Hacker News Reader

Comment by baby | Hacker News Reader

This is a huge problem with new consoles I find. I don't remember having to update my N64 every time I wanted to play it. But my PS3? Every time I want to play I have to spend like 30 minutes in downloading and installing an update. Every single time. I don't play that often but still do play from times to times and I haven't had a clean launch for years.

View on HN

Agreed completely. I joked that the U in "Wii U" stood for "update" because the amount of forced modal updates required to every part of the system was almost comical when the system was new.

I've also got the Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3 and PS4 and all are basically the same... if I haven't turned it on in a couple weeks it is nearly guaranteed I'll have to sit through a couple-hundred megabyte update or two (for the OS/firmware and probably whatever game I am playing too) and fritter away 10-15 minutes before I can do what I wanted to do in the first place.

Even the systems that try to make this less bad by downloading updates in the background while in low-power mode tend to be pretty clumsy about the whole thing, so even though the download part is already done for me I still probably have to sit through a 5+ minute 'install' (after agreeing to a EULA, and maybe a TOS change or two) requiring 2 restarts.

bleh.

You'd think somebody would learn from Microsoft's long, hard struggle with Windows Update, and make consoles do the same thing Windows now does: download the update in the background at low priority while the console is on, then install it when you shut the console off. (And, for added effect, make the console actually look and sound like it has powered off while the updates are still installing. Windows 8 does this.)

I think the problem with that approach is that if you want to play online then everyone needs to be running the same client version.

> then install it when you shut the console off.

I seriously hate that on my laptop. I want to switch off and be on my way and suddenly Windows tells me it needs to install an update before shutting off. Seriously wtf! This is the kind of things that drives me to Linux, where I know that when I click Shut down, the system will be off in 20 seconds.

Why not just close the lid & put it to sleep? You really shut down every time you move somewhere with your laptop?

That's really bad from a security perspective. It's possible to retrieve all sorts of data from a machine that has been 'slept', especially things like the decryption key for the HDD. Various ports on the outside of the laptop, like USB, have DMA for performance reasons.

Wouldn't all these issues be present anyways if the thief simply turned on the machine?

No. If I shut down my laptop, my hard drive is encrypted and keys are no longer in RAM (modulo a cold-boot attack, but that is only really useful for <30 minutes after shutdown without preparation).

You must have great reasons to be so paranoid. I am slightly jealous.

I mean the chances of putting the laptop to sleep and having your laptop stolen by someone with enough knowledge to obtain access to the keys in RAM to decrypt the hard drive - well, that would be an amazing story! Not to mention the fact that you have data that would be worth all of that trouble!

Boot Bios password. You ever heard of this ?

Well, the shut down button shows if it will install updates. If you don't want to, choose restart, then do a hardware shutdown during POST.

That's not what I expect from a OS in the 21st century. I want to be able to do things my way without having to circumvent the system.

I think OSX has been doing this since Leopard, but instead of forcing the update during shutdown, you can apply it whenever you want (it's already downloaded unless you turned auto updates off). I much prefer this route. Forcing the update on a restart or shutdown ends up being more annoying than you think.

I went over my ISP bandwidth cap twice before I realized OSX was doing this in the background. For people with limited bandwidth allowances, this isn't a good option.

> look and sound like it has powered off while the updates are still installing

What happens if the user unplugs in this state?

It says not to while it's doing it in large lettering. You'd likely corrupt the installation. How much that would affect the user would probably depend on the update.

That is really good to know, thank you. I've been thinking of getting a console, but I have limited bandwidth via a satellite connection. Constant updates as you described would eat my allowance up really fast.

AppleTV is pretty similar. My parents use it only when I come home about once a month. At that time, there's an update that needs to get installed. Now my parents have the impression that the AppleTV just takes that long to boot up every time. Hard to change people impressions after they've noticed a pattern.

I seem to remember Apple TV updates are optional, and can be deferred until later.

I have the same problem with my gaming PC. When I boot it up, I have numerous updates for Windows, Steam, games, etc.

Sure, but that's been true of PCs for ages. We're all used to the idea that PCs need to be updated. To me one of the advantages to consoles was that they could pick up and play at any moment.

