Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How Often Do You Update Your OS?
An anonymous reader writes: A couple friends of mine have been having a debate recently. One is constantly updating all of his operating systems (desktop, phone, and otherwise), often as soon as a new patch is available. He tries betas and nightlies. He has a different ROM on his phone every other week. The other friend is much more conservative with his updates. Once his systems are running smoothly, he wants to leave them alone for as long as possible. He'll do some serious security updates, but he's extremely wary of anything involving major UI changes or functionality differences. What's your preference? Are you constantly tweaking? Waiting for the early adopters to work out the kinks? How does your preference change between work machines and personal machines?
First I update the VMs, if they survive then I update the main box. I'm running CentOS BTW.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
In the immortal words of Weird Al:
"I've beta tested every operating system; gave props to some but others, I dissed 'em "
Yeah I tend to update and change my OS frequently on my personal systems. Work systems tend to be kept in known stable configurations.
Nothing to see here
Alvin Toffler thought human personalities could be split between those who welcome change and those who avoid it. First published in mid-20th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.amazon.com/Future-S...
https://www.goodreads.com/book...
Whenever I have some of the most expensive and valuable resource to waste - my time. If it is up and working, security updates go in, after 2 to 3 weeks, other updates may go with them as well, but not necessary. I would rather be out on my bicycle or working on my photo collection ( sometimes I take 3-4k photos on a weekend) than doing updates. Keep in mind, the summary talks about upgrades - the new rom every week. Update is keeping the same version, upgrade is moving to another.
This is an issue that I think is handled beautifully by Ubuntu's release system. LTS releases come out on a relatively steady schedule, with bleeding-edge releases in between. I personally stick with LTS releases, which come out often enough to keep me up to date with features, etc., but without lots of things breaking all the time.
And, yes, I like Unity very much.
Let the suckers and adventurers be the beta testers.
Don't run the crap which is most likely to be causing you security problems in the first place -- I've never been impacted by a Flash zero day exploit because I don't run it.
Many years of being around computers has taught me that I have no intention of putting up with the drama of beta testing for companies who do a lousy job of QA.
I've seen WAY too many things which are broken on day 1, or even worse, which introduce new broken on day 1 that it takes some time to identify.
There isn't an OS vendor on the planet I'd accept a fresh release from and install on the first day.
If you do this stuff as a hobby, have fun with it. The rest of us don't have the time or the inclination to consider upgrading the OS to be a hobby.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
And now my entire lab is going Linux, because this Win 10 thing and auto updates means our systems would be at risk.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Second
Your friends show two distant points on the patching spectrum we have to make all the time.
Neither is right, nor wholly wrong. The first friend doesn't worry so much about stability, and for himself that's fine. He knows the choices he's making and he's really into that. Good for him. The second friend is more conservative and more in line with what the mainstream hopes for and expects. I'd like to know what they consider "serious security" updates, because it could be anywhere from reasonable security to complete insecurity. This is why most environments have tiers of patching and testing. We know we need to get security updates out as much as possible. Some people get more value out of being on the bleeding edge than having a stable install, others can't/won't have their work interrupted for any cost. This is also why this argument is silly to have between two people on which way is "better."
As for what I do? My home system gets updates as soon as I see they're available. I occasionally play with nightlies or betas, on a VM, to see if there are major interface tweaks, a new feature I want, or whatever else I'm interested in. I'd never suggest that for most of my friends or relatives.
Incidentally, that's pretty much how it goes at work. Most of the people I work with in IT, and a few select users are in the first group. Most people get security updates quickly, and well vetted other updates when they're more thoroughly tested.
I have one computer that just receives updates, but it is running a Linux distribution that mostly delivers bug and security patches rather than upgrading the software or changing the user interface. While it isn't my production computer per se, it is the machine that I expect to be reliable.
The rest of my computers and devices receive updates and upgrades as often as I feel like, which is frequently these days. Nightlies and betas are usually stable enough if you avoid the first few rounds. It is also fun to see how the technology is developing, even if I usually see the changes as frivolous or counter productive.
One thing that I don't go hog-wild on updating though is application software. It is far too easy to get data locked into a format that is incompatible with earlier releases, which is a time sink if things do go wrong and I do have to back up to a prior version. Operating systems aren't as much of a concern on this front since they just provide services to applications.
Much easier to sleep at night.
Which is the one which comes pre-installed on most distros?
with the production releases and patches. I won't use betas or nightlies unless I'm trying to fix a specific bug.
I'm still using DOS on a P-II w/640k RAM. No problems so far.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I used to tinker a *lot* more than I do now, but lately I have a more purpose-driven use of devices. This means I like to have them in a working and stable state when I turn them on, so my upgrades are fewer and further between. I think if your hobby is the devices themselves, then you'll upgrade a lot. If you're like me and your hobby/work involves use of the device, the bleeding edge doesn't matter so much unless the latest patch/whatever directly impacts what you're doing.
"False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
I update as soon as I can. Once there is a hint of a new version I update. I use Ubuntu as my OS of choice, I never stick to a LTS. And my Android devices are always up to date with the newest Android, Cyanogenmod on all my devices except my Nexus 6 - which runs stock.
the Emacs vs VI war is over (Emacs won) ...
Yeah I'm thinking not. I've been a Unix sysadmin for over 15 years and I've never worked with a single person who uses Emacs.
Nothing to see here
Automotive control interfaces change all of the time.
Into about 1980 all American cars and trucks had, for many years, placed the headlights control on the dash at the left. Wiper blade control was usually on the lower left side of the dash near the knee bolster. They placed the turn signal on the left side of the column, placed the gearshift on the right side of the column, and placed the brights control on the floor, operated by the left foot. The radio was generally low on the right side. If a fancy car had an interior dome light with dimming capability it was usually placed on the left with the headlight control, and if there was cruise control, the function was integrated with the turn signal indicator stalk, with a slider on the side for set/coast and a button on the tip for on/off.
In the late seventies and eighties they started playing with multifunction stalks and all bets were off. Some cars integrated nearly every function into the stalk, and if the car had a floor shifter instead of a column shifter sometimes a second multifunction stalk was added to the right side. Floor controls were mostly eliminated and most low, hard to reach controls were relocated to stalks. Tilting telescoping steering columns added a third stalk on the lower-left of the column. When Mercedes Benz took over Chrysler they attempted to add a fourth stalk to the column, low on the right, for the cruise control. Steering wheels got controls on the front, then on the back. At one point early on there was a "rim blow" steering wheel where squeezing the wheel would activate the horn.
My point is that automotive controls are very much NOT standard. Even basic functions like gear selection could be pushbutton, could be a column stalk, could be a dash stalk, could be a floor stick, could be a dash-mounted knob, could be a center-console knob, and there are probably more variations yet. Drivers have to get used to each and every configuration.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Caveat: this is mainly a Linux recommendation. ymmv with windows (may kill the cat, sour the milk, unravel a sweater.)
If you're running Fedora, or other bleeding-edge releases you might want to dial back the constant updating in favour of stability. New releases are often accompanied by unexpected instability and new bugs, in favour of additional features. If your project has a heavy focus on developers and not stability, problems updating to the latest version of a package can be compounded by issues like circular dependencies and missing libraries. Gentoo overlays, for example, are legendary in their varying degrees of skullduggery.
im not sure id ever recommend carte blanche nightly updates, but im an old neckbeard that takes far too much pleasure in the arcane nonsense of system administration. Tune into your project/distro's mailing lists for the latest info, just like you might tune into the weather channel. Did the opsec mailing list just issue security warnings for your distro? which packages do you use? updating them might be a good idea. set aside a time at the end of the week, or month, where you have a good hour away from other distractions to roll up the latest updates for other noncritical things on the OS. editors, music players, and the like can come when you, the sysadmin, are ready.
Finally, and rolling-release distros can tune out for this part, you want to be pretty careful about major updates. Did a new release come out? is it a major or a minor? what are the differences between those for your distribution? check the forums and IRC to see whos updates so far and what their experience was like. Some may recommend in-place updates, others may recommend a more unix-like backup-and-restore if the package or ports manager is known to be flakey. you dont have to pour through every iota of the release notes but its your perogative to know what changed, why it changed, and what it means for the way you use your computer.
lastly, dont sweat it. keeping current with security patches is a best practice we all appreciate on the internet, but I know plenty of people who never upgraded their djbdns installs and lived long enough to scold me about >512b DNS answers.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I'm on arch, so way too often if you ask me. To specifically answer the question: at least once a week, with probably a new kernel update every couple of weeks. I make sure I have LVM snapshots between each update procedure as at least 1/4 of the time something breaks. I really wish arch didn't use rolling updates, but the vast AUR repository unique to arch is more than worth it.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Say what? I work in a shop with extensive Solaris and Linux installation, and run several personal Linux boxes as well. They all have vi. None of them, as far as I know, and I checked several, have Emacs. This was not a conscious decision for any of them: it's just the way the hosts installed (although on my personal boxes, I would've installed vi had it not installed by itself). Who won the war?
Still running Windows for Workgroups 3.11....
MS word 2.0 works just fine!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The answer is simple: hipsters don't design car user interfaces, but they do "design" software user interfaces.
It may be difficult to believe these days, but for quite some time, from the mid-1980s to the mid-2000s, software UIs were quite consistent on each major platform. Almost all Windows apps looked the same on any given version of Windows. Almost all Mac apps looked the same on any given version of Mac OS. Even on X, where there was no standard toolkit, at least a Motif-like theme was offered by most toolkits. There was even superficial similarity across these very different platforms, where the UIs consisted of very similar components, even if the appearance differed.
The important thing to remember is that all of that software predated the influx of hipsters into the computing industry. The hipsters flooded in starting around 2005, which corresponds exactly to the decline in user interface consistency. After a few years of work, these hipsters left us with UI disasters like all of modern web design (especially Slashdot Beta), Chrome, Firefox 4 and later, GNOME 3, and Windows 8.
Hipsters care only about the appearance of the UI. The usability of the software is not a concern to them. The appearance is what they deem to look "good", of course. So if, as a user, you find that the software looks bad and is difficult to use, then the hipsters insist that you are wrong and they are right.
Gedit is the best example I've seen of how the hipster approach to "design" can totally destroy a software user interface. Gedit, which is nothing more than a simple Notepad-like text editor, went from having consistent, usable interface to having this terrible farce of a user interface. That's right, they managed to fuck up the user interface of a text editor that badly!
At least the auto industry, in general, has kept these hipsters away from the physical dashboard. Yes, they have screwed up some of the software for in-car screens, but at least that functionality is non-critical.
.
Version updates:
.
Security and other interim updates:
For my currently installed OS's (Mac OS 10.10 and Windows 7) I usually wait to do an update until it's been out for at least a day to see who in the tech pundit world is freaking out, or posting that it eats all of your files. If there's no noticeable uproar, I assume it's probably safe. For a new OS releases, I generally skip every other one. So, Windows went from XP to 7, Mac OS went from 10.6 to 10.8 to 10.10. I like to give the big boys time to correct their mistakes with whatever newfangled crap they tried to fix (that wasn't broken) each time they release a major "upgrade".
It has been about 35 years since the blinker interface was changed. Gotit.
There's a big difference between how you treat your desktops and your servers.
I wanted a change of pace and moved from embedded stuff on Linux to iOS development. So my desktop is basically always the latest OS X version.
I still have Linux servers running for OwnCloud and my personal website, and that's all Debian Stable. But given that it's Stable, I always update to the latest.
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
I run a nightly ROM on my phone, but that's only because there's no stable release of it anymore (it's officially "unmaintained" but the nightlies work well).
My laptop runs debian testing, which I update daily. I follow "testing" not "stretch" - so when stretch is released (in 25 years or so), it'll automatically "upgrade" to the next testing.
My desktop runs arch. They use a rolling release, so I update that pretty often as well.
So I guess the whole "how often do you update" thing doesn't apply to rolling OSs.
Sure it does. Just because a release is offered doesn't mean you have to install it. I run gentoo which also does rolling releases. There are pros and cons to keeping up or rather *not* keeping up. The pro is that you don't have to deal with the breakages. The con is that eventually you will need to come up to current and that can be a holy terror. Not only do you have a large number of manual fixes for things that don't settle out on their own but sometimes you can't easily get from the version you have to the version that is current without going through an intermediate version that is not easily determined and may not even be in Portage anymore.
I kind of wish there was an option to update only those packages that have not changed for a week or two. That way, if packages fixes are needed, someone else finds them and the packages is fixed before I have to deal with it.
I'm in the middle of updating an eepc 900 to useably current ubuntu. While not strictly a rolling release, the machine is nearly six years behind so I have to install LTS updates sequentially. No obvious breakages so far but it does take a very long time.
Still running OSX 10.6.8 -- an OS version ca. July 2011
Isn't broken in the sense that anything about it significantly impedes what I use the computer for; anything that was really crappy -- like Safari -- has been replaced with something that worked better.
Ergo, no need to "fix" it.
I have more interesting things to do with my time than adopt change for the sake of change.
There's a great deal positive that can be said for a stable OS environment, not the least of which is that software which I develop for it will work for more people than software that utilizes functionality only available from a later version of the OS. Speaking for myself, I view a statement about any application of the general form "requires late version of/latest OS" as an abject failure of the developer to think of the users.
That's not to say that others aren't, or shouldn't be interested in the latest OS version-- it's just that I am not, and that addresses the question that was asked.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Basically, I upgrade my OS when I decide I want new hardware, which isn't very often any more.
Wish this got more time on slashdot.
The 60% of the geography of the United States that does not have high-speed internet, or has low-speed data with data caps and no other options, NEVER get to update operating systems.
While no one should think they are entitled to high-speed internet, the fact is that outside large cities u.s. connectivity is just about the worst on the planet.
Many in rural areas can't even update an OS to a new version since everyone changed updates to be online-based.
Back in the days of physical media, we would just order a new version of the OS on disk. This is why I left Windows after Win2000 and went to Macs - OS on DVD's for less than $20 shipped to your home. For a while, Mac was the only way if you could not download. Well, you know what happened after Snow Leopard - no more Mac media.
In our small town of 530, there are 5 people with WIndows 7, because it came on the cheap pc/laptop they bought. A few still use Vista, 3 of us also have Mac Snow Leopard, and the rest of us have WinXP.
None of us have the 'internet' to update anything, so we don't. Our pc's still work as good as they did when we got them though.
We all run Ad blockers to minimize the misuse of our connections.
When you have little internet connection and use little of the internet, you don't seem to ever get viruses and malware though. A great trade-off.
Why does tech insist on updated stuff that ends up frustrating and annoying users to get an overall UI improvement of %0.01? Come on, guys, go work on something useful or make the bits behind the UI better.
That's TiVo's big problem. They've been adjusting the UI lately, and with each iteration it looks like they are introducing more bugs than they remove. TiVo's quality control level has been dropping drastically.
As the title says....
Nope. Every distro I've seen (although I'll admit I haven't made a business of surveying them) installs vi by default but not Emacs.
I can install JOE the same way. So obviously JOE has won the editor wars.
Some things interest some people; other things interest other people. Sometimes there is overlap. Here on slashdot, considering the age, stability, and desirability of one OS version as related to another is quite topical in terms of the issues the site generally is understood to cover.
Perhaps you should wander off and find a story you are interested in. No need to read the ones that don't provoke an interest, you know. You do know that, right?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
"Blinkers" are both turn signal and hazard indicators. Cars I have owned manufactured in the past 20 years have had at least three distinct control methods to turn on and off the hazard indicators. So no, "blinkers" haven't been standard for 35 years.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
On my phone? Whenever my provider pushes an update.
On my computer? Only when my current OS isn't doing something I need it to do.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I update Ubuntu on my laptop as soon as s new version comes out, my desktop a week later (just in case). My phones and tablets I update as soon as a new version of Android becomes available for it. As rooted phones don't always ota very well, I update them manually.
As for the microwave and the refrigerator, I update them immediately, but fortunately, that never happens. I sincerely wish I could update my cats. They're 17 years old, they still run on their first OS version, which is getting a bit worn out. When they jump on my desk to be close to me, they don't make it and fall back off, managing to grab my bare elbow with one or two nails and holding on to it.
As for myself, I did one upgrade, which is sufficient for now.
no, I don't have a sig
Server: Latest with 1 week after patches released unless security mandated. This way let's see what else breaks.
Laptop/Desktop: Latest Windows with the above caveat. Apple update to the latest, no need to wait, apple patches so rarely. No Linux desktop/laptop (Who does that anymore?)
Phone/Mobile: Latest, always. Chances are if it breaks it's because of some rare use case some idiot did doing something equally stupid.
Gaming Consoles: Latest, do it, patch everything ASAP, go beta here for nifty new features!
Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
There shouldn't be any UI changes which are not optional, meaning you can revert them after you've made the update and restore them any time.
Today's OS vendors are so focused on marketing, they don't get that novelty and innovation are a BAD thing in UI design. Consistency and familiarity are GOOD things.
Automotive control interfaces change all of the time.
But in most cases, the automobile someone drivers does not.
And when someone does change car, maybe every 5-10 years, getting up to speed with the new controls takes them a few minutes.
This is because, fair as the examples you give of evolving car controls might be, ultimately you still turn the steering wheel to change direction (and you turn it anticlockwise to turn left). When you get a different car, you still have the same gas and brake pedals you used to. If you drive a manual then you still have the same clutch pedal and probably a near-identical gear stick arrangement. The range of external lights and when you use them hasn't changed a lot in decades. The internal and external environment-related controls are still roughly the same. The changes are mostly cosmetic, more akin to changing visual themes in software than changing actual functionality to something significantly different that the user must then learn before they can use the software effectively again.
If software only changed its UI significantly every 5-10 years, and you could choose when to switch, and when you did it would still basically work the same way but you might have to spend five minutes figuring out where the main functions were found in the new version, I don't think users would be nearly as frustrated by the changes as so many are today.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I let my Linux Mint desktop slide way out of the support envelop while I waited for PC-BSD to become a viable replacement. I had a single FreeBSD machine running ZFS as my server, which had been rock solid, but I'd never run a BSD desktop before. Then in a single week it was "BSD everywhere" on my home network.
I embrace change on my own terms (which is not change caused by the Gnome developers becoming bored of their own architecture, or Canonical deciding that tablets are the new shit). PC-BSD features boot environments. This amounts to an "undo" key for your operating system. Batch patch? Nuke the fucker.
