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?"
And I want to be in control of if it's going to crap or not.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
about the EULA not allowing it to be in the Ubuntu repositories.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
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?
I am using Picasa 3 beta on my imac and have no issues with their updater. Although it came as a surprise to me when it first popped up an alert that a new version was out. Resource usage is minimal (didn't even know it was running - which I guess is the issue some are having.
Conservative, mod down for violating
Does anyone have an "in" with somebody at Google Earth or the outfit they contract with to provide the imagery? A large portion of central and northern Arizona hasn't been updated in years i.e. the images are still in low resolution. The reason I ask is that I belong to a Search & Rescue team and we are currently looking for evidence of a downed aircraft reported missing two years ago. However, much of the possible crash area is still way out of date. In general, not having current imagery makes our job more difficult than it should be.
YES
Shop smart, Shop S-Mart.
... 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)
Why on Earth can't they use something like Sparkle, which is so much less obnoxious - this only warns you when you launch your application, and also self updates if you say yes. If all software started acting like Google Software Update, then we would spend half our day simply closing update windows for software which we haven't used in a month.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Bonjour is a "discovery service", like the thing in Windows that detects what printers, computers etc. are on your network. It's probably needed for iTunes' media sharing functions.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
I would mind this less if Google was known for care in developing its client code. I specifically remember uninstalling Google Desktop last time due to its consumption of system resources and nasty vulnerabilities.
Exactly so. I also don't want to be disturbed with whatever I'm doing by an updater happily sloshing in data in the background. I love Google Earth, but it's been uninstalled now; I might try killing the updater later with the command line, but can't be bothered right now. Seems to be, the best thing we can do is bombard Google. Send them emails with complaints. They'll get the picture, and I think they'll adjust the code - at least enough to only run when you want it to, or on selected components. Now, this might be part of a bigger plan of theirs (world domination, anyone?), likely to force updates of Chrome and other software, but they usually do listen to public opinion. We just have to make it public, and this /. articls is a good start.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it well worth the effort.
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 mean, it is disappointing that a company I respect would do something like that. It could be worse, like installing software you didn't already have (yes Apple, I'm talking to you). At the same time, I have a feeling the power of us in the community will prevail and find a way to circumvent this unwanted action. Give us time... Most of the products I love, I stay with for one reason alone, the community. And of course, if enough of us complain on here, maybe Google will hear.
The difference is the similiar program on windows, has an Preferences menu item where you can set the 'check for updates' frequency to 'never'.
Admittedly, I moved to Mac after 10 years running Linux, but the procedure, cut 'n' pasted below, seems simple enough.
Best Slashdot Co
HP is yet another one of those companies that insists on a background process to update printer drivers, etc. I realized one of the last updates fixed a security flaw. I think my next move will be to uninstall the updater altogether, and thus not have to worry about security holes in a freakin' updater.
It used to be every software house insisted on a systray icon, even though it didn't need it.
Now the latest trend are background "updater" processes, even for stuff that doesn't need it(Adobe reader, etc).
Typically there's no indicators of it being installed, and trying to uninstall it is a mystery.
This needs to change. Identify it as malware or something. Anything.
I'm sure the automatic updater will remove itself the day Google Earth comes out of beta.
This is a non-story. Google gives you the option of not using their software. It is not like they are trying to sneak it by you, and you can remove it if you realize that you do not like it.
I can understand why the updater runs on its own schedule. If the software updates itself when you aren't using it, then it will be ready to use when you want to use it! I hate it when software checks for an update when I run it, and then download and install the update. Google wants the software to be up to date and start when I use it. Makes sense to me, though I understand your concerns about the auto-update policy if you are concerned about bugs and regressions.
Or you could always block the updater's Internet access with your firewall.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
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.
I don't know that this rises to the level of "evil." On the other hand, I would call it inconsiderate, self-important, and shoddy workmanship.
If you get a full install of Bonjour (downloading it from Apple directly instead of getting it with an install of iTunes) it's a fairly nice and useful tool. Unfortunately, the Windows install that comes with iTunes is loboitmized (probably in an effort to avoid complaints, but it's still a shame) and really doesn't do much more than let iTunes share it's library.
