Slashdot Mirror
When Forced "Upgrades" Bring You Down
Viadd sent us an interesting article about
unwanted upgrades. Its a little ranty, but it basically surrounds ReplayTV "Upgrading" their units by changing a feature in a way that Tog thinks is worse (and I'd tend to agree). With more software becoming subscription based, the line between bug fix, feature enhancement, and removal of features is going to get more blurry. I don't think that this particular example is the best, but this is really important to think about. Should we pay to remove bugs? What about when "Features" are trojaned along with the bugfix that we don't want? And what about when every device in your house is computerized? How does that amplify the problem? And what about when its a device like your tivo which upgrades automatically, leaving you no way out?
It's pretty much been eradicated from the Internet out of fear that it might be illegal, but I found a copy of it here.
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
We could either hack the DOC support into our current (single firewall) product, or rewrite the entire thing from scratch, and Do It Right(tm). We decided on the latter, and after 3 months of the dev and QA team working till midnight (or later in some cases) we have a product that is 99% done. We're back to normal hours anyway, and have one version out the door. A second one is currently undergoing final QA.
But back on track.
Before all you needed was a registration key. This was created by a serial number that you got when you purchased the product combinged with your MAC address, creating a unique key. Without this you got a demo mode, but still could update to the latest and greatest software.
Well, sales had their way and decided that hey, we can make this a revenue stream, and decided to make people pay for upgrades. This involved creating a new key which was basically a support receipt. Show the receipt at the door and you get upgrades... don't want to pay? Get only the last released version, no upgrades, no security fixes, no nothing. I personally don't like it, but I'm not at the top of the food chain here, so I can't complain too much.
But you'll notice a few things here:
Oh well, a little bit OT I'm sure, but it's interesting to see this from the other side. I wonder if this feature was originally put in because someone in the upper echelon said "hey, we can make more money from this thing!"
"Surprise! Outlook Express has automatically upgraded you to a full Passport membership!"
Better yet- the next version of MS Word still has a spell checker, but saves disk space for you by keeping work file caches on a special Passport server...
guess what? The CD player I bought in 1985 won't play A lot of CD's that are released nowadays. For example, Wierd Al's latest, since it is 'mixed mode'. Is that not an unwanted upgrade? A CD is a CD right? Think before you open your trap.
This has been happening for years outside of the computer industry. I have a Stereo system built in 1974 that sounds better than just about anything on the market today. And it is still pumping bass. Anything you buy now is designed to die in a matter of months. This began in the mid-80's with the yuppies having more disposable income, manufacturers realized they could make stuff disposable. That is the same idea here. Everything will be disposable eventually, including computers.
For a couple of months now, I've been playing the MMORTS game "Mankind" (read: playing far too much). It's published and maintained by a European company (French?) called Vibes.net. Periodically, Vibes updates the client game, and when you log on these updates will automatically be downloaded and installed. Nevermind the potential for a disgruntled employee to hit every MK player with a virus...
So here's what happened. Vibes decided, for whatever reason, that ingame e-mails should be stored on the player's computer rather than on the servers. So everyone logs on, and their clients download this update. Except, in addition to reorganizing the mail system, this update, for no explicable reason, screws up the entire building system. Most costs show up as negative numbers, disallowing you to execute those builds. Your builders say they can build ground structures in space, and space structures on the ground. In short, Total Chaos ensues as no one can get anything done, assuming they can even log on and enter their [star] systems.
Now, the big issue here is really that Vibes obviously needs better QA. I get the feeling they didn't test this patch AT ALL before releasing it. However, if the upgrade system wasn't force-feed, the people brave enough to download an untested patch (this isn't the first crazy-ass patch Vibes released) would be able to warn off the more cautious players from getting it.
Hypothetical examples can be instructive too. Think of what would have happened if every NS3 user had automatically been "upgraded" to NS4, or from 4 to the ultra-bloat of 6. Or if MS had forcefully pushed out the catastrophic IE5.5. Or if (heaven help us) the Linux kernel automatically "upgraded" itself...
According to Q273006, this is "by design". Thanks, guys.
When you're pausing it so you can read something on the screen, or determine whether the receiver's foot was down before he left the end zone, or a myriad of other possibilities.
If "Freeze-Frame" was one of the included features of Replay, and they chose, without user validation, to remove that feature, then they're taking away something they've already paid for. Nevermind that they've since changed it back--the original behavior of the unit was altered without the customer's approval to be no longer in compliance with advertised specifications.
We've all seen the warning "Specifications subject to change without notice," except, in the past, once you've actually purchased something, the specifications stopped changing.
even when this feature was still active ... you could bypass the ads simply by pressing one more key after you hit Pause
If this restored the live-action TV, then you're still not regaining the lost freeze-frame feature. If this turns off the ad and returns you to the current program, frozen on the screen, then it's a little more acceptable. But still, it's something that you didn't ask for, and that wasn't part of the deal when you bought the unit.