I can temporize for years, then jump in with both boots if the time seems right.
It's one of the worst things about computing culture that we still collectively tolerate: the notion that capability upgrades are welded at the hip to work flow "innovation". Install a new OS, you're guaranteed to get a mixture of both.
I'd vastly prefer the tick-tock model as practised by Intel (or the alternating new airframe / new engine model as practised by Boeing) where releases that muck with the established user interface change no underlying features / capabilities at all (so the only reason anyone installs the GUI refactor release is because you actually want to partake in the bling rebinding).
Hopefully BSD won't someday lose its mind like Linux did, in which your trusty tighty-whities suddenly becomes a full-body support corset (with no-one asked). Personally, I can handle the change from tighty-whities to rc.d boxer shorts just fine, thank you very much.
I run Gentoo on my primary machines. Any guesses?
Specifically, Debian testing with unstable and/or experimental packages if I desire a specific feature and deem them stable enough. People who talk about leaving new versions to get early problems ironed out have too much faith in software developers in my opinion. I'm amazed at the stuff I've been told they didn't notice or considered a feature. In order to get such things fixed, you need to be engaged, and that means using new versions of stuff so you actually know what's going on. If you're only using old versions then you've only get yourself to blame when developers go down crazy street.
the Emacs vs VI war is over (Emacs won) ...
Yeah I'm thinking not. I've been a Unix sysadmin for over 15 years and I've never worked with a single person who uses Emacs.
I'm a Unix systems programmer and administrator and I routinely use both Emacs and Vi depending on the task. Vi is universally available out of the box and is really good for small, quick things while I prefer Emacs for larger, longer edits and development, especially on complex things with many files.
People get too cranked up over "this vs. that" when it really boils down to using the most appropriate tool for the task - that you're competent with. Emacs is a much more capable and sophisticated tool, but comes with a much higher learning curve. I've been using Emacs (and Vi) since the 1980s, and am more productive on most of my tasks using Emacs. That said, using it to edit a few lines in the hosts file is like trying to kill a mosquito with a sledgehammer.
Emacs and Vi both win when used appropriately.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
to update, I update.
Automotive control interfaces change all of the time.
Really? The "control interface" of my '81 Ford is the same as the day it was purchased.
That depends entirely on what's on the device I'm updating.
My phone has basically no important information and the entire thing is backed up in 3 different locations. I only update it when I absolutely have to because being without it if it bricks during the update is a nightmare, and most updates change the way the phone works and just end up irritating me. I don't know anyone personally that's ever had their phone remotely hacked, and even if they did... so what?
My work computer? It gets updated every night. There's a team of people that handle that.
My home computer? Well, MSFT is involved... that used to auto-update until they came out with that "upgrade to windows 10!" notification. Now I don't trust their updater at all and updates are turned off permanently. I'll update when I need to.
Linux installs stable updates on its own. Never had a problem.
Websites and things? Again, depends on the content. I've got a Teamspeak server that's been running on an EC2 Instance for years and I'm never updating that.
I use Ubuntu, and I keep my laptop up-to-date with the latest version. I do not generally go for the Beta versions, unless reviews say that it is stable enough. Usually performance and stability improve significantly between versions. On servers, I keep the latest LTS version, and install security updates regularly.
Coke screwed the pooch when it switched over to New Coke and immediately switched back to Coke Classic in the 1980's. I switched over to Pepsi and never looked back. No debate here.
The beta/nightly guys are doing it because it's their hobby. This is entertainment for them. Like the guys who just analyze the hell out of game graphics instead of actually playing the games. These guys are always complaining about how their stuff isn't working right, but they love it.
If using the OS as a tool to get things done is your main concern then you back off to what gets you the new features you need/want.
If you're a luddite and afraid of being kicked out of your habits then you never update until hardware death forces you, even though you're missing a lot of upgrades that could help you do things better and faster. Some of these guys admit it, which is fair enough (my Mom doesn't want to have to relearn), and the others have endless lame excuses.
I used to be one of the first guys, now I'm one of the middle guys. Debian testing dist-upgrade, Windows 8.1 with Metro stripped out, Android 5.1.1. It just works without being bleeding edge. Okay, Win10 on one non-critical machine, for my inner child.
Actually, vim won the war, not vi.
signed,
Mr. Actually
We travel a lot and rent a lot of cars. It can range from being mildly annoying to almost hazardous, getting to know the controls for a new vehicle, especially when other things like the seat and mirror positioning will also have to be set.
True, the pedals and steering wheel haven't moved, and the actual turn signal stalk's basic signal-left and signal-right functions are unchanged, but as I said, the gearshift selector and everything else is up for grabs.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
And the UI of my XP-based media center box is still the same as it was when it was installed. What's your point?
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I re-image mine from an image I made, stored on a server in the middle of the house. Every time the machine boots, it re-images the OS image on the local hard drive, thoroughly destroying anything else that might have been on the disk. When an update to the main image is necessary, I make a new one.
I create those once about every six months, unless there's an emergency patch like Heartbleed. This works on all of the computers in my home. Wife and daughter go through the same process on their machines.
Boot to Ghost, install os, play, run, do whatever. In the event of a virus, it's short lived. When I attended Berkeley, this was the way they had set up their computer lab. I remember, at the time, being intrigued by the setup.
Now that I have myself, my wife, and a five year old all using machines around the house (nine distinct pc's), I have a practical use application for this.
Since I implemented this about five years ago, we have had virtually no problems with it. The drawback of course is that it's a lot easier to do if your machines, desktops, laptops, etc, all match. Learned that one the hard way, but good now.
My machine gets shut down about once a week. My daughter is always letting the battery burn down on her laptop, so she images more frequently than anyone else in the house. My wife is also at about once a week.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
DOS 6.2 was good. 6.22 wasn't exciting, so I stopped there. Has anything notable changed?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Meh, they both suck compared to Brief.
