Slashdot Mirror
Typical Windows User Patches Every 5 Days
CWmike writes "The typical home user running Windows faces the 'unreasonable' task of patching software an average of every five days, security research company Secunia said on Thursday. 'It's completely unreasonable to expect users to master so many different patch mechanisms and spend so much time patching,' said Thomas Kristensen, the company's CSO. The result: Few consumers devote the time and attention necessary to stay atop the patching job, which leaves them open to attack. Secunia says that of the users who ran the company's Personal Software Inspector in the last week of January, half had 66 or more programs from 22 or more different vendors on their machines. ... Secunia has published a white paper (PDF) that details its findings."
Funny--my Firefox updates when I start it up, my Flash and Java and Adobe Reader update essentially on their own, and Windows updates when I shut it down...Steam updates on its own...Trillian and uTorrent give me a button to push to update them...I'm pretty much a power user, but I've never been prompted to update something that was remotely confusing. As long as things that need updating have an easy button to push to do it for you, I'm happy--extra bonus points if there's a checkbox in the installer to choose between "update automatically" and "prompt annoyingly when an update is available"
I've owned a Droid phone for 5 days now. I've already had to "patch" two of the apps for it out of about 10 apps that I have on the phone.
By those standards I'd say MS is doing one hell of a fine job.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
After using Linux I don't understand how Windows users put up with the Microsoft updates that frequently fail to install, sometimes require multiple reboots and then still needing to update everything else manually.
Because none of those things are particularly accurate ?
1. updates that frequently fail to install: My friend's laptop constantly complains about needing ~44 critical updates, but any attempt to install them results in an instant "44 updates failed to install". On my laptop, luckily, most updates installed, but I always had 2 or 3 that wouldn't.
2. Multiple reboots: Install Windows XP (without any service packs) and try updating. Count the number of reboots. Try a similar test on any Linux distro (pick a CD as old as you want), notice how you only need to reboot once to have all of the updates apply.
3. Still needing to update anything else manually: Turn on a computer with Windows that hasn't been used in a year. Install all updates. Now go here: http://www.filehippo.com/updatechecker/. Notice how many installers you need to download and run manually. Start up any arbitrarily old Linux distro and run an update. Notice how everything is up to date (note: By default, most distros don't give you the newest version of most software, but this is intentional and can be worked around by using a distro that doesn't suck).
Well, installing an OS version first released 7-8 years ago may not be the best solution all around. Also, you can simply download the latest service pack, and start with that install first. Not being a troll here, simply that if I were to install Fedora Core 1, and update from there, I might experience a couple of pain points along the way. The real issue with windows, is most software isn't distributed by Microsoft, with Linux it's mostly from your distro. If you start installing software from outside what your distro's repositories come with, you will see similar issues. ex: updating VMWare Server after every single kernel update in the OS updates...
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
What?
Ubuntu (9.10 or 8.04) has constant updates and approximately once a month a kernel fix, which require a reboot. Some other patches has gotten my system into a state which require[1] reboot. You really need to pay attention much more often than "once every 6 months".
[1] The easiest and fastest option.