Here is why you should never allow applications (or the OS) to automatically update itself. Always only do updates manually, and wait sufficient time to make sure that the guinea pigs (ie. those who do allow automatic updates) have determined that the update is safe.
Which makes me think that it would be really nice to have a delayed update built-in to windows update. You could tell it to inform you of updates 1 month after they've been released, or whatever time frame you're comfortable with. Microsoft would never do that, of course, but it would be nice.
Posted by: Jake Munson | December 17, 2007 at 01:46 PM
I (partially) disagree.
Sure, you probably don't need to update an application (like QuickBooks) that works fine on your machine, but for the OS it's a completely different story, especially if it's Windows.
Anybody remembers the Slammer worm? It spread so fast because almost nobody cared about OS updates.
Posted by: Loris | December 18, 2007 at 03:50 AM
At the risk of exposing my admitted anti-Mac sentiments, I've never heard of such a disaster with a major Windows update and wonder how much of this is basically a Macintosh issue. Or how wise giving such advice is to Windows users. Microsoft is SO slow and SO careful issuing fixes when security exploits are reported -- making sure that they will run perfectly on a gazillion different machine types and flavors of Windows before releasing them, and even then sometimes dribbling them out to users a few at a time -- that it behooves Windows users to get those OS updates, at least (reserving judgment on ALL software updates as a general proposition), as soon as they become available. I.e., by auto-update at 3:00 am when available. Cf. the well-reasoned response from loris above.
The Macintosh community is so used to thinking that security exploits are strictly a Windows issue that it may have grown complacent as far as exercising a healthy degree of ongoing paranoia about its own vulnerability.
Posted by: David Brooks | February 16, 2008 at 06:35 PM