Comments on: Apple Taking Heat for Auto-Update

By: kevin thibault

kevin thibault — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 21:25:08 +0000

the blog, and all tge result comments all miss the point with me. I somehow got Safari. Dont use it. Never tried it. On my start screen but I just learned it is a browser as I tried to find out how to keep it from interrupting my game with an Auto update; thought I had crashed – game “not responding” and find that my pc is in process of “auto updating” my version of Safari without asking me If I want to do it now. I suspect that -and it even mentions somewhere- that safari may be autoupdated — but I havent been able to find out where to go to keep auto-update from interrupting my applications in the future. It should be a prominent choice in the auto update preferances. I also dont want my machine hung up waiting for a response to a screen which I will never see until my game/application ends.

By: lenalandmine

lenalandmine — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:55:28 +0000

This made my day.

(Go apple)

By: Kat

Kat — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:08:31 +0000

I solved this problem by uninstalling quicktime all together. If I happen to visit a website that uses quicktime…. see ya! I don’t appreciate being tricked into installing megabytes worth of software I will not be using.

By: Now Microsoft Warning Apple of Security Leaks? | The Apple Blog

Now Microsoft Warning Apple of Security Leaks? | The Apple Blog — Sat, 31 May 2008 03:34:15 +0000

[...] is all, of course, in response to Apple’s pushing of Safari on Windows iTunes’ users. Naturally, Microsoft does not like other companies that try to take [...]

By: Stephen Hendrick

Stephen Hendrick — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:46:50 +0000

“There is a checkbox that they can uncheck so that it does not install Safari.”

You shouldn’t have to uncheck it. It should be opt-in, not out.

By: Todd

Todd — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:44:41 +0000

Basically, I guess we should call iTunes just another malware program that is going to slow down your windows based computer. I always thought of Apple as being above all that, … or are they becoming more like Microsoft after all.

I know more about computers than most, but I am guilty of hitting the OK button just like most people do when they are “updating” software.

Apple please don’t resort to being like Microsoft… I may need to find a new MP3 player.

By: Tony

Tony — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:17:53 +0000

In general i would prefer software companies to not try and slip in new software. If Apple was doing the right thing, it would offer safari vai the updater but leave it unchecked. The user should always have to opt in rather than opt out.

As has been mentioned in a number of previous post, a lot of companies are doing this and it only looks like its going to get worse. Standards seem to be slipping and these companies will only have themselves to blame in a few years time when people start to automatically click ‘no’ and ‘cancel’ whenever something pops us, regardless of whether it is an important update or not.

If one good thing has come out of this, it is the that safari will gain increased market share. Increasing the diversity of browsers being used to access the web encourages the use of standards and is good for the web.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:27:32 +0000

I can’t believe you folk are comparing Apple’s pushing Safari 3 as part of an iTunes update, to malware.

Shady business practice? Perhaps.

Then again, last time I tried installing Microsoft’s MSN Messenger, it wanted to give me some “Microsoft Live” garbage – it didn’t explain what parts of the “Live” package I could choose to install to get just the instant messenger.

At least Apple’s option puts “Safari 3.1″ out there in plain view, and installing it isn’t going to drastically change your computer’s operation. If you’re short on disk space, sure you’ll have issues. Otherwise, it’s just more crapware.

This is a case of the pot calling the silver service black (milk with your tea, sir? no, thank you).

By: arum0r

arum0r — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:27:45 +0000

this is overblown.
when steve introduced safari for windows, he did said that apple will push it by way of iTunes and qt. And everyone reported it.
so why now only they make noise?

By: engrish

engrish — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:12:59 +0000

Azzamallow, it’s no wonder that no one complained about Apple Software Update when it was working as intended, that is updating previously-installed apps to a new version instead of proposing new ones.

What does Firefox do with their updates? Are you seriously asking that? They’re updating the browser you already choose to install, most of the time for security reasons. Apple does this too, and rightly so, when they release a new security update patching some vulnerability, or a new point release. And in both cases you can disable the auto-update in the preference pane.

By: azzamallow

azzamallow — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:20:29 +0000

I think this is a massive overreaction by Lilly. Apple has every right to get their foot in the door this way. The apple updating software was there before safari arrived, and no one complained then. Think about what firfox do with their updates! They dont even ask you, it just happens. At least users have a choice here.

What is dodgy is installing the latest Windows Live Messenger. The installer has all this boxes ticked for installing other stuff (like Windows Live Mail) in the INSTALLER. Which means if you leave your computer then come back you will have all this other stuff installed straight up.

Its all dirty tactics agreed. All companies do it, just on varying degrees. In the end Lilly’s company is just as guilty as Steves.

By: Jethro

Jethro — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:37:20 +0000

Gordon,

It is different for you because you use a Mac already, and even more different for you because you already have Safari on your computer. The real issue is trust. People downloaded iTunes and Quicktime for a reason–to listen to music and watch movies. Users should not have to double check every time there is an update to make sure nothing is being slipped by them. I doubt that most Mac users would be okay with Microsoft slipping in a little Windows explorer for Mac every time Microsoft Office Auto-update launched.

Oh, and the article was originally written to reflect that nobody is “forced to take Safari if they want iTunes and Quicktime.” It is the last sentence above the picture.

By: Gordon Anderson

Gordon Anderson — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:00:05 +0000

this is way overblown. The dialog makes it clear it is new software. The Apple software updater that runs on Macs works pretty much the same way so I guess I am used to it, and I have no problem unchecking updates I don’t want. Windows aren’t forced to take Safari if they want iTunes and Quicktime. The article should be rewritten to reflect that.

By: Stephanie Guertin

Stephanie Guertin — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:44:50 +0000

Do other software manufacturers do this? Yes – I refer to Yahoo! toolbar, which appears as an install option on a ridiculous amount of software, and to Google toolbar, which comes at the least with Java. Does Microsft do this? Yes – remember the recent screaming over the idea that Office 2008 might have automatically installed Silverlight? Remember the difficulty of not-installing WMP 11, which appeared in every security update notification for a very long time?
This is not new. This is not even particularly noteworthy when it’s Apple. These days, almost every software manufacturer with more than one product- especially if some of them are free – does this. And yes, people do just click through installers without reading them. They always have and they likely always will; it’s this behavior that keeps both the spyware-makers and the spyware-removers in business.

Not a big deal.

By: Chip

Chip — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:17:14 +0000

I feel this is much ado about nothing. What is so seriously wrong with Apple distributing Apple software with it’s own distribution engine? Remember, this is an *optional* update, with an *optional* choice of installing Safari. If you don’t want it, un-click the box.

Anyone who just ‘clicks away’ and then gets upset about something they didn’t want, well, that’s not an issue of trust, it is an issue of end-user laziness, and at worst, end-user ignorance.

By: armchairpunter

armchairpunter — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:50:30 +0000

One is tempted to make two comparisons:

(1) “craplets”
(2) the MS antitrust case over Explorer