Fair enough, but I think it's also fair to say you're probably the exception rather than the rule here, both in the frequency with which you switch vehicles and the diversity of the controls you encounter. Maybe it's different here in the UK, but basically one rental or courtesy car probably works 99% like any other, apart from the manual vs. automatic controls. The gear stick for a manual is always in roughly the same place, and every car or van I've ever driven that had 5+ forward gears had 1-5 in the same positions, with the only variations being where reverse is and whether there are extra forward gears.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
It depends on whether a machine is one on which I do work for which I get paid, or not. My main workstation, which is the source of my income, warrants a very conservative update approach. I was very slow in leaving XP, and with a mature, stable Windows 7 environment, I'm in no hurry at all to adopt another version of Windows. Yeah, like everyone else I've seen the popups inviting me to upgrade to Windows 10. You first. I can't afford to be down while I figure out why things aren't working or figuring out where Microsoft hid certain buttons this time.
I will sometimes install a new version on a spare machine just to see where technology is heading, and acquaint myself with what I will eventually have to deal with, but that's a lower priority. I'm not really interested in spending half my life doing upgrades and figuring out what broke.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
True, if you're want to split hairs.
The pointer moves in the direction that your mouse moves.
If you tap the top-left side of the mouse, it's called a click.
Click on the picture that looks like a button to do what the text on the button says.
This has been true ever since the earliest of GUI's.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
alias ds="sudo aptitude update; sudo aptitude install debsecan \`secan-update\` dpkg aptitude debian-archive-keyring"
function secan-update() /etc/default/debsecan
{
.
debsecan --only-fixed --format packages --suite $SUITE
}
When I was younger, it was fun and novel to update my OS everytime something "new" came out, so I would. I spent a lot of my weekends and weeknights doing this. Hell, sometimes I would completely wipe my machine just to try a new OS or two for fun.
However, once I actually got into the workforce, I found I valued a stable platform a whole lot more than exploring "new" OS features (which are really never that "new" anyways). It got a lot less fun to spend all weekend trying to get something to work right, only to be left with a semi-stable environment that I couldn't use for work on Monday morning... Installing, re-installing or upgrading OSes gets old pretty quick when you need a stable environment to work in.
Now I get annoyed if they drop support for my installed OS less than 3 years after I installed it.
Now get off my lawn and quit waving those Windows 10 and Mint 17 install disks at me!
And the UI of my XP-based media center box is still the same as it was when it was installed. What's your point?
That auto manufacturers don't push out updates to their install base every Tuesday. Sure, different vehicles have different designs. That don't change after they've been built. Software on phones, computers, set-top boxes, etc changes frequently, and often change the interface.
Automotive control interfaces change all of the time.
Really? The "control interface" of my '81 Ford is the same as the day it was purchased.
Well, the auto makers have "fixed" that problem in their latest models. They now have those little "onboard computers" that constantly scan many of the controls and figure out how to map them to physical actions. This means that any "upgrade" to the software can change the functioning of all the controls. You can think you're just getting an upgrade to improve the mileage, but that upgrade can flip the meaning of the turn-signal controls.
Some of the latest models have wifi, so they can do upgrades while you're traveling. We'll probably soon be hearing of accidents caused by a sudden change in meaning of what the driver did with the controls. (Yes, they may say the upgrades won't happen while the car is moving. What that means is that if you stop at a stop sign or light, when you start moving again, the controls may have silently changed. And if you think they wouldn't do upgrades without your permission, you haven't been paying attention.)
If computer-industry history is any guide, it'll probably take decades for all this to settle down to an intuitive, reliable auto UI. And the security problems still won't be solved, so your car can be taken over at any moment by "hackers" - or the police - or your insurance company.
(I wish I were joking ... but I'll probably get a "funny" mod for this anyway. ;-)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I also have a friend who upgrades everything all the time. "the new phone's amazing" either means that the "old phone sucks" -- which makes no sense since the old phone was "amazing" when it was new too -- or that the new marketing is amazing -- which makes sense because the old marketing was also amazing.
There are countly amazing things that can be added to anything. Some new features are just really impressive. But being impressive doesn't mean that it improves my life at all.
A frisbee that can be thrown over a half-mile is really cool (and called an aerobe, by the way, and I love them) but I don't have a park that large, nor would I enjoy playing catch with a friend that far away.
Similarly, most new OS features might be neat, but they don't actually change my life at all. Perhaps the best example I can give is with regard to office/productivity suites.
Between word, excel, wordperfect, lotus 123, and-if-you-thought-wordperfect-was-dating-myself wordstar, I've been writing essays and poems and business documents for close to thirty years. Before the computer "clipboard", before 3d text-art, before pivot tables, before ribbon bars, before toolbars, before menu bars, before arrow-keys, even before the mouse. In the end, the business documents that I produce today, to earn a living, aren't any more sophistimicated than the ones that I producted 25 years ago, early in my career. Believe it or not, youngin's, business invoices and quotes and proposals existing before XML. So none of these new features actually provide any additional benefit to my life. They only change the way I create the very same invoice -- whether for dot-matrix, inkjet, laser, PDF, or e-mail.
How many new OS features actually add to my life? The answer is: none. So I upgrade my OS when I upgrade my computer. When is that? When my computer is too old to play the almost-latest games -- because games are entertainment, and entertainment is my sole purpose in life.
The OS is very definitely secondary.
All that said, there have been OS upgrades that have improved my life. Win 95 let me switch between games and work faster, which meant that I could play more games. Vista let me have more pixels so I could work more at a time and keep the tv playing in the corner at the same time. Win 7 added nothing. Win 8 added nothing. Win 10 would let me work cross-device better, if my work were capable of being done anywhere but a desk, but it ain't.
Many families have multiple cars. Ours has 3, all different manufacturers, and I frequently drive all three in any given month. It is fairly maddening to go between cars and to deal with different controls that require additional attention just to remember where the turn signals are without ending up with the wipers flapping.
Our Ford and Toyota put almost everything from the column on opposite sides. Even adjusting the air conditioner settings requires a conscious mental shift to get remember how to get the desired result.
It creates a lot of needless distraction.
This is aggressively missing the point. The original poster was discussing the fact that you can hop in any modern car and know with certainty how to actuate the left or right hand turn indicators. His/her point is valid and true, but instead of addressing it you are now on about hazard lights.
Anonymous Cowherd? Is that you?
