twitter: more...

Change is never well received whether it be a new operating system (Windows Vista) or a new version of commonly used software (Windows Live Messenger), to name a few Microsoft examples. Even a name change is hard to imprint on the public’s mind – Windows Live Messenger officially began its rebranding from MSN Messenger in 2005 in beta form and officially released in 2006, but four years later people are still referring to it as MSN.

My annoyance with upgrades and new versions is the cumbersome process that they often use. You have to download the installer, shut down all the programs, then hope that they don’t insist on a system restart. Windows Live applications are a big offender too, requiring you to download a downloader wrapper to get the few applications you really need. And when you want to upgrade for security reasons, you get the whole new setup file, not a few lines of code like Google does with their ingenious binary diff.

I’ve had this reminder of a new version of Windows Live Messenger is waiting to be installed for weeks now, and I just don’t want to sit around for 5-8 minutes while the installer does its thing, and then tries to upsell me on other Windows Live applications.

Of all WLM users, I should be able to better understand that security breaches happen and they need to be patched every now and then, so when I clicked the "What’s New" button for the security update, you can understand my ire when I am greeted with this page. The team has "identified an important security issue in Messenger", but they don’t say what it is! There’s no link to a changelog either, so I can’t judge for myself if this is a necessary security update. For example, if some bozo can compromise my system by hacking through my signature sounds, that won’t affect me, because I don’t use user sounds at all! Let me be the judge of what and what not to upgrade!

So until I decide to be bored and upgrade or format my computer and download the latest version, WLM will continue to pester me with its upgrade notices (which you can’t turn off either, to the best of my knowledge).

3 comments

I don’t know about this specific case, but I’ve heard that when a patch is released and it’s not a foced upgrade, to prevent accidental disclosure of the vulnerability, minimal information is shared.

O

Posted by Rob Dolin on Oct 12, 2009 at 11:01 pm.

… I hope all is well with you and I like your “About” statement :)

Posted by Rob Dolin on Oct 12, 2009 at 11:02 pm.

I suppose that’s one reason to withhold a change log, but other companies and organizations release their bug fixes publicly all the time. I guess you have to consider the demographic and other factors – like how the users of WLM don’t actively upgrade unless forced to (I know of a lot of people that put off downloading v14). My main issue with the upgrade process is that it’s not simple – clicking download downloads and runs the downloader / installer for the suite and not just for WLM.

Things are going well. I haven’t updated the About statement to reflect my current position, but glad you like it. Hope things are going swimmingly with the next version of Windows Live.

Posted by Richard Shih on Oct 19, 2009 at 11:24 am.