Slashdot Mirror
Google Earth 5.0 Silently Changes Update Policy
mario_grgic writes "Recently announced Google Earth version 5.0 adds interesting new features like images of ocean floors and some detailed images of Mars. But it also brings another unwelcome change for Mac OS X users. Google Software update daemon is installed when the application is launched for the first time. The user is greeted with an uninformative message that does not really explain what is about to happen. After the user accepts, Google Update Agent is downloaded and installed. It updates all Google applications and not just Google Earth. Also, it runs on an unchangeable schedule of its own (instead of, say, only when one of Google's apps is launched), consuming system resources. Worst of all it can not be simply removed, since it is downloaded and installed again once Google Earth is launched. Users really have only two choices: live with it, or uninstall all Google apps. There's a discussion about the updater in this Google Group, including details of a way to disable it (not for the faint of heart). So fellow Slashdotters, has Google crossed the line?"
usually when i want to disable anything on mac (dash board, spotlight, etc) i usually change the file permissions to 000. this wont work with google updater?
... so you bought a Mac???
I still don't understand why all these companies feel like they need to create their own bloated ecosystem on top of the OS. All the #$%@#! application needs to do is check for an update and link me to its website (even that is not necessary). Adobe is the worst at the this-they have their own $^$#&*$@ file browser, for $@#%'s sake! And their updater nags and doesn't work properly half the time.
I'm not excited to see Google go down this path. If this is cloud computing, I'd rather be from the moon!
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
I really love the unified update system of the Linux distributions. One process updates all the software.
Right now, I have the following updaters running:
Windows
Adobe
Kapersky (Anti-virus)
Java
Apple
Isn't it time everyone gets on board with 1 system? This way, Apple can't sneak Safari in, we can set a coordinated restore point, and there is only one update user interface.
As software releases become a more fluid experience relying on weekly builds and not annual or semi-annual releases, I think all these updaters are going to eventually create a clusterfuck and a negative user experience if we don't get everyone on the same system.
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
I tend to agree with you, but I think it's a long ways off.
If you look at the economy, we're (potentially) on the verge of a 2nd great depression. That's because the people that ran companies around the great depression are now 1 or 2 generations removed from the people that run the things now. The new people just don't have any concept of the Great Depression, and just see ways to make money, and now we're winding up in a similar boat.
Right now Google is helmed by people that are incredibly smart and chant "don't be evil"... what happens in the 2nd or 3rd generation of management 40 years down the line? Will the montra still be there? I bet not.
So are you just not ever going to install anything on your computer? Or did you not bother to read the part that said:
Would you tell someone finds out the toys his kid has been playing with were painted with lead-based paints "just don't buy your kid any toys and you'll be okay?" Or do you think that when we find out someone is doing something that is just plain unacceptable, we should shine a light on that behavior and motivate them to smarten up?
I don't care why you're posting AC
Cuz that's the way to go lets ignore the fact that this is a sudden unprompted and uninformed update to an already existing software which installs extra software which then uses up system resources on an unchangeable schedule.
It has nothing to do with installing the software and everything to do with a major change in policy with no warning. If Microsoft makes a change like this people never say "so don't use their product" they wail on and on about user rights. Google on the other hand is defended like a religion.
Why can't something that has nothing to do with Google Earth not be installed? People want to install Google Earth. They DO NOT want to install Google Updater. What's so hard about that to understand? What is Google trying to be, Microsoft? (Movie Maker, IE, Outlook Express, Messenger, etc. etc.)
:) It really is my computer. If I choose to install something, I should be at the very _least_ aware of the consequences of the installation. AND if I remove it, stop trying to put it back. If it isn't on the computer, there _is_ a reason. So, I'm not installing Google Earth until they fix it. It's not worth the hassle and wasted cpu cycles.
why not make it a "check for updates on startup" (of the app), and allow the user to disable that? Is that so hard? OR, be forthright enough to tell users AT THE TIME OF THE INSTALLATION that they're agreeing to install an app that they have no control over, and one that keeps coming back even if you get rid of it? I don't see the point, nor do I see why Google insists on making it some kind of requirement that they are obtuse about in their instructions? What happened to "Don't be evil"?
I remember what these sorts of things are called... malware.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
No, actually, because companies need customers to survive.
But in the case of Google, you're not the customer, you're the product. Google's customers are the advertisers, and they're selling your eyeballs.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Google went public, that's what happened.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.