I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
I drive a car with the automatic transmission gear selector on the column. I have inadvertently turned on the windshield wipers a couple of times in the pickup with a floor-stick because the wiper controls on the truck are where the gearshift is on the car.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Compare the controls in a 2010 Chrysler 300 with a 2013 Chrysler 300. Both are on the LX chassis and share most components, but steering wheels, dash assembly, and controls are not the same between the two cars, and that's two cars on the same chassis. Compare to the other cars like the Sebring/200 and the newer 200, or the Town and Country as it has evolved through recent years, or go into the Dodges and look at the differences between the Caliber, Dart, Avenger, Charger, Ram, and Grand Caravan and you'll see massive differences in controls even within a given model year.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Personally, I mostly stick to release versions. I may try a beta on an unimportant computer, just to get a sense of what's coming, but OS betas make more sense if you're a developer trying to make sure your app will work on the new OS. As a user, or even an IT pro, you're mostly wasting your time.
Myself, I'll install the new version of OSX, Windows, and iOS as soon as I can get a gold master. If it's going to cause problems, then I want to experience those problems before my clients experience them. I know enough to manage with a few bugs, or roll back to an earlier release if I need to. For everyone else, I recommend that they wait at least a couple of months to see whether any big problems emerge. In the mean time, I'll recommend installing the update on a computer or two so that they can test that their apps word, and see how they like the new OS. I always recommend holding off, however, for any important machines. At least for a month or two.
I don't update my OS, ever.
The overlords living at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, CA 95014 are the ones updating the OS for me.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Server? Get it right and apply only security updates. Work desktop? Change it up every once in a while as long as stability isn't sacrificed. Don't spend so much time tweaking that you lose a lot of time actually doing your work. Home workstation? Play with it. Try things out. See which updates are worth putting elsewhere. Game system? Make sure it supports the games you want to play and isn't an easy security target. Work phone? Get security updates, but don't update it to odd things that your IT department is going to hate you for. Personal phone? Well, who cares as long as it's as dependable as you need it to be?
I tend to run an emerge --sync and apply most package updates every day or two. In my experience this helps keep things running smoothly. The kernel, however, only gets updated every month or two, or when I become aware of a kernel vulnerability that potentially might affect my system (rare but not unknown). Same basic procedure with my work PC: Windows Updates every few days, or sooner if I learn of a critical (but patched) vulnerability. Obviously on a mission-critical production system my policy would be different, but the Gentoo system is for my own use and would not cripple me if it went down because of an update, although that has never happened. (I've broken X during the modularization project, for not R-ing the F-ing M . . that's the worst that's happened to me yet.) The 'Doze system at work would be a royal pain to rebuild since it has, and needs, multiple versions of various Microsoft and other dev tools. But it would not be crippling either; worst case is I'd borrow a VM and use that while rebuilding mine. I don't keep anything on the HD that isn't also on the network in a Git repo or file share someplace else.
Nonaggression works!
If I'm having a problem, then I ride the bleeding edge until the mainstream has a fix, then run that. Otherwise, boring is stable.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
My last remaining Windows machine, which is used for photo and video editing in bursts during certain times of the year (I'm an amateur photographer/videographer with seasonal subjects) a self-built i7-3770k machine, was updated following every editing session until recently. I'd finish what I was doing, allow Windows 7 to apply any needed updates, and then shut the machine off until it was needed again. The machine is now running a Windows Insider Build of Windows 10, because I needed to know if several somewhat esoteric and out-of-date applications for my other hobby, ham radio, were going to run properly. I keep good backups, however; this includes a full backup of all my photos to Amazon. My Apple devices are updated as soon as Apple releases an update, with two exceptions. My MacBook Pro, iPad, backup iPhone (usually used for timelapse video now) and AppleTVs are updated immediately when an iOS or Mac OS X update is available. I also update my AirPort Extremes on the same policy. Exception one is that my current phone is updated a few hours later, once I notice no major issues with the iPad and old iPhone. Sometimes I wait a day or two if I know I'm going to need my phone no matter what. Exception two is that I'm currently running beta iOS 9 on my old phone, because I felt adventurous. None of my machines or devices are used for production work I'm paid for, my employer handles maintenance of my single-device work computer, so I can afford to take the updates regularly.
I have my production computer, where, once everything is stable, it stays at that OS with security updates as needed. I then have my testing machine, where I hold the mentality of, "If it ain't broke, don't stop tinkering." That machine has been offline for about 2 years due to me not having time to tinker, but that's changing shortly.
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
I never upgrade an OS to a new major release (i.e. WindowsXP to WIndows7) on old hardware. The new OS will consume more resources so it's better to buy modern hardware for it if you absolutely need features in a newer OS. I suspect the vast majority of people upgrade just to keep up with or stay ahead of the Jones.
For my laptop (Mac OS X): update as soon as updates are available, unless it's a major update (i.e. a new OS version, not just a patch). If it's major, I'll usually wait a bit and see how it goes in the wild with early adopters, first. For my desktop (Arch Linux): Arch uses a rolling release model, so I do a daily check on what's available and then decide if I want to apply those updates immediately or wait. This depends on what is being updated. If it's the kernel or Xorg I might wait a bit. For minor stuff I usually go ahead and update right away. For my phone (Android): At the moment I'm running Cyanogenmod. I don't flash new nightlies very often; I tend to stick with one I find stable. I do like to keep fairly current, though. I apply app updates as soon as they're available. For my tablet (Android): It's a Nexus version and I never bothered rooting it or anything, I just get the updates as they come.
Personal machines:
Home laptop (primary, I also tend to work on it) - I stick with Windows 7. Obviously it is the last sane/usable version of Windows. Skipped Vista entirely. I always tend to use the Good Windows release (95, 98SE, 2000, XP, now 7). Looking forward to install Windows 10 as it looks quite sane and 7 is getting old. I apply patches automagically. With Windows it happens that some patches break stuff but it is easy enough to uninstall them. Also I run Secunia Psi to notify me about outdated apps and it also can update them automagically which is convinient.
Home Macbook (secondary, for fun) - I stick with Mavericks since I don't like the new flat look and basically it still works and apps are working so not a big deal for me. I install patches as they show up.
Home server (router, network functions, VMs for development) - Arch Linux - it is a rolling release distro so I just upgrade everything from time to time when I have security related updates pending. It works - never had broken for me.
Raspberry Pi - I use few for dedicated projects (media player, dedicated retro gaming system). When I set it up and it works I tend not to update it since I don't see the point.
