There should be an option for determining if updates are automatically downloaded or not. If they are, allow setting days/times or anytime to do so. For those of us on metered connections this matters. Also, for other purposes - having the software just decide to to start using the internet can be an issue and is not proper software etiquette.
Then, there should be an option in the case of automatic downloads being enabled, to determine if the download should automatically be installed, and, if so, on what day/time or immediately; or if it should be installed when the user gives specific permission.
As I know, if a team has released an update, your browser will automatically download it when you launch the browser again. And for me this is a problem too. It was one of the main reason why I stopped using ICQ and Skype.
If I need to update my browser I can just to to Menu ā About. It works for all browsers, but not for Brave. The worst thing: when Brave starts to download the update, I donāt see any notifications and I just donāt know whatās happening.
Dating back to Braveās Muon version, there have been user requests for user control over checking for, downloading, and installing updates. Reasons behind these requests vary. Toward the top of the heap: some users have inconsistent access to broadband. For these users, when broadband access is sub-optimal, checking for and downloading updates is a very low priority. On the other side of the ledger, from Brave developersā perspective, users with other than the latest version installed complicate support and may well compromise security. (This is far from a complete list.)
Iām a user, not a developer. Iām one of those who occasionally has only tenuous connectivity when Iām using laptops with either 32- or 64-bit Windows 7 installed. Brave isnāt the only app that, behind the scenes, wants to phone home. (That said, there are many apps ā including competitive browsers ā that respect their users and give them control over checking for, downloading, and installing updates.) The culprit ā not just for Brave, but for all apps behaving this way ā is typically autoruns. Autoruns are programs that automatically run at startup. From Microsoft, for Windows, thereās a workaround:
For me, editing autoruns keeps this problem under control, specifically, my control.
A warning and a remark:
First, the warning: editing autoruns can cause unwelcome and unwanted consequences. Itās a powerful tool and misuse can get you into trouble.
And second, the remark: this workaround is specific to Windows. I currently rely on W-7 for which support ends next January. Exploring alternatives, Iāve found various ways to edit the Linux equivalent of autoruns ā for the same reason I do it under Windows. Under Windows, the above-referenced app has worked reliably for me for years. I canāt (yet) suggest similar alternatives for other operating systems.
Iām a developer and have supported every version of Windows since Windows 3 (also MCSE Certified). Iām very aware of this utility of Windows and the like. I saw your other post about using this method - which motivated me to start this Feature Request. It shouldnāt come down to having to do it this way.
Sometimes I think developers forget who they are writing software for. I am already starting to get the little hairs on the back of my neck standing up in relation to Brave - there seems to be a lot of interest in control and oversight. Iām beginning to look at other options for things like YouTube, FB, etcā¦ and this was looking like a method of doing so - but could I be stepping out of the pan and into the fire? Weāll see.
Working from memory (which for me is perilous) when I first started paying attention to Braveās Muon version, this issue ā user control over updating ā garnered some enthusiastic support from users but was summarily dismissed by Brave.
I added my support to the earlier thread and to this one to prime the pump.
With essentially no call from Brave users for control over when and how Brave seizes and uses resources, the only viable alternative is self-help and workarounds like editing autoruns.
Oh, and please donāt think I was complaining about your solution or dismissing it - makes perfect sense and is a good idea. It just shouldnāt need to be done that way.
I came to Brave from Firefox for this very reason. The moment Firefox denied user control of updates, I began seeking alternatives. Thereās a lot to like about Brave - enough so that I wished Iād switched to it years ago, but denying user control of updates is a deal breaker and not for the reasons cited so far. In my case, I am running older system software on older system hardware. Updates are a frightful prospect because sooner or later, they will mean the end of functional use. One day, everythingās working great and then, thanks to an auto-installed update, itās down the tubes.
Data use is not the main reason. There are a heaps of reason to limit updates to times, when the user is able to deal with the potential conflicts they cause with extensions, or any accidental bugs. if everyone auto updates them all your machines end up with the same problem at the same time (thanks crowdstrike for proving this is a real issue). And its not a problem for support having to deal with older versions, becasue they can simply say āupdate to latest versionā. But when something does go wrong having some machine running older version allows for community troubleshooting and problem solving.
Thanks for the reply - and for keeping this ancient thread alive.
I totally agree with you about the value of phased / staged updating. Itās relevant for me because I wrangle more than one computer - and I donāt update them simultaneously. Advice for folks with only one computer: other than bragging rights, thereās no benefit to being first to update ā¦ but donāt wait too long.
Adding (not relevant to my comment to which you replied, but I did reference this earlier): linux (at least debian - the flavor I use) DOES allow users control over updates. āControlā can vary from āfully manualā to āautomaticā; works for me.
Joining the thread to INSIST users be given control over when to update brave or any extension/add-on. It should not be autoforced for those of us who live in areas of weather unpredictability (or on deadline for an imporant project, etc), the last thing we need is to waste time and bandwidth on an update we have no control over. or to risk someting going wrong on an incompatible OS.
PLEASE revise this forced policy of FORCED LACK OF CONTROL. IF you want people like me to keep trying/using your product.