Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sloppy coding all around. If you don't want to program something right, why don't you just direct users to the website to manually update it?

On one hand it's good that the author owns up to it, and they worked with their users to provide remedies. But so many things aren't adding up. Why does your screen recorder need to check for updates every 5 minutes? Once a day is more than enough.

This screams "We don't do QA, we shorts just ship"



Or, given it's a Mac app, just have the Mac app store take care of updates. That's part of the value that using the app store service gives you, the other one being not spending thousands in accidental data transfer when you do auto updates wrong.


> Or, given it's a Mac app, just have the Mac app store take care of updates. That's part of the value that using the app store service gives you,

And pay Apple their 30% cut on your revenue? No thanks.

> the other one being not spending thousands in accidental data transfer when you do auto updates wrong.

Or just actually write proper automated tests for basic features first, before a large refactor to prevent introducing issues like this from happening again?

While I respect the author's honesty in this mistake, the main takeaway here is not mentioned and that is just writing proper automated tests as their impression on this post is that there aren't any.


2% of that already goes to stripe or whatever you use. after a year it's 15%. It also gives your both a distribution and marketing channel.

It was good enough for netflix etc.

*I* don't want applications to be able to update itself. Look at malware zoom for example.

It's funny that people don't like telemetry, but at the same time they're ok with regular software update checks + installs.


The same Netflix that's been spats with Apple over avoiding app store fees by flouting policies that had other apps kicked out of the store? I'd suggest that it was, in fact, not good enough for Netflix.


Software doesn't need to check for updates at all. If I want to update my software, I'll update it. I don't need or want the software to be doing it on its own. All OS's have a native package manager at this point that can handle updates. We don't need applications going around it.


A quick warning "Hi User, your out of date, please update." Is fair.

What's really scary here is the lack of consent. If I want to record videos I don't necessarily have an extra 250mb to spend( many users effectively pay by the gig) everytime the developer feels like updating.


sad how many places take the position of "prod is QA and users are the best testers" lol


No meaningful consequences exist.

So why not ?


from tfa

> One of our users, who lived in a house, had their internet provider cancel their contract due to enormous traffic generated during a month. It was extremely problematic as there was no other internet provider available around.

so, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Likewise, no meaningful consequences exist for the actual software creators here.

The User had to pinky promise not to do it again, the service was ultimately restored.

Aside from the 8k bill nothing happened to them.

This article feels more like a self name and shame. I wouldn't trust these people to run code on my computer




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: