Windows Update a Marketing Ploy?
When the average end-user’s computer notifies them that a Critical Update is available for Windows, many seem to feel obligated to download all "updates" available in the Product Catalog. An audit of needed updates and additional enhancements to Windows are a convenience, and a step toward making the PC self healing -- although many of these components are not necessary for the consumer. Rather than being a centralized location meant to distribute essential maintenance for a product, Windows Update’s existence could easily be considered a strategic effort to make other Microsoft products and services ubiquitous.
The advent of Windows Critical Update Notification for Windows Update provided a gateway for the typical end user to maintain an up-to-date version of Windows rather than remaining static from the day the machine was purchased. In doing so, the need for technical support can be significantly reduced while assuring that the most recent Windows technologies will be utilized by an increased percentage of the user base. The unsuspecting user will compulsorily download many of the available components on the Windows Update site without giving any thought to what exactly it is that they are downloading.
While not to delve into the topic of software bundling, Windows Update has become an ideal way for Microsoft to push their non-OS related products by grouping them with seemingly necessary downloads. A great example of this is Microsoft's new MSN Messenger. The new software, a competitor to AOL, AT&T, and others, is now not only an offered update, but also included with new versions of Internet Explorer, which is required to continue using the site itself. Is MSN Messenger really an operating system update?
This is not to say that all Windows users are being taken advantage of. More advanced users of the Win32 GUI are able to customize the site to their liking, successfully utilizing it as a timesaving tool for their home use of Windows. These same users are also likely to be familiar with each available component, and how it may be beneficial to their system. Thus, they are able to perform a complete itemization of the site.
However, due to the level of inter-product integration and the likelihood of a component establishing itself as the default application for the function it performs, the average end user is not capable of exercising their freedom of choice. This seemingly helpful site could potentially lock them into using even more Microsoft products and solutions for their daily tasks. Applications that perform these tasks seem to be becoming an extension of an aging Windows. Compare the contents of the Windows Update site to those displayed by Corel Linux’s Update, and a clear distinction between these web-based update services will be seen.
It would be reasonable to say that there may be an agenda which extends beyond customer support and complements a broader strategy to ensure that a technically inferior OS remains desirable enough to maintain the status quo. This goal may accomplished through providing free Windows-only applications, exclusive content, or establishing a universal set of Internet applications through a new, perpetual distribution channel. Several of these "updates" may undergo a metamorphosis into being considered "system files" and then be guarded by the operating system’s "self-healing" capabilities.
In all fairness to the Windows Update Product Team, they are providing an easy, innovative, and reliable product. However, the product they work on is called Windows Update. There is nothing wrong with offering incentives to consumers and even rewarding them for using any one particular product. It could also be said that consumer demands are being fulfilled since the typical daily tasks being performed on PCs are changing and becoming more Internet oriented. Listening to and collecting music, surfing the Web, and exchanging well wishes with friends are all desired functions of today’s computers. Just walk from dorm to dorm on a college campus and see what people are doing with their machines. However, the potential abuse of these often-involuntary customers is worth commenting on whether it is a valid accusation or not.
What are your thoughts on this subject? Comments and discussions are suggested - just keep in mind the focus is typical end users and also that personal attacks of any kind are not welcome. Ideas are key and no one's feedback should be taken personally by anyone.