On Windows myself, and I'd just updated to GE5, and found this this morning. Of course, no way to uninstall.
Deleted the service entries under HKLM/System/CCS. Rebooted, removed PF/Google/Updater/*
Removed inherited permissions on Updater and made the folder read-only (never thought I'd be truly thankfull for NTFS).
I totally disagree about this, but GE and GTalk seem to run ok with the above changes.
bonjour is multicast dns + service discovery. The multicast dns part means a computer, printer, etc broadcast their name/ip address to the local intranet (no need to set up a hosts file or dns server). The service discovery part means they can also broadcast a list of services/ports/etc they support. As mentioned, that's how iTunes can identify other computers on your intranet that are sharing music.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Bonjour is the network discovery protocol (DAAP) that makes it so your computer can find and connect networked or wireless speakers, printers, share music libraries and more without having to manually find and type in IP addresses especially when you're on DHCP in your house (which you most likely are). I use it at work to advertise machines with certain services (like distributed computing/compiling) to the network so that I don't have to scan for them. It also gives you great DNS services without needing to configure a DNS server (like P2P for DNS).
Bonjour is one of the reasons networking is so 'easy' on Mac's and even on Linux (if you install it). It's similar to Windows' equivalent of Windows Zeroconfig (Microsoft's Link-local Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR)) but it adheres to the published and open standards unlike Microsoft implementation which is also the reason that there is only 1 printer at my job that is discovered through Microsoft's protocol and ALL printers (HP Laserjet, Brother and inkjets) are discovered through Bonjour.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
In principle, YES Google crossed the line, clearly. (Reasons are already espoused in other threads, too tiresome to repeat.) In practice, it probably depends on whether end users perceive a clear change in the performance of their PCs.
If the app isn't visually intrusive and doesn't hork throughput, I would guess most won't care one way or the other. Problem is, if the updater causes problems, the simplest option is to uninstall the software -- and who will reinstall it later?
What ticks me off is that with this choice Google seems to be catering those with a surfeit of bandwidth... I never have enough bandwdith, never; now you want to steal a slice of what little I have for your own purposes? Bad Google, bad, evil Google!
I envision a conversation between two typical users:
"Hey, you seen that new Google Earth? Looks cool."
"Yeah, but if you install it nothing else on your computer will work right."
"Oh, dude... screw that."
Sometimes I have to say to hell with it and just eat my jellybeans.
Of course there are Mac (and windows) users for whom that is true. However, OS X is a BSD variant, and as such makes a very powerful and very geeky platform for those of us who like it that way. In fact, disabling the Goog's updater by changing its permissions is trivial using chmod. As for "cannot be simply removed", that is false. I can easily remove anything I want in OS X via the terminal. If you want it "simple", use sudo mc F8. :)
Caveat Utilitor
Actually no, that sort of stuff only seems to happen with Apple's Windows offerings. There's a system-wide software updater on the Mac, kind of like Windows Update, that updates various things. But individual programs like iTunes or whatever won't update themselves or try to download other stuff.
On Windows it is really easy to use the msconfig tool and stop things like the itunes updater, google updater, quicktime assistant, acrobat speedup, tkbell(the realplayer app) and a host of others from starting.
Uncheck what you don't want to start. Decide you really like the updater? Go back and click the check box.
If I were you, I would phone Google and ask for my money back!
Oh wait...
The problem with 'self-updating' apps is you have to ensure that you never change the way they check for updates or at least always maintain the old paths. If you don't, then that person who only runs the app three times a year is never going to get the update.
On top of that, you now have to maintain this setup for each app you distribute.
Having a 'mother program' which watches over all the apps and downloads updates for them on a regular schedule is a far more stable and reliable way of doing things.
What really needs to happen is these 100+ companies that have enough apps that they think they need to install a background "update" service need to come together to define an open protocol for apps to register with one 'services/daemon/app' so instead of 100 programs all attempting to check for their own programs, you have one service that is covering them all.
