Hubris is a big fault of Google and its engineers. They have a culture of thinking "there's one way to do it, we're smart, and we know best."
Honestly Fedora (and arch, ubuntu, debian and so on) simply spoils me, everything I need to do my job is a `dnf install` away and it just works.
I'm reminded of that every time I have to interact with a windows desktop how poorly the other (majority) side have it.
There is something to be said about letting application developers control the update rhythm of their application's releases.
(To clarify, I’m just pointing out a humorous observation, not making a statement on Sparkle)
The button I want is “update in the background when you close the app”, and it shouldn’t ask; it should just quietly do that. For all that chrome’s updater is like a tropical disease, it sure has way better UX than sparkle.
http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2011/08/zygote....
Depends whose requirements. The user's requirements are incredibly straightforward:
1. Never update; there's no benefit.
Updating is pushed on users anyway on the theory that they're connected to the internet, but it's not meant to help them. It's meant to help other people. Updates that help the user are generally provided on a pull model, and often charged for.
2. Never be vulnerable to known attacks.