Now for work computers we have strong policy. Workstations and laptops have frozen Windows version (licensing obviously, compatibilty), we push all updates via WSUS on which we accept them. We test updates on selected group of machines (IT staff) before pushing them to all. For servers we also have standardised versions (Windows, RHEL/CentOS). We roll any major upgrade through change management with backup/recovery plans in place (VM snapshots, application backups prior to upgrade i dedicated time windows etc.).
I've seen cars with a knob on the bottom right of the steering column, push button on top of the steering column, and slider on the steering column. However North American cars for the past ~10 years, and imports for substantially longer, have standardized on a conspicuous red button in the center stack, usually fairly high up.
Yup. Volvo has fan speed on the left, temps on the right, Ford trucks have it reversed and the controls are buttons instead of knobs, etc. It is maddening.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
Because it's Read-Only Memory.
(I am old enough to remember using UV lamps on EPROM, but the programming voltage was much higher than the operating voltage, so you had to take them out of the socket before programming them)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
That auto manufacturers don't push out updates to their install base every Tuesday. Sure, different vehicles have different designs. That don't change after they've been built.
On my car I used to have the option to set the "Auto-off" interval on the headlights to "Off, 60 sec, 120 sec". I had the PCM reflashed as part of a recall on the Throttle actuator programming. Now I have the option of "60 Sec, 120 sec", for some reason "Off" was removed from the newer version of PCM software.
"I like to update my devices to the latest bleeding edge builds during peak operation hours and when major production changes occur." - Newbie CTO
30% off web hosting. Coupon code "SLASHDOT".
Even if a UI isnt very good, a COMPULSORY change always. If the UI stinks to hell, but it works, it is ALWAYS better to keep it. No one is against optional changes. No people can buy other wierd (Dvorak) keyboards if theyw ant. But they are not the answer to most people's requirements.
Most USERS are strongly opposed to having raw fish rammed down their throat against their will. Most "new improved" UI's appear to lack support for important use cases the inventors had not realised existed (or were opposed to on religious grounds).
As for the mad fucks that keep inventing new icons. I wish horrible things happen to them. Its bad enough having to learn about Icons when I learned to read perfectly well over 60 years ago. Why do they not keep the ones they have invented? Are they smoking something I should know about?
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
If you mean upgrading to a new version - will do it on rare occassion, either need new features, or the old version didn't work so well. Maybe once per machine. If you means applying patches, then only once when the new OS is installed, then never. In any case, all my OS's are long since out of support anyway.
I do a lot of work on office machines, computers, scanning equipment, high end printers. 30 years ago, you never had software problems, it was all hardware problems. Relay units, switches, cams, clutches...now, there are times I don't even get my screwdriver out of my toolbag. Everything is dependent on the operating system. I'm not one to rush right out and update the software in my machines. I'll let them go a week or two, unless a specific update corrects a problem a customer is currently having. I go by the old line, "just because its new, doesn't make it better, it just means it's new". Sometimes updates break other things, so I'll wait and let someone else be the guinea pig.
OK, even a Renault is more intuitive than KDE, but you get my point...
No?
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Beside security updates that I typically apply right away, I usually only update my systems during summer. The rest of the year, I am too busy and too depend on my systems to work to take the chance of breaking a key feature.
Point in case, I upgrade my laptop to the recent Debian release a few weeks ago, and I am encountering many bugs related to the networking and audio stack. So I'll have a good month to figure them out.
I'm no kid and the symbol on that switch has been standard for longer than I've been alive. It's not always in the same place, but it's always prominent and always looks the same.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I can one-up that - I drive manual transmissions - have for more than 20 years. Both vehicles of mine are manual transmission (car and truck.)
I was driving the work van (automatic) the other day with a coworker, and while slowing down I lifted my left leg and reached to the center of the van - where I found no manual shifter. My coworker was wondering what I was doing.
Talk about muscle memory...
Column shifters can operate differently too:
1. Common old automatics had PRND[3]21. I was in a newer vehicle that had PRNDM. In order to access manual gears, you have to move the selector to 'M' and use buttons on the shifter stalk to access all lower gears. So when you are towing and need to drop down a gear to control your descent, you need to muck about with the shifter+buttons+dash display to make sure you've picked the right gear. Compare to before when you move the shifter stalk down one (or two.) Intuitive, eh?
2. I certainly haven't forgotten the manual shifter on the column, or 3-on-the-tree. Put new drivers in it and they'll never figure out how to move it as they'll think it's automatic. They'll probably grind gears a lot though. :-)
Stuff evolves.
Had the reverse once... A friend and I took his hatchback to LA on a LONG day trip to buy something on craigslist, and as I pulled into the rest-stop near 29 Palms I completely forgot that it was a manual. Slowed up to the stop sign, the engine chugged and died. He burst out laughing. It was kind of funny.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Into the late eighties some vehicles with older-type Delco steering columns still had it on the underside of the column. The way it worked was you pulled the knob out, then turned on the left turn signal (if I'm remembering right) and that bypassed the ignition cut-out on the turn signals and blinked all four corners.
It was ridiculous and could definitely not be activated in an emergency without taking the time to think about the procedure.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
As for the mad fucks that keep inventing new icons. I wish horrible things happen to them. Its bad enough having to learn about Icons when I learned to read perfectly well over 60 years ago. Why do they not keep the ones they have invented? Are they smoking something I should know about?
I assume that you mean whole-new icons for an existing function rather than a stylistic bent on an existing, well-known icon design. The problem is that they're increasingly hiring visual artists, rather than UI engineers, because they think something avant-garde will help sell more product.
What I really hate is "Ribbon" used by many Microsoft Office products. I learned on Office 4.3. Just about every version of Office until the introduction of "Ribbon" had a similar interface, and that interface had three redundant components, quick-use icons on toolbars, drop-down menus, and keyboard combinations. Ribbon threw a lot of that in the trash and I'd rather use Libreoffice or Openoffice now.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I do seem to recall my mother's Chevette having this, now that you mention it.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I remember when they transitioned to the center button. I don't think it was an American requirement, but when one attempts to sell the same car in all markets one attempts to accommodate all requirements wherever possible, so it became a defacto standard that everyone else eventually followed.
