have determined to be the add-on of the week. In the case of anti-virus software, running two anti-virus programs at the same time can really hose a system up.
When I have to explain to the customer that their system ground to a halt because the latest Acrobat updater included Mcafee on the install, the first two questions I am inevitably asked are: "Is there another program I can use instead of Acrobat?" and "I've heard of McAfee, are they really that bad that their program stopped my computer from working?"
It's one thing to include an option to install additional products during the initial, but it's a whole new level of low to try to sneak one in during an update. Updates should UPDATE the software they already have, NOT install new software (that is for installers).
All you're doing is fostering distrust with customers for these add-on products (and your own).
Yes, the user can click on the check-box and decide not to install the add-on, but the reverse is also true and two decades of support tell me that most end users do not pay close attention to the options given during a software install. By setting the install as a default, a large number of users unwittingly install whatever apps you have determined to be the add-on of the week. In the case of anti-virus software, running two anti-virus programs at the same time can really hose a system up.
When I have to explain to the customer that their system ground to a halt because the latest Acrobat updater included Mcafee on the install, the first two questions I am inevitably asked are: "Is there another program I can use instead of Acrobat?" and "I've heard of McAfee, are they really that bad that their program stopped my computer from working?"
It's one thing to include an option to install additional products during the initial, but it's a whole new level of low to try to sneak one in during an update. Updates should UPDATE the software they already have, NOT install new software (that is for installers).
All you're doing is fostering distrust with customers for these add-on products (and your own).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)