What if Netscape or Microsoft downloaded updates to their browsers that forced you (and hackers couldn't figure out how to prevent the forcing) to view an ad before each page you viewed? Sure, you can get past the ad simply by clicking somewhere, but it's still a feature you didn't ask for. And, technically, legally, there's no reason the next patch you download can't do exactly that. Then where will we be?
I can't wait until we hear about the first "upgrade virus", an infection that gets on a shoveware server and then tells all the suckers they need to download an "upgrade" with the hostile payload in it.
Think of the thrill of destroying millions of computers in a matter of hours.
OK, pedantics will note that what I'm describing isn't stricly a virus or a worm, so call it what you will.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
If you haven't already got the 2.0 software you have two choices. Give up on getting the TiVo service, no updates, no guide data, etc. and keep the features you like in v1.3, or accept the change.
I have no hard choice to make. I just recently got a TiVo, and made sure that it had the 1.3 software, because I live where there is no service. So far it's by far the best VCR I've ever owned. Buffering live TV is amazing, having about 16 shows queued up for recording is wonderful. Not having to search for a blank tape, or the blank part of a tape is sooo convenient. Having the service would be nice, but I can live without it.
Besides, the system runs Linux. Sure it's stripped down, running on a PPC chip with some strange libraries but it's Linux -- BASH shell and all. I've been poking around with it for about a week and I think within a month or so I should be able to give it my own guide data from sources I can find on the web. And you know what? It's *fun* to hack.
I agree that it kinda sucks that the upgrade is not optional and breaks some things that people counted on. But you do have a choice -- until you get 2.0 you don't *need* the service for the thing to work.
No, I don't want the new player with a million flashing banners in it. I just want to play the damn video stream, and all I need is the missing .DLL file associated with the new codec, damnit!
My solution: Check what's in C:\Wherever\Common Files\Real, copy it out, perform the "upgrade" on an expendable Windoze install, and see what DLLs got upgraded.
Then just copy the new DLLs into the old directory. Odds are you'll be able to play the .RM file just fine.
I've managed to keep using RealPlayer version 6 up to the present day using this technique.
Does anyone have a similar hack for things like the Sorenson .MOV codec under 'doze media player? I'm damned if I'm ever upgrading that monstrosity past version 6. It's bad enough that Real tries to re-download itself when it finds an unknown codec, but WMP phones home without my consent to do it "automatically".
Fuck that. Anyone know where WMP stores its files, and what's required for the various codecs?
TiVo runs Linux and has been hacked pretty well. So if they remove something and you want it back, add it yourself.
But.... I think it's easy to see why ReplayTV did this. They are failing. TiVo is beating them in the market, for good reason. ReplayTV isn't selling boxes any more, they are trying to "license their technology!". Which, if you know anything about this business, means they are gone.
I disagree. We are under no obligation to conform to the business plan of corporations. I don't have a Tivo or Replay, but I hardly ever watch commercials; either I've taped the show and fast-forward through them, or I just flip to another channel. Is that thievery? Here's another one: unlike most people, I pay my credit card balance in full every month, thus depriving Mastercard of interest they expected me to pay. If everyone did that, Mastercard would be in serious trouble. Does that mean it's wrong for me to avoid 18% interest rates? I don't think so.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
What bothers me even more is the possibility of redefining the contract under which you are allowed to use the thing. With the new update comes one of these click-away contracts which may as well redefine the terms of use. Maybe a DVD-player suddenly asks you to buy a special version if you want to run public shows. I really don't want to think of something really nasty here in fear of seeing it in reality tomorrow.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Although the question raised by this article is still valid, the basic facts that provoked it are already obsolete. ReplayTV has already disabled this feature.
In fact, they did so months ago!
I'm a very happy long-time Replay owner (since October of 1999) and I agree with the author that the product has significant advantages over Tivo. However, I think he's blown this all out of proportion.
First of all, when you are pausing the show you are watching, what difference does it make if they put an advertisement on the screen? Really, is it that much of an intrusion? Come on!
Second of all, even when this feature was still active (and its been disabled for months now) you could bypass the ads simply by pressing one more key after you hit Pause. (The Exit key).
Once again, this is much ado about nothing, in the case of the specific ReplayTV feature, anyway.
Notwithstanding the earlier comments about the feature having been corrected after lots of people complained...
Software is just a set of instructions that controls hardware, so it seems logical that the software would do what you want it to do. What is it going to do; complain?
But that isn't really true. Software serves the purposes of the people who write it, but only indirectly serves the needs of the consumer who buys it. A company writes useful software because they can trade that software for money, and writing good software lets them collect more money for more software. But the software is written by the company and for the company.
That is really the reason that I love Linux. It is written for my needs by other people with the same needs. Compare the advertising screens in AIM and GAIM for example, the ad filtering tools of Netscape 6 (or IE for that matter) versus Mozilla, or the spam filtering of procmail and mutt compared with Outlook.