Most of the columns that you describe were made by GM's Delco group, and were sold to Ford, Chrysler, and AMC in addition to use by GM. For a time GM made almost everyone's columns. It can be handy when repairing them, as the turn signal cam and other parts fit all applications.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The position of the manual transmission shifter wasn't always where it is now. It used to be up on the column where it was close to the steering wheel. It moved in a sideways H pattern similar to what it does on the floor, but at a right-angle to the driver.
I find floor shifters to often be worse than column shifters, but the mechanisms to actuate a floor shifter are simpler so companies were able to market it as being more hip, and the public bought on.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
the Emacs vs VI war is over (Emacs won)
Nope. B-)
When I got my first UNIX box, back in the '80s, it had two megabytes and did NOT have demand paging, which would have allowe a larger virtual image to run. That was too small to compile emacs. (The joke at the time was that the name was really an acronym for Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping. B-) )
So I learned VI. Then I used it VERY heavily for years, on the original conferencing system whose software was later ported to The Well. After that a number of editing idioms were "wired into" my hindbrain and I could do the things I wanted to do with text very efficiently with vi.
As machines improved I tried emacs several times. Each time I found that the stuff I depended on took about 1.5 to 3 times as many keystrokes. This was too much of a penalty to pay for the handful of features it offered.
At one point I considered going to it but running in a vi emulator mode and gradually migrating to native idioms. But I discovered that, kitchen sink that it was, it had TWO vi emulator modes, each with distinct deviations from vi (alias "bug sets"). With one vi emulator, even with substantial shortcomings, I might still have made the shift. With two there was no easy way to chose, so I didn't bother.
Now I'm using vim, which is close enough. One of my regular colleagues is an emaxian rather than a vithian and we get along just fine. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Kinda like the buttons to close, maximize and minimize a window.
OSX - I wait a week
Windows - wait for Service pack 1 + 2 weeks.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You are supposed to figure that stuff out before you put the vehicle in motion.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Wont... 'Cause I want to split hairs.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
DOS Shell
Windows 3.1
Windows 3.11 for Workgroups
Windows 95
Windows XP
Windows 7
As for my mobile phone OS, I upgrade it every time my phone dies and I have to buy a new one...
Ubuntu 14.04 LTS on company servers. I run an update (apt-get) every Sunday. Same OS on my PC. I don't know when we'll upgrade to 16.04 LTS. (Patches yes. upgrades no. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.)
This is aggressively missing the point. The original poster was discussing
The whole thread is aggressively missing the point of the topic which is about how often OS updates are made
Down = left blinker, up = right blinker
Actually, that's usually flipped in RHD cars. (Thankfully, the pedals are the same all over the world.)
I only recently updated my PC from XP to Windows 7, because for the first time XP wasn't able to fulfil my needs. I wanted to play Elite: Dangerous, and while I could've messed around getting the latest DirectX and graphics drivers working under XP, I decided it was finally the time to move on... to 7. And I'll probably stay with 7 for many years to come, so long as it works for me.
Windows, to me, is just a tool to get things done, and so long as it does its job, I have precisely zero other interest in it. Linux is more or less the same too, I'm well over switching distros to see what they're like every month or two. Other operating systems are different though, and I will update my Amiga OS / MorphOS machines as soon as an update appears because they're far more interesting to me OS-wise.
That reminds me, I should really update my Haiku installation...
I don't think applying such updates counts as an OS update unless you're installing a new kernel.
Down = left blinker, up = right blinker
That's actual not a good way to remember this.
You generally turn the lever into the direction in which you are going to turn the steering wheel.
Consistency at last!
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
The original poster was discussing the fact that you can hop in any modern car and know with certainty how to actuate the left or right hand turn indicators.
Except you cant. Japanese/Korean cars use the Right Hand Side stalk for turn indicators, and European cars use the Left Hand Side. In a market with equal amounts of both like Australia, either you know your cars well and can guess accurately, or its basically 50/50.
Not in the UK it isn't. Hyundai are the other way round, but I believe this is a Far East thing, not a RHD thing.
I drove a manual for about 5 years, but I have been driving an automatic for 15 now. I almost got into an accident a few weeks back and out of habit, my arm reached for the shifter in an attempt to downshift. I was grabbing an air.
Auto updates / patches as they come along. Preference for LTS builds like Linux Mint for stability. New full version of commercial OS when I get a new computer. (I'm on Windows 7 right now and won't upgrade until I replace my laptop in a couple years. Windows is necessary for my job.)
I think the last time I intentionally bought and installed a new version of a commercial OS on a computer I already owned was when I jumped from OS9 to OSX on a clamshell iBook.
I guess the other time was a year or so ago when WinXP went EOL, and I switched that old desktop to Linux Mint. I suppose that technically counts as an upgrade, but I didn't purchase a new OS, and I didn't upgrade to a newer version of Windows.
Mod parent up more!
If you use an LTS distro, then stick with its release schedule.
This is currently 3 years for the desktop, and 5 years for servers.
I have been sticking to this schedule and it works really really well!
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
I did the same thing, in an automatic. Slowed for a stop sign, reached for the center gearshift and lifted my left foot.
Then I pushed down the "clutch" and hit the left end of the wide brake pedal.
We found out that the car had -really- good brakes!!
One of the guys in the back seat ended up in the front... 8-)
Yes, I drove a "column shift" way back "when". It was actually not so bad, the reflexes were similar to the floor shifter.
But the column shifters were more loose, particularly after they were no longer brand new. I like the floor shifter better.
It depends very much on what is being done with the equipment.
Some have never been updated and updating it can get you fired!
Some are updated when new hardware is purchased, but not otherwise unless a definate problem shows up.
(Those are not usually connected to any network or internet.)
Some are updated about two weeks after updates are released, unless zero-day exploits are reported.
A few are updated immediatly. Either for hobbies or as early tests for the other machines. (Or both at once.)
If something changes from a right-click to a left-double-click, or from a launch button to buried in the start menu, that most definitely is a UI change. And the hazard indicator on cars I've owned has changed from a slider on the steering column, to a toggle push button on the steering column, to a single-press button in the center of the dash.
And "changing the location of something is not a UI change" is just plain wrong when talking about cars. Move the gas pedal to the steering column and you've made a far bigger change to using a car that anything Windows has done in 20 years to using a computer.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.