Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Slashdot Asks: Should Tech Companies End the One-Year Software Update Cycle?

Posted by msmash on from the who-is-it-for dept.

Software giants Google, Microsoft, Apple and others release a major software update to their desktop and mobile operating system (and OS for other platforms they have) each year. This model seemed viable -- to a consumer -- until a few years ago -- the days when shiny new features were exciting -- but of late the number of bugs that companies are failing to patch before shipping these operating systems has seemingly gone off the roof. For instance, Apple has released more than 10 software updates since seeding out iOS 11 in September this year (up from seven last year). Similar is the case with macOS.

The situation has gotten so dire that IT admins in many corporate environments are waiting for as long as six months before they are certain that it is fine to get the staff to move to the "newer" major software update. For companies like Apple, new software update also means a business opportunity. Several of the new features that they ship with the new update doesn't work with older iPhone and iPad models. And as we learned this week, new major software updates could hinder the performance of old gadgets. With these things in mind, should industry at large consider prolonging the duration between two major software updates? Or should they stick with a one-year software cycle model?

11 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. I just want the names to make sense. by XXongo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just want the names to make sense. I'm not sure if my OS-X "Namibian Tiger" is supposed to be updated to "Mount Rushmore" or vice versa, and I'm not sure if either one is compatible with Hasta-la-vista. And I've completely given up trying to understand whether my red hat is a fedora or not, or whether peppermint comes before chocolate chip, or after.

    1. Re:I just want the names to make sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple and Ubuntu are particular egregious on this.

      "Requires OS X Tabby Cat". Um, I'm running 10.14... f--ked if I know; how does that relate to Tabby Cat?

      Third-party stuff for Ubuntu is just as bad. "Use download link x if you're running Lounging Lizard, link y if you're running Moping Marmot." What the f--k is that? I've got 16.04. Do I need link x or link y?

      Code names are cute and all, but come on, publishers, focus on something useful: cite version numbers.

    2. Re:I just want the names to make sense. by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1, Insightful
      No. You are completely wrong on this: crazy names are wonderful: just try Googling a version number! No chance.

      but Google "Mangy Marmot" and there is only one beast in town with that name. And, in case you are in any doubt about it, Lounge Lizard come first, because "L" comes before "M" in my dictionary, and if it does not in yours, either you are using a Cyrillic Dictionary, or you need to get a new one.

      As an example of how not to do it, call your web server "httpd" (OpenBSD, I am looking at you) how in $(DEITY)'s name are you expected to find help on specific configuration details?

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    3. Re:I just want the names to make sense. by belg4mit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Simple, try using more than one search term: Ubuntu 10.4,
      OpenBSD httpd 1.3, etc. Is that so bloody difficult?

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
  2. One year cycles aren't for consumers benefit by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they're for habituation. They want you in the habit of buying on a schedule so it feels 'off' if you miss a beat. Starbucks uses this to keep folks drinking their coffee flavored sugar water. Let it go too long and consumers forget about you. That's why we got Windows ME & Vista.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  3. Agile by sunderland56 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Internally all these companies preach "Agile" and "continuous software delivery". Guess that's just all to pacify upper management, since it isn't really working.

  4. Basically, they can't. by XSportSeeker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The answer is yes, but tech companies won't do it, because these things have nothing to do with consumer needs, but are instead strictly tied to stuff like marketing, and advertising. And it has huge sprawling effects that are hard to predict and figure out.

    For companies like Google, Apple and Microsoft, software cycles don't live in a vacuum. They are tied to advertisement campaigns, keynotes, presentations, relationships with press, developers, business contracts, and a whole ton of other stuff people might not be aware of.

    It takes far more than what the article is complaining about to tip the scale.

    1. Re:Basically, they can't. by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This, pretty much. The product/sales/marketing departments are bred and educated on the yearly sales cycle; software development is ultimately dictated by them. The closest truce that I've seen has been the creation of LTS releases, which matches the annual or semi-annual cadence of the corporate sales/acquisition cycle with that of need for IT departments/software developers to ship and support stable software. Ubuntu's 2 years between LTS releases is rather long but it's extremely predictable and results in good stability with the interleaving releases being flexible enough to try out new features without screwing over seasoned IT professionals.
       
      For consumer products like the iPhone there will almost always be an annual incremental upgrade over last year; you don't want to sell the same product (iPhone, Laptop, Tablet*) two years in a row with no improvements at Christmas, you're looking at a sales disaster. You'd have to get rid of the Christmas sales season to effectively kill annual software updates.
       
      *The iPad seems to be the sole exception to this, the iPad Mini hasn't seen any significant upgrades since ~2013 and apple still sells the iPad Mini 2 despite being on version 4 or 5 now. Tablets with their larger batteries and internal volume pretty much maxed out on features within a couple of years of their introduction and hit full market saturation and last forever for whatever reason.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  5. Re:Use the Debian model by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ubuntu which is the most like Debian instead has a 6 months release cycle and they constantly have shit-tons of problems with every new release, same with Windows which also moved to a 6 months cycle now.

    If you don't like how quickly things change in the normal Ubuntu releases, stick to the Long-Term Support releases, which are, like Debian, every 2 years.

  6. Re:release cadence by leonbev · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're not buying into that "Continuous Deployment, ship a new build to production every night!" BS, are you? Automated code testing is still no match for real end-user testing, and you're going to eventually release shit code to production if you rely on it.

  7. Yes by JohnFen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Although there are many things that are contributing to the ongoing decline in software quality, I think "rapid release" and similar Agile-inspired release cycles have done more to speed up the problem than any other single factor.

    Ditch it.