2025-01-08
Further to "Seems like new != better. I don't want to upgrade hardware anymore".
SoundCloud recently released an update for their iOS app where they replaced the font family and made the interface more "modern" by rounding out some components. Maybe someone liked this update but I was faced with the problem of not being able to return to the version that I personally liked more.
In general the auto-update feature is very convenient. But if I like the software and it covers all my needs do I need to change anything at all? It doesn't seem to make much sense. Changing the familiar consumes our resources in order to get used to something new.
It's like some unknown people come into your apartment and start rearranging furniture the way they want it. And they don't care at all about your indignation about the refrigerator that now stands right next to your bed because someone thought that having access to food straight from the bed was a good idea. But this is a completely different topic.
That's how I came to disable auto-updates wherever possible.
It is quite obvious that it is not beneficial for businesses when their users stay on older versions of the product. Some companies solve this problem in a radical way by saying that "you will no longer be able to use our product unless you update", combine this with the massive transition of modern business exclusively to the digital and as a result you have no other choice.
Another solution is to gently hint that it's better for you to update because we "improved performance" or improved security. Although the last one is really the only good reason to update.
But actually feels like the versioning went the wrong way at some point.
Top comments (9)
My opinion: Auto updates are essential and everyone should let everything (hardware, firmware and software) auto update as often as possible. This is the only way, I believe, we will enhance security and move forward towards a more hack and ransomware free future.
The problem is that companies abuse this ability to auto-update and use it to enshittify the products and services we rely on and (usually now) rent (by paying a subscription).
A smart company would create two auto-update channels: One for security features and one for product features.
You are right. I was thinking about "multiple channels updates" (aka "multiple versioning") as a concept but didn't know that it was already used in practice. Do you have any examples?
Unfortunately I don't have any examples. That's my point. I wish I did.
But, thinking about this further (and to contradict myself slightly), what happens when a feature update is a security update. For example, rewriting some code which improves security but also perhaps changes functionality. As always, the reality is more difficult than the theory. So perhaps we're doomed to allow the software producers to have their way?
In the next post I'll try to think about what a software architecture might look like in a "perfect world" (aka an architecture that might be suitable for "multiple channels updates")
As someone who got used to JS ecosystem I see everything else around as quite slow and calm paced software worlds 😅 but yeah, possibility to stick with some working software and get rid of these update badges once and for all would be very nice to have, especially for persons with anxieties of all kinds. As you mentioned, security updates are very important as multiple recent cases show, so people are getting used to auto updates. Which is not good. Especially on mobile. They’re so frequent that I see a list of various new updates in AppStore right the day after I had made a bunch. Even if you build a custom software for personal use, external APIs also have versioning and deprecations of all kinds.
Not sure if one can make anything reasonable about it. It is the world we’re living in. With AI proliferation it will only get worse.
Grow your own narrow and minimalist toolset… build more custom independent personal software with scarce dependency list… consider switching to more flexible and customizable OSs…
Haha like your conclusion at the end 😅
I've been really thinking about it lately
My summary of your posts is; the closed down system of Apple doesn't fit you. Try Android and Windows.
You don't need the latest phones or machines to run Android or Windows.
For Android apps there are APK sites where you can find all the versions.
The main reason Apple has a closed down system is because they want the user experience to be as smooth as possible. And it pays off because it is one of the biggest companies in the world.
If you want more freedom, you should be willing to take on the burden of taking care of your security and user experience.
In the case of the Soundcloud app, do they still provide the service you want from them? If you do I don't think you are going to stop using the app. And if you don't you will choose another provider for that service.
If a company should care about every wish of every user, they would be out of business very soon. Forget the customer is king mantra. As long as they can monetise their service or product, they will do with it what ever they want to do.
I don't think it is a problem with versioning. I think businesses just add more features to keep users on their platforms. What they could do to create a better user experience is to make function specific apps. And then users can pick and choose, or even combine apps. It is the good old unix philosophy.
It wasn't about any OS or service. It was about software in general. I still believe that the software can be more flexible for end users
It is good you want more flexibility for end users. I think by seeing how many people use the inflexible apps, it is not high on their list.
Have you thought about the cost of flexibility?
Developers, designers, and product managers all have to think about the consequences of the flexibility.
Design most of the time is connected to branding. Features are connected to business opportunities. Companies are not going to let you mess with that.
You can look at all the parts of an application separate and you see a lot of room for improvement, like flexibility.
But you always have to consider the purpose of the application.