update-manager behaviour [was: Auto-launching of applications]

[Jacob Rau]

Pablo Quirós wrote:
> First, I think opening a window automatically is *really* annoying,
> and much more disturbing than the current bubble. The idea of the new
> notification system is to avoid disturbing the user, and with that
> decision things will get worse.
Opening a window automatically will be extremely annoying, and probably 
won't work. The experienced user knows where to look for updates, and 
the inexperienced user will not notice it until he goes to turn the 
computer off, at which point he will close the window. Don't open the 
notification window.
> Most computer users don't care at all about updates. They just want a
> system that works and stays out of their way. I am one of this users,
> and I would happily accept security updates to be installed
> automatically by default. If there is some action needed from me (eg:
> restart firefox), I will do it, but I want to make actions *only* when
> it is absolutely necessary, and it is not for installing updates.
> Experienced users who are not happy with this can always change it to
> only install updates when they decide to.
This method would personally irk me. If I'm working on a project that 
uses Apache, I would expect Apache to stay available, but all of a 
sudden, my project stops working...and my hard drive starts 
cranking...and then I realize that update-manager has stopped my Apache 
process so that it can replace it with a newer version. Not. Cool.

This may not seem like a problem for "normal" users, but what would you 
do if you tried to open OpenOffice or Firefox and got a strange cryptic 
error instead of the program you want? With no indication whatsoever as 
to why...
> If automatic updates by default is unacceptable,
I would say it is.
> I suggest the following:
> I'd show a message to the users first time they see update-manager,
> explaining them the purpose of the
> program, and giving them a choice of what the default behavior should
> be <SNIP>
> That way, anyone can choose what is best for them, and the program is
> introduced to the users first time they see it, so that they know it's
> purpose and why "it appeared magically".
That's probably the best of the ideas I've seen so far. Educating the 
user is a good idea, and really the only feasible choice I can see in 
this case.

Jacob