Devices That Auto-Update: Sneaky or Smart?
Amazon automatically updates Kindle Fire devices without user approval. Is this good or bad?
The other day I fired up my Kindle Fire (review of the device forthcoming) and something interesting happened. I stepped away for a few minutes and came back to an update screen. Say what? I didn’t see a prompt (although I’m sure there was some sort of notification that popped up while I was away), and I certainly didn’t give the device my authorization to download and install and update. What gives?
At first I was a little upset. What if I was in the middle of something important?? (Not that you can really get deep into an app or game on the Kindle that you couldn’t easily get back into. It’s not quite as inconvenient as a Windows update after Patch Tuesday, when your computer decides to reboot while you’re in the middle of working on an important document.) But still, it was a pain to wait for the device to update, and then restart at least once (maybe twice).
When my devices have an update available, I’m curious to know what kind of fixes, improvements, or new bugs surface. So when the Kindle Fire auto-updated, I did what I do with all updates: I went to the Internet for answers. Turns out it was more of behind-the-scenes enhancement, with something about adding a full-screen mode to the web browser. It also applied a security fix which un-rooted anybody who rooted the device.
For those who are unfamiliar with the term “root,” regard a device like the Kindle Fire, it essentially means that you’re accessing the device in an unintended way. In more simple terms, you’re hacking the device. Rooting isn’t necessarily done for malicious or evil reasons — although it’s the illegal side of rooting that gives the term a bad name — in fact some people like to try and reverse-engineer the devices to learn more about it and to figure out how it works. I’m not a lawyer, but reconfiguring the device in a way that Amazon doesn’t want you to do, whether it’s to load pirated software, or to innocently poke around at how the device works, likely goes against the terms of use that you probably had to agree to when you started the Kindle for the first time.
My question to you, dear reader: is Amazon smart or sneaky by forcing system updates without the user’s permission?
Let’s weigh the pros and cons.
As an IT guy in my “real life” job, security is important. One of the ways you can stay safe from all of the maliciousness of the Internet is to keep your computers and devices as up-to-date as possible. Whether it’s your operating system, your antivirus, or the network firewall that keeps people from accessing your files: it’s important to update. Security holes are discovered all the time, and the only way to address these issues, other than releasing brand new hardware, is to update the software behind the devices. The auto-update for the Kindle Fire ensures that everybody is getting the latest application improvements and security fixes. If there’s a flaw in the system, Amazon can patch it, push the fix to all of the devices, and everybody is safe.
It’s also good (at least in Amazon’s eyes) because it protects their device from people who are using it in ways that it was not intended to. But is bad for those who hack the system for evil reasons, and for those who just want to figure out how the damn thing works.
One of the downsides of an auto-update, and I’ll use my iPod Touch as an example, is that sometimes the latest update isn’t always the best. If not properly tested, or not tested thoroughly enough, an update could cripple an existing feature or possibly make the device useless until fixed. While the issue wasn’t as significant with the iPod Touch, upgrading from iOS 4 to iOS 5 definitely made features on my and my wife’s iPods respond sluggishly. Forcing the device to update, means that Amazon should be absolutely sure that all testing had been thorough, or they could be creating more problems that every would have. Not giving the user the option to choose, in this situation, could be bad. On the other hand, the auto-update in this scenario would also mean that “crippled” systems would be automatically fixed without the user having to seek out the update.
Personally, I’m fine with the auto-updates. While I was taken aback by it patching my system without my permission, I like having the latest fixes, enhancements, and updates. I like my devices to work in the best possible way. Some people may argue that the best possible way isn’t the way that Amazon designed the device, and those people will likely be in a constant battle with Amazon by rooting and rerooting after each new update.
Those who feel that open source software is the way to go, I’m fine with their opinion. However, at the same time, it’s good to have restrictions. They’re there for a reason. Some people may feel not to be told by the product and its software that they can’t do something that they want to. I pick my battles. Sure, the benefits of rooting a device has its perks, but at the same time, some of these methods come with a “proceed at your own risk” warning that could brick, or make useless, the device if done incorrectly. It’s not a risk I’m willing to take.
Where do you weigh on this topic? Are auto-updates the work of the devil, or are benefits to knowing that you’ll always be up-to-date? Do these updates only bother those who want to “do more” with their devices, or do casual users suffer, too?
0 votes
Related posts:
- PSN Downloads To Be Limited To 2 Devices Sony is changing the rules. If you like to do...
- New PS3 Firmware Update Brings Auto Trophy Sync and Cloud Saves For Plus Members The PS3 firmware update 3.7 is now live and it...
- 500K Android Devices Activated Each And Every Day Man. That’s like 250,000 every twelve hours! Andy Rubin, Google...
- PS3 System Update 4.0 Is Here, It’s The Vita Update Or as I like to call it, “the reason why...