Advertising pressure is all around us. Eventually your VR-spec's will no doubt advertise nearby pizza parlours in flashing green and red trying to attract your attention away from the sidewalk ahead of you.
He who has the code controls his own future; I want to be in control of the data I see, I don't want the machines that serve me to make their own decisions about what I should see based on the interests and focus groups of the corporations that supply them.
I'd add that the end of the world is upon you all, but then I really would be needlessly raving. But truly -- all of you who cut down open source or Linux every chance you get. Have you really thought through what you will be getting instead?
LibBT: BitTorrent for C - small - fast - clean (Now Versio
I argued with one company in 1988 that I should not have to pay for support to report their bugs to them. Later, if you were the first to report a bug to Microsoft, they would then not charge you for the upgrade.
Before, on the old days, I called in to report a problem with SoftIce .99, they told me that they knew about it and if I would like the beta version to see if that fixed the problem.
The web has helped a little so that there is an easy way to see the bug list instead of waiting 30 minutes on hold to be told that the problem was in their database.
If the UCITA had a provision to require a vendor to be responsible for their bugs, it would pass like wildfire (or at least with users).
Fight Spammers!
A large part of the software industry is becoming subscription based. Unlike traditional shrink-wrapped software, subscription-based software "services" use client software (or hardware) which works in conjunction with servers run by the company. These servers hold play lists, hosted web sites, TV listings, you name it. This allows the software to access dynamic data which can't be bundled up and shipped to the client. Subscription fees are like cable fees: you are paying the company for the service (the cost of bandwidth and server maintenance, generating new content, hosting web sites, etc.), not the software itself. This is a common model for MMORPGs, for instace.
Given that the service requires clients to interact with servers run by the company, let's consider some scenarios:
There are bad reasons too. A company wants to add a new money-making service, and since this means more revenue they want to make it mandatory. I can understand why cash-starved companies would want to do that, but it's wrong. If someone is paying for a service already, they should never be forced to take an upgrade which makes them pay more (in time, money, or aggravation). That means the company is failing to live up to its end of the bargain.
As somebody who was working for Personal Software (VisiCorp) when Visicalc was launched, but in no way part of the group writing the licence, let me add my own view on why the licence came to be.
It wasn't just because of the fear of bridges falling down. That was a longstanding fear with tools and programs sold to engineers, and was the source of clauses in many contract waiving "consequential damages." For example, when you use film, they put in a warning that they are only liable for the cost of the film if it fails, not the value of the picture you lost. If not, they would have to charge a lot more for film and developing, since people use 20 cent film to take million dollar pictures.
It was much more than that. The reality, as all programmers know, is that large and complex systems have bugs. They will always have bugs. All the copies sold will all have the same bugs. There will be new versions, which will fix some of the bugs, but not all of them. And the new versions will have new bugs.
This will never go away. And the software vendors know it, but the users at the time might not have known it. The reality was, if you can get sued because you have bugs, you can't release software at all.
This is unlike most manufactured goods. When they have flaws, usually the flaws are limited to a few particular units. When they have design flaws, which force recalls or class action suits, product lines and companies are often ruined. Most products had simpler designs, and design flaws were few because you could test for them.
But you can't test software enough to get out all the design flaws. Or if you can, it's a rare and very expensive skill.
So the only way to realistically sell software, especially $150 software like Visicalc, is to say, "Face it, this thing is going to come with some bugs."
I always figured at some point the world would come to understand what bugs are and we could develop social and legal concepts of what sort of warranties make sense for software. So that people will do QA, but not delay releasing software endlessly. So that the sort of bug that raises legal liability exists but is rare enough that people can run a business.
We aren't there yet.
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
There are at least 3 "negative" features in the new TiVo release:
If the upgrades were completely optional, I'd be more than happy to stick with my existing version of the software. I love my TiVo. It works great. I don't want them changing it.
With ReplayTV, your threats only really amount to 'If you do this, I'm never going to buy a ReplayTV unit again!' Frankly, this isn't really all that much of a threat to a company who already received your money.
On the other hand, the Tivo $10/month fee is key to their profitability. If you and 1,000 of your closest tivo-using friends (see below on the tivo forums) were to threaten to leave them due to a similar complaint, you'd probably be able to raise some eyebrows.
Now, this is a pretty interesting situation. While I've always been the first to criticize subscription software (which, essentially, this is - since you can't use Tivo w/o the listings [as of version 2.0 of their software]), it seems to me that we're actually receiving some leverage here - at least when we use the software as a group.
To see an excellent example of a group of software users coming together in a community, check out the AVS Tivo Forum, where a very good number of Tivo users congregate to speak with each other, and extraordinarily, Tivo representatives. This forum is a model of how a company should interact with their customers. They even rolled out a beta version of their latest software update to a significant number of forum users - giving them the opportunity to test their code on a large scale, and giving these users a chance to be the guinea pigs they desire to be :)