Yep, every time I run iTunes, it seems, I'm asked to install some new piece of the MacOS desktop. The real problem is that Apple is refusing to port iTunes to Windows. Instead, they're just adding the APIs and support services that they rely on under MacOS to Windows, which means that nothing performs well, as it's all a redundant layer over the Windows functionality that does the same thing.
The difference is Some of us actually like Google. itunes is crap people put up with when they get ipods. They chose to buy the ipod so they are forced to deal with apples BS.
They crossed the line a long time ago (with Google Desktop originally copying stuff to their servers by default as one example. Data mining Gmail without permission is another).
If you think they are just now crossing the line, you're not paying attention to what Google has been up to.
Just my $0.02.
If you things being downloaded without your knowledge, don't install any software and unplug your computer from the network. Just visiting this page caused your browser to download text, images and javascript without your knowledge or consent.
I'm thinking that many of you do not seen to grasp how network apps like google earth work and how they are supposed to be updated regularly when the services they depend on are updated.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
People buy macs because they are streamlined, cool, boxes that you turn on and just use. They don't want the control offered by Linux/Windows. The argument I hear constantly from my brainwashed friends/family who use macs is that it just works without tweaking. (They think that is a good thing...)
If selling their soul to do business in China wasn't crossing the line then I don't see how this could be.
Theres an Iphone app for Google. It can't have the updater. Apple wouldn't allow it. So people desperate, but not willing to live with the lost resources could always go out and get a touch.
I still don't understand why all these companies feel like they need to create their own bloated ecosystem on top of the OS. All the #$%@#! 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!
Mod this guy up. You know the app that annoys me the worst? It's FF. That app pops up almost every time I start it asking either to update extensions or install downloaded extensions. Adobe's updater crashes most of the time. Flash is evil. You don't know until you hit something like youtube and then presto half the sites you visited yesterday magically don't work today because you need the next flash. I seriously doubt youtube changed their stuff. I think that's just flash's annoying way to force people to update. I actually don't mind windows update half the time. The Sun Java app seems like the quietest app that checks for updates.
I really think that its about time for MS or some one to say enough is enough. We need an app updater as part of windows. I'd also like to set never check for updates and never be bothered by them. That's what I do 98% of the time when given the option. I'm sorry if you want me to install your latest greatest or all your patches. I'm happy with my version. I don't hate breaking things to update them. Today there is no way to roll back to yesterdays crap most of the time either. Once you get that update, you are stuck with the update.
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 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
This is the behaviour of malware.
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.
Couple of weeks ago my G1 browser started getting Google Mobile for my homepage instead of the fully-featured Google page. Turns out Google started directing ALL mobile browsers to Google Mobile pages based on user agent. The iPhone fanboyz went ballistic. I just screamed. Among the things I lost was the Bookmarks gadget. Pus.
Their logic was, from several forum posts, that Google wanted mobile (actually 'phone' browsers was how they put it) users to have a 'consistent' experience across platforms.
If I want a consistent browser experience similar to that of, say a Motorola RazrV3 user, or a BlackBerry Pearl user, I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED A RAZR OR PEARL!!!!!
Sorry. I still get angry.
I bought a G1 mostly to get an enhanced browser, 3G/WiFi service to be able to use the browser, and therefore have a more *useful* experience. Google has essentially downgraded my browser.
I do have a workaround - the Steel browser lets me set the user agent to 'Desktop'. Now I get my Google pages like I like them.
I'm not sure this is Google becoming evil, or Google becoming Nanny. Or is that the same thing?
It couldn't have anything to do with wireless providers asking if there were some way Google could minimize the amount of bandwidth mobile suers were sucking through the straw, could it?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Google on the other hand is defended like a religion.
Thanks for saying this. It is nice to see that I am not alone in recognizing that Google gets a pass of far worse actions than we would put up with out of any other companies.
Anyone who knows about this and leaves installed any Google webapp is basically asking for it.
Sorry if you find those apps useful. They are also inherently treacherous. They inherently give power over your data and your computer to a third party. You can trust them only to the extent that you trust that third party. I suppose you could run them from a separate unprivileged account and not put anything sensitive through them...but once you're doing that, then using them is so much hassle that you might as well not bother.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.