At least with my PS4, I've never been forced to download/install an update, either game or OS. You simply can't use online features if you aren't up to date.

But how often do you not turn your PC on for a month? That's much more common with consoles.

Steam is running all the time when my computer is on (and I use my computer every day), and games just keep themselves up to date. For a given game that I'm trying to play, there's maybe a 15 minute period every couple of months when I wouldn't be able to launch it immediately.

The Windows updates aren't required in order to play games, and they can just be delayed until the next time you're restarting. Not a huge deal there.

Very often. I don't have a regular gaming habit, that applies to both my gaming enviroment (strictly speaking, the Windows side of my mac) and my console.

For the console, btw.: all of them support nightly updates, so I rarely have the problem there.

My gaming PC is used occaisionally, and I do not leave it on when not in use. My day to day computer usage is a separate machine running OSX.

The worst was when my Windows machine would restart itself in the middle of gaming to install updates, but luckily you can turn that off.

unless something has changed, steam updates are usually optional.

Also pc's are often left on/used for other things so the windows, steam and game updates all kinda just download and install in the background so when you go to play its usually just ready, unlike consoles where you turn it on and it then has to download/install everything as you wait to play.

One of the reasons I switched from windows to debian was not having to deal with windows-style updates: you can have the computer running and don't need to reboot after updating. I wonder if someone already thought of applying the same principle to consoles.

How is it that you don't need to reboot your computer to update with UNIX but you do have to reboot your computer quite often on Windows?

There are still a few instances where rebooting Linux after an update is a good idea. Kernel updates, for one.

Mostly, though, the applications and services in Linux can be restarted individually, making updates a non-reboot snap.

Windows updates are the worst. Once it decided to restart to install updates right in the middle of a dota game.

I now run linux mint on my gaming rig, so that's never a problem

another solution (solely to the updating problem) would be to disable automaitc updates, no?

Well, in a sense. I'd still want automatic updates, but what I don't want is it to automatically force the computer to restart.

This is possible to turn off in Windows, but requires fiddling with the registry.

I just realised that my original post wasn't clear - my computer RESTARTED in the middle of my game. Hence my frustration :).

Windows updates aren't required before you can start playing a game, which is a huge advantage.

This is why I don't play my 360 anymore. A few times a month, I find I have some time during a lunch break to play a game. My free time is completely consumed by a system update, then I turn off the console and go back to work.

This happens to me. I think I'll turn on the old console for a quick game. 30 minutes later it's still updating. Guess I'll go do something else then.

I have the same (shitty) experience with the PS3 (a little less with the Xbox 360 and somehow updates seem faster on that one). This is basically pushing me away from consoles which were supposed to be "plug and play" in the first place. The best thing is just to put these consoles offlines so that you cannot technically update anything at all. Some newer games may complain about the need of a new firmware, though...

The playstation 3 has a feature that will update the games over night, do you utilize this feature?

That only works with a paid PS+ subscription.

A subscription you're particularly unlikely to get if you only use the thing every couple of weeks.

I don't know. I'm not a heavy user (I am in bursts, but not on average), and I'm happy to pay for PS+. I like the "free" games, it's introduced me to stuff I had never considered before that I really enjoyed. No, I don't think you need to be a heavy gamer to appreciate PS+.

Agreed. It pays for itself immediately. Anyone with a PS3, PS4, and/or Vita that doesn't have PS+ is objectively Doing It Wrong. Anyone who is such a non-gamer that there isn't a single game on PS+ that they might conceivably enjoy is such a non-gamer that their big mistake was buying a game console to begin with, not the fact that they did or did not get PS+. Seriously, it is that good of a deal.

Finally, anyone with a modern or semi-modern Sony console that refuses to pay for PS+ based on "the principle of the thing" needs to revisit their life choices and find vastly better principles to fight for (trust me, there is a limitless supply). Again, it's that good of a deal, and FFS it's only $50 people.

This is a problem Samsung has replicated with their SmartTVs. Turn on SmartHub, and 30% of the time it insists on an update. Then randomly sometimes it updates in the background with a popup notification when it is done.

Useful platform, but really annoying